[FoRK] Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power

Ken Ganshirt @ Yahoo ken_ganshirt at yahoo.ca
Sat Mar 26 10:17:11 PDT 2011


--- On Sat, 3/26/11, Gregory Alan Bolcer <greg at bolcer.org> wrote:

> Thus, going back to my original comment, it's like a red queen race, 
> design needs to be running at full speed just to keep up
> with usefulness.
> 
> In case of nuclear power, usefulness means the ability to generate 
> massive amounts of power versus the ability to design something that 
> doesn't leave a significant opportunity for a load of death and 
> destruction is the race.
> 

Yeah, sounds about right.

sw whined about the front-end cost loading on nuclear versus the "conventional" forms of generation. It's just too bad we had not realized the gross and long term impacts of the "conventional" forms as early in their development life cycles so we could have front-end loaded them with the relevant costs, too. 

He suggests the "conventional" forms are back-end loaded. Tain't quite so. 

At least, the back-end loading is not on the producers as the front-end tends to be.  Another advantage of the front-end load -- besides the more realistic costing -- is that you can put it where it belongs, on the producer and, through the pricing, the consumers. The back-end load instead shifts those costs to the tax payers. And by ignoring the issues at the front end the costs of "cleanup" are generally far greater because the problems are less well managed and contained.

Woulda/Coulda/Shoulda..... <shrug>

         ...ken...


More information about the FoRK mailing list