Re: I thought of an initialy regulated industry!... (fwd)

[Jim Choate <ravage@EINSTEIN.ssz.com>]

Forwarded message:

> Date: Fri, 09 Oct 1998 01:39:08 +0000
> From: Michael Hohensee <mah248@is9.nyu.edu>
> Subject: Re: I thought of an initialy regulated industry!... (fwd)

> > > Absolutely nothing.  That's my point, not yours --or at least not the
> > > point you made in your previous post.
> > 
> > It is *exactly* the point I have made from day 1.
> 
> It would appear that Jim either cannot read his own posts (and this may
> well be, as I had a hard time deciphering the exact meaning of that last
> paragraph-sized sentence), or simply cannot remember them.  He certainly
> seems to have a problem with reading the posts of others.

Here is my position. I am pro nuke. Even given the lethality of the
compound and the costs related to disposal it still represents a better
investment of resources and human lives than natural oil, gas, etc.

Yes coal plants use and put out heated water, and yes it effects the
environment. Yes nuclear plants put out as much water as coal plants. It
still represents the major constituecy efluent from a nuclear plant in
regards environmental hazard. The only real question I had regarding nuclear
plants versus coal was the water retention process and the manner in which
nuclear plants process it (there is a question related to comparing coal to
nukes that takes this into account). I was under the (now apparently mistaken)
impression there was a regulation that seperated the core cooling water from
the energy regeneration system driving the turbines (which drive the
generators). The actual process is to release that water slowly over time
into the normaly non-radioactive effluent. Coal plants on the other hand do
put out over 300,000 tons of solid waster per year for a 1000MW plant. This
posses a much higher health hazard (irrespective of some parts per billion
contaminant that is the most toxic substance known to man) than the .5 tons
of solid waste a nuclear plant puts out.

Yes there are stupid laws regarding private processing of nuclear fuel. No,
I don't support them and *nothing* I ever said can be construed that way.

> I'm being to him --flaming him for no good reason! (it's true, there
> isn't a good reason for flaming one such as Jim, they have no effect
> --but it is somewhat cathartic).  While being certain to avoid
> responding to anything in my previous two posts --or at least not in a
> way that makes any sense.

Um, to be absolutely accurate, I have only 'flamed' a few people on this list
ever. Tim May, Perry Metzger, Micheal Frumkin, Adam, a couple of others I don't
remember at the moment. I did it in only one or two instances (Hi Timmy!)
toward any one person. I think the most offensive statement was calling Perry
Metzger a son-of-a-bitch one time because of a particular self-centered
comment he'd made. That was '93 I think, check the archives.

I don't believe I've ever flamed you. And don't intend to now.


    ____________________________________________________________________
 
       To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice.

                                                     Confucius

       The Armadillo Group       ,::////;::-.          James Choate
       Austin, Tx               /:'///// ``::>/|/      ravage@ssz.com
       www.ssz.com            .',  ||||    `/( e\      512-451-7087
                           -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'-
    --------------------------------------------------------------------