[OT] They're restarting Chernobyl?

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Sat Nov 27 19:36:39 1999

That's no secret, by the way. A few months ago public TV had a long program
dealing with the misconceptions about nuclear power generation and how the
press distorted all the "facts" surrounding 3-mile island and it's incident
back in the '70's. They even stated that the dirt right around the nuclear
power plant had the lowest radioactivity of any area within some substantial
radius, since that's a coal-bearing area and normal ambient radiation levels
are actually quite high.

What's really important here, in the U.S. is that you have to get the GOV to
keep the industry straight, but not get into the industry's pocket. The
same sloppy work and corruption that caused the Chernobyl problem is what
scares most of those who follow the truths of the situation.

Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Murillo-Sanchez <cem14_at_cornell.edu>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Saturday, November 27, 1999 5:45 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] They're restarting Chernobyl?


>Chuck McManis wrote:
>>
>> Consider it flame bait if you like, but if you run the numbers this
country
>> would be a lot better off (fewer people killed generating the power,
fewer
>> natural resources destroyed) with a nuclear power infrastructure than it
>> would be with a fossil fuel powered one.
>>
>> --Chuck
>
>and, if you consider the possibility of catastrophic climate
>change from global warming resulting by past and
>present burning (the blame falling disproportionately on the US),
>the number of casualties might be in the billions, due to
>starvation. I know, nobody really knows what _could_ happen,
>but nobody can deny that the possibility exists either. Well,
>maybe some people deny it, but by and large they are linked to
>the oil companies.
>
>To keep this on topic, I have been comparing daily electric load
>profiles from 40, 30 and 20 years ago to the present ones.
>Starting 40 years ago, profiles became bimodal (one peak at
>11:00 AM, another (larger) around 5-6:00PM in winter, or 8:00PM
>in the summer). So, turning the lights
>on at home after work (and for preparing dinner) meant the
>largest load. This second peak slowly evolved to an earlier
>hour (2:00PM-4:00PM), while the earlier peak grew to a size
>comparable to that of the second one in winter, and only slightly
>smaller in the summer. Only two factors at work here: computers
>and air conditioning.
>
>--
>Carlos Murillo-Sanchez email: cem14_at_cornell.edu
>428 Phillips Hall, Electrical Engineering Department
>Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853
Received on Sat Nov 27 1999 - 19:36:39 GMT