🚀 go-pugleaf

Donald Borowski <borowski@spk.agilent.com> wrote:



>"D.A.Kopf" wrote:

>> Murray Love wrote:
>> >
>> > "D.A.Kopf" <dak@dakx.com> wrote in message
>> > news:393D6C16.AB65AC41@dakx.com...
>> > > Donald Borowski wrote:
>> > > >
>> > <snip>
>> >
>> > > However, it seems reasonable to me that individual risk-taking
>> > > should not imperil the lives of others. Criminal law seems to
>> > > agree, by allowing punishment for involuntary manslaughter.
>> > > If I fell off a roof onto someone, well, I'm bound to say I'd
>> > > feel responsible for their injury. If a nuke that I designed had
>> > > an accident that caused injuries, I'd feel uncomfortable arguing
>> > > that I'm not reponsible becaused I used accepted engineering standards.
>> >
>> > This is a quandary of any industrialized society.  Substitute "chemical
>> > plant", "gas flares", "car", "toaster", or "space shuttle" for "nuke", and
>> > you'll see what I mean.  Pretty much all engineered items carry a risk, and
>> > that's OK if society decides they're worth it.
>>
>> Although individuals can decide whether to use cars, toasters, or (here in
>> North Carolina) collapsing walkways, while these other risks are forced upon
>> them. It thus seems to me their acceptance is properly a political, not an
>> engineering, decision.

>There may be some merit in the distinction, but there are very few who decide to
>use no electricity. Only in this case is there an "imposed" risk and no benefit.

>The real case we are discussing then is a risk that I take on directly (e.g.,
>installing and maintaining PV panels) or one that I take on indirectly (the nuke
>plant that I get power from). From either I get the benefit of electricity. If
>either one kills me, I am just as dead.  But the risks of the nuke plant are
>lower.

>And then there is the next case of a coal plant vs. a nuke plant. Once again, the
>risks of the nuke plant are lower.

>Some have made the counter argument that a nuke accident would make a large swath
>of land inhabitable for generations. I still am not convinced that even over
>generations the damage caused by the anticipated number of nuke accidents is
>greater than the damage caused by the normal operation of the coal plants that
>would be necessary to produce the same amount of energy.

>--
>Donald Borowski
>Agilent Technologies, Spokane PGU

Thanks for giving me a great quote to put on my web site!!! Do you
have a picture of yourself wearing a dunce cap?