🚀 go-pugleaf

Sam McClintock wrote:
> 
> First and foremost, let the special get on the air.  I would love to
> see an objective film on the issue.  It should not scare anyone
> dedicated to a non-nuclear world (unless the dedication was built upon
> falsehoods).  If the piece is objective, and environmental groups
> continue to be dysfunctional over it, then it will only shore up
> support among the anti-environmental groups.
> 
> Dennis Nelson <innrcrcl@erols.com> wrote:
> 
> > No.  The true source of terror is that another human being would
> > not hesitate to expose you and your city, town or state to
> > invisible, undetectable environmental toxins which could seriously
> > impact your health, without exhibiting a single pang of social
> > conscience.  The fear of other humans doing nasty things to you
> > unbeknowns to your is much greater than the fear of everyone
> > living with the same natural uncertainty.
> 
> Sounds like today.  We have a whole bunch of invisible, detectable and
> undetectable, toxins floating around ambient air throughout the world.
> You yourself contribute to these emissions unless you live in a
> non-techno paradise without a car (since you are writing to usenet,
> that is obviously not the case).  I do believe though that the most
> valid argument for nuclear energy is that the non-nuclear emissions
> would have been reduced based against a world predominated by fossil
> fuel use.  Thus the potential risk from nuclear would have been
> predominantly one of locality (small leaks or containment issues),
> instead of regional/global as with fossil fuel emissions.  In short,
> better for people and the environment.  (And yes, I am assuming nuclear
> standards of today's industry, not Chernobyl.)
> 
> And to some extent, this is short-term thinking also, as nuclear mining
> and spent fuel presents its own problems.  But if you are really
> terrified of the "invisible, undetectable . . . toxins," sign up for
> the psychiatric help now - because we already have it, it is here to
> stay for the foreseeable future, and you are breathing it.
> 


My response had to do with the people side of the pollution equation not the 
toxins themselves.  Call it paranoid if you wish but there are examples of
deliberate, intentional bypassing of filters in incinerator plants, during
the night, and blowing the crap out into the air just to save the cost of
cleaning the stacks and disposing of the filters properly.  If I could trust
all people to treat me the way I would treat them, then I would not have such
fears.  I think that a general attitude of self-centered-ness, and "me first"
contributes to a moral decline and a societal loss of trust in institutions.


Dennis Nelson