Dark Matter 10/9 - Art Bell interviews Dr. Andrew Karam

Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess I should say, too, that just because something isn't dangerous doesn't mean it's OK. My view of much of this is that it's sort of like my sons' room - it's not an immediate danger to my health, but it still needs to be cleaned up if I'm going to feel comfortable there for a prolonged period of time. Likewise, the contamination from Fukushima doesn't pose a significant threat to anyone's health - but it still needs to be cleaned up, and we should do our best to keep it from getting any worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow
Wow - I wasn't expecting much interest before the show. I'm going to have to step out from time to time for coffee (and I'll have to stop typing during show), but let me see if I can try to help out. And also, don't worry about the "Doctor" part - I really prefer Andy. My great-uncle was Dr Karam - he delivered babies and made people feel better. I usually just put my students and co-workers to sleep, so I'm not sure it really applies to me. Anyhow...
LOL! :D
 
Do you think nuclear energy is a viable source to replace coal powered plants or are they too dangerous Andy?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow
Do you think nuclear energy is a viable source to replace coal powered plants or are they too dangerous Andy?

That's a really good question. To me the answer's not too difficult - I lived within 200 feet of an operating nuclear reactor for nearly 4 years and didn't worry about it at all. What worried me was that we might be caught by the Soviets. That, and the quality of our food and coffee. So I KNOW that you can make a safe nuclear reactor - it's just that safety costs money and we have to try to balance the cost of added safety versus the risk that we might need that protection. For example, I can drive a tank and be totally safe on the highway - but tanks are expensive and I don't run across many risks that I'd need a tank to protect me from.

In comparison to coal, would you believe that there's more radiation dose to the public from coal than from nuclear? It's because coal contains radioactivity - due to the geochemistry of uranium and the way that coal forms. Plus, coal mines kill a lot of people - more people die in coal mines every year than were killed by Chernobyl in the last 27 years. When you also factor in indirect deaths due to air pollution and global warming, nuclear comes out a lot safer than coal - even we we add in Fukushima and Chernobyl.

I should also say that I know these are controversial statements - but I can back them up with my own calculations as well as studies of a bunch of organizations - and not all of them are government studies or industry studies. I don't have the references here at my fingertips, but if there's enough interest I can post links later this week or next week.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow
Thank you for joining us before the show tonight Andy!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow
I do agree that coal mines have killed many and is not great for the environment and nuclear can be a very safe way to create energy but I don't believe some companies and/or government know how to run them correctly in an emergency, maintain them or even install them in a geological safe place such as Fukushima.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Shadow
I do agree that coal mines have killed many and is not great for the environment and nuclear can be a very safe way to create energy but I don't believe some companies and/or government know how to run them correctly in an emergency, maintain them or even install them in a geological safe place such as Fukushima.

You're right - those are the key points. The bottom line is that most large-scale forms of energy have inherent dangers and we've got to try to manage those dangers as best we can. There are some great programs out there - France and Canada for example have had very few problems and none of them serious. In the US only the Three Mile Island plant has had a severe accident and even that didn't expose many people to radiation. And prior to Fukushima, the Japanese had an enviable safety record.

To me, the interesting thing is that, even though the reactors were pretty well destroyed, nobody died from radiation exposure and nobody is going to die from radiation exposure from this accident. This is like saying that I've had several auto accidents - but I've never been hurt. If we design the plants well then they should protect us (workers adn public) from even the occasional accident. Of course we don't want to have an accident - but at least if one happens (as with my car) we can do our best to keep them from hurting anyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adele_delight
Greetings and good evening Andy. Welcome to the Dark Matter Fan Forum. I was so looking forward to listening to you on Art Bell's show tonight until I got some bad news. My bandwidth allotment is very low and I won't be able to listen to you on SXM. Depressing to say the least. However, I can still participate in the Chat Thread here so it's not a total loss for me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.