FREE Two-Day Shipping for Students. Learn more |
| ||||||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
14 of 14 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Still a very important and level headed book.,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Health Hazards of Not Going Nuclear (Paperback)
Dr. Beckman's energy book is still the most concise comparison of health hazards across multiple electrical generating technologies of which I am aware.
He makes clear that no technique for generating electricity is absolutely safe. Each has its risks. However some are much more dangerous to human safety and health than others. His energy book carefully makes comparisons and shows that our failure to use nuclear as the primary heat source for electrical power generation has sentenced many people to premature death. Nuclear power generation using U.S. technology is not only safer in some aspects, but in all significant aspects. In his first chapter he discusses the fear mongering campaign that eventually halted construction of nuclear power reactors in the United States. He examines some of the lies, half-truths, and true statements of the type "I see you have not raped any under-age girls in the last two weeks." As usual fear sells, and journalists who did not wish to investigate the facts contributed heavily to the destruction of the U.S. lead in the use of the safest form of power yet discovered. Dr. Beckman disposes of the canard about the possibility of nuclear power stations exploding as part of his description of how nuclear power is used to generate electricity. We know more about the safety aspects of nuclear energy than any other form of power generation. Dr. Beckman pulls together enough of the fuzzy data available on the other forms to show that they are significantly more dangerous. Since Dr. Beckman's book was published it has been shown that coal plants release enough uranium and thorium in their stack gases and scrubber sludge to power a nuclear power plant larger than the coal powered plant. One of the few significant hazards of nuclear power is the release of radioactivity. Most coal plants release too much radioactivity to operate if they were regulated by the NRC. U.S. background radiation is about 250 millirems per year (some locations in other countries have levels 20 times higher). To this, nuclear power plants add about 0.003 millirems. Living within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant adds about 1/100 as much radiation as 1 old color TV. Grand Central station in NY could not be licensed as a nuclear reactor even without any fuel because its granite blocks emit too much radiation. Dr. Bechman discusses loss of coolant accidents and events leading to a meltdown and shows that even in this type of extreme event, loss of life is unlikely. He shows that loss of life events for nuclear power generation are the result of worst case computer simulations while deaths associated with fossil fuel generation are frequent occurrences. He discusses the many parts of the power generation cycle. For example coal mining kills about 100 times as many miners per unit of power as do fatal accidents in uranium mining. Black Lung disease causes about 50 excess lung cancer deaths for every excess case of lung cancer among uranium miners. About 100 people a year are killed in the process of transporting coal to power plants. At the time of his publication none had been reported killed transporting fuel for nuclear power plants. Storage disasters for nuclear fuel are a small calculated theoretical disaster, but storage disasters for other fuels kill actual people - a 1976 storage fire in Brooklyn killed only a few people because the wind was blowing in a favorable direction, but a 1944 LNG tank explosion in Cleveland killed 133, and in 1973 an empty LNG tank exploded killing 33. Minor accidents with gas kill about 100 people a year. In 1973 calculations show that a small change in radiation levels at nuclear plants would cost 800 million per saved life. The NRC mandated the change. A similar calculation showed that moving LNG tanks out of crowded areas would cost 0.001 million per life saved, but that has not been done. Non-fossil fuel generation also has risks. In 1928 a dam collapse in Santa Paula, California killed 450, and in 1959 a French dam collapse killed 412. A landslide into a reservoir (1963 in Italy) killed 2,000 people and left 50,000 homeless. Even solar, because of its very dilute nature, is more hazardous than nuclear. Non-nuclear waste is again far more dangerous. Dr. Beckmann has very competent explanations. He estimates that replacing a 1,000 MW coal plant with a nuclear plant will save very roughly between 20 and 100 lives a year. Dr. Beckman even discusses environmental impacts, terrorism, sabotage. reliability, and economy. Quite a bit for 177 pages of text including a 5 page preface on Three Mile Island. This book is still incredibly informative and pertinent to our resumption of nuclear plant construction. Hopefully this time the lies will not be accepted so uncritically.
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
An excellent and worthwhile analysis,
By
This review is from: The Health Hazards of Not Going Nuclear (Paperback)
The book is an in-depth technical treatment of the subject, but it is very readable for the layman. Beckmann deals with the arguments against nuclear power in a clear and decisive fashion. There is an interesting analysis of the reasons for the controversy as well. The only major problem I have with this book is the fact that it is rather outdated at 20+ years old.
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Rational attack on unreasoned silliness,
By A Customer
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Health Hazards of Not Going Nuclear (Paperback)
A thoughtful examination of the energy issue, as well as environmental safety concerns associated with it. Accurate, reliable well researched, I strongly recommend this book for anyone concerned with the future of society or the environment.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
