[Date Prev][Date Next][Date Index]

RE: E-M:/ Nukes

Enviro-Mich message from Rane Curl <ranecurl@engin.umich.edu>

On Wed, 10 Jul 2002, Patrick Diehl wrote:

> We believe your economic argument is specious.  If the nuclear power
> industry attempted to purchase liability insurance on the open market, it
> could not.

This appears irrelevent to the question of real risks. There is very
little nuclear power liability experience upon which to base insurance
premiums, and hence the insurance judgements are more based in perceived
than in established risks. This is also common in more mundane activities
when insurance companies do not have accumuluated experience in real
risks. In contrast to this (for example), although the risk of death,
injury and property destruction is much greater in the transportation
sector than in the nuclear sector, insurance is available for the former
because of the very well documented risks and claims history.

I suggest that the discussion be returned to comparisons of the long term
risks associated with the accumulation of nuclear wastes at numerous
separate locations around the country, many close to population centers or
sensitive resources (water supply, for example), versus moving and storing
these wastes at a more isolated and secure central repository.

--Rane L. Curl

ENVIRO-MICH:  Internet List and Forum for Michigan Environmental
and Conservation Issues and Michigan-based Citizen Action.   Archives at

Postings to:  enviro-mich@great-lakes.net      For info, send email to
majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info enviro-mich"