X-Message-Number: 11319
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:35:28 +0100
From:  (John de Rivaz)
Subject: Re: To Crevier and others

In article: <> Thomas Donaldson 
<> writes:
> The current ban on nuclear power is not necessarily going to be permanent.
> In fact, if it is done in space then most of the arguments against it
> would disappear completely. Where is the pollution? For that matter, even
> without nuclear power, large masses can be flung here and there --- much
> more dangerous than any bomb.

I have never understood banning nuclear power in space - surely to be 
sensible such a ban should include most of the objects found there, such as 
stars, pulsars, black holes, quasars etc? One of the objections to sending 
people to the planet Mars seems to be the radiation dose that they would 
receive during the journey. Putting lead shielding or a magenetic shield 
similar to the Earth's around a space vehicle would be totally impractical 
as far as I know.

Of course there is a risk in *launching* radioactive material into space. In 
an accident, it might burn up and disperse in the Earth's atmosphere. But 
presumably this problem could be overcome by launching inert matter into 
space that can be made radioactive one it is up there.

Sincerely, John de Rivaz
Homepage:         http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/JohndeR
Longevity Report: http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Sauna/3748/lr.htm
Fractal Report:   http://www.longevb.demon.co.uk/fr.htm 
PCS - a  Singles listing sheet for people in Cornwall

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=11319