To: Grainne who wrote (17359 ) 2/1/1998 2:34:00 AM From: Krowbar Respond to of 108807
Hi Christine, I was responding to your statement in post 17273 below when I said that we are incapable of destroying life with our nuclear weapons. << Speaking of asteriod deflecting, that will almost certainly happen with nuclear weapons. I believe this is a very mixed bag, and that it is just as probable that we will destroy all life with them as save ourselves, and I think this is the double edged sword of technology. >> I try to choose my words carefully. I did not say that nuclear weapons are safe, or don't cause tremendous damage, only that they will not kill off all life. I was extrapolating based on past nuclear explosions. The immediate blast damage is deadly to a radius of about 5 miles. We have millions of square miles of Earth surface. The lasting radiation will kill a percentage of the survivors, but not all. If the Aussies didn't hear any news reports, they would barely know anything happened. Their biggest clue would be red sunsets. I also did not say that exploding nuclear plants are O.K. To the people that lived nearby, it was a disaster. People 100 miles away didn't know anything happened. The pictures and poems should be a reminder that we need to build nuclear plants safely. Chernobyl had no containment structure, and was poorly engineered and sloppily built. There was nobody killed at Three Mile Island. I stand by my statement that our greatest danger is greenhouse gases. Runnaway greenhouse effect is capable of killing of all life, almost. There will be a few heat loving bacteria remaining that will feast on our bodies. Efficient housing and transportation should be our first priority. Efficient housing with solar panels will need little or no outside energy. Unless we give up our addiction to cars, we need to find another way to power them. I see electric cars in the future powered by nuclear plants as the answer. Perhaps someday we will power them with solar powered garage roofs.