Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!floyd!harpo!ihnp4!ihuxb!alle
From: alle@ihuxb.UUCP (Allen England)
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: Nuclear power reduces radioactivity
Message-ID: <622@ihuxb.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 24-Apr-84 13:31:23 EST
Article-I.D.: ihuxb.622
Posted: Tue Apr 24 13:31:23 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 26-Apr-84 01:25:06 EST
References: <2720@azure.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL
Lines: 22


  ]>One thing I haven't heard anyone mention in the debate of nuclear power
  ]>versus coal power (yes, there are other possibilities, but the ones that
  ]>have been developed have severe environmental consequences, too) is the
  ]>radioactivity of coal.  My understanding from physicists that know
  ]>better than I is that more radioactivity is released per kilowatt-hour
  ]>from a coal-fired electric plant than from a nuclear electric plant
  ]>(including the radioactive waste from the nuclear plant and the low-grade 
  ]>radioactivity from mine tailings and waste from refining nuclear fuel).  

]Absolutely not true.  Coal contains, on the average, 1.8 parts per million
](ppm) uranium.  In comparison, the average uranium content of uranium ore is
]1500 ppm.  To produce an equivalent amount of electricity, about 20 times more
]coal than uranium ore must be mined.  But because there is roughly 1000 times
]more uranium in uranium ore than coal, the mining part of the nuclear fuel
]cycle brings 50 times as much radioactivity to the earth's surface (1000/20=50).

Whoa!  What about Carbon-14???  I believe that it is a significant part
of coal.

--> Allen <--
ihnp4!ihuxb!alle