Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!space
From: Slocum@HI-MULTICS.ARPA (Brett Slocum)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re: plutonium
Message-ID: <860303165814.950167@HI-MULTICS.ARPA>
Date: Mon, 3-Mar-86 11:58:00 EST
Article-I.D.: HI-MULTI.860303165814.950167
Posted: Mon Mar  3 11:58:00 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 5-Mar-86 04:04:15 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 40

Now, sarcasm aside.

In regards to the plutonium question, I should have stated that plutonium
is a rather poisonous substance, not the most poisonous.  Since few
studies have been done since the 50's due to lack of government interest
and money and volunteers, it is difficult to exactly determine 
the toxicity.  I tend to take potential risks seriously, unlike the
NASA and MT management (and some readers of this forum) appear to. 

I don't buy the harmlessness of dropping radioactive materials into the
ocean.  Yes, the United States did it for a while (and stopped), and
Britain is still doing it, but there have been problems from this
activity.  Areas in coastal Ireland, which is the closest land area
to the British dumping area, have reported very high incidences of
cancer, attributable to the dumping activity.  Also, some of the material
has been found as far away as Scandinavia.  Now, I realise that the
amount involved in dumping are high, but the material is put into
steel or lead casks and supposedly remains intact.  In the case of the shuttle,
most of the material may remain intact, but some will not, and little of
it would be as well protected as the dumping casks.  

As far as the death of thousands, I'm not talking about dying instantly
or even in a month from the accident. I'm talking ten years down the road.
Cancer works that way. 

In reference to hysteria, I find the negative responses to my original posting
to show a remarkable level of propaganda in the opposite direction. They
seem to be saying "No experts believe plutonium to be exceptionally
dangerous", "No additional deaths would occur", "Nobody has ever died
from atmospheric releases of plutonium", "It's safe to dump it in the
ocean", etc. with as little to back them up as I did.  They sound like
spokespersons for Kerr-McGee or the rest of the nuclear power industry or
the U.S. government.

Now, I hope that we can leave this topic alone and move on to other things.

    -- Brett Slocum <Slocum at HI-MULTICS.ARPA>

P.S. My reference was not the National Enquirer, but The Nation, which
is respected, but somewhat anti-nuclear.