Similar Posts

Recent Comments from our Readers

  1. Avatar
  2. Avatar
  3. Avatar
  4. Avatar
  5. Avatar

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe to Comments:

4 Comments

  1. Thanks Rod for the interview and for letting us know about the book. Dr. Montgomery has a short video, Global Approach to Nuclear Energy, at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22IfuM6VH6A . I love the contrast between the expansive video title – ‘Global Approach’ – and its length, one minute 42 seconds.

  2. As someone without a conversion story (I read the occasional schlock TV-derived book as a kid and one of them was from “Voyage to the bottom of the sea”, so I never was anything but favorable to nuclear power) it’s good to see those who’ve switched camps and what prompted them.

    The sad stories are those of people who are already converted, but don’t dare say so out loud because they fear alienating all of their still-brainwashed followers.

  3. The mention of the Hanford N reactor vs Chernobyl missed the fact that, unlike Chernobyl, the N reactor had a higher fuel to moderator ratio that previented an excursion like what occurred at Chernobyl. I realize to the public this may be thought of as a nuance, but such design features can make a big difference.

  4. Rod,

    Before I listen to this podcast I want to ask you a question: why do you support a carbon tax rather than a radiation tax? Does not hydrocarbon resource acquisition, as well as hydrocarbon burning, release all manner of measurable radiation? Would not demand for a radiation tax be a more effective way to attack the Linear No Threshold Hypothesis?