Abstract
A commentary is provided on the uncertainties in the data and in qualifying the phenomena relating to the risks imposed by the various steps involved in the use of coal, oil, natural gas, hydropower, and nuclear fuels for the generation of electricity. Uncertainties appear to be extremely large for hydropower which exhibits both large scale ecological impacts and the potential for high consequence, moderate frequency events at specific sites. Major risk-related uncertainties with the use of nuclear fuels include those surrounding nuclear weapons proliferation and reactor accident frequencies and consequences. Uncertainties for coal and oil include specification of the damage function of air transported sulfates and the effects of atmospheric CO2 buildup, acid rain, and groundwater contamination from mine water runoff. Compounding these problems is the potential impact of the growing global competition for a diminishing supply of oil. In the studies reviewed herein, the assessed risks of the nuclear fuel cycle are no greater than those of the primary alternatives. Prudence suggests that we do not totally reject any particular option at this time on the basis of health effects alone; similarly, no option is an undisputed choice.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Starr C. Social benefit versus technological risk. Science. 1969 Sep 19;165(3899):1232–1238. doi: 10.1126/science.165.3899.1232. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Winkelstein W., Jr, Kantor S., Davis E. W., Maneri C. S., Mosher W. E. The relationship of air pollution and economic status to total mortality and selected respiratory system mortality in men. I. suspended particulates. Arch Environ Health. 1967 Jan;14(1):162–171. doi: 10.1080/00039896.1967.10664708. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]