COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	%cohen[w88,jmc]		Review of Cohen for Stanford summer reading
C00005 ENDMK
C⊗;
%cohen[w88,jmc]		Review of Cohen for Stanford summer reading

	If the ultimate fate of nuclear energy in the U.S. were entirely
to be determined by the politics of 1988, it would be doomed.  The
Republican candidates are weakly for it, and the Democrats have all taken
positions against it and in support of every kind of obstructionism.
However, if nuclear energy is really the best option for humanity
over the next several hundred years, it will win.  Of course, this
wouldn't be inevitable if the U.S. were the only country in the
world.  It has happened in the past, and one can imagine it happening
in the future, that a country will firmly follow a path to ruin,
regardless of the information available about alternate paths.
Fortunately, there are many countries in the world, and France,
Japan and the Soviet Union (in spite of Chernobyl) continue to
develop nuclear energy successfully.  If they're right, and I
think they are, we'll eventually wake up, suffering only a little
unnecessary poverty and additional loss of technological leadership.

	Bernard Cohen, a physicist specializing in health related
radiation problems, presents a carefully argued case.  He is strongest
in treating the problems of reactor accidents, waste disposal and
other radiation hazards.  He carefully compares the {\it loss of life
expectancy} (LLE) from nuclear energy with other hazards and finds it
small.  It is also small compared to the LLE of other methods of
energy generation and the LLE being caused by the country being
poorer.

%energy religion