Ja.? Om nie
eens te praat van radioaktiwiteit wat daardie neutrone gaan
induseer nie.? En daardie wand wat die neutrone moet keer, moet
ook nogal naby 'n plasma van sowat 150 miljoen C (of K) wees.
Tungsten verdamp (sublimeer) onderkant 3 000 C, en moet dus
aktief verkoel word.? En neutrone wat deur die wand en
verkoeling kom, tref en beskadig dan die ultraduur kriogene
supergeleidende magneetspoele.? Sal laasgenoemde meer as 'n
minuut van kontinue plasma fusie kan oorleef?? Meer as 'n dag??
On 2024/11/14 21:28, Pieter Van der
Walt via groups.io wrote:
Die idee van metale wat self stralingskade herstel
klink maar vergesog.
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024, 19:59
bernhard via , <bernhard=[email protected]>
wrote:
Hierdie
is uitstekende artikels.? Lees ook die kommentaar aan
die einde van die Eerste artikel (Fusion, forever the
energy of tomorrow?).? Die koste van die teiken was $100
000, en dit het maar 3.15 MJ gelewer -- minder as 1 kWu
se neutron supersnel neutrone, en dalk 0.1 kWu se hitte
wat dalk eendag in nog minder elektrisiteit omgesit kan
word.? En sowat 90 kWu was nodig om die lasers te pomp
om heelwat minder as 0.1 kWu se elektrisiteit te lewer.
In
die tweede artikel (Feretting out the truth about
Fusion) se^ Rosner:? "Embrittlement
won¡¯t be a showstopper for fusion energy."? Daarvan
verskil ek nogal.? Soos ook dr Klaus Isebeck--
destydse hoof van Stralingsbeskadiging by SA se AEK
(of dalk destyds reeds Kernkor).? Hy het in 'n kursus
oor daardie onderwerp by UP se Dept Fisika onomwonde
gese^:? "People who believe in Nuclear Fusion, do not
understand Radiation Damage".
On
2024/11/14 18:13, Pieter Van der Walt via wrote:
Hierdie ouens vertel dieselfde storie as
Bernhard. Nie in ons leeftyd nie, nie in ons
kleinkinders se leeftyd nie.
PW
----------
Forwarded message ---------
From: Pieter
Van der Walt via <pwvanderwalt=[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 5:20?PM
Subject: [ZA-energie] Fusion, forever the energy
of tomorrow?
To: ZA_energie <[email protected]>
From: Bulletin
of the Atomic Scientists<newsletter@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 4:23?PM
Subject: Fusion, forever the energy of
tomorrow?
To: <pwvanderwalt@...>
UK
Nuclear Notebook | Bob Rosner Interview
| More? ? ?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Read a shareable version
of this
newsletter.
Was this email
forwarded to
you?
to stay
current.
Presented in partnership
with
November
14, 2024
?
?
A
researcher in
the interior
of the
magnetic
fusion
experiment
known as
Alcator C-Mod
at MIT. The
interior of
the
donut-shaped
device
confines
plasma hotter
than the
interior of
the sun, using
high magnetic
fields. (Image
courtesy of
Bob Mumgaard /
Plasma Science
and Fusion
Center, MIT.)
DAN DROLLETTE JR
The Bulletin's November 2024 magazine
investigates
nuclear
fusion's
potential.
Will it become
a commercial
energy source
within the
next decade,
or will we
still be
waiting a
century from
now??
DAN DROLLETTE JR
Can
nuclear fusion
be developed
quickly enough
to make a
difference for
climate
change?
Theoretical
physicist,
former head of
Argonne
National
Laboratory,
and
self-described
"plasma guy"
Bob Rosner
discusses?fusion,
climate
change, and
other reasons
to pursue it.
Part of our
November
magazine, this
article is
available to
all for a
limited time.?
Advertisement
HANS M. KRISTENSEN,
MATT KORDA,
ELIANA JOHNS,
MACKENZIE
KNIGHT
For decades, the United Kingdom has maintained a
stockpile of
approximately
225 nuclear
warheads¡ªup to
120 of which
are available
for delivery
by four?Vanguard-class
nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines.?The stockpile is now
increasing,
according to
the latest
Nuclear
Notebook by
experts at the
Federation of
American
Scientists.?
?
Royal Navy Vanguard-class
nuclear-powered
ballistic
missile
submarine HMS
Victorious
departs HM
Naval Base
Clyde?in?Scotland.
The other
three Vanguard-class
SSBNs are also
based at
Clyde.
(Credit: Will
Haigh / UK
Ministry of
Defence.)
ROBERT ALVAREZ
Yesterday marked 50 years since the death of?Karen
Silkwood, a
union activist
and
whistleblower?at
a plutonium
fuel
plant.?Robert
Alvarez
recounts the
efforts he,
his wife, and
others made in
successfully
seeking
justice for
her.?
QUOTE
OF THE DAY
"Because we haven't
seen severe
illness and
deaths yet, I
think there's
been some
complacency
around trying
to control
this virus
[H5N1], but
I've always
said we
shouldn't wait
for farm
workers to die
before we take
action to
protect them.
I just don't
think you
should gamble
with people's
lives like
that."
¡ª Jennifer
Nuzzo,
director of
the Pandemic
Center
and?professor
of
epidemiology
at Brown
University
School of
Public
Health,?The
Guardian
?
PRESENTED IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH
Join a free course exploring AI policy
challenges,
developed with
MIT and Oxford
experts.
Learn about
frameworks for
governing
advanced AI
and proposals
to mitigate
extreme risks.
Our alumni
shape policy
at
governments,
international
organizations,
and leading
think tanks.
Your gift fuels our
mission to
educate and
empower.
Together we
will work to
ensure science
serves
humanity.
?
?
???
? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ??
?
Copyright ? 2024?Bulletin
of the Atomic
Scientists
On Thu, 14 Nov 2024, 19:59 bernhard via , <bernhard=[email protected]> wrote:
Hierdie is
uitstekende artikels.? Lees ook die kommentaar aan die einde van
die Eerste artikel (Fusion, forever the energy of tomorrow?).?
Die koste van die teiken was $100 000, en dit het maar 3.15 MJ
gelewer -- minder as 1 kWu se neutron supersnel neutrone, en
dalk 0.1 kWu se hitte wat dalk eendag in nog minder
elektrisiteit omgesit kan word.? En sowat 90 kWu was nodig om
die lasers te pomp om heelwat minder as 0.1 kWu se elektrisiteit
te lewer.
In die tweede
artikel (Feretting out the truth about Fusion) se^ Rosner:? "Embrittlement
won¡¯t be a showstopper for fusion energy."? Daarvan verskil ek
nogal.? Soos ook dr Klaus Isebeck-- destydse hoof van
Stralingsbeskadiging by SA se AEK (of dalk destyds reeds
Kernkor).? Hy het in 'n kursus oor daardie onderwerp by UP se
Dept Fisika onomwonde gese^:? "People who believe in Nuclear
Fusion, do not understand Radiation Damage".
On
2024/11/14 18:13, Pieter Van der Walt via wrote:
Hierdie ouens vertel dieselfde storie as Bernhard.
Nie in ons leeftyd nie, nie in ons kleinkinders se leeftyd nie.
PW
---------- Forwarded
message ---------
From: Pieter
Van der Walt via <pwvanderwalt=[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 5:20?PM
Subject: [ZA-energie] Fusion, forever the energy of
tomorrow?
To: ZA_energie <[email protected]>
From: Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists<newsletter@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 4:23?PM
Subject: Fusion, forever the energy of tomorrow?
To: <pwvanderwalt@...>
UK
Nuclear Notebook | Bob Rosner Interview | More?
? ?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Read a shareable version
of this
newsletter.
Was this email
forwarded to
you? to stay
current.
Presented in partnership
with
November
14, 2024
?
?
A
researcher in
the interior
of the
magnetic
fusion
experiment
known as
Alcator C-Mod
at MIT. The
interior of
the
donut-shaped
device
confines
plasma hotter
than the
interior of
the sun, using
high magnetic
fields. (Image
courtesy of
Bob Mumgaard /
Plasma Science
and Fusion
Center, MIT.)
DAN DROLLETTE JR
The Bulletin's November 2024 magazine
investigates
nuclear
fusion's
potential.
Will it become
a commercial
energy source
within the
next decade,
or will we
still be
waiting a
century from
now??
DAN DROLLETTE JR
Can
nuclear fusion
be developed
quickly enough
to make a
difference for
climate
change?
Theoretical
physicist,
former head of
Argonne
National
Laboratory,
and
self-described
"plasma guy"
Bob Rosner
discusses?fusion,
climate
change, and
other reasons
to pursue it.
Part of our
November
magazine, this
article is
available to
all for a
limited time.?
Advertisement
HANS M. KRISTENSEN,
MATT KORDA,
ELIANA JOHNS,
MACKENZIE
KNIGHT
For decades, the United Kingdom has maintained a
stockpile of
approximately
225 nuclear
warheads¡ªup to
120 of which
are available
for delivery
by four?Vanguard-class
nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines.?The stockpile is now
increasing,
according to
the latest
Nuclear
Notebook by
experts at the
Federation of
American
Scientists.?
?
Royal Navy Vanguard-class
nuclear-powered
ballistic
missile
submarine HMS
Victorious
departs HM
Naval Base
Clyde?in?Scotland.
The other
three Vanguard-class
SSBNs are also
based at
Clyde.
(Credit: Will
Haigh / UK
Ministry of
Defence.)
ROBERT ALVAREZ
Yesterday marked 50 years since the death of?Karen
Silkwood, a
union activist
and
whistleblower?at
a plutonium
fuel
plant.?Robert
Alvarez
recounts the
efforts he,
his wife, and
others made in
successfully
seeking
justice for
her.?
QUOTE
OF THE DAY
"Because we haven't
seen severe
illness and
deaths yet, I
think there's
been some
complacency
around trying
to control
this virus
[H5N1], but
I've always
said we
shouldn't wait
for farm
workers to die
before we take
action to
protect them.
I just don't
think you
should gamble
with people's
lives like
that."
¡ª Jennifer
Nuzzo,
director of
the Pandemic
Center
and?professor
of
epidemiology
at Brown
University
School of
Public
Health,?The
Guardian
?
PRESENTED IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH
Join a free course exploring AI policy
challenges,
developed with
MIT and Oxford
experts.
Learn about
frameworks for
governing
advanced AI
and proposals
to mitigate
extreme risks.
Our alumni
shape policy
at
governments,
international
organizations,
and leading
think tanks.
Your gift fuels our
mission to
educate and
empower.
Together we
will work to
ensure science
serves
humanity.
?
?
???
? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ??
?
Copyright ? 2024?Bulletin
of the Atomic
Scientists
Hierdie is
uitstekende artikels.? Lees ook die kommentaar aan die einde van
die Eerste artikel (Fusion, forever the energy of tomorrow?).?
Die koste van die teiken was $100 000, en dit het maar 3.15 MJ
gelewer -- minder as 1 kWu se neutron supersnel neutrone, en
dalk 0.1 kWu se hitte wat dalk eendag in nog minder
elektrisiteit omgesit kan word.? En sowat 90 kWu was nodig om
die lasers te pomp om heelwat minder as 0.1 kWu se elektrisiteit
te lewer.
In die tweede
artikel (Feretting out the truth about Fusion) se^ Rosner:? "Embrittlement
won¡¯t be a showstopper for fusion energy."? Daarvan verskil ek
nogal.? Soos ook dr Klaus Isebeck-- destydse hoof van
Stralingsbeskadiging by SA se AEK (of dalk destyds reeds
Kernkor).? Hy het in 'n kursus oor daardie onderwerp by UP se
Dept Fisika onomwonde gese^:? "People who believe in Nuclear
Fusion, do not understand Radiation Damage".
On
2024/11/14 18:13, Pieter Van der Walt via groups.io wrote:
Hierdie ouens vertel dieselfde storie as Bernhard.
Nie in ons leeftyd nie, nie in ons kleinkinders se leeftyd nie.
PW
---------- Forwarded
message ---------
From: Pieter
Van der Walt via <pwvanderwalt=[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 5:20?PM
Subject: [ZA-energie] Fusion, forever the energy of
tomorrow?
To: ZA_energie <[email protected]>
From: Bulletin of the
Atomic Scientists<newsletter@...>
Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 4:23?PM
Subject: Fusion, forever the energy of tomorrow?
To: <pwvanderwalt@...>
UK
Nuclear Notebook | Bob Rosner Interview | More?
? ?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Read a shareable version
of this
newsletter.
Was this email
forwarded to
you? to stay
current.
Presented in partnership
with
November
14, 2024
?
?
A
researcher in
the interior
of the
magnetic
fusion
experiment
known as
Alcator C-Mod
at MIT. The
interior of
the
donut-shaped
device
confines
plasma hotter
than the
interior of
the sun, using
high magnetic
fields. (Image
courtesy of
Bob Mumgaard /
Plasma Science
and Fusion
Center, MIT.)
DAN DROLLETTE JR
The Bulletin's November 2024 magazine
investigates
nuclear
fusion's
potential.
Will it become
a commercial
energy source
within the
next decade,
or will we
still be
waiting a
century from
now??
DAN DROLLETTE JR
Can
nuclear fusion
be developed
quickly enough
to make a
difference for
climate
change?
Theoretical
physicist,
former head of
Argonne
National
Laboratory,
and
self-described
"plasma guy"
Bob Rosner
discusses?fusion,
climate
change, and
other reasons
to pursue it.
Part of our
November
magazine, this
article is
available to
all for a
limited time.?
Advertisement
HANS M. KRISTENSEN,
MATT KORDA,
ELIANA JOHNS,
MACKENZIE
KNIGHT
For decades, the United Kingdom has maintained a
stockpile of
approximately
225 nuclear
warheads¡ªup to
120 of which
are available
for delivery
by four?Vanguard-class
nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines.?The stockpile is now
increasing,
according to
the latest
Nuclear
Notebook by
experts at the
Federation of
American
Scientists.?
?
Royal Navy Vanguard-class
nuclear-powered
ballistic
missile
submarine HMS
Victorious
departs HM
Naval Base
Clyde?in?Scotland.
The other
three Vanguard-class
SSBNs are also
based at
Clyde.
(Credit: Will
Haigh / UK
Ministry of
Defence.)
ROBERT ALVAREZ
Yesterday marked 50 years since the death of?Karen
Silkwood, a
union activist
and
whistleblower?at
a plutonium
fuel
plant.?Robert
Alvarez
recounts the
efforts he,
his wife, and
others made in
successfully
seeking
justice for
her.?
QUOTE
OF THE DAY
"Because we haven't
seen severe
illness and
deaths yet, I
think there's
been some
complacency
around trying
to control
this virus
[H5N1], but
I've always
said we
shouldn't wait
for farm
workers to die
before we take
action to
protect them.
I just don't
think you
should gamble
with people's
lives like
that."
¡ª Jennifer
Nuzzo,
director of
the Pandemic
Center
and?professor
of
epidemiology
at Brown
University
School of
Public
Health,?The
Guardian
?
PRESENTED IN PARTNERSHIP
WITH
Join a free course exploring AI policy
challenges,
developed with
MIT and Oxford
experts.
Learn about
frameworks for
governing
advanced AI
and proposals
to mitigate
extreme risks.
Our alumni
shape policy
at
governments,
international
organizations,
and leading
think tanks.
Your gift fuels our
mission to
educate and
empower.
Together we
will work to
ensure science
serves
humanity.
?
?
???
? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ??
?
Copyright ? 2024?Bulletin
of the Atomic
Scientists
Hierdie ouens vertel dieselfde storie as Bernhard. Nie in ons leeftyd nie, nie in ons kleinkinders se leeftyd nie.
PW
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Pieter Van der Walt via <pwvanderwalt=[email protected]> Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 5:20?PM Subject: [ZA-energie] Fusion, forever the energy of tomorrow? To: ZA_energie <[email protected]>
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists<newsletter@...> Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 4:23?PM Subject: Fusion, forever the energy of tomorrow? To: <pwvanderwalt@...>
UK Nuclear Notebook | Bob Rosner Interview | More? ? ?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Read a shareable version of this newsletter.
Was this email forwarded to you? to stay current.
Presented in partnership with
November 14, 2024
?
?
A researcher in the interior of the magnetic fusion experiment known as Alcator C-Mod at MIT. The interior of the donut-shaped device confines plasma hotter than the interior of the sun, using high magnetic fields. (Image courtesy of Bob Mumgaard / Plasma Science and Fusion Center, MIT.)
DAN DROLLETTE JR
The Bulletin's November 2024 magazine investigates nuclear fusion's potential. Will it become a commercial energy source within the next decade, or will we still be waiting a century from now??
DAN DROLLETTE JR
Can nuclear fusion be developed quickly enough to make a difference for climate change? Theoretical physicist, former head of Argonne National Laboratory, and self-described "plasma guy" Bob Rosner discusses?fusion, climate change, and other reasons to pursue it. Part of our November magazine, this article is available to all for a limited time.?
Advertisement
HANS M. KRISTENSEN, MATT KORDA, ELIANA JOHNS, MACKENZIE KNIGHT
For decades, the United Kingdom has maintained a stockpile of approximately 225 nuclear warheads¡ªup to 120 of which are available for delivery by four?Vanguard-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines.?The stockpile is now increasing, according to the latest Nuclear Notebook by experts at the Federation of American Scientists.?
?
Royal Navy Vanguard-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine HMS Victorious departs HM Naval Base Clyde?in?Scotland. The other three Vanguard-class SSBNs are also based at Clyde. (Credit: Will Haigh / UK Ministry of Defence.)
ROBERT ALVAREZ
Yesterday marked 50 years since the death of?Karen Silkwood, a union activist and whistleblower?at a plutonium fuel plant.?Robert Alvarez recounts the efforts he, his wife, and others made in successfully seeking justice for her.?
QUOTE OF THE DAY
"Because we haven't seen severe illness and deaths yet, I think there's been some complacency around trying to control this virus [H5N1], but I've always said we shouldn't wait for farm workers to die before we take action to protect them. I just don't think you should gamble with people's lives like that."
¡ª Jennifer Nuzzo, director of the Pandemic Center and?professor of epidemiology at Brown University School of Public Health,?The Guardian
?
PRESENTED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
Join a free course exploring AI policy challenges, developed with MIT and Oxford experts.
Learn about frameworks for governing advanced AI and proposals to mitigate extreme risks.
Our alumni shape policy at governments, international organizations, and leading think tanks.
Your gift fuels our mission to educate and empower. Together we will work to ensure science serves humanity.
?
?
??? ? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ??
?
Copyright ? 2024?Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists<newsletter@...> Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2024 at 4:23?PM Subject: Fusion, forever the energy of tomorrow? To: <pwvanderwalt@...>
UK Nuclear Notebook | Bob Rosner Interview | More? ? ?
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Read a shareable version of this newsletter.
Was this email forwarded to you? to stay current.
Presented in partnership with
November 14, 2024
?
?
A researcher in the interior of the magnetic fusion experiment known as Alcator C-Mod at MIT. The interior of the donut-shaped device confines plasma hotter than the interior of the sun, using high magnetic fields. (Image courtesy of Bob Mumgaard / Plasma Science and Fusion Center, MIT.)
DAN DROLLETTE JR
The Bulletin's November 2024 magazine investigates nuclear fusion's potential. Will it become a commercial energy source within the next decade, or will we still be waiting a century from now??
DAN DROLLETTE JR
Can nuclear fusion be developed quickly enough to make a difference for climate change? Theoretical physicist, former head of Argonne National Laboratory, and self-described "plasma guy" Bob Rosner discusses?fusion, climate change, and other reasons to pursue it. Part of our November magazine, this article is available to all for a limited time.?
Advertisement
HANS M. KRISTENSEN, MATT KORDA, ELIANA JOHNS, MACKENZIE KNIGHT
For decades, the United Kingdom has maintained a stockpile of approximately 225 nuclear warheads¡ªup to 120 of which are available for delivery by four?Vanguard-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines.?The stockpile is now increasing, according to the latest Nuclear Notebook by experts at the Federation of American Scientists.?
?
Royal Navy Vanguard-class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine HMS Victorious departs HM Naval Base Clyde?in?Scotland. The other three Vanguard-class SSBNs are also based at Clyde. (Credit: Will Haigh / UK Ministry of Defence.)
ROBERT ALVAREZ
Yesterday marked 50 years since the death of?Karen Silkwood, a union activist and whistleblower?at a plutonium fuel plant.?Robert Alvarez recounts the efforts he, his wife, and others made in successfully seeking justice for her.?
QUOTE OF THE DAY
"Because we haven't seen severe illness and deaths yet, I think there's been some complacency around trying to control this virus [H5N1], but I've always said we shouldn't wait for farm workers to die before we take action to protect them. I just don't think you should gamble with people's lives like that."
¡ª Jennifer Nuzzo, director of the Pandemic Center and?professor of epidemiology at Brown University School of Public Health,?The Guardian
?
PRESENTED IN PARTNERSHIP WITH
Join a free course exploring AI policy challenges, developed with MIT and Oxford experts.
Learn about frameworks for governing advanced AI and proposals to mitigate extreme risks.
Our alumni shape policy at governments, international organizations, and leading think tanks.
Your gift fuels our mission to educate and empower. Together we will work to ensure science serves humanity.
?
?
??? ? ?? ? ?? ? ?? ? ??
?
Copyright ? 2024?Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists
"... does he
try to influence Trump to recognize that as an economic matter,
clean energy is a huge opportunity for the United States to
outcompete China?"
So nie, vrees
ek, gaan dit andersom wees -- China gaan wen!? Ons nasate sal
almal Chinees moet leer lees en skryf!
Musk
Believes in Global Warming. Trump Doesn¡¯t. Will That Change?
The
Tesla billionaire is a key figure in the president-elect¡¯s
orbit. One question is whether his views on climate and clean
energy will have any sway.
Listen
to this article?¡¤ 7:26 min?
Share
full article
614
Elon
Musk is expected to have a direct line to the White House
in the coming months.Credit...Doug
Mills/The New York Times
By?
Elon
Musk has described himself as??and??But he also threw himself
wholeheartedly into electing as president someone who has
dismissed global warming as a hoax.
Now,
as President-elect Donald J. Trump prepares to enter the
White House, one big question is how much sway ¡ª if any ¡ª
Mr. Musk¡¯s views on climate change and clean energy might
have in the new administration.
During
the campaign, Mr. Trump??on electric
vehicles as he grew more friendly with Mr. Musk, the
billionaire chief executive of Tesla. After months of
bashing plug-in cars and promising to halt their sales, Mr.
Trump backtracked slightly this summer.
¡°I¡¯m
constantly talking about electric vehicles, but I don¡¯t mean
I¡¯m against them. I¡¯m totally for them,¡± he told a crowd in
Michigan. ¡°I¡¯ve driven them and they are incredible, but
they¡¯re not for everybody.¡±
Advertisement
At
the time, Mr. Musk claimed credit for Mr. Trump¡¯s apparent
shift, telling Tesla shareholders at a June meeting, ¡°I can
be persuasive.¡± Referring to Mr. Trump, he said, ¡°A lot of
his friends now have Teslas, and they all love it. And he¡¯s
a huge fan of the Cybertruck. So I think those may be
contributing factors.¡±
Now
Mr. Musk,??at Mr. Trump¡¯s
Mar-a-Lago residence and??with the
president-elect¡¯s family, is expected to have a direct line
to the White House in the coming months. Mr. Musk¡¯s
companies, including Tesla and SpaceX,?, and he is expected to seek additional
advantages for his businesses.
But
whether his persuasion might extend to other realms, such as
climate issues, remains to be seen.
¡°It¡¯s
a real question,¡± said Paul Bledsoe, a lecturer at American
University Center for Environmental Policy. ¡°Does Musk only
advocate for the interests of Tesla and SpaceX? Is he just a
self-interested lobbyist? Or does he try to influence Trump
to recognize that as an economic matter, clean energy is a
huge opportunity for the United States to outcompete China?¡±
Mr.
Musk and Mr. Trump¡¯s transition team did not respond to
requests for comment.
Mr.
Trump¡¯s views on??are no mystery.
He has doubted whether the Earth is getting hotter.
(Scientists are unequivocal that it is.) He has??climate change as ¡°where the
ocean is going to rise one-eighth of an inch over the next
400 years.¡± (Sea levels??an average of roughly eight
inches over the past century and are expected to rise
several feet or more by 2100 as glaciers and ice sheets
continue to melt.)
Advertisement
The
president-elect?, yet again, from the 2015 Paris
climate agreement, under which nearly 200 nations pledged to
curb the greenhouse gas emissions that are heating the
planet. He has attacked solar panels and wind turbines. And
he told a crowd of supporters on Wednesday that the United
States would amp up oil production even beyond current
record levels. ¡°We have more liquid gold than any country in
the world,¡± Mr. Trump said.
Mr.
Musk, by contrast, has consistently said he thinks climate
change is a problem ¡ª although he has sometimes wavered on
how urgent that problem is. He has long been a major
proponent of shifting to low-emissions technology like solar
power, batteries and electric vehicles.
In
a??published
last year by Walter Isaacson, Mr. Musk was described as
becoming interested in solar power and electric vehicles as
a college student because he was worried about the dangers
of global warming and the prospect of the world running out
of fossil fuels.
Tesla¡¯s
success in producing electric cars with mass appeal helped
supercharge a global industry. Mr. Musk¡¯s company also sells
rooftop solar panels as well as batteries that can provide
backup power to homes or help balance wind and solar power
on the grid. This year, battery storage accounts for roughly
10 percent of Tesla¡¯s revenue.
¡°I
think we should just generally lean in the direction of
sustainability,¡± Mr. Musk??during a two-hour,
live-streamed chat the two men held on X in August. ¡°And I
actually think solar is going to be a majority of Earth¡¯s
energy generation in the future.¡±
Advertisement
Mr.
Musk has also supported nuclear power, which does not
produce any greenhouse gases and which Mr. Trump has
sometimes endorsed. ¡°Nuclear electricity generation is
underrated,¡± Mr. Musk added during their chat. ¡°People have
this fear of nuclear electricity generation, but it¡¯s
actually one of the safest forms of generation.¡±
Yet
Mr. Musk also suggested that there was no hurry to stop
global warming. ¡°We still have quite a bit of time, we don¡¯t
need to rush,¡± he said in August. He later added, ¡°If, I
don¡¯t know, 50 to 100 years from now, we¡¯re mostly
sustainable, I think that¡¯ll probably be OK.¡±
That
puts him at odds with many world leaders and
environmentalists, who have urged nations to??down to
around zero by midcentury, to keep global warming at
relatively low levels. Scientists agree that the longer it
takes humanity to stop pumping greenhouse gases into the
air, the greater the risks of deadly heat waves, wildfires,
drought, storms and species extinction.
In
recent years, Mr. Musk has urged caution about drastic
societal changes to address climate change. ¡°I¡¯m super pro
climate, but we definitely don¡¯t need to put farmers out of
work to solve climate change,¡±?, commenting on farmers in Belgium
who were protesting limits on nitrogen pollution.
He
also said in his August chat with Mr. Trump, ¡°If we were to
stop using oil and gas right now, we would all be starving
and the economy would collapse. So it¡¯s, you know, I don¡¯t
think it¡¯s right to vilify the oil and gas industry.¡±
Advertisement
In
the past, however, Mr. Musk has openly disagreed with Mr.
Trump on climate issues.
In
2017, when Mr. Trump announced that the United States would
withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, Mr. Musk stepped
down from two presidential advisory councils in protest.
¡°Climate change is real,¡± he wrote. ¡°Leaving Paris is not
good for America or the world.¡±
At
the time, several officials in the Trump administration ¡ª
including Rex Tillerson, then secretary of state ¡ª??the president to stay in the
Paris accord. But in the end, Mr. Trump sided with those in
his cabinet who dismissed climate change altogether and
wanted to exit the pact.
Some
observers point out that Mr. Musk isn¡¯t the only influential
donor on the issue of energy in the president-elect¡¯s orbit.
During the campaign, Mr. Trump??from oil and gas
interests, including the billionaire Harold Hamm of
Continental Resources.
Mr.
Hamm has had Mr. Trump¡¯s ear since 2016 and pushed him then
to appoint Scott Pruitt to run the Environmental Protection
Agency, where Mr. Pruitt denied the science of global
warming and unraveled various climate regulations. (Mr. Hamm
did not respond to a request for comment.)
¡°One
can only hope that Donald Trump will put conspiracy theories
to the side and take the decisive action to address the
climate crisis that the American people deserve,¡± said Dan
Lashof, U.S. director of the World Resources Institute, an
environmental group. ¡°But I won¡¯t hold my breath.¡±
The biggest
of 2 dams for this has already been completed years ago. Then
after severe mismanagement, some fatal accidents and huge cost
overruns at the Ingula pumped storage scheme, further work at
the larger (1.5 GW,? 21 GWh) Tubatse scheme was stopped.
Re: Eskom wastes R840m on Wilge Project, then asks for 40% rate increase
On Tue, 05 Nov 2024, 06:56 Pieter Van der Walt via , <pwvanderwalt=[email protected]> wrote:
Daardie plaat haak vas!?
On Tue, 05 Nov 2024, 06:04 bernhard via , <bernhard=[email protected]> wrote:
Sabine has
quite a sense of humour, excellent common sense, and in my view
is right on most topics.? Also on the current reality of modular
reactors.
But not on
nuclear power generally or on renewables -- she after all
trained as a particle physicist rather than a nuclear physicist,
and does not really understand the practical effects of the
complexity of radioactive decay products.
On Tue, 05 Nov 2024, 06:04 bernhard via , <bernhard=[email protected]> wrote:
Sabine has
quite a sense of humour, excellent common sense, and in my view
is right on most topics.? Also on the current reality of modular
reactors.
But not on
nuclear power generally or on renewables -- she after all
trained as a particle physicist rather than a nuclear physicist,
and does not really understand the practical effects of the
complexity of radioactive decay products.
Sabine has
quite a sense of humour, excellent common sense, and in my view
is right on most topics.? Also on the current reality of modular
reactors.
But not on
nuclear power generally or on renewables -- she after all
trained as a particle physicist rather than a nuclear physicist,
and does not really understand the practical effects of the
complexity of radioactive decay products.
Re: Eskom wastes R840m on Wilge Project, then asks for 40% rate increase
On Fri, Nov 1, 2024 at 10:53?PM bernhard via <bernhard=[email protected]> wrote:
Dr NEIL OVERY: Weaponising
science in SA¡¯s nuclear discourse
The denigration of other
disciplines or voices is dangerous as nuclear power poses so
many questions that science cannot answer
?
01 November 2024 -
05:00
by?Neil Overy
During her
welcoming speech at last month¡¯s Nuclear Energy Summit
hosted by the department of electricity & energy in
Tshwane, Princy Mthombeni, one of SA¡¯s most vocal
nuclear boosters, referenced author Chimamanda Ngozi
Adichie¡¯s observation that it is dangerous to reduce
anything to a single story, reminding those present of
¡°the importance of embracing diverse perspectives¡±.
Speaking at the
summit, both electricity & energy minister
Kgosientsho Ramokgopa and his deputy, Samantha
Graham-Mar¨º, continued on this theme by emphasising that
the government was intent on engaging properly with all
stakeholders when it comes to nuclear power. For
example, Graham-Mar¨º stated that ¡°our ministry is not
going to compromise on public participation ... openness
and transparency ... we need to work together¡±.
ADVERTISING
Unfortunately, and
clearly quite intentionally, rather than embracing
¡°diverse perspectives¡± and ¡°public participation¡±, the
summit did the exact opposite. Not only were
representatives of civil society entirely excluded from
the summit, but both Graham-Mar¨º and Ramokgopa made it
clear that they had little interest in opinions about
nuclear power that were contrary to theirs or the
government¡¯s.
Graham-Mar¨º came
straight to the point in her address by stating that
opponents of nuclear power in SA are simply ¡°ignorant¡±.
Ramokgopa drank even deeper from the well of?ad hominin?attacks,
noting that opponents of nuclear power ¡°live in the mud¡±
because they ¡°soil¡± nuclear technology. These mud
dwellers are, he observed, merely ¡°commentators¡± who do
not provide evidence against nuclear power, but rather
use myths to ¡°deceive¡± South Africans.
During her
welcoming speech at last month¡¯s Nuclear Energy Summit
hosted by the department of electricity & energy in
Tshwane, Princy Mthombeni, one of SA¡¯s most vocal
nuclear boosters, referenced author Chimamanda Ngozi
Adichie¡¯s observation that it is dangerous to reduce
anything to a single story, reminding those present of
¡°the importance of embracing diverse perspectives¡±.
Speaking
at the summit, both electricity & energy minister
Kgosientsho Ramokgopa and his deputy, Samantha
Graham-Mar¨º, continued on this theme by emphasising that
the government was intent on engaging properly with all
stakeholders when it comes to nuclear power. For
example, Graham-Mar¨º stated that ¡°our ministry is not
going to compromise on public participation ... openness
and transparency ... we need to work together¡±.
Unfortunately,
and clearly quite intentionally, rather than embracing
¡°diverse perspectives¡± and ¡°public participation¡±, the
summit did the exact opposite. Not only were
representatives of civil society entirely excluded from
the summit, but both Graham-Mar¨º and Ramokgopa made it
clear that they had little interest in opinions about
nuclear power that were contrary to theirs or the
government¡¯s.
Graham-Mar¨º
came straight to the point in her address by stating
that opponents of nuclear power in SA are simply
¡°ignorant¡±. Ramokgopa drank even deeper from the well of?ad hominin?attacks,
noting that opponents of nuclear power ¡°live in the mud¡±
because they ¡°soil¡± nuclear technology. These mud
dwellers are, he observed, merely ¡°commentators¡± who do
not provide evidence against nuclear power, but rather
use myths to ¡°deceive¡± South Africans.
He
contrasted those who live in the mud with a ¡°fraternity
of scientists¡±, experts who provide ¡°objective¡± and
¡°unemotional¡± evidence that is not sullied by politics.
It is these scientists and experts, the minister
declared, who will guide the government¡¯s decision on
nuclear power, not the commentators who have ¡°not been
in a science lecture hall¡±.
The
problems with Ramokgopa¡¯s characterisation of the
nuclear debate and the role of scientists in that debate
are so many it is hard to know where to begin.?The first
is one of categorisation. What exactly is a scientist?
Ramokgopa boldly stated in his address that ¡°we have a
duty as scientists here to sustain the momentum of this
conversation¡±.
Koeberg
nuclear plant as seen from Melkbosstrand. Picture:
SHELLY CHRISTIANS
Yet
Ramokgopa, and quite a few of those who spoke in
different panels during the summit are engineers, who
many would argue are not scientists. Put simply, in
terms of nuclear power scientists are people who are
said to understand the phenomena, while engineers apply
or ¡°engineer¡± the phenomena in the real world.
The
homogeneous categorisation of scientists is also
problematic. Zizamele Mbambo, the deputy director of
nuclear power in the department of mineral resources, is
a geologist. Is a scientist without any qualification in
nuclear physics or any of the nuclear sciences any more
competent than, say, a geographer, to have an opinion on
nuclear power?
This
grouping together of a ¡°fraternity of scientists¡±
reveals the problem of privileging and venerating
science in this debate, as it assumes that anyone with a
science background, no matter what disciple of science
it may be in, not only understands the debate but
automatically understands it better than anyone who is
not a scientist. In this way, science and scientists are
¡°weaponised¡± as a means by which to present some form of
pure, evidential truth that nuclear power is good for
SA.
In
privileging scientists the minister can also dismiss
inconvenient opposition to nuclear power from other
disciplines, such as sociology, philosophy or economics.
Let¡¯s use economics as an example. There are highly
skilled economists working in SA for reputable
independent research organisations, such as Meridian
Economics, that have repeatedly shown that there is no
economic case for nuclear power in SA. But hey, they are
not ¡°scientists¡±, so it doesn¡¯t matter what they have to
say. The same goes for those who model energy choices,
such as academics at the University of Cape Town¡¯s
Energy Systems Research Group, who can presumably be
similarly ignored.
It is also
nonsense to suggest that scientists are by definition
objective, unemotional and not subject to political
influence. There are plenty of scientists who will work
for whoever pays them the most, including tobacco and
fossil fuel companies, while history has repeatedly
shown that science can serve the ends of despicable
policies founded on deeply subjective opinions and toxic
political perspectives. Let¡¯s not forget, for example,
how the discourse of ¡°scientific¡± racism buttressed the
apartheid regime.
Finally,
Ramokgopa¡¯s argument cannot explain scientists who
oppose nuclear power, of which there are many. How are
they accounted for in his schema? Similarly, if only
scientists are worthy of being listened to when it comes
to nuclear power, the guest of honour at the summit,
International Atomic Energy Agency director-general
Rafael Mariano Grossi has a problem, as he has a PhD in
international relations. The absurdity of this argument
is clear.
The
denigration of other disciplines, or voices from civil
society and society more generally, is dangerous because
nuclear power poses so many questions that science
cannot answer because they are either unanswered by
science or beyond its disciplinary scope. For example,
there is no scientific consensus on the effect of
repeated exposure to low doses of radiation, and science
has little to offer when we consider the question of how
to persuade humans to keep away from nuclear waste sites
for 100,000 years.
Despite
the rhetoric about the need to embrace different
perspectives, what we actually heard from Ramokgopa was
his willingness to embrace only those scientists who
share his government¡¯s views on nuclear power, dividing
the world into the enlightened and the ignorant. In
closing down debate in this fashion the exact opposite
of what the minister wants to happen, will happen.
Rather than accelerating the arrival of a shiny, happy
nuclear future, further distrust in the government¡¯s
intentions will be sown.
Science
and scientists are, of course, absolutely critical to
any debate on nuclear power, but they do not have a
monopoly of wisdom on nuclear power and cannot be the
only resource the government relies on to make difficult
political choices.
Science
must not be used as an excuse to evade the substantive
and important pluralistic conversations that need to
take place among all South Africans about the role of
nuclear power. After all, engaging in robust debate
about important issues is the lifeblood of a healthy
democracy and should result in more rational outcomes.
Comment
Indeed. Neither the Electricity & Energy Minister nor his deputy appear to have any qualifications in nuclear physics or nuclear fission. They
have no scientific right to their statements quoted
above. Indeed,?their derogatory
statements?(and those of others of
their ilk)?apply more to
themselves than to those they criticise.
?In sharp contrast, real nuclear physicists can assess the potential of nuclear power reactors scientifically, and have a much better understanding of the enormous complexity engendered by the fact that hundreds of different fission product nuclides result from the fissions in a typical power reactor.
?
?This complexity, coupled to the fact that most of these neutron-rich fission products are radioactive, with half-life times varying from below a micro-second to thousands of years.
?
?This complex radioactivity, whose alpha, beta and gamma-decay creates further radioactive isotopes of elements ranging from zinc to the lanthanides. ?The huge variety of unstable nuclides necessitate complex and expensive safety measures.?
Dr NEIL OVERY: Weaponising
science in SA¡¯s nuclear discourse
The denigration of other
disciplines or voices is dangerous as nuclear power poses so
many questions that science cannot answer
?
01 November 2024 -
05:00
by?Neil Overy
During her
welcoming speech at last month¡¯s Nuclear Energy Summit
hosted by the department of electricity & energy in
Tshwane, Princy Mthombeni, one of SA¡¯s most vocal
nuclear boosters, referenced author Chimamanda Ngozi
Adichie¡¯s observation that it is dangerous to reduce
anything to a single story, reminding those present of
¡°the importance of embracing diverse perspectives¡±.
Speaking at the
summit, both electricity & energy minister
Kgosientsho Ramokgopa and his deputy, Samantha
Graham-Mar¨º, continued on this theme by emphasising that
the government was intent on engaging properly with all
stakeholders when it comes to nuclear power. For
example, Graham-Mar¨º stated that ¡°our ministry is not
going to compromise on public participation ... openness
and transparency ... we need to work together¡±.
ADVERTISING
Unfortunately, and
clearly quite intentionally, rather than embracing
¡°diverse perspectives¡± and ¡°public participation¡±, the
summit did the exact opposite. Not only were
representatives of civil society entirely excluded from
the summit, but both Graham-Mar¨º and Ramokgopa made it
clear that they had little interest in opinions about
nuclear power that were contrary to theirs or the
government¡¯s.
Graham-Mar¨º came
straight to the point in her address by stating that
opponents of nuclear power in SA are simply ¡°ignorant¡±.
Ramokgopa drank even deeper from the well of?ad hominin?attacks,
noting that opponents of nuclear power ¡°live in the mud¡±
because they ¡°soil¡± nuclear technology. These mud
dwellers are, he observed, merely ¡°commentators¡± who do
not provide evidence against nuclear power, but rather
use myths to ¡°deceive¡± South Africans.
During her
welcoming speech at last month¡¯s Nuclear Energy Summit
hosted by the department of electricity & energy in
Tshwane, Princy Mthombeni, one of SA¡¯s most vocal
nuclear boosters, referenced author Chimamanda Ngozi
Adichie¡¯s observation that it is dangerous to reduce
anything to a single story, reminding those present of
¡°the importance of embracing diverse perspectives¡±.
Speaking
at the summit, both electricity & energy minister
Kgosientsho Ramokgopa and his deputy, Samantha
Graham-Mar¨º, continued on this theme by emphasising that
the government was intent on engaging properly with all
stakeholders when it comes to nuclear power. For
example, Graham-Mar¨º stated that ¡°our ministry is not
going to compromise on public participation ... openness
and transparency ... we need to work together¡±.
Unfortunately,
and clearly quite intentionally, rather than embracing
¡°diverse perspectives¡± and ¡°public participation¡±, the
summit did the exact opposite. Not only were
representatives of civil society entirely excluded from
the summit, but both Graham-Mar¨º and Ramokgopa made it
clear that they had little interest in opinions about
nuclear power that were contrary to theirs or the
government¡¯s.
Graham-Mar¨º
came straight to the point in her address by stating
that opponents of nuclear power in SA are simply
¡°ignorant¡±. Ramokgopa drank even deeper from the well of?ad hominin?attacks,
noting that opponents of nuclear power ¡°live in the mud¡±
because they ¡°soil¡± nuclear technology. These mud
dwellers are, he observed, merely ¡°commentators¡± who do
not provide evidence against nuclear power, but rather
use myths to ¡°deceive¡± South Africans.
He
contrasted those who live in the mud with a ¡°fraternity
of scientists¡±, experts who provide ¡°objective¡± and
¡°unemotional¡± evidence that is not sullied by politics.
It is these scientists and experts, the minister
declared, who will guide the government¡¯s decision on
nuclear power, not the commentators who have ¡°not been
in a science lecture hall¡±.
The
problems with Ramokgopa¡¯s characterisation of the
nuclear debate and the role of scientists in that debate
are so many it is hard to know where to begin.?The first
is one of categorisation. What exactly is a scientist?
Ramokgopa boldly stated in his address that ¡°we have a
duty as scientists here to sustain the momentum of this
conversation¡±.
Koeberg
nuclear plant as seen from Melkbosstrand. Picture:
SHELLY CHRISTIANS
Yet
Ramokgopa, and quite a few of those who spoke in
different panels during the summit are engineers, who
many would argue are not scientists. Put simply, in
terms of nuclear power scientists are people who are
said to understand the phenomena, while engineers apply
or ¡°engineer¡± the phenomena in the real world.
The
homogeneous categorisation of scientists is also
problematic. Zizamele Mbambo, the deputy director of
nuclear power in the department of mineral resources, is
a geologist. Is a scientist without any qualification in
nuclear physics or any of the nuclear sciences any more
competent than, say, a geographer, to have an opinion on
nuclear power?
This
grouping together of a ¡°fraternity of scientists¡±
reveals the problem of privileging and venerating
science in this debate, as it assumes that anyone with a
science background, no matter what disciple of science
it may be in, not only understands the debate but
automatically understands it better than anyone who is
not a scientist. In this way, science and scientists are
¡°weaponised¡± as a means by which to present some form of
pure, evidential truth that nuclear power is good for
SA.
In
privileging scientists the minister can also dismiss
inconvenient opposition to nuclear power from other
disciplines, such as sociology, philosophy or economics.
Let¡¯s use economics as an example. There are highly
skilled economists working in SA for reputable
independent research organisations, such as Meridian
Economics, that have repeatedly shown that there is no
economic case for nuclear power in SA. But hey, they are
not ¡°scientists¡±, so it doesn¡¯t matter what they have to
say. The same goes for those who model energy choices,
such as academics at the University of Cape Town¡¯s
Energy Systems Research Group, who can presumably be
similarly ignored.
It is also
nonsense to suggest that scientists are by definition
objective, unemotional and not subject to political
influence. There are plenty of scientists who will work
for whoever pays them the most, including tobacco and
fossil fuel companies, while history has repeatedly
shown that science can serve the ends of despicable
policies founded on deeply subjective opinions and toxic
political perspectives. Let¡¯s not forget, for example,
how the discourse of ¡°scientific¡± racism buttressed the
apartheid regime.
Finally,
Ramokgopa¡¯s argument cannot explain scientists who
oppose nuclear power, of which there are many. How are
they accounted for in his schema? Similarly, if only
scientists are worthy of being listened to when it comes
to nuclear power, the guest of honour at the summit,
International Atomic Energy Agency director-general
Rafael Mariano Grossi has a problem, as he has a PhD in
international relations. The absurdity of this argument
is clear.
The
denigration of other disciplines, or voices from civil
society and society more generally, is dangerous because
nuclear power poses so many questions that science
cannot answer because they are either unanswered by
science or beyond its disciplinary scope. For example,
there is no scientific consensus on the effect of
repeated exposure to low doses of radiation, and science
has little to offer when we consider the question of how
to persuade humans to keep away from nuclear waste sites
for 100,000 years.
Despite
the rhetoric about the need to embrace different
perspectives, what we actually heard from Ramokgopa was
his willingness to embrace only those scientists who
share his government¡¯s views on nuclear power, dividing
the world into the enlightened and the ignorant. In
closing down debate in this fashion the exact opposite
of what the minister wants to happen, will happen.
Rather than accelerating the arrival of a shiny, happy
nuclear future, further distrust in the government¡¯s
intentions will be sown.
Science
and scientists are, of course, absolutely critical to
any debate on nuclear power, but they do not have a
monopoly of wisdom on nuclear power and cannot be the
only resource the government relies on to make difficult
political choices.
Science
must not be used as an excuse to evade the substantive
and important pluralistic conversations that need to
take place among all South Africans about the role of
nuclear power. After all, engaging in robust debate
about important issues is the lifeblood of a healthy
democracy and should result in more rational outcomes.
Comment
Indeed. Neither the Electricity & Energy Minister nor his deputy appear to have any qualifications in nuclear physics or nuclear fission. They
have no scientific right to their statements quoted
above. Indeed,?their derogatory
statements?(and those of others of
their ilk)?apply more to
themselves than to those they criticise.
?In sharp contrast, real nuclear physicists can assess the potential of nuclear power reactors scientifically, and have a much better understanding of the enormous complexity engendered by the fact that hundreds of different fission product nuclides result from the fissions in a typical power reactor.
?
?This complexity, coupled to the fact that most of these neutron-rich fission products are radioactive, with half-life times varying from below a micro-second to thousands of years.
?
?This complex radioactivity, whose alpha, beta and gamma-decay creates further radioactive isotopes of elements ranging from zinc to the lanthanides. ?The huge variety of unstable nuclides necessitate complex and expensive safety measures.?
