Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 8 · column 2 of 4 · from the scan, no model involved
hausted by the mid-1980s, if the nuclear plants now planned are put into operation, Clark said. So we will be forced to import uranium, and the uranium “cartel” is already busy, he said. During the past 18 months, when the public began to look toward nuclear power, the price of uranium increased fivefold,
“BY THE time nuclear plants begin to offer a return on the huge investment spent in developing them, we will have to import uranium,” Clark predicted. One solution to this future uranium shortage is to build “breeder reactors,” Clark said. Supposedly, , these reactors can “breed” or create fuel.
“But this is one more phase the government has used to convince the public we’ve finally invented perpetual motion,” Clark said. But the chief disadvantage of the breeder reactor, according to Clark, is that plutonium is produced in the process. Plutonium is a radioactive substance which is capable of “explosive fission.” It is the most toxic substance yet known, Clark said, and has a “half life' of 24,000 years, which means it must be perpetually stored to prevent its release in the environment. •
Plutonium is cooled, before it is stored, with liquid sodium, Clark said,'''and will explode if it comes in contact with water. The government, and other nuclear power boosters, claim that plutonium can be stored safely. Perhaps. Clark said, "but I'm conservative in my estimation of science and technology. And I know that human beings will be operating these plants.” At best, Clark said, the breeder reactors will open a "Pandora's Box.
Considering the dangerous aspects of the breeder reactors, which will be necessary in order to avoid importing uranium, who's pushing so hard for nuclear power? Clark was asked. "Oh, West
78.7%