Nuclear

Careful Examination Needed

Issue 9 and Volume 102.

Letters

Careful Examination Needed

I read your editorials each month with interest. I do not always agree with your views but they do add to my understanding of various subjects. I would like to add my comments to the letter from Michael Gembol published in the June 1998 issue. I differ with the position stated in his letter.

At one time, there was truescience and there was political science. Today all science is political. Any viewpoint that is not totally politically correct is unacceptable. The individual who holds that view is irresponsible–as (Gembol) has accused you of being. Mr. Gembol does not seem to know that the initials P.gif. after your name on the masthead stand for Professional Engineer. Since those same initials do not appear after his name, I would assume that Mr. Gembol is a political scientist.

Please continue to give your views on the problems facing industry and our country. We need to examine all these problems carefully.

William E. (Ed) Nelson, P.gif.

Dickinson, Texas

Nukes Need Boost

I read your article (May 1998) on the nuke plants and the fossil fuel comparison, and I`m glad that a few of us have the same thoughts. I have always felt that the roadblocks thrown in front of nuclear power were not warranted.

I agree with you that the cost of production for nuclear power is low and very competitive but the attendant costs of construction were what made nuclear power appear outrageous. As far as environmental friendliness, nuclear is the cleanest; and the problem with nuclear waste is that no-one is making the decisions on waste disposal that are necessary. We can blame the government for not acting and ourselves for not letting our representatives know that they need to get off the pot.

I hope the nuclear power industry does get a boost from deregulation, and further, that we become more rational with nuclear regulation.

Bill Lekas

San Diego State University

Rotor Bore

Info Available

I enjoyed your article on “Competition Dictates Maintenance Decisions” in (the May 1998) Power Engineering.

At Carolina Power & Light we have used the finite element, fracture mechanics techniques to extend the inspections of our turbine rotor bores. As you said, “it requires much work,” but it can be done. I have written about the methodology that we use in a personal web page at http://personal.rdu.bellsouth.net/rdu/m/o/mont123/turbine.htm.

There is nothing proprietary in it.

George Montgomery

Carolina Power and Light