Risk with Energy from Conventional and Nonconventional Sources

Risk to human health was compared for five conventional and six nonconventional energy systems. The entire cycle for producing energy was considered, not just part. The most important conclusion drawn is that the risk to human health from nonconventional sources can be as high as, or even higher tha...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science) 1979-02, Vol.203 (4382), p.718-723
Main Author: Inhaber, Herbert
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Coal
Construction materials
Electricity
Energy
Energy sources
Humans
Industrial Waste
Natural gas
Nuclear fuels
Nuclear power
Occupational Medicine
Oceans
Power Plants
Power resources
Public Health
Risk
Solar energy
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Risk to human health was compared for five conventional and six nonconventional energy systems. The entire cycle for producing energy was considered, not just part. The most important conclusion drawn is that the risk to human health from nonconventional sources can be as high as, or even higher than, that of conventional sources. This result is produced only when the risk per unit energy is considered, rather than the risk per solar panel or windmill. The risk from nonconventional energy sources derives from the large amount of material and labor needed, along with their backup and storage requirements. Risk evaluation is a relatively new discipline, and therefore the results presented here can be considered only a beginning. However, society should keep relative risk in mind when evaluating present and future energy sources.
ISSN:0036-8075
1095-9203
DOI:10.1126/science.419404