YOUR OPINIONS ON SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND OUR MAGAZINE
LETTER OF THE MONTH
A different nuclear option
Dr Jonathan Foley’s article, ‘Can tech save us from climate change?’ (New Year, p71) was an excellent summary of where we are. While I agree that “We shouldn’t wait for fusion,” I am, however, surprised that he didn’t suggest stable salt reactors (SSRs) to provide near-net-zero electricity. These nuclear reactors aren’t expected to be certified for use in the UK until 2030, but a plant is being built now in New Brunswick, Canada. SSRs can be built far quicker than conventional nuclear facilities [in about 2.5 years compared to 6 to 8] and cost about a third of the price. They can operate at atmospheric pressure and their fuel can be uranium, thorium or waste from military and civil nuclear installations (reducing the need for geological storage by up to 90 per cent).
Charles Scott, via email
WRITE IN AND WIN!
The writer of next issue’s Letter of the Month wins a pair of popular science books. Put pen to paper and you could win Sleeping Beauties and A Brief History of Timekeeping.
Benefits without the harm
Several years ago, I wrote in regarding an article that quoted a study that said drinking a little red wine was good for you. As I pointed out, it was the antioxidants in the red wine rather than the alcohol that was providing the beneficial effect, so you might as well drink grape juice rather than wine.
In the years since, many mild drinkers have probably done themselves harm by using the study’s findings to over imbibe. So I was pleased to see that in you
