Chernobyl Nuclear Accident Congressional Hearings Transcript

14
The Chairman. You have started on a range of opinion. I understand
that that is part of the public dialog that is going on. I have
likened the situation in the nuclear industry today by saying, yes,
there is indeed a risk as there is to all of life. But it is not perfect
in its record, as indeed nothing in life is perfect.
Often times, we, in our political debates, use the old illustration
of a half of glass of water and say, "Is the glass half full or half
empty?" This is a glass of water that is better than 99 percent full
and less than 1 percent empty, and are we going to look at the
glass and say, "That is not completely full," and throw it
while we are thirsty.
away
Let's do with the Salk vaccine for polio. It is not perfect; there
are a few people who get polio. There is substantial risk to public
health and human condition because of a whole variety of situations
in our society.
We debate the 55 mile per hour speed limit, knowing that raising
it to 70 will cause more deaths on the highway, and cutting it to 35
would save some. We make some trade-offs in our society measuring
the greater risks, or the greater costs to society.
There is a cost to not having safe energy and there is a cost to
not having sufficient energy. There are costs in any of the decisions
that we made. It is a lot easier to play the negative than it is to
play the positive.
It is a lot easier to sell fear than it is to sell confidence. I notice
that some people recently, a very prominent scientist has written
an article that has received wide publicity, saying American technology
has failed and he points to the failures that are obvious.
But, American technology has succeeded dramatically in a whole
host of things that make our life safer, more comfortable, rich and
more rewarding.
Is the glass 99 percent full, or 1 percent empty? I do not know
what the appropriate proportions are and I certainly am not complacent
about safety in the nuclear power field any more than I am
complacent about safety in dam design.
We have just observed the 10th anniversary of the failure of the
Teton Dam in Idaho that caused the loss of 11 lives and $0.5 billion
worth of damage, but we have not drained every dam in the country.
We do not live in fear, below every dam. We know that there
are earthquakes that cause problems and earthquake scientists predict
that there will be severe earthquakes in California, but we
have not evacuated California.
Although some suggest it.
I am confident that with the help of the Senator from Ohio and
others, that we are not going to see anything brushed under the
rug in the investigation of the procedures we use with the nuclear
industry, nor am I suggesting that it should be.
I think I have been as insistent as anyone has been or should be
with respect to examining the safety features of our industry; doing
what we reasonably can do to make certain that we take the actions
that are necessary, appropriate the money that we have to
appropriate, create the programs that are necessary to give the
people of this country assurance that we are doing what can reasonably
be done with respect to safety in this industry.