If the second sentence of Chapter One is an accurate excerpt from this book, it is seriously flawed:

Excerpt from Megawatts and Megatons : A Turning Point in the Nuclear Age

Chapter 1

ATOMS, ELECTRONS, AND NUCLEI

All matter is an assembly of atoms. A liter of water, for example, contains about 1026 atoms of hydrogen and oxygen.

Please, tell me it isn't so. If it were, we'd be able to see those atoms, wouldn't we?

Although its authors fail to recognize that worldwide oil+natural gas extraction will certainly peak before 2015, this book is very timely. Garwin & Charpak write (p. 246) "We believe that one of the highest duties of society as a whole is to assess and to choose its destiny. In this book our goal is less to prescribe than to inform our readers of the options as we see them ... In considering nuclear energy we do not in any way intend to denigrate other approaches to providing for the needs of society -- including renewable energy, improved efficiency to reduce energy needs, and the like. Nevertheless, all these options will have direct and indirect effects on the environment." Nuclear power for electricity generation is one of their threads, the other is weapons and arms control which Garwin has worked on for many years mostly to point out the futility of defense against weapons not delivered by missiles and against missiles after decoys are deployed.

The book compares the success of nuclear power-plants in France (where reactors produce 80% of the electricity) with the perceived failures in execution in the US. The authors consider both direct (once through) disposal and reprocessed fuel cycles, outlining costs in energy and radioactivity release of both, and the mixed French experience with reprocessing and breeders. They note that advanced reprocessing has the potential to reduce waste volume and long-term radioactivity, at the expense of doubling release today (p. 198). They advocate research into uranium separation from sea-water, noting that early experiments are very promising that this can meet growing power needs for hundreds of years. Of course, what we really need are about 40 years of growth to bridge the world to a mix of fully sustainable electricity sources and to take up the growing slack from declining oil+natural gas. The authors first consider the bridging contribution of coal, arguing (p. 232) that CO2 sequestration is certainly feasible at the cost of reducing power-plant net energy output by 30-50%. Coupled with oil+gas decline, sequestration would reduce anthropogenic CO2 generation to levels well below the lowest 2100 projection of the IPCC (perhaps explaining the seemingly comatose response of Cheney/Bush to the Kyoto process). They discuss reactor concepts like the inaccurately named "energy amplifier" sub-critical, accelerator assisted thorium concept of Rubbia, but less discussion of nearer term developments such as the pebble bed modular reactors that seemed until 4/02 to be on track in South Africa. Both approaches are said to attain passive safety. If such designs are not debugged urgently, we will have to depend on expanded use of derivatives from technically "ancient" light-water reactors derived from submarine power-plants.

The authors also discuss opportunities for terrorists to divert enriched fuel from reprocessing and waste disposal, and note how attractive disposal sites will be for future warriors after all but the plutonium has decayed! They do not discuss the vulnerabilities of existing reactors, but do advocate burying the next generation of power-plants. A chapter on safety also advocates distributing potassium iodide tablets to saturate thyroids of those near power-plants undergoing "an incident"; failure to do this in a timely fashion at Chernobyl produced the criminally high incidence of childhood leukemia. (Until rationality overcomes PR, you can buy suitable KI on the Web. A single dose is useless!) They compare nuclear industry hazards to other industries, tabulating (p. 202) that the relative probability of dying from even a Chernobyl accident is minute compared to cardiovascular disease or "medical errors in hospitals". They discuss the effects of radiation at Chernobyl in detail. There are only a few typesetting errors, and a number of not funny cartoons; the illustrations are clear and useful. It is likely that for the next few decades, our choice in the US will be either a nuclear reactor within 50 miles or electricity rationing through extremely high prices. I plan to use this book in my upcoming college-freshman level energy course for non-science majors ..., and recommend it as a solid introduction to a complex but very real conundrum for our technically challenged society.

Having read Gary Richardson's review, and having NOT READ the book (as is evidently the case for Mr. Richardson as well), I submit that the excerpt in question was intended to have been written and read as 10 to the 26th power atoms in a liter of water. That is a 1 followed by 26 zeros (100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 atoms). While I have commited a diservice similar to Mr. Richardson's by rating it, I will not actually attempt to review the book until I have READ it. May we all do the same!