Content deleted Content added
comment |
add to remark |
||
Line 6:
We should not discount the popular impact of this statement. I added "Newspaper articles at the time..." and I wonder why there is any question about Strauss' meaning. Clearly the New York Times, writing about the Sept. 16 1954 speech, understood that Strauss was referring to the entire atomic energy program. Even if Strauss was misunderstood, he did not take any great pains to clear up the record. [[User:wkovarik]] -- Bill Kovarik, March 15, 2011.
:A direct copy of the entire speech would clear up most of the questions around the usual (often mangled, as the one included today is) quotes. (Did the NYT reprint the entire speech or just portions?)<br> Robert Pool, 1997 p.71,[http://books.google.com/books?id=BR1PQ6fPLz4C&pg=PA71] quotes this preceding line, often left out: "Transmutation of the elements--unlimited power ... these and a host of other results <i>all in fifteen short years</i>. It is not too much to expect that our children...." etc. There's little question that Strauss was waxing poetic; more to the point: many sources say he was encouraging science writers to <i>promote fission power</i> to these ends. Which completely makes sense considering their need to create more plutonium.<br>His view was not widely shared; in 1951, General Electric's own C. G. Suits, who was operating the Hanford reactors, said that "At present, atomic power presents an exceptionally costly and inconvenient means of obtaining energy which can be extracted much more economically from conventional fuels.... This is expensive power, not cheap power as the public has been led to believe."[http://books.google.com/books?id=5HdddXH_1ngC&pg=PR5] [[User:Twang|Twang]] ([[User talk:Twang|talk]]) 16:53, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
| |||