[en] The objective of the paper presented is to show that nuclear fission power is the best, and maybe the only, alternative source of energy. It is written for a wide range of readers, including non-scientists and scientists who are not particularly informed on the issues involved. The first question considered concerns man's need for energy; it is concluded that conservation measures alone cannot suffice. Next, the earth's energy sources are examined, and the extent of each is estimated in the simple context of the length of time it could last at present use rates. Only nuclear fission, nuclear fusion, and solar energy can provide for future time scales commensurate with man's historic past, while avoiding the possibility of catastrophic social upheaval. Fusion and solar energy are rejected on technological grounds because the world energy problem is so pressing that one cannot gamble on hopes for future technological breakthroughs. Thus, only nuclear fission meets the twin criteria of technological feasibility and adequate resource base. Each of the controversial issues surrounding nuclear fission energy is examined in some detail. The conclusion is reached that none is serious, and that nuclear fission offers by far the best energy source from environmental, economic, longevity, and overall safety standpoints

No abstract available

[en] The paper examines the extent to which nuclear power could help ameliorate the greenhouse problem. Topics discussed include: (1) How serious is the environmental threat posed by the greenhouse effect? (2) How large a part do fossil fuels play in producing greenhouse gases? (3) Is it possible to prevent or abate the anticipated global warming? (4) Can nuclear power play a significant role? (5) What overall approached might best reduce greenhouse emissions? Global cooperativeness in addressing the problem will be essential. 14 refs., 5 tabs

[en] Relative yields of LiBeB isotopes are calculated for proton and α-particle induced reactions at energies in the neighborhood of ten or tens of MeV, and comparisons are made with solar system abundances. A match is found for incident particles in the neighborhood of 16 MeV, assuming the meteoritic value for the B abundance and standard values for other target and product abundances. To obtain matches to a lower than meteoritic B abundance or for protons and α particles at the same energy per nucleon, it is found necessary to alter the initial abundance assumptions or assume selective destruction. The range of possible fits suggests that the nuclear cross sections do not preclude each of the LiBeB isotopes being produced mainly in reactions at the relatively low energies considered here

[en] The book follows a logical sequence in considering the energy problem. After studying all the facts about available fossil-fuel and nuclear resources and combining these with judgments of the technical feasibilities of untried alternatives, the authors conclude that nuclear fission is the most secure choice for the foreseeable future. Coal must be utilized in the near-term, they conclude, but no time must be lost in deploying nuclear power. They conclude that nuclear power is impressively safe, economically and environmentally preferable to coal, and utilizes a resource having essentially no application source. They add, ''the time to act responsibly, sensibly, and logically is now--not a decade or two hence--when the hazards of emotionalism may have out-damaged any hazards of controlled radiation.''

[en] Lamb et al. recently have reported preliminary evidence for γ-ray line emission from the region of SS433. These authors have suggested that observed gamma-ray line features at 1.2 and 1.5 MeV may be the red- and blue-shifted components of the 1.369-MeV line from the first excited state to ground-state transition in ²⁴Mg. The purpose of this note is to point out some serious difficulties with this interpretation of the observed γ-ray lines

[en] This book contains 10 chapters. Some of the titles are: Overview of the indoor radon problem; Terminology for describing radon concentrations and exposures. Methods for detection of radon and radon daughters; and Observations of lung cancer: Evidence relating lung cancer to radon exposures

No abstract available

[en] The interpretation of observed gamma-ray lines from the astronomical source SS433 was examined in the light of gamma-ray production cross sections measured at the University of Washington and elsewhere. It had been initially suggested by Lamb et al. that the observed lines were the blue- and red-shifted components of the 1.369-MeV line from the ²⁴Mg(p,p')²⁴Mg reaction between ²⁴Mg nuclei in the jet of SS433, moving at a speed equivalent to 33 MeV per nucleon, and ambient protons. However, this explanation implied that the shifted components of the doublet at 1.64 MeV from the ²⁴Mg(p,pα)²⁰Ne and ²⁴Mg(p,2p)²³Na reactions should be seen with nearly the same intensity. The apparent absence of these lines argued against the original simple interpretation. It has been subsequently proposed by Ramaty, Kozlovsky, and Lingenfelter that the 1.369-MeV line could be produced by a combination of the ²⁴Mg(p,p')²⁴Mg and ²⁸Si(p,pα)²⁴Mg reactions taking place in collisions between grains in the jet and ambient protons. A test of the model of Ramaty et al. can in principle be provided by further examination of the gamma-ray spectra from SS433

[en] Gamma ray yields from the p + ⁵⁶Fe reaction from 5 to 15 MeV are shown. Gammas of 0.847, 1.238, and 1.811 MeV come from inelastic scattering, while those of 0.812 MeV come from the (p,n) reaction. 1 figure