I don't believe in hysteria or the way the author manipulates the data, but if his NASA quotes are correct, he brings up some issues. If somebody has access to the real NASA assessment, please correct me.
- the risk of plutonium release is 1 in 300. This is quite big. NASA calculated the shuttle launch risk at 1 in 150 (or so, I can't remember exactly) which was lowered by the 2 disasters in 100 flights, to 1 in 50.
- NASA estimates the cost of cleaning the land from $241 million to $1.3 billion per square mile. It seems too costly for inoffensive shards of ceramic.
- NASA includes other costs as: resident relocation, agricultural quarantine, land use restrictions. Why is relocation needed if the plutonium is contained?
Either the author misused the quotes or NASA is not totally sure the ceramic casing will withstand a launch failure.
Space/Science » in reply to Moonbats Oppose Pluto Mission
what if he has some points