Confronting Economic and Social Realities, 1980–1999 163
(i) the establishment and use of artificial
islands, installations and structures;
(ii) marine scientific research;
(iii) the protection and preservation of the
marine environment.Source: The Law of the Sea: Official Text of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea with Annexes
and Index (New York: United Nations, 1983), pp. 3, 11, 18.(a) sovereign rights for the purpose of explor-
ing and exploiting, conserving and manag-
ing the natural resources, whether living or
non-living, of the waters superjacent to the
sea-bed and of the sea-bed and its subsoil
and with regard to other activities for the
economic exploitation and exploration of
the zone, such as the production of energy
from the water, currents and winds;
(b) jurisdiction as provided for in the relevant
provisions of the Convention with regard to:DOCUMENT 131: Bernard Cohen on Nuclear Energy and
Risk Assessment (1983)Sensible evaluation of environmental issues frequently requires an understanding of complex scientific data
in order to assess environmental risk. Alarmists on all sides of complex issues have always been very ready to
distort facts by providing one-sided information to the public. In his book Before It’s Too Late, published four
years after the partial meltdown of a nuclear reactor at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania had stifled further
discussion of nuclear expansion in the United States, the physicist Bernard Cohen questioned the ability of the
public to evaluate the hazardousness of nuclear energy.How well does the American public under-
stand the hazards of nuclear power? A poll of
radiation health scientists shows that 82% of
them feel that the public’s fear of radiation
is “substantially” or “grossly” exaggerated.
Another poll shows that 89% of all scientists,
and 95% of scientists involved in energy-related
fields, favor proceeding with the development of
nuclear power; among the public there is only a
slight majority in favor.
In a recent study in Oregon, groups of college
students and members of the League of Women
Voters were asked to rank thirty technologies and
activities according to the “present risk of death”
they pose to the average American. Both groups
ranked nuclear power No. 1, well ahead of motor
vehicles, which kill about 50,000 Americans each
year, cigarette smoking, which kills 150,000, and
eleven others that each kill over 1,000. How many
can be expected to die annually from generation
of nuclear power including the risk of accidents,
radioactive waste, and all of the other dangers
we hear so much about? According to estimates
developed by government-sponsored research pro-
grams, about ten per year. If you don’t trust “the
Establishment,” you might trust the leading anti-
nuclear activist organization in the United States,
the Union of Concerned Scientists (USC), which
estimates an average of 120 deaths per year from
nuclear power. In either case, nuclear power is
perceived to be thousands of times more danger-
ous than it actuality is... Clearly the American
public is grossly misinformed about the hazards of
nuclear power.* * *
[T]wo of the most serious environmental
problems we face are air pollution and acid rain.
Air pollution is doing billions of dollars worth of
damage each year, spreading filth and ugliness,
and destroying a wide variety of property rang-
ing from women’s stockings to granite statues.
Acid rain is rendering lakes lifeless, damaging
the forestry and fishing industries, and creating
international tensions between the United States
and Canada. Both the air pollution and acid rain