Perfection as the enemy of the good

When it comes to nuclear energy and space travel, which are the two things that would help the world the most right now, there is this irrational quest for perfection.

With space travel, perfection means that nobody ever gets hurt.  It is irrational because without some risk taking, progress can come to a halt.  Without progress, more people can actually suffer and die because of the irrational demand that nobody can ever be allowed to take risks.

Environmentalism is the same way in that a way to rise to the next level in energy production is feasible, but the opposition is intensely afraid of radiation.  What I'm referring to here is molten salt reactors.  These reactors are not radiation free, but they are a substantial improvement over current designs.  However, they won't be adopted because of the irrational demand that they be perfect, and free from any radiation whatsoever.  Such a demand, if it succeeds, will stunt progress and lead to more suffering in the world than would be the case if they were allowed to proceed.

Rand Simberg, who has a blog, is writing a paper on this subject.  I helped fund this project through Kickstarter, and here is something in an update just emailed to supporters:

I've got a pretty good first draft of the piece written. It's being reviewed by some experts, so it's not final, but it is substantially complete.

As I feared, it's turned into a small book -- it's currently at about 26,000 words, and 41 pages of a Word document in 12 point Times. Current title: Futile Obsession: Our Irrational Quest For Absolute Safety In Spaceflight.  [italics added]

We are also seeing that phenomenon of an irrational quest for no risk in general.  I saw that in a Cold Fusion update that I posted about yesterday.  Ruby Carat asked a question of a (minor) presidential candidate and she mentioned that cold fusion is free of radiation in her question.  As if this mattered nearly as much as she seems to believe.

Don't get me wrong, cold fusion would be a great thing.  But it also may not be the panacea that is being touted even if it is successful.  Once that facts seeps in, will those products come into disrepute?  Well, they shouldn't.  Instead, it should be decided on its merits--- among these would be the likelihood of an improvement in conditions.  If it isn't perfect, so what?  Cold fusion should be sold on its merits, if they exist.  Not on being radiation free, even if that is the case.