[ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?

Muckerheide, James jimm at WPI.EDU
Fri Apr 21 12:05:53 CDT 2006

To spend >$100 million to reduce "less than 12 mrem/yr" to "less than 4
mrem/yr" as a component of background radiation, which varies from less than
100 mrem/yr to about 800 mrem/yr, with local areas to several rem, is

Waukesha WI says it will spend >$100 million.  It has a population of ~65000.
Most are towns and small cities on well water (private wells excluded).  I
think Waukesha is one of the larger ones, but I don't know.  Dozens of small
towns are stuck switching to surface water (competing with others) or
"cleaning up" well water and becoming "radwaste generators" to feed rad
protectionists with more funds extracted from the general public.

Is the Yucca Mountain scam more than "a family" taking drinking water from a
well?  At how many $ billions by the RICO perpetrators?

Regards, Jim 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael McNaughton [mailto:mcnaught at lanl.gov]
> Sent: Friday, April 21, 2006 12:07 PM
> To: Muckerheide, James; radsafe at radlab.nl
> Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Re:Reasonable risk?
> How many people are affected? And are we spending $100 million total or per
> year? An argument might be made for spending $100-million per year to avoid
> 12 mrem/year to a million people.
> At 09:45 AM 04/21/2006, Muckerheide, James wrote:
> >Hmmm...  What does this say about EPA limits of 4 mrem/year for Yucca
> >Mountain, and from radium in drinking water presently costing municipal
> >suppliers $100s millions to fix for concentrations below about 12
> Mike McNaughton
> Los Alamos National Lab.
> email: mcnaught at LANL.gov or mcnaughton at LANL.gov
> phone: 505-667-6130; page: 505-664-7733

More information about the RadSafe mailing list