AW: [ RadSafe ] RE: Greenpeace nuclear video

Rainer.Facius at Rainer.Facius at
Tue Jan 17 14:32:37 CST 2006



Thank you for your clarifying comments.


Could you add some pointers to the "real science" for those unfamiliar with this subject matter like me?


Best regards, Rainer




Von: radsafe-bounces at im Auftrag von goldinem at
Gesendet: Di 17.01.2006 18:21
An: radsafe at
Betreff: [ RadSafe ] RE: Greenpeace nuclear video

I took a quick glance at the powerpoint by Dr. Large, famed consulting
engineer, and was amazed at the leaps of faith necessary to believe any of
this.  Clearly Dr. Large either has an agenda or as a consulting engineer,
needs to do a little more homework.  I won't bother the list with all the
arguments about the validity of extrapolating low doses to significant
health effects, we all know that is unproven, controversial, and probably
not correct.  However, the engineering aspects at the beginning of the
"presentation" are a bit surprising if he really is an engineer.  I don't
know the Sizewell plant well but for US PWRs, the release of radioactivity
necessary for the plume presented is pretty much impossible (engineers
never say never).  As are the "vulnerabilities" to an armed invasion by
insurgents.  Anyone interested should read some of the real science done
over the past few years on aircraft impacts to containment buildings to
learn what really might result - a big mess outside but no radiological

Eric M. Goldin, CHP (and Ph.D. too)
<goldinem at>

You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:

More information about the RadSafe mailing list