[ RadSafe ] Your letter of Jan. 6

[mpatterson at canberra.com]

Bernard,

As an educator you are probably one of the best people to help educate the 
public on this type of a topic.  I think a comparison to risks associated 
with other power generation technologies might help the public process and 
comprehend the information.  Consider for example the risk of having a 
coal mining operation in an area.  How many additional deaths is it likely 
to cause per year?  How many coal mines would it take to keep an 
equivalent power output to the nuclear power output? 

This seems like a study that our government should fund.   I say this 
because these types of studies and public relations projects are funded by 
the governments in other industrial countries such as Japan and France.  I 
realize that there are competing industries that might try to block such a 
study in the US.  If this is the case then perhaps EPRI or another 
industrial group should fund.  If the study was worded properly in a more 
global context then perhaps the IAEA or the UN could fund it.  I think the 
study will be better received by the public if it is done by a University 
or a team of Universities. 

Once the study has been completed the result would need to be synthesized 
into easy to understand graphics, pamphlets and presentation. This type of 
information could then be given to high schools and universities as "free" 
educational materials.   Students have open minds and represent the 
future.  This information could and should also be place on one or more 
websites. 

Just some thoughts I had when I read your note below.   I certainly agree 
with all of you that public perception and understanding is key to moving 
forward with nuclear energy.

- Sincerely,
Melissa Patterson
In Vivo Systems Product Manager








Bernard Cohen <blc+ at pitt.edu>
Sent by: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
01/18/2006 10:32 AM

 
        To:     wilson at physics.harvard.edu, mbrexchange at list.ans.org, cstarr at epri.com, Ted 
Rockwell <tedrock at starpower.net>, RadiatSafety <radsafe at radlab.nl>
        cc: 
        Subject:        [ RadSafe ] Your letter of Jan. 6


    I am writing in response to your letter of Jan. 6 bemoaning the fact 
that theYucca Mountain repository seems to be going nowhere, summarized 
in your sentences "Maybe the repository will be finished bo 2030. Maybe 
not."
    I believe it is extremely important to educate the public to 
understand that buried radioactive waste is not an important potential 
threat to human health. I don't think the public can ever understand or 
become comfortable with the Probabilistic Risk Analysis (PRA) approach 
used by DOE; It is vulnerable to criticism on many points and the 
critics are only too happy to take advantage of this, and the public 
cannot judge between "experts". I have long advocated doing a PRA for an 
average U.S. location (which I have shown is very easy to do and to be 
understood by the public, and which comes out quite acceptable), and 
relying on the public to believe that the experts can choose a site at 
least as good as an average site. My most recent presentation of this 
viewpoint is published in "Probabilistc risk analysis for a high level 
waste repository", Risk Analysis 23:909-915;2003
     An improved approach to achieving public understanding was recently 
published in my paper  "Understanding the toxicity of buried radioactive 
waste and its impact", Health Phys 89;355-358;2005. It shows in easily 
understandable fashion that the buried waste from a continuous nuclear 
power program operating over thousands of years will cause about 1.0 
deaths per year in U.S. based on assuming LNT and no improvement in 
cancer cure rates.
    If someone would figure out how to present these ideas to the mass 
public audience, I think it would do a lot of good. Any advice on how I 
might help in this would be greatly appreciated.

_______________________________________________
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: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/