[ RadSafe ] An article from globeandmail.com

Philippe J. Duport pduport at uottawa.ca
Wed Dec 12 12:12:51 CST 2007

Thank you Colette,

The case of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission would have been
stronger had it been accompanied by a detailed cost-benefit analysis,
i.e. a comparison of the severity, probability and immediacy of the
risks posed to public health by present non-compliance with regulatory
requirements (backup pumps not yet operational in case of power failure)
on one side and the severity, probability and immediacy of the risks
incurred by patients, worldwide, in need of potentially life saving
medical radioisotopes on the other side.

Philippe Duport

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Colette Tremblay
Sent: December 12, 2007 11:37
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: [ RadSafe ] An article from globeandmail.com

Colette Tremblay (colette.tremblay at ssp.ulaval.ca) thought you would be
interested in the following article from globeandmail.com, Canada's
leading source for online news: 

"Ottawa thwarts nuclear watchdog" 
A Three-Mile-Island-type of nuclear accident could occur at Canada's
Chalk River reactor unless a backup power supply system, capable of
withstanding natural disasters such as earthquakes, is installed,
according to an assessment by the president of the Canadian Nuclear
Safety Commission. 

Note from  Colette Tremblay: I didn't know that Steven Harper was a
nuclear scientist :-) 

Get the news delivered to your inbox. Sign up for our daily News Update:

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: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

More information about the RadSafe mailing list