[ RadSafe ] shortage of tech 99

John R Johnson idias at interchange.ubc.ca
Wed Jul 29 11:37:37 CDT 2009


My response is below. 

You probably know this but others may not. The major medical isotope is Mo-99, the parent of Tc-99m. 

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: garyi at trinityphysics.com 
  To: radsafe at radlab.nl ; Bill Prestwich ; Brennan, Mike (DOH) ; John R Johnson 
  Sent: Tuesday, July 28, 2009 8:25 PM
  Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] shortage of tech 99

  Bill and John, 

  Maybe I'm missing something. Help me understand why I'm wrong. If I apply to build a reactor for medical isotopes (or any other purpose) anywhere in North America, I imagine that an organized and rather nasty effort will be mounted to prevent or delay that reactor from ever being approved. Agree, but not all politicians would. For example, Lisa Raitt (Canadian Federal Minister for Natural Resources) has been quoted as saying it would be "sexy" to be involved with AECL's radioisotope production. If approved, the effort will shift to preventing or delaying construction. If constructed, the effort will shift to preventing or delaying the reactor from ever coming on line.  At every step of the way, any and every tactic that might make the reactor more expensive to finish and operate will be used against me.  At every step of the way, I will be working against the considerable momentum of 40+ years of propaganda. 

  That's just history.  That's the main reason why we don't have more reactors, more advanced reactor technology, and more nuclear power.  More to the point, that is the main reason why we don't have at least two or three other reactors on the continent that can produce medical isotopes.  The folks who accomplished all this now call themselves Greens. 

  That is my line of reasoning.  I've got an open mind, so let me know how I am mistaken. Please note that my argument does not rely on any recent action by Greens - the last 40 years or so are more than enough anti-nuclear activism to produce the current situation.  I understand that Greens do not gloat over the medical problems they have created, but to me this sudden reticence is like the bus passenger who earnestly wishes that nobody will get hurt, after the fool climbs over the seat, grabs the wheel, and steers your bus off the cliff. 

  I don't think we should think of all "greens" as being equal. I know some so called greens who think that nuclear power can help slow down global warming. 


  As you know, AECL designed at replacement (Maple) for NRU before I left Chalk River in 1988 (see the recent Radsafe message by Laszlo Toro). It was approved by their Nuclear Safety Advisory Committee (NSAC), which included the AECB (the regulators that were replaced by the CNSC). I think that the problems with the Maple reactor should have been fixed by a committee and AECL and CNSC engineers and scientist similar to NSAC. Instead it has been stopped by the AECL and CNSC politicians.

  -Gary Isenhower 

  On 28 Jul 2009 at 14:06, John R Johnson wrote: 


  I also "live in the country where this is going on" and agree with 

  Hi Bill! I hope all is well at McMaster. 

  John R Johnson, PhD 
  CEO, IDIAS, Inc. 
  4535 West 9th Ave 
  Vancouver, B. C. 
  V6R 2E2, Canada 
  idias at interchange.ubc.ca 

More information about the RadSafe mailing list