[ RadSafe ] evacuation: where and how long?
Karen_Street at sbcglobal.net
Mon Nov 21 21:02:40 CST 2011
1 mSv/year, and the Ukraine didn't object????
According to http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/default.aspx?id=498&terms=chernobyl%20exclusion%20zone
in only 0.5 sq km of the 4300 sq km exclusion zone does radioactivity exceed the normal background (2.5 mSv) by more than 50%.
This does not make sense to me. Why would people agree to protecting us against such a meaningless level of danger?
On Nov 21, 2011, at 6:15 PM, Andrew McEwan wrote:
> Part of the problem is the ICRP advocacy of ALARA, the confusion between
> constraints for planned exposures and reference levels for existing
> exposures, and the guidance in ICRP Publication 111 (International
> Commission on Radiological Protection. 2009 Application of the commission's
> recommendations to the protection of people living in long-term contaminated
> areas after a nuclear accident or a radiation emergency ICRP Publication
> 111; Ann. ICRP 39 (3) (Amsterdam: Elsevier))
> that exposures should be reduced where possible to below 1 mSv/year. Clearly
> where exposures cannot reasonably be reduced to what are perceived as 'safe'
> levels, and these levels are set by 'experts', there is a high degree of
> unnecessary anxiety.
> Some of the problems with the guidance of ICRP 111 and ICRP 103 with regard
> to setting reference levels are discussed in a just published paper in the
> Journal of Radiological Protection (Is ICRP guidance on the use of reference
> levels consistent?)
> Andrew McEwan
Friends Energy Project
More information about the RadSafe