[ RadSafe ] Fwd: [New post] Meticulous research indicates much greater li...

[William Lipton]

Saying that other industries are more hazardous than nuclear power is NOT
an effective public relations approach.  It reminds me of the story where I
was asked to give the eulogy at the funeral of someone who was universally
regarded as mean spirited and hateful.  After extensive thought, all I
could say was:  "Well, his brother was worse."

Bill Lipton
It's not about dose, it's about trust.



On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Bill Prestwich <prestwic at mcmaster.ca>
wrote:

> The Bhopal chemical disaster far outweighs any nuclear power accident when
> it comes to the harm done. Oil spills and mining disasters need far more
> discussion than reactor accidents, since the consequences have been far
> more
> terrific.
>
> Bill.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of JPreisig at aol.com
> Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 11:00 AM
> To: radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Fwd: [New post] Meticulous research indicates much
> greater li...
>
> Radsafe,
>
>      When the coal, oil, natural gas start to run out  in 50 years, people
> will be building new nuclear reactors with a big smile on  their faces.
> Maybe they'll have 40% efficient solar cells on their  home roofs also.
>
>      Joe Preisig
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 4/22/2015 6:38:17 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> rwhelbig at gmail.com writes:
>
> Is this  really meticulous research or are these people anti-nuclear
> activists first  and scientists second?
>
> Roger Helbig
>
> Meticulous research  indicates much greater likelihood of another
> Chernobyl-scale nuclear  accident
>
> by Christina MacPherson
>
> Wheatley and co's work suggests  that a Chernobyl-scale accident is
> worryingly likely to occur within the  working lifetime of the reactors now
> being built. And when that happens, a  once obscure place will enter the
> lexicon as a synonym for catastrophe,  just like Chernobyl, Windscale and
> Fukushima.
>
> These risks will have  to be carefully weighed against the advantages.
> The question for engineers,  policy makers and the general public alike is
> whether that risk is worth  taking, given what's at stake.
>
> The Chances of Another Chernobyl Before  2050? 50%, Say Safety Specialists,
> MIT Technology Review  April 17,  2015  ".....And there's a
> 50:50 chance of a Three Mile Island-scale  disaster in the next 10 years,
> according to the largest statistical  analysis of nuclear accidents ever
> undertaken........
>
> What is the  likelihood of another Chernobyl in the next few years?
>
> Today, we get an  answer thanks to the work of Spencer Wheatley and Didier
> Sornette at ETH  Zurich in Switzerland and Benjamin Sovacool at Aarhus
> University in  Denmark. These guys have compiled the most comprehensive
> list
> of nuclear  accidents ever created and used it to calculate the likelihood
> of other  accidents in future.
>
> Their worrying conclusion is that the chances are  50:50 that a major
> nuclear disaster will occur somewhere in the world  before 2050. "There is
> a
> 50 per cent chance that a Chernobyl event (or  larger) occurs in the next
> 27
> years," they conclude.
>
> The nuclear  industry has long been criticised for its over-confident
> attitude to risk.  But truly independent analyses are few and far between,
> partly because much  of the data on accidents is compiled by the nuclear
> industry itself, which  is reluctant to share it.
>
> The International Atomic Energy Agency rates  accidents using a system
> called the International Nuclear Event Scale,  which is related to the
> amount of radiation released. However, the Agency  does not publish a
> historical database of these accidents, probably because  it has a dual
> role
> of both regulating the nuclear industry and promoting  it. Read more of
> this
> post
>
> Christina MacPherson | April 22, 2015 at  8:22 am | Categories: safety
> | URL:  http://wp.me/phgse-jiW
>
>
> http://nuclear-news.net/2015/04/22/meticulous-research-indicates-much-greate
> r-likelihood-of-another-chernobyl-scale-nuclear-accident/
> _______________________________________________
> 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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For  information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit:  http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>