[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Los Alamos Wildfires -Airborne radioactivity news coverage-Stupidity thread
In a message dated 5/18/00 5:12:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
merritt9@llnl.gov writes:
> Subj: Re: Los Alamos Wildfires -Airborne radioactivity news coverage
> Date: 5/18/00 5:12:09 PM Eastern Daylight Time
> From: merritt9@llnl.gov (Kim Merritt)
> Sender: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> Reply-to: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list)
>
> During the response to the Cerro Grande fire, a team was sent to the
> fire burning down in southern NM to take comparative measurements.
> We are not as stupid as world and Mr. Farber seem to think we are.
>
>
> Kim Merritt, RRPT
> Physics Safety Support Officer
> 3-9668, pager 01017
> http://www-phys-r.llnl.gov/SafetySupportGroup
> ************************************************************************
Radsafe and Ms. Merritt:
Wow, Kim take a breath --and please try and calm down. I've not had to walk a
mile in Ms. Merritt's shoes so I don't know why she feels the world thinks
she's stupid. However whatever the reason, I must clearly state that nothing
I said or which was reported as my saying in the Albuquerque Tribune about
the sidebar issue of possible minor increases in airborne radioactivity due
to residual fallout in biomass from the tragic wildfires in New Mexico
implied she or anyone at LANL were stupid.
When I received a call from Lawrence Spohn, a reporter from the Albuquerque
Tribune, about the potential for there being trace amounts of Cs-137 and
Sr-90 in biomass around LANL, I believe my comments were quite deliberate and
non-inflammatory. I did not want to pour gasoline on the fire so to speak.
Today's article in the Albuquerque Tribune which I posted to Radsafe earlier,
contained comments attributed to me which read:
" Vermont radiation health physicist Stewart Farber, who has studied
radioactivity in trees and wood ash, said that to distinguish between natural
and unnatural sources of radioactivity, the monitoring agencies need to have
spectral analysis looking for peaks of individual radioactive elements.
"I can't believe they haven't already done that, especially considering
the capabilities of a place like Los Alamos," he said. "But if they are
basing this on gross measurements -- and that is what they're saying -- then
there is no way that they can say that."
Earlier this week, Farber said he has "no doubt" that the Cerro Grande
smoke and ash contain radioactive cesium and strontium, and not necessarily
because of any direct lab activities that would have released them through
fire and smoke.
His studies show that trees accumulate cesium and strontium which are
fallout products from nuclear-weapons testing decades ago.
From past experiences, Farber said, government agencies "just don't know
how to handle radiation in public."
He said he doubts that radioactivity in the smoke poses a serious health
risk, but acknowledged studies to confirm that have not been done."
I was commenting above to Mr. Spohn about the general case of weapon's test
fallout which is in biomass in every part of the US to varying degrees based
on a national survey I conducted in 1990 through the Health Physics Society.
I told Mr. Spohn that a fire in Florida would release far more fallout Cs and
Sr than a similar fire in New Mexico.
A careful reading of the above Tribune article of today shows I recognize
LANL's analytical capabilities and merely could not understand why the
measurements made to date [as reported in the FEMA report of May 17 - "Cerro
Grande Fire Radiological Air Sampling Around the Los Alamos National Lab"
--see http://www.lanl.gov/worldview/news/fire/updates/0517.shtml] seemed
ambiguous on the point of isotopic measurements on gamma activity in air
particulates.
Just how can Ms. Merritt claim I called the folks at LANL stupid based on the
above news report. I was quoted as saying that I believed there were likely
to be trace amounts of fallout Cs and Sr in the smoke from the fire but "not
necessarily because of any direct lab activities that would have released
them through fire and smoke." This is actually quite understanding of LANL's
plight in this situation.
Mr. Spohns quotes me as saying that "he doubts that radioactivity in smoke
poses a serious health risk..". I actually went on to say to Mr. Spohn that
by far the major risks from the Los Alamos area fires & smoke would be the
conventional air pollutants [fine particulates, PAH, etc.] due to both the
acute, and long term impacts, that would dwarf the theoretical radiological
risks which if there would be long-term trivial risks.
My comment, as he wrote: From past experiences, Farber said, government
agencies "just don't know how to handle radiation in public." isn't exactly
what I said but close enough. I was referring to the seemingly limitless
ability of various Government agencies to fail in communicating with the
public about radiation issues. I recall saying that they manage to appear
guilty of withholding information on radiation issues due to fears, and an
inability to openly discuss radiation risk with the public. The public is
desperate for information on radiation issues and hears only fuzzy, and
word-engineered statements by PR types that leave the public ever more
distrustful of officialdom and the nuclear endeavors they represent.
I would hope that someone in Ms. Merritt's position carefully read what is
reported about anyone's comments on a technical issue, before painting
everyone who is quoted in a news article with too broad a brush. It serves
no useful purpose for a health physicist like Ms. Merritt, to appear so
defensive and hostile to the outside world.
Stewart Farber, MS Public Health
Consulting Scientist
Public Health Sciences
172 Old Orchard Way
Warren, VT 05674
[802] 496-3356
email: radiumproj@cs.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html