Re: Coal v. Nuclear

[Robert A Scott <bobscottchp@juno.com>]

	I too was surprised to see the smaller number from coal generation than
nuclear generation.  The table at the ANS website referenced NCRP 92, 93,
94, 95 and 100.  I was not able to find either the value .003 for coal
generation or .009 for nuclear generation.  But I did find a comparison
which may shed some light.
	From NCRP 93, the annual collective effective dose equivalent from coal
as a fuel (remember many people can burn coal) was 80-700 person-Sv (or
8000-70000 person-rem) in 1980.  The annual collective effective dose
equivalent from nuclear was 0.00003-0.13 person-Sv (or 0.003 - 13
person-rem) in 1980.  Now perhaps by adjusting these doses to the 50 mile
radius listed in the ANS table one can derive the .003 and .009 values; I
leave that to the experts.  BUT, the TOTAL dose to the US population in
1980 was estimated to be approximately 7 orders of magnitude (10000000 X)
greater for coal than nuclear.

Bob Scott, Esq., CHP
Roger Williams Medical Center
Providence, Rhode Island
bobscottchp@juno.com
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html