RE: radioactivity from fossil fuel power stations

[BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>]

On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Jacobus, John (OD/ORS) wrote:



> Dr. Cohen,

> And what are the ranges associated with these death values?  Or are they

> absolute values?



	--The radiation effects are based on BEIR Reports, assuming

present populations and house construction as it affects radon entry, and

assuming that over the next million years or so, the probability of a

house being constructed at any point in U.S. is equal. As you may know, I

do not accept the linear-no threshold theory on which these estimates are

based. I also believe that cancer will become a curable disease in the

next thousand years or less. But I am playing the game that the anti-nukes

play.

	The chemical carcinogens from coal burning estimates are also

based on the linear-no threshold theory, as adopted by EPA. The air

pollution estimates are a long story.



> 

> . . .

> 	--The whole discussion was based on radiation doses. If we

> consider total deaths, coal burning is dominated by air pollution which is

> generally estimated to cause at least 10,000 deaths per year in U.S.

> Annual U.S. deaths from 100 nuclear power plants are: reactor accidents

> (treated probabilistically) - 2; routine emissions - 2; all others - less

> than 2; on a per GWe-year basis, these numbers should be divided by 100.

> 	For coal burning, a treatment similar to the one I use for long

> term deaths from radiation doses gives about 30 deaths per GWe-year from

> chemical carcinogens released in coal burning. 

> . . .

> 



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.