Re: FW: NORM (understanding nuclear power/ICRP)

["Bjorn Cedervall" <bcradsafers@HOTMAIL.COM>]

Sandy & others who may be interested:



When I participated in an ICRP meeting recently (Nov. 12) - about revision 

of the ICRP recommendations it was pointed out that this revision is 

necessary for many reasons including the future of nuclear power. One reason 

for the revision - is about communication - the system should preferably be 

simplified. It was said that some differential equations may have to be 

replaced by common sense.



"No threshold" will not be removed and we all know that there are many 

opinions here (Radsafers) on it - lets not start that debate again (just 

read the archives to get into the jungle of arguments).



There are many interesting features of this ICRP work which will be finished 

in about four years. Most probably it will be beneficial to the nuclear 

power industry (wordings like "trivial dose" and "negligle dose" will 

probably be introduced). It has escaped no one's attention that "trivial" is 

a value word that needs some kind of reference - an obvious one is the 

natural background but the background is a complex topic itself. The 

original "controllable dose" has more or less been left - the concept that 

initiated the debate & generation of ideas. The weighting factor (RBE) for 

alpha may be reduced considerably (probably to make it more consistent with 

various endpoints) - as a preliminary standpoint a factor of 10 rather than 

20 has been mentioned. The cost-benefit perspective will certainly be 

flexible in the light of   socioeconomic and/or risk cultural contexts that 

may differ between countries/world regions.



The transparency of the ICRP work provides a valuable opportunity to suggest 

constructive improvements & changes without propagandistic overtunes.



Bjorn Cedervall    bcradsafers@hotmail.com

------------------------------------------

>The term "nuclear" is simply too technical, and any attribute related to 

>it, also becomes a factor that is also not understood.



When the industry had opportunities to explain nuclear power and how it 

worked, over the decades, the opinion was, they don't need to know, they 

won't understand. It is this very condescending attitude that has put us in 

the defensive posture we are in today. As a matter of fact, that attitude 

still exists here on Radsafe. We see it everyday.





_________________________________________________________________

Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp



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

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.