RE: SNF Shipments

[Jack_Earley@RL.GOV]

I don't believe in "accidents" in general, so I don't consider it "lucky"

that there haven't been any releases. There haven't been releases because of

design and control. I believe there's a saying that the people who are most

prepared and work hardest are the most "lucky."



Jack Earley

Radiological Engineer





-----Original Message-----

From: Jerry Cohen [mailto:jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET]

Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 5:11 PM

To: Tim; Marthaller, Chris; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: SNF Shipments





Your argument seems reasonable to me. BUT, if I were

a dedicated anti-nuke or a politician, it would only prove that --

we have been luckey so far-------



----- Original Message -----

From: Tim <tstead@ntirs.org>

To: Marthaller, Chris <Chris.Marthaller@wipp.ws>;

<radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2002 12:54 PM

Subject: RE: SNF Shipments





> There have been over 3000 shipments of SNF thus far,

> some involving severe accidents.  At no time has any

> radioactive material been released as a result of the

> accident.

>

> The only thing that the anti's have ever found

> contrary was some situation where liquid was

> transported (I find that hard to believe, but let's

> run with it) and there was a minor spill when it was

> opened up on-site.  That spill, of course, was

> contained to the *immediate* vicinity.

>

> In other words, they don't have a dog in that race.

> It has been brought up many times, Chris.  They just

> refuse to listen.  For example, they claim that we

> only have limited experience (~3000 shipments) and

> thus we cannot gauge future sucesses on a *limited*

> history.  That does two things.  First, it neglects

> the *perfect* safety record of millions of miles of

> European transport.  Second, it flies in the face of

> their argument against nuclear power plants (which do

> have quite a bit of operating history with a fantastic

> safety record and perfect radiological protection

> record).

>

> So, how can they claim that we don't have enough

> history to prove it's safety when they do not look at

> the history of nuclear power to gauge it's safety?

>

> Tim





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

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.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/

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

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.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/