[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Dirty bomb scenario
Greetings All,
I think we will see a re-examination (or at least a realistic view of
relative risk) of the LNT right about the time someone suggests demolishing
Manhattan to eliminate a few pCi/g of Ir. I read a story recently
(referenced here?) about a reactor in Maine that is being decommissioned.
Suddenly everyone is becoming aware of the high price we pay for trivial
risk. Once it starts REALLY hitting our pocketbooks, a more realistic
scenario should unfold.
-Rob
Robert J. Gunter, CHP
Follow the money....
*******************
The Federation of American Scientists has an assessment of the "Dirty
Bomb" scenario worth reading:
Dirty Bombs: Response to a Threat
The US has indicated its willingness to spend hundreds of billions of
dollars to combat threats that are, in our view, far less likely
to occur
than a radiological attack. This includes funding defensive measures
that are far less likely to succeed than the measures that we
propose in
this testimony. The comparatively modest investments to reduce the
danger of radiological attack surely deserve priority support.
=Snip=
See:
http://www.fas.org/faspir/2002/v55n2/index.html
************************************************************************
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/