[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: radiation exposue at st lucie
Dear Richard,
You wrote:
"Forwarding popular press articles to a technical list is of limited utility
in my opinion. Press articles with mis- and dis- information, especially
when the most egregious of these are aggregated, are a major cause of some
of the unwarranted fears we have of nuclear technology."
I don't agree, many who is part of this list is also devoted to
communication on nuclear event issues. This is my case, for instance. I have
learned a lot with nuclear news all of the world, this include American
press and also anti-nuke or green parties information.
About press communication, does not matter the topic, for instance the one
related with this subject at
http://www.gopbi.com/partners/pbpost/epaper/editions/saturday/martin_stlucie
_d37a0a3c2727b03e0043.html
or the one, always repetitive, Cancer risk for radiation workers, BBC, at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/2317269.stm
What individuals, organizations, associations should do is to answer some of
them, explaining the real facts,
Doesn't matter if they will publish or not, in a type of section dedicated
to readers, they in high percentage always do it.
A purpose of Communication issue, the last IAEA document published on this
matter was "Communication Planning by the Nuclear Regulatory Body", IAEA
Safety Reports Series n.24 and to those interested, the document is
available to can download at
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1135_scr.pdf
I worked in this document as IAEA consultant and I would like some opinions
about.
One important lesson learned is dealing with the press, or even in public
dialogue, "there is no difficulty to ask questions, difficulty is the
ability to answer the questions".
Jose Julio Rozental
joseroze@netvision.net.il
Israel
Thursday, 10 October, 2002, 15:59 GMT 16:59 UK
----- Original Message -----
From: Richard L. Hess <lists@richardhess.com>
To: Norman Cohen <ncohen12@comcast.net>; <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent: Sunday, October 13, 2002 5:03 AM
Subject: Re: radiation exposue at st lucie
At 07:46 PM 10/12/2002 -0400, Norman Cohen wrote:
> > Radiation Exposure at Nuclear Plant
> >
> > ASSOCIATED PRESS
> >
> > HUTCHINSON ISLAND, Fla.- Federal officials are investigating
> > how 28 nuclear power plant workers were exposed to radiation
> > during a maintenance operation.
That's all very interesting, Norman, but it doesn't tell us WHAT the dose
was.
What dose were these workers actually exposed to?
Was it as much as a transcontinental flight?
Was it as much as a dental X-ray?
Are they glowing in the dark?
ALARA is a great goal, but if it wasn't ALARA did it do any harm?
Forwarding popular press articles to a technical list is of limited utility
in my opinion. Press articles with mis- and dis- information, especially
when the most egregious of these are aggregated, are a major cause of some
of the unwarranted fears we have of nuclear technology.
I would hope that while the UNPLUG SALEM campaign has a very obvious stated
goal, accurate reporting of technical details should not be sacrificed to
your goal.
There are some warranted fears of the technology, and Davis-Besse and the
management and regulatory failures are good examples of what can
organizationally go wrong, but this was a step to correct that, as I read
between the lines.
Thanks!
Richard
************************************************************************
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/