[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
AW: more st lucie workers expsoed
At 05:06 PM 10/20/2002 -0400, RuthWeiner@AOL.COM
wrote:
I
http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/trib_local_news/article/0,1651,TCP_1107_1482702,00
.html
Can
someone explain to me why external occupational exposure to 20 to 25
mrem and internal occupational exposure to 1 to 2 mrem are news?
Yes, Ruth,
It's easy.
The lay
population is very afraid of nucular (sic) accidents because there is the
image of the huge destruction at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the image of the
atmospheric testing in the 40s and 50s, the image of Chernobyl ingrained in
our minds.
]
--------------------------------------------------------
Sorry, I cannot confirm that the Chernobyl accident had any impact on
the minds of the US population and even on US scientists. When I spent six
weeks in the USA in 1988 I gave quite a few presentations on the
consequences of the Chernobyl accident in Europe. To me it seemed, that
hardly anybody knew about the accident and that nobody was informed about
the consequences in different parts of Europe. After that I noticed, that
some US institutions had made some modelling on the Chernobyl accident
impact - but they neglected wash-out from rain - which was the most
important factor of contamination in Europe. They did not regard the fact of
precipation and not that in Northern Europe still snow was on the ground.
These model-drawbacks might hopefully have been considered. in
US-models since then.
Regarding Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which I have visited, I
can only hope that this will forever be on the mind of mankind. This was no
accident - how can you dare to call this an accident????. Comparing
Chernobyl with Hiroshima and Nagasaki is unacceptable: Hiroshima and
Nagasaki was intended to kill as many people as possible, Chernobyl was an
unexcusable accident, provoked by the NPP staff by violating clear rules.
[Christian Schönhofer] Franz