RE: respiratory tract dose (HP vs. IH approach)

["Ted Rockwell" <tedrock@CPCUG.ORG>]

Jerry, you're right: the question, "what is so special about radiation?" is

key to our problem.  Alvin Weinberg, reaffirmed to me personally last week

his belief that "the Faustian bargain" is the correct model for nuclear.

Nuclear, to him, is in a class by itself, almost beyond human capability to

control.



I told him I couldn't disagree more.  Nuclear follows the same

well-understood laws of nature as everything else.  It is not capable of

uniquely disastrous consequences (I'm not talking about nuclear weapons

here). LNG ships, chemical and oil refineries, even nitrate fertilizers are

demonstrably capable of more destruction.  Not to mention electric power and

communication systems.  Nuclear plants are not unforgiving, hair-triggered

hazards.  They are, in fact, remarkably stable and self protecting.



Of course we should continue to critically monitor and improve our safety

procedures.  But the need is no more critical than for many other systems.

And we must recognize that excessive fear-driven ALARA is not just expensive

and unnecessary, it is seriously harmful. Prescribing that nuclear

casualties require mass evacuations of perhaps millions of people is so

clearly unworkable that it may lead to shutdown of Indian Point, which would

then be followed by others, as anti-nuke forces taste the blood in the

water.



To make all this real, we have to repudiate the extreme scenarios that are

physically unachievable and make clear the limitations imposed by the

physical and chemical properties of the materials involved, that restrict

the release and dispersion of radioactivity from damaged fuel to levels that

cannot cause a public health hazard, even though they may exceed various

artificially-imposed regs.



At least, that's how I see it.



Ted Rockwell



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

From: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]On Behalf Of Jerry Cohen

Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 2:38 AM

To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

Subject: Re: respiratory tract dose (HP vs. IH approach)





    The recent discussions on this topic (both civil and nasty) point up to

what is, or at least was a basic fundamental difference in philosophies

between the Industrial Hygiene (IH) and Health Physics (HP) approach to

problem solving.. As a CIH, who has dabbled in health physics for several

years, I have observed that basically, the IH objective is to protect

workers health by applying professional judgment based on knowledge and

experience (avoiding  major expenditures to correct minor problems, and

above all recognizing that the dose makes the poison). On the other hand,

the basic HP objective is to assure that all operations are in compliance

with regulatory requirements (doses must never exceed specified limits,

whatever it takes). ALARA requirements are also thrown in for good measure.

    Of course, in recent years, with the advent of OSHA and similar laws,

the IH field seems to be degenerating to the same status HP is in. There are

even pressures to implement ALARA requirements to limit chemical exposures.

What's happening is almost enough to make you sick!

     BTW, in a recent radsafe posting, the question was asked, "What is so

special about radiation that that justifies the  need for an ICRP, NCRP,

UNSCEAR, NRC, and the plethora of regulations, and restrictive requirements?

The question is serious, but so far there has been  no serious reply.

Anyone care to take a stab at it? If there is a cogent reason, it would

really

be nice to know it. If not, we sure are wasting a lot of time, effort, and

money for nothing.



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

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/