Re: some comments from Mangano; all your postings; radsafe secret agents

["Vincent King" <slavak@bresnan.net>]

Another fallacy from Norm and Mr. Mangano: if Sr-90 averages are rising,

then it can't be fallout, it must be the nuclear plants.



As I've mentioned before, these environmental protection advocates need to

learn a little environmental science.  It's not as simple as that, as anyone

familiar with environmental pathway analysis could tell you.



Take a simple example.  Let's say I'm downwind and over a mountain ridge

from a big nuclear test.  The airborne plume, which is the only pathway

carrying the fallout to my location, will pass by me and be gone in a couple

of hours.  Does that mean that my exposure is over when the cloud is gone?

Of course not.  If I get my drinking water from the river, I'll see elevated

concentrations for weeks or months.  Same for surface contamination.  Same

for ingestion of contaminants in garden crops and milk.  Same for material

resuspended in air every time the wind picks up.  But according to Norm and

Magano's reasoning, if my exposure goes up over the next few weeks, it must

come from some other source, because the original source of the fallout is

already long gone.  Wrong!



The little detail they seem to be unaware of - or intentionally gloss over -

are the long term environmental compartments (someone mentioned the

stratosphere a few days ago - excellent example) that occur in environmental

pathways.



But, hey, their explanation sounds good on the surface and is probably

plausible enough to fool the average citizen, and that's good enough for

them.



Vincent King

Grand Junction, CO



(Oh, I almost forgot - isn't it convenient that radioactive waste is NOT in

the food chain when it might invalidate the TFP's desired conclusions (see

below)?  I thought one of the bad things about nuclear power was that nasty

waste that is supposed to expose people for millions of years. -VK)





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

From: "Norm Cohen" <ncohen12@comcast.net>

>

>

> Norm:  As you recall, we covered these topics in Trenton in May, i.e.

> (note - the Baldwin press conference)

>................

> - Because Sr-90 averages have risen substantially in the 1990s in all

areas

> we studied, we know it must be a current source of Sr-90, not old bomb

test

> fallout. Other current sources include Chernobyl (only in late 1980s);

research

> reactors (small/dwindling in number, small in size); waste (not in food

chain);

> medical uses (no use for Sr-90).

>............



>> Hope this helps, JOe

>



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

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/