Re: WIPP shipment through Albq. NM

[Steven Dapra <sjd@swcp.com>]

Jan. 12



	In response to Bill Lipton's posting earlier today, I am not using "fog"

to defend anything.  (His posting is below.)



	Speaking specifically of TRU shipments to WIPP, the "issue" is that public

safety has already been addressed 	a thousand times over and "reasonable

actions" have been taken to assure public safety.  The so-called "public"

that shows up at these meetings is the same small band of radiophobes,

pacifists, and anti-nukers whose "concerns" about WIPP can not be addressed

except by shutting down the site and permanently cancelling the entire

project.  Not only that, it would take another 20 years -- or more -- to

close down the salt mine where some wastes are already stored, because of

all the demands the anti-nukers would make about a "safe" closure.



	I know -- either personally or by reputation -- most of the anti-WIPP

elements in Albuquerque.  It is impossible to get a straight answer out of

any of them about anything pertaining to WIPP or radioactivity.  I know

because I have tried.  They do not represent the public at large, they are

an infinitesimally small group of well-organized busybodies with an

enormous political agenda and a penchant for hauling the DOE into court.

(One of them was bragging last night about how her group has a suit pending

against the DOE.)  Their "concerns" are irrational and for that reason they

do not count.  They also do not count because they have no basis in science.



	At that hearing last night an anti-WIPPer got up to the microphone and

said the WIPP trucks traveling through Albuquerque are irradiating people

on the highway who drive near the WIPP trucks.  Alpha particles in TRUPACTs

are irradiating other drivers??  Alpha particles can't penetrate a sheet of

paper.  How in the name of Heaven are they going to get out of a TRUPACT??  



	Do you really believe -- Bill -- that this is a rational concern?  Does

"democracy" mean we have to make public policy decisions based on palpable

falsehoods about radioactivity?  This irrational public you are so eager to

listen to would like to shut down every power reactor in the country.  Are

you going to 'take your chances' with that too?



Steven Dapra

sjd@swcp.com



- - - - - 



Bill Lipton's posting:



	"I enjoyed Kim Kearfott's posting about defending nuclear power plants

with fog.



	"You are apparently using this concept to defend your arguments.



	"The issue isn't which is more dangerous - a gasoline tanker or a TRU

waste shipment.  It's what reasonable actions can be taken to assure public

safety AND address public concerns.  You may think that public concerns

about TRU waste are irrational.  Nevertheless, they still count.  It's

called democracy.  Overall, I'll take my chances with an irrational pubic

over having an elite group of 'the best and the brightest' tell me what's

good for me."



- - -  END - - -













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

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/