Re: Sausages and Environmental Standards..

["jjcohen" <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>]

    I am somewhat bemused by the discussion on how the 4 pCi/l EPA radon

standard was derived. I believe it was Bismarck who said," It is a good

thing

that people do not know how either laws or sausages are made". Most people

actually believe that our environmental standards have a scientific basis.

Regulatory agencies go to great lengths to perpetuate this belief. However,

efforts to determine a scientific basis upon which a standard is derived are

often futile. I imagine that if the public could be made aware of the rather

arbitrary and/or politically motivated nature of these standards the

situation might change, but that is not very likely. As previously discussed

on Radsafe, emotional arguments are far more influential to a scientifically

unsophisticated public. I lament all the money and other resources that are

squandered on scientific research to support development of environmental

standards when the knowledge gained is essentially ignored.

    The radon standard is but one example. I recall that in the hysteria

following the Three Mile Island accident, a multi-million dollar interagency

study was conducted to determine an effective EPZ (emergency planning zone)

to be established around nuclear power plants. A multi-volume report was

produced containing detailed and extensive discussions on the nature of

potential radioactivity releases, diffusion modeling, biological radiation

effects, and other factors that might affect consequences. It was concluded

that a 10 mile diameter surrounding the plants was needed for an EPZ. I

spent many hours trying to find how the 10 mile limit was derived from all

the material discussed in the report. Finally, I gave up and asked those

involved in the study where the 10 miles came from. The only answer I got

was that "it seemed reasonable" considering the costs and administrative

problems involved. What,

if any, impact the extensive scientific studies had on the regulatory

decision remains a mystery. What is not a mystery is that all the money

spent on these studies is irretrievably gone.

Jerry Cohen





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

From: <RuthWeiner@AOL.COM>

To: John Andrews <andrewsjp@chartertn.net>

Cc: radsafe <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2004 7:07 AM

Subject: Re: 700 cancer cases caused by X-rays...Montclair NJ info...





> It would be intersting to make a compilation of cases like this one, and

the brief history of the EPA radon standard, to show how much the policies

that supposedly protect public health are the result of some individual

decisions that have nothing to do with public health at all.

>

> ruth

> ruthweiner@aol.com

/









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

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/