Re: Coal vs. Nuclear -Reply

[Bernard L Cohen <blc+@pitt.edu>]

 This depends on the question you are answering. If the question is which 
gives more radiation exposure to people, nuclear or coal burning 
electricity, the answer is clear and quantitative -- coal burning gives 
1000 times more radiation exposure to people than the nuclear waste 
buried at a randomly selected site in US, and by digging uranium out 
of the ground, nuuclear averts 10 times as much exposure as coal burning 
gives. Scientists should try to keep things simple--- I should have 
expressed my original statement in terms of dose rather than in terms of 
deaths caused according to linear, no threshold theory.

On Tue, 5 Dec 1995 FRAMEP@ORAU.GOV wrote:

> 
> Bernie Cohen wrote in part:
> 
> >The dominant consideration in radiation hazards from coal vs. 
> >nuclear is from release of U, Th, and Ra that will eventually become 
> >radon. The coal releases will eventually cause about 30 deaths per
> >GWe-y while nuclear power, by removing uranium from the ground, will
> >eventually save hunreds of lives per GWe-y. 
> 
> This type of argument is good if you believe, as I do,  that low doses of
> radiation probably (not certainly) carry a risk.  If you believe, as Al has
> stated he does, that low doses (and especially those from radon which
> is what we are talking about here) are beneficial, then this particular
> argument should be made in favor of coal. Not so?
> 
> 
> Best wishes
> 
> Paul Frame
> Professional Training Programs
> ORISE
> framep@orau