Re: Low Doses, Ethics and LNT -Reply

["Theodore S Bohn"<BST@inel.gov>]

SILENCE on our part may be a detriment to the nuclear industry.  We speak
among ourselves about the wonders and benefits of nuclear energy (preaching
to the choir), but all the public hears is the anti-nuclear side.  How many
advertisements to see promoting nuclear energy. Not many!  We in the
industry usually sit back in our comfortable office chairs and think the
benefits of nuclear should sell themselves.  After decades of constant
anti-nuke propaganda (Nader and etc.), the public generally believe what
their fed.  Do we ever march on Washington in support of nuclear power??
Do we ever go out of our way to promote nuclear causes?? Some do but not
many.  The default is SILENCE which is killing us.  There should be a huge
lobbying effort for nuclear.  Money should be spent promoting nuclear on TV
and other communication facilities to balance the anti-nukes efforts.
Education is not enough! Many don't want to learn but would rather revel in
rumors and half truths.  We need a constant stream of pro-nuke propaganda
of our own reaching the public. The airlines do it,  the car manufacturers
do it, the beer manufacturers do it (with frogs) and think how many annual
deaths are attributed to them and still they have the public's blessing.
Enough of this! Have a good day !




lee_david_w@lanl.gov on 08/13/97 10:01:14 AM

Please respond to radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu


To:   radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
cc:    (bcc: Theodore S Bohn/BST/LMITCO/INEEL/US)
Subject:  Re: Low Doses, Ethics and LNT -Reply




     Sandy's and Ron's recent postings prompted me to propose the following
for
discussion.
     Who is a bigger KILLER--the airline industry or the nuclear industry?
     What do we as RADSAFERS conclude that the Airline Industry is doing
"right" that the Nuclear Industry seemingly is doing "wrong" from the
standpoint of maintaining the trust and confidence of John & Jane Doe?
After all, the airline industry, on an annual basis, routinely ends up
killing far greater numbers of people than the nuclear industry ever
thought about doing.  Yet, even though the airline investigation boards
only seem to come up with corrections AFTER a given airline accident has
occurred, such "response after the fact" still seems to somehow maintain
the trust/confidence of the public.  Even we RADSAFERS presumably do not
curtail our taking airline flights subsequent to major airline crashes!  In
comparison, it seems that no matter how proactive the nuclear industry is
in terms of retrofitting and replacing/updating safety systems with the
latest in technology, we still cannot seem to obtain the trust/confidence
of the public.
Best regards  David


At 10:00 AM 13-08-97 -0500, you wrote:
>Sandy:
>
>Go easy on the caffiene man you're goin to blow a gasket!
>
>But seriously, to use an analogy:
>
>If a plane crashes 50 miles from my house do I have any concerns?
>Not if I ain't on the plane.
>Not if none of the parts hits my property.
>
>Can the FAA tell me, with 100% certainty, that I will not be affected by
this
>crash?
>.......YES......
>
>Now
>
>If a Nuclear Power Plant melts down 50 miles from my house do I have any
>concerns?
>If there is a release to the environment???
>If the wind blows it over my house???
>
>Can the NRC tell me, with 100% certainty, that I will not be affected by
this
>meltdown?
>...NO....
>
>Don't get excited now.  This ain't me talkin this is John & Jane Doe out
there
>lookin at Nuclear anything and seeing Chernobyle all over again.  And we
can do
>all the studies we want and gather all the statistics we want and it will
all
>go in one ear and out the other.  Until genetic science gets to the point
where
>we can PROVE without a doubt that 'small' exposures are harmless we are
blowin
>in the wind.  We also have to remember that the public was sold a bill of
goods
>about Nuclear Power from the beginning, (too cheap to meter, safest
industry
>going, best trained and qualified personnel, etc).  Well, it's pretty
>expensive, we have had a litany of errors ongoing since Chalk River (most
non
>published till recently) and those best trained and highly qualified
people
>have made mistake after mistake all the while trying to cover up their
>mistakes.
>
>The truth is, most folks just flat don't trust anything with the word
Nuclear
>attached to it and I can't say as I blame them much.  We ain't (<= i love
that
>word) been very good at being honest with ourselves, much less the public.
>
>Oh, by the way I'm not an anti nuke.....far from it....have been nuclear
since
>' 65.  Seen the good, the bad and the ugly.  So just a little reminder
that
>sometimes it is good therapy to get outside the box and look at ourselves
as
>others see us and always remember
>
>...................PERCEPTION IS REALITY....................
>
>Ron Shepherd   RSC, HP, ALARA, RADDOG
>
>33 Rem and still lookin good!
>
>SHEPHRL@GWSMTP.NU.COM
>
>Standard disclaimers apply.
>
>
David W. Lee
Los Alamos National Laboratory
Radiation Protection Services Group (ESH-12)
PO Box 1663, MS K483
Los Alamos, NM  87545
PH:   (505) 667-8085
FAX:  (505) 667-9726
lee_david_w@lanl.gov