Re: British Radioactive Pollution -Reply

[GACMail98@aol.com]

This is just a press release.  I'd like to get the full report.  Also, I'd be
interested in any other data which is available and the official/public/media
response. 

<<I feel that the media, or in this case Greenpeace, is remiss in not stating
the real consequences (dose estimate) of the Tc in seaweed.>>

If GP knows, and withholds this information, then perhaps.  But isn't it
really Sellafield's and the UK's responsibility to demonstrate that the
operation of Sellafield is safe?  Or the scandinavian authorities'
responsibility to demonstrate there is no impact?  What dose assessments and
monitoring have THEY done?

Glenn
GACMail98@aol.com

In a message dated 98-06-22 11:28:47 EDT, ARMAGAF@GWSMTP.NU.COM (ANTHONY F.
ARMAGNO) writes:

<< Subj:	 Re: British Radioactive Pollution -Reply

 Glenn,
   Although I don't agree with many of your posts, I somewhat agree with this
 one.  However, I feel that the media, or in this case Greenpeace, is remiss
in
 not stating the real consequences (dose estimate) of the Tc in seaweed.  The
 fact that they identified it is a good thing, and the source should be
 determined.  But I think they would get more mileage out of publicly stating
 that they found the increase and will be actively monitoring for its source,
 than providing "low hanging fruit" via scare numbers without meaning.  Bottom
 line, if Sellafield is causing an increase in these levels, eventually this
 could cause a "real" dose consequence, and should be stopped before it
reaches
 them.
 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
 Anthony F. (Tony) Armagno
 Northeast Utilities Millstone Station
 Tele: (860) 437-2519
 E-Mail: armagaf@gwsmtp.nu.com
 According to Cowboy Wisdom: There's more ways to skin a cat than stickin' his
 head in a boot jack and jerkin' on his tail!
  >>