Re: Potassium Iodide -Reply -Reply

[Emil <kerremba@pilot.msu.edu>]

Sorensen, Scott wrote:
> 
> RadSafers,
> 
> Re:  prophylactic KI administration during nuclear reactor emergencies.
> 
> To help frame the debate/comments, I suggest the proposed NRC
> recommendations be applied to real life scenario, namely the TMI
> accident.  (I'm assuming that Chernobyl-magnitude releases would be
> highly improbable in countries using light-water reactors)  Under the
proposed recommendations:...

kerremba@pilot.msu.edu

Scott, 
 I do not like to defend (CHERNOBYL) RBMK-1000  reactor design, it has
its pluses and minuses and it worked well when it was used for its
ORIGINAL purpose. But RBMK-1000 is a LIGHT-water reactor. I do not think
that only Former Soviet Union and its satellites had RBMK type  reactor
design, western countries have a few similar design reactors. But I
belive there are not in used by now.
You probably ment Pressurized-water instead light-water.

 I just would like to remind that noboby belived  or even think that
Chernobyl scenario is possible even with  to THAT degree of abuse to
RBMK-1000 in 1986.
In RBMK-1000 reactor specifications the maximum projective accident was
very far from what happened in 1986. I would like to be understood
correctely, I am not against Nuclear power,  I am for IT with all my
hands!!! 
I just belive that emergency response plan should include atleast the
worst known case scenario . I think in a long run it will pay off if we
will be prepared for the worst and it will never happen.
I do not think our industry will survive something similar to Chernobyl
again!!
I think public will understand that we are prepaired for the worst well
known case scenario and we do not belive that it may happen. The best
emergency plan should not be used any way if other normal procedures are
in placed.
I proposed used Chernobyl accident as the worst possible case under the
proposed recommendations.
best ragards,
Emil