Re: Re: Side of a volcano

["Sorensen, Scott" <ssorensen@doeal.gov>]

Radsafers,

The points provided by Ron Kathren and Franz Schoenhofer are well taken.
 The release from a breached reactor containment should be a much more
greater concern, on a radiological perspective, compared to the natural
radioactive materials released by an erupting volcano.  However, would
one be really thinking about fission products while viewing an oncoming
pyroclastic flow?  

My thought is based on the assumption that the regional effects from a
volcanic event would be much more catastrophic than any effects caused
by a reactor release.  The public authority should (?) be more busy
addressing other, non-radiological concerns.  The same may apply during
a significant earthquake event as well.  Granted, there would be
concerns during the recovery caused by the damaged nuclear facility.
But how would these compare against other disaster-related problems
(e.g., infrastructure recovery, impacts from other industries)?  On a
global perspective, I don't have a good feel for how the radiological
detriment from the reactor release stacks up against the environmental
impact from the various volcanic emissions...  Should we be denying
nuclear facility siting or spending lots of money for contingencies for
an event where the radiation-related impact is minimal compared to the
overall catastrophe?

Well, I've vented enough ;-)

-Scott Sorensen
ssorensen@doeal.gov.
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html