Greenpeace prefers La Hague to Kerala

["Franta, Jaroslav" <frantaj@aecl.ca>]

re. the story below, here's a suggestion for Greenpeace: go to India's
Kerala State to cart away the 77-square-mile stretch of ocean front where
radiation levels up to 30 times higher than most people on  the planet
experience... are not causing any harm, according to recent studies by
scientists (see BBC's posting at
http://www.nandotimes.com/healthscience/story/0,1080,47541-76686-548122-0,00
.html ). There are similar radiation zones in southern China, Iran and
Brazil, but the Kerala coast is believed to be the only high radioactivity
region with a high population density. There are about 5,200 per square mile
here.

> http://nucnet.aey.ch/nucnet/news.html
> France: Cogema Rejects Greenpeace Claims
> Greenpeace has revived its campaign against Cogema over treated effluent
> discharges from the La Hague reprocessing plant, but the French nuclear
> fuel
> cycle company has flatly denied the latest charges. 
> The anti-nuclear activists say they have discovered "dangerously high"
> levels of radioactive contamination on the seabed near the site, in the
> northern French region of Normandy. A Greenpeace statement said the
> discovery highlighted the "continued failure" of the French government and
> its regulators to protect the marine environment and public health. 
> The statement said divers operating from the Greenpeace vessel 'Strakur'
> had
> collected sediment samples, which were later analysed by the independent
> French radiological laboratory ACRO. Greenpeace said there were "alarming"
> levels for radioactive elements, including caesium-137, cobalt-60,
> americium-241 and ruthenium-106. The statement claimed that the sediment
> "exceeded the European Community levels for controlled nuclear waste". 
> Philippe Pradel, director of industrial operations with Cogema's fuel
> fabrication and recycling division, retorted: "The results are right, but
> the interpretation of the figures is really false and alarmist." The
> figures
> were similar to those reported to a special local commission dealing with
> public information on La Hague. Mr. Pradel added that the figures involved
> were very low (lower than those for standard granite) and continued to
> show
> the "negligible" radiological impact of the plant. 
> Greenpeace began a concerted campaign against La Hague in early 1997,
> following publication of a study that suggested a link between the local
> incidence of childhood leukaemia and factors such as seafood consumption
> and
> use of nearby beaches. 
> <><><><><><><><><><><>
> and from http://www.greenpeace.org/pressreleases/nuclear.shtml
> Also on site at Dielette were representatives of the French Radiation
> Protection Agency (OPRI) who took radioactivity readings. OPRI and
> Directorate of the Nuclear Installation Security (DSIN) are demanding that
> the waste in the tank should be taken to Cogema at La Hague to be tested .
> However, Greenpeace is refusing to allow this, claiming Cogema will simply
> discharge it again. 
> Greenpeace is demanding that OPRI or DSIN provide written conformation
> that
> the radioactive effluent in the steel container on the lorry is too
> radioactive to be transported and that OPRI find a suitable company and
> site
> for the proper storage of the material. 
> "We intend to continue this operation to take La Hague's radioactive
> effluent out of the environment because the French Government and its
> operating company COGEMA refuse to take action to stop this ongoing
> environmental catastrophe" said Simon Boxer of Greenpeace International
> "The
> companies of nuclear power stations around the world that ship nuclear
> waste
> fuel to La Hague, and the governments that support them, are guilty of
> wilfully contaminating the environment on an unprecedented scale." 
> Greenpeace divers took sediment samples from around the La Hague discharge
> pipe and anlaysed by the independent French radiological laboratory ACRO,
> contain alarming levels of radioactive elements, including: caesium-137
> (19,390 Becquerel/kg); cobalt-60 (9,063 Bq/kg); americium-241 (1,649
> Bq/kg);
> and ruthenium-106 (9,408 Bq/kg). This sediment exceeds European Community
> levels for controlled nuclear waste. 
> <><><><><><><><><><><>
> regards,
> 
> Jaro
> (my opinions only...)
> 
> Jaro Franta, eng.
> 
> Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. 
> Design & Engineering Services
> J.L. Gray Engineering Centre
> Deep River, Ontario, K0J 1P0
> e-mail: frantaj@aecl.ca
> day tel.: (613) 584-3311 ext. 5133
> 
> 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html