Re: 60th criticality accident- Copy of note sent to BBC

[GlennACarlson@aol.com]

I opine that Mr. Farber's letter to the BBC is an example of a well-written, 
rational letter in contrast to Mr. Cohen's letter.  I also suspect that Mr. 
Farber's letter will more likely result in it's intended effect.  I also 
agree with the substance of Mr. Farber's letter.  Thank you, Mr. Farber.

Glenn A. Carlson, P.E.
St. Charles, MO
glennacarlson@aol.com

In a message dated 10/3/99 7:59:41 PM EST, RADPROJECT@aol.com writes:

<< Subj:     Fwd: 60th criticality accident- Copy of note sent to BBC
 Date:  10/3/99 7:59:41 PM EST
 From:  RADPROJECT@aol.com
 Sender:    radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
 Reply-to:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
 To:    radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list)
 
 Copied below is a note sent to a BBC reporter, Ms. Ali McConnell,  who had 
 been pulling together a story on the Japanese accident this past week.  
 Perhaps some of the comments might be of interest to members of this board 
on 
 the thread being discussed.
 
 Stewart Farber
 ========================
 <<Subj: Fwd: 60th criticality accident- 
 Date:   10/1/99 4:49:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time
 From:   <A HREF="mailto:RADPROJECT";>RADPROJECT</A>
 To: <A HREF="mailto:ali.mcconnell@bbc.co.uk";>ali.mcconnell@bbc.co.uk</A>
 
 
 Dear Ms. McConnell:
 
 When we spoke yesterday about the accident in Japan, you asked how many 
 accidental criticalities had occurred previously. Attached is a listing from 
 a DOE training course of a few years ago.
 
 I am quite familiar with the Wood River, RI accident since I conducted 
 environmental radiation monitoring programs nearby in the early 1970s for a 
 proposed nuclear power plant a few miles distant. I had a chance to meet 
with 
 the Wood River Plant operators when this small fuel reprocessing facility 
 [reprocessing fuel elements from Navy nuclear reactors in a plant operated 
by 
 United Nuclear] was still in operation and reviewed various reports in the 
 open literature about the accident.
 
 What is of interest to me is, in looking at the ten accidental criticality 
 accidents in the attached, how fortunately, there have been relatively few 
 fatalities in these various accidental criticalities during some 50 years of 
 nuclear operations. 
 
 I'm not trying to downplay the serious nature of accidental criticalities 
 since they represent a breakdown of all controls that are supposed to be in 
 place to prevent such an occurrence. However, the occurrence of any 
 accidental criticality must be evaluated vs. the frequency of their 
 occurrence and the range of consequences that result vs. the total benefit 
of 
 the operations [such as total power produced] that are tied to the nuclear 
 operation involved.
 
 Compare the consequences of the 10 accidental criticality accidents 
attached, 
 to the record of major accidents that have occurred in other fuel cycles 
such 
 as coal mine accidents which have killed hundreds of miners in a single 
 accident, or collisions between coal transport ships and passenger ferries 
 which have killed 1,500 members of the general public in some cases. 
 Accidents in transporting gas and LPG by pipeline have resulted in some 
 accidents that I can recall which killed over 500 members of the public on a 
 train in Russia back around 1989 when leaking gas filled a valley and then 
 ignited as a train passed through the valley consuming a passenger train. 
 These accidents are part of one limited element of the coal or gas fuel 
 cycles, and to be balanced one would have to evaluate all elements of each 
 fuel cycle for demonstrated or likely risks to compare one to the other.
 
 Every form of energy has its "price" and not just in dollars. Ultimately the 
 public has to decide if the overall risks of any fuel cycle [whether 
nuclear, 
 coal, oil, gas, biomass, hydro, solar, etc.] per unit energy produced vs. 
the 
 incentives for that particular energy source [assessed on economic, 
 environmental, climatic, and strategic grounds] make a given fuel cycle more 
 or less acceptable or even desirable.
  
 Regards, 
 
 Stewart Farber, MS Public Health
 Consulting Scientist
 Public Health Sciences
 Director - Radium Experiment Assessment Project
 172 Old Orchard Way
 Warren, VT 05674
  
 Phone/FAX: (802) 496-3356 
 E-mail: radproject@aol.com  <A HREF="radproject@aol.com">Click here to send 
 e-mail to REAP</A>
 Web site: http://www.delphi.com/carsreap <A 
HREF="http://www.delphi.com/carsreap";>Click here for REAP Website</A>
  
 The Radium Experiment Assessment Project is a project 
 of the Center for Atomic Radiation Studies, Inc., a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) 
 organization. Contributions are tax deductible to the extent permitted by 
law.
  -----------------
  >>

In a message dated 10/1/99 9:14:11 AM EST, blc+@pitt.edu writes:

<< Subj:     Letter to NPR
 Date:  10/1/99 9:14:11 AM EST
 From:  blc+@pitt.edu (Bernard L Cohen)
 Sender:    radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
 Reply-to:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
 To:    radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu (Multiple recipients of list)
 
    In response to the coverage of the Japanese nuclear accident on
 National Public Radio Morning Report, I sent the following:
 
    In your Oct. 1 coverage of the Japanese nuclear accident, you
 explained the health effects of radiation by interviewing a representative
 of Union of Concerned Scientists. That organization is a highly political
 one with no standing in the scientific community. There are true
 scientific experts on health effects of radiation in many dozens of U.S.
 Universities, and any one of them would have been a more credible source
 of information on the subject. There is also Health Physics Society, the
 international scientific Society of experts on the subject which would
 have been the most credible source of information. Use of organizations
 with a strong political agenda as a source of scientific information is
 highly irresponsible for NPR.
 
 Bernard L. Cohen
 Physics Dept.
 University of Pittsburgh
 Pittsburgh, PA 15260
 Tel: (412)624-9245
 Fax: (412)624-9163
 e-mail: blc+@pitt.edu
 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html