home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.environment
- Path: sparky!uunet!pmafire!russ
- From: russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown)
- Message-ID: <1993Jan10.232841.22830@pmafire.inel.gov>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 23:28:41 GMT
- Organization: WINCO
- Subject: Re: TMI Releases & Population Dose
- Summary:
- References: <1992Dec30.151416.11706@odin.corp.sgi.com> <1992Dec31.034210.16668@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> <Jym.8Jan1993.0930@naughty-peahen>
- Followup-To:
- Organization: WINCO
- Keywords:
- Lines: 31
-
- In article <Jym.8Jan1993.0930@naughty-peahen> Jym Dyer <jym@mica.berkeley.edu> writes:
- >Tino alleges:
- >
- >> The _total population_ dose from TMI was about 10 person-rems.
-
- The central estimate of population dose was about 2000 person-rem for
- the 541,000 persons living within 50 miles. This is an average dose of
- 4 mrem.
- >
- >=\= Pray tell, how do you know that? It is well-documented
- >that MetEd does not have measurements of the radiation released,
- >in part because much more was released than their equipment
- >was calibrated to detect.
-
- There is, of course, a difference between "radiation released" and
- "dose". That distinction seems to have eluded Mr. Dyer.
-
- The average dose commitment is about 10% of the annual increment that
- residents of the mountain west receive from cosmic radiation (higher
- altitude). The cancer rates in the intermountain region are among the
- lowest in the nation for the last 40 years. Note that the three lowest
- rates have been found in Utah, Idaho, and Colorado......yes, Utah!
-
- The obsession with TMI "health effects" is symptomatic of the pathetic
- orientation toward PR rather than science.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-