Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Precautionary Principle and Nuclear Radiation’ Category

EPA abandons major radiation cleanup in Florida, despite cancer concerns

 Note that the Center for Public Integrity is the source of this article which appears courtesy of the Global Security Newswire, a project of the nonprofit, nonpartisan Nuclear Threat Initiative. By Douglas P. Guarino published January 30, 2014

The Environmental Protection Agency is walking away after a decades-long battle with Florida politicians and industry officials over cleaning up phosphate-mining waste in an area that could expose more than 100,000 residents to cancer-causing radiation levels. Under a decision quietly finalized two weeks ago, the federal agency will leave it to state officials to decide the fate of the sites in and around Lakeland, an approximately 10-square-mile residential area midway between Orlando and Tampa

.http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/01/30/14190/epa-abandons-major-radiation-cleanup-florida-despite-cancer-concerns (more…)

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Radiation’s Risk to Public Health By Ira Helfand, MD

From the beginning of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011, the public was told repeatedly by industry spokesmen and government officials that the radiation discovered in the air, drinking water and food was “safe” or that it did not pose a threat to public health.  This unfortunately is not true.

 

It is the consensus of the medical and scientific community, summarized in the National Research Council BEIR VII report, that there is no safe level of radiation.  Any exposure, including exposure to naturally occurring background radiation, creates an increased risk of cancer.  The BEIR report concluded that every thousand man-rems of radiation exposure will cause one cancer.

 

While the risk of low-dose exposure may be very low for a given individual, when large numbers of people are exposed, there are health consequences.  If one person receives 1 rem of exposure, he or she has a one in one thousand chance of getting cancer.  But if a thousand people are exposed, one of them will get cancer.  And if a million people are exposed, one thousand of them will get cancer.  If the whole US population is exposed to that dose, there will be 300,000 cases of cancer.  So while the dose of radiation in a glass of drinking water may be so low that any one person does not need to take specific protective measures, the cumulative impact on the whole community may be very significant. (more…)

Read Full Post »

ARE WE SAFE YET?

With the help of every one of you we SHUTDOWN SONGS and we are safe from a accident during the operation of this plant, and they are not producing more nuclear waste each day. But we are not safe from a accident involving the nuclear waste and will not until it is moved out this dangerous area. This type of high-level nuclear waste cannot be left in an earthquake and tsunami zone here on California’s coast.

Did you know that SCE has collected two and a half billion dollars to decommission San Onofre from ratepayers, and they are asking for another $2 billion from ratepayers.  Did you know that SCE will get paid from the Department of Energy as well to store the  nuclear waste on site for who knows how long & how much?? If they take the 60 years they want to decommission you know they will come back and ask for never more money from ratepayers and the DOE. Now you can see why this was a financial decision on their part. Bottom line they will make more money this way. Are starting to see the real cost of nuclear power, and we have not even started talking about the real problem which the amount of nuclear waste on site, and do we want a nuclear waste dump at San Onofre for the future of California?

The most important reason to shutdown your local nuke plant is you stop the production of more nuclear waste. But wow, if you think shutting one down is hard wait until you start to see what is left there, and the amount of work to be done. But with that said we have to SHUT THEM ALL DOWN as soon as possible because the amount of waste is out of control in every since of the word. NO MORE NUKES FOR AMERICA must be our goal.

Did you shutdown San Onofre so people in SoCal would be safe? Then are really going to stop working now & let it become a nuclear waste dump for God knows how long? Or did you work so hard to shutdown San Onofre so that our communities will truly be safe for the future?  Did I mention that nuclear waste is most dangerous as it cools for the first 100 years. Truly safe to me means decommissioning in a secure & timely manner (10 yrs as Arine Gundersen says is possible) & removal of all nuclear waste and complete cleanup of the site. That is why I worked to help close San Onofre, and that is why we will need your support as we work for a complete cleanup of the San Onofre nuclear plant for the safety of all California’s.

WHAT HAVE WE DONE TO THIS WORLD OF OURS?

Read Full Post »