[Vision2020] Yes, Coal Fired Plant and Radon Radiation: Was: Re: Is it on its way to Idaho?

[Donovan Arnold]

Ted,
 
I think that nuclear power plants that lose their cooling are far more dangerous to the environment than coal mines. Most nuclear power plants only have a four hour backup power system.
 
Saying that coal plants are more dangerous to people than nuclear power plants, is akin to saying that baseballs are more dangerous than hand grenades because more people are injured with baseballs than hand grenades in the United States each year. Yet we don't see people replacing baseballs with hand grenades. The reasoning would be as such with nuclear power plants as the US builds them today, highly unsafe. 
 
Donovan Arnold
 

--- On Thu, 3/31/11, Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com> wrote:


From: Ted Moffett <starbliss at gmail.com>
Subject: [Vision2020] Yes, Coal Fired Plant and Radon Radiation: Was: Re: Is it on its way to Idaho?
To: "Chuck Kovis" <ckovis at turbonet.com>
Cc: "Vision 2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Date: Thursday, March 31, 2011, 11:06 AM


While the radiation released from nuclear power plant accidents, or
nuclear waste, or nuclear weapons (can you believe that nuclear bombs
were tested in the atmosphere on US soil once upon a time?) has had
and likely will continue to have negative impacts, it appears the
public exagerates the extent of the impacts while paying far less
attention to other radiation sources, such as coal burning, releasing
more radiation than nuclear power plants, or natural radon gas, a
problem impacting the Inland Northwest  (read here:
http://wa-radon.info/WA_general.html ), estimated to kill thouands in
the US annually ( http://www.epa.gov/radon/pubs/citguide.html ).

It is important to note given the worry over nuclear power induced by
the Japan nulcear plant failures, that modern third or fourth
generation nuclear power plants can be built with far greater safety
margins than first generation nuclear plants such as the Fukushima
reactors constructed in the 1960s and 70s (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_I_Nuclear_Power_Plant ),
releasing radiation in Japan (read here on third, fourth generation
reactors:  http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf08.html ).

Consider what is well known by science, that coal fired plants release
more radioactivity than nuclear plants:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation

>From website above:

According to a 1978 article in Science magazine, "coal-fired power
plants throughout the world are the major sources of radioactive
materials released to the environment".[20]

And another source:

http://www.energyplanusa.com/coal_energy_plan.htm

Coal ash emits more radiation than nuclear plants
Scientific American 2007
The waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than
that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash
emitted by a power plant – a by-product from burning coal for
electricity – carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more
radiation than a nuclear power plant emits that produces the same
amount of energy.
---------------------
And yet another...

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

For comparison, according to NCRP Reports No. 92 and No. 95,
population exposure from operation of 1000-MWe nuclear and coal-fired
power plants amounts to 490 person-rem/year for coal plants and 4.8
person-rem/year for nuclear plants. Thus, the population effective
dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear
plants.
---------------------
Consider radon...

Imagine if nuclear power plant operation was killing 15,000 to 20,000
thousand a year in the US, as the following source estimates death
from radon exposure?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation

>From website above:

Radiation exposure from radon is indirect. Radon has a short half-life
(4 days) and decays into other solid particulate radium-series
radioactive nuclides. These radioactive particles are inhaled and
remain lodged in the lungs, causing continued exposure. People in
affected localities can receive up to 10 mSv per year background
radiation.[4] Radon is thus the second leading cause of lung cancer
after smoking, and accounts for 15,000 to 22,000 cancer deaths per
year in the US alone.[18]
------------------------------------------
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett

On 3/31/11, Chuck Kovis <ckovis at turbonet.com> wrote:

> The Environmental Protection Agency said a March 25 sample of milk produced
> in the Spokane, Wash., area contained a 0.8 pico curies per literlevel of
> iodine-131, which it said was less than one five-thousandth of the safety
> safety guideline set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. . . . . An
> EPA spokesman said that while the agency isn't certain that the iodine-131
> found in the sampled milk came from Fukushima, its discovery is "consistent
> with" what the agency knows has been released so far from the damaged
> nuclear reactors there. (Wall Street Journal article dated March 31, 2011)
>
>
> Naw, it ain't coming to Idaho, Andreas, just Spokane.  Chuck Kovis

=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet, 
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
               http://www.fsr.net                       
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20110331/d645b5f5/attachment.html