<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Ted,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>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.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>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. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Donovan Arnold</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>--- On <B>Thu, 3/31/11, Ted <SPAN>Moffett</SPAN> <I><starbliss@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: Ted <SPAN>Moffett</SPAN> <starbliss@gmail.com><BR>Subject: [Vision2020] Yes, Coal Fired Plant and Radon Radiation: Was: Re: Is it on its way to Idaho?<BR>To: "Chuck Kovis" <ckovis@turbonet.com><BR>Cc: "Vision 2020" <vision2020@moscow.com><BR>Date: Thursday, March 31, 2011, 11:06 AM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>While the radiation released from nuclear power plant accidents, or<BR>nuclear waste, or nuclear weapons (can you believe that nuclear bombs<BR>were tested in the atmosphere on US soil once upon a time?) has had<BR>and likely will continue to have negative impacts, it appears the<BR>public exagerates the extent of the impacts while paying far less<BR>attention to other radiation sources, such as coal burning, releasing<BR>more radiation than nuclear power plants, or natural radon gas, a<BR>problem impacting the Inland Northwest (read here:<BR><A href="http://wa-radon.info/WA_general.html" target=_blank>http://wa-radon.info/WA_general.html</A> ), estimated to kill thouands in<BR>the US annually ( <A href="http://www.epa.gov/radon/pubs/citguide.html" target=_blank>http://www.epa.gov/radon/pubs/citguide.html</A> ).<BR><BR>It is important to note given the worry over nuclear power induced by<BR>the Japan nulcear plant failures,
that modern third or fourth<BR>generation nuclear power plants can be built with far greater safety<BR>margins than first generation nuclear plants such as the Fukushima<BR>reactors constructed in the 1960s and 70s (<BR><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_I_Nuclear_Power_Plant" target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_I_Nuclear_Power_Plant</A> ),<BR>releasing radiation in Japan (read here on third, fourth generation<BR>reactors: <A href="http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf08.html" target=_blank>http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf08.html</A> ).<BR><BR>Consider what is well known by science, that coal fired plants release<BR>more radioactivity than nuclear plants:<BR><BR><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation" target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation</A><BR><BR>>From website above:<BR><BR>According to a 1978 article in Science magazine, "coal-fired power<BR>plants throughout
the world are the major sources of radioactive<BR>materials released to the environment".[20]<BR><BR>And another source:<BR><BR><A href="http://www.energyplanusa.com/coal_energy_plan.htm" target=_blank>http://www.energyplanusa.com/coal_energy_plan.htm</A><BR><BR>Coal ash emits more radiation than nuclear plants<BR>Scientific American 2007<BR>The waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than<BR>that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash<BR>emitted by a power plant – a by-product from burning coal for<BR>electricity – carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more<BR>radiation than a nuclear power plant emits that produces the same<BR>amount of energy.<BR>---------------------<BR>And yet another...<BR><BR><A href="http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html" target=_blank>http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html</A><BR><BR>For comparison, according to NCRP
Reports No. 92 and No. 95,<BR>population exposure from operation of 1000-MWe nuclear and coal-fired<BR>power plants amounts to 490 person-rem/year for coal plants and 4.8<BR>person-rem/year for nuclear plants. Thus, the population effective<BR>dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear<BR>plants.<BR>---------------------<BR>Consider radon...<BR><BR>Imagine if nuclear power plant operation was killing 15,000 to 20,000<BR>thousand a year in the US, as the following source estimates death<BR>from radon exposure?<BR><BR><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation" target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation</A><BR><BR>>From website above:<BR><BR>Radiation exposure from radon is indirect. Radon has a short half-life<BR>(4 days) and decays into other solid particulate radium-series<BR>radioactive nuclides. These radioactive particles are inhaled and<BR>remain lodged in the lungs, causing continued
exposure. People in<BR>affected localities can receive up to 10 mSv per year background<BR>radiation.[4] Radon is thus the second leading cause of lung cancer<BR>after smoking, and accounts for 15,000 to 22,000 cancer deaths per<BR>year in the US alone.[18]<BR>------------------------------------------<BR>Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett<BR><BR>On 3/31/11, Chuck Kovis <<A href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=ckovis@turbonet.com" ymailto="mailto:ckovis@turbonet.com">ckovis@turbonet.com</A>> wrote:<BR><BR>> The Environmental Protection Agency said a March 25 sample of milk produced<BR>> in the Spokane, Wash., area contained a 0.8 pico curies per literlevel of<BR>> iodine-131, which it said was less than one five-thousandth of the safety<BR>> safety guideline set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. . . . . An<BR>> EPA spokesman said that while the agency isn't certain that the iodine-131<BR>> found in the sampled
milk came from Fukushima, its discovery is "consistent<BR>> with" what the agency knows has been released so far from the damaged<BR>> nuclear reactors there. (Wall Street Journal article dated March 31, 2011)<BR>><BR>><BR>> Naw, it ain't coming to Idaho, Andreas, just Spokane. Chuck Kovis<BR><BR>=======================================================<BR>List services made available by First Step Internet, <BR>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. <BR> <A href="http://www.fsr.net/" target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A> <BR> mailto:<A href="http://us.mc381.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Vision2020@moscow.com"
ymailto="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table>