Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Kevin OMalley
"Worked well enough that there was no radiation release..."

***This is flatly untrue. The following top 3 hits out of 718 from Google for "radiation release" "three mile island" will serve as an example.

I stand corrected, there was no significant radiation release.

***But it would ablate and cause the radiation to migrate.

Never said there would be no radiation released, said you'd be lucky to detect that which was released.

319 posted on 12/22/2004 8:09:19 AM PST by Toddsterpatriot (Protectionism is economic ignorance!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 312 | View Replies ]


To: Toddsterpatriot

"I stand corrected, there was no significant radiation release."
***I guess here is where we disagree, perhaps on what the meaning of "significant" is. From what I can see in the NRC’s 2004 Fact Sheet on the TMI Accident, they now acknowledge that even under NORMAL operating conditions, there are 12 deaths attributable to radiation release at nuclear plants.

http://www.tmia.com/accident/whatswrong.html

Excerpt:
In August 1996, a study by the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, authored by Dr. Steven Wing, reviewed the Susser-Hatch study (Columbia University; 1991). Dr. Wing reported that "...there were reports of erythema, hair loss, vomiting, and pet death near TMI at the time of the accident... Accident doses were positively associated with cancer incidence. Associations were largest for leukemia, intermediate for lung cancer, and smallest for all cancers combined... Inhaled radionuclide contamination could differentially impact lung cancers, which show a clear dose-related increase."

Findings from the re-analysis of cancer incidence around Three Mile Island is consistent with the theory that radiation from the accident increased cancer in areas that were in the path of radioactive plumes. "This cancer increase would not be expected to occur over a short time in the general population unless doses were far higher than estimated by industry and government authorities," Wing said. "Rather, our findings support the allegation that the people who reported rashes, hair loss, vomiting and pet deaths after the accident were exposed to high level radiation and not only suffering from emotional stress.”

Even under normal operating circumstances nuclear plants release radiation. The NRC acknowledged that 12 people are expected to die as a direct result of normal operation and releases for each commercial nuclear reactor that is granted a license extension of 20 years.





"Never said there would be no radiation released, said you'd be lucky to detect that which was released."
***Again it appears that we part company. A runaway, sinking nuclear plant which is no longer moderated except by surrounding seawater in an open loop configuration is a radiation heat pump into the environment. The seawater closest to the device quickly turns to steam, ablating away as it rises to the top because it's lighter than the surrounding water, and carries its radiation with it into the open sea. From there, ocean currents could carry the radiation poisoned seawater to multiple places. We can easily measure the radiation that leaked from the Chernobyl accident, which would be on the same order of magnitude as the radiation leaked into the sea under this scenario.


323 posted on 12/22/2004 10:00:40 AM PST by Kevin OMalley (Kevin O'Malley)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 319 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson