Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
As many of my readers point out in their comments, Hurricane Florence endangers aging nuclear power plants in the Carolinas. Below find ...
-
The weekend edition of the Wall Street Journal reports that PG&E suffered a massive loss of control of the utility's databases, le...
-
In 2007, Rick Weiss reported for the Washington Post potential hazards of genetic medicine and the failed regulatory apparatuses designed t...
Good analysis, HOWEVER, a few weeks back I used the exact same NRC link to extract data and to re-analyze the basic presumptions of the "natural radiation" baseline. The bottom line is that the natural radiation baseline as it is set, is a complete and utter joke, a travesty, a deception of humanity.
ReplyDeleteThe baseline is at least 6 times higher than it needs to be from ACTUAL background radiation that you can't avoid.
You need to scroll down 2 or 3 pages on my link here to the story I wrote,
http://oahutrading.blogspot.com/p/japan-nuclear-information.html
Here is an Excerpt
Exposing one of the "Big Lies"
In some areas, Radon is not completely avoidable. Mostly it seeps into basements. Radon ventilation systems are very effective, they can reduce this amount at least 50% and maybe 80%, just depends how much air you want to move. So instead of a 37% of your exposure if you reduce that 80% it is 7.5%, plus 5% cosmic, and 3% soil, that is 15%. So by "so called 'natural sources" like med procedures, nuke medicine, those items are jacking up your doe like 400% from where is could be "naturally". the whole natural radiation lie, unravels as a complete joke... about half of us will contract cancer in our lives, and yet you can't prove that any one source caused it. Therefore by the "Scientific Method" radiation cannot be proven to be unsafe, therefore the PNPs Pro Nuke Pimps will state that "natural radiation" is proven to be safe, and therefore a little extra disaster radiation is OK too. Check the chart closely, the PNP lies immediately emerge.
I guess the government would benefit from the taxes of businesses that are of a much larger scale. Instead of planning larger recreational projects for communities, why not invest more on donation?
ReplyDeleteLauren Edith