----- Original Message -----
From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2004 8:03 PM
Subject: [L3] Re: Scouted: Nuclear waste court woes
> Even mining tailings are considered hazardous: "NRC
> regulations require that a cover be placed over the
> mill tailings to control the release of radon gases at
> the end of milling operations. The cover must be
> effective in controlling radon releases for 1,000
> years to the extent reasonably achievable and, in any
> case, for no less than 200 years."
>
> {and *hey* is that the source of your 200yr figure?)
No, and let me add a point here. We had small 2 Curie sources that were
sent thousands of feet downhole, usually offshore. The requirements we had
to meet was proof of containment for at least 400 years. With a half-life
of 400 years, this means the radioactivity has to be around 200 microcuries
before it was considered acceptable for it to leak into the
environment...thousands of feet below the surface. There is no way for the
danger from that to be anywhere close to background once it got near the
surface. Yet, that doesn't matter, rules are rules.
No one really complains about that; everyone has accepted ALARA (As Low As
Reasonably Achieveable) as one of the requirements. Even if the danger is
so low as to be close to unmeasurable, if one can make it lower, one must.
My argument is that it is reasonable for the criterion for risk from
nuclear power to be the same as risk from anything else.
Dan M.
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
