Slashdot Mirror

Close (or "mostly true", depending on your point of view). A true class 1 laser will not damage eyes, but a stronger one may be rated as class 1 provided there is an interlock (such as in a laser printer). More info here

Hmm maybe not. But in the UK things appear to have been a little different.

1) A 4th March 2001 report by the Sunday Times newspaper starts like this:
'Top scientists establish link
HIGH voltage power cables have been officially linked to cancer for the first time. A study shows that children living near them run a small but significant increased risk of falling victim to the disease. Sir Richard Doll, the epidemiologist who discovered the link between smoking and lung cancer in the 1960s, will this week warn that children living near electricity power lines are at an increased risk from leukaemia. He is also expected to say that there may be a link with adult cancers but that this is unproven. His work was commissioned by the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), the government's radiation watchdog. Doll is chairman of its Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation (Agnir). He has spent months analysing the results of studies on cancer among people living near power cables. It is the first time a British government body has accepted the link between cancer and power lines.'

2) You can find the actual report dated 6th March 2001 at http://www.nrpb.org/press/press_releases/archive/2 001/press_release_5_01.htm .
First paragraph quote:
'After a wide-ranging and thorough review of scientific research, an independent Advisory Group (Chairman: Sir Richard Doll) to the Board of NRPB has concluded that the power frequency electromagnetic fields that exist in the vast majority of homes, are not a cause of cancer in general. However, some epidemiological studies do indicate a possible small risk of childhood leukaemia associated with exposure to unusually high levels of power frequency magnetic fields.'

Please note that this is a British government body!

What you nuclear-haters always assume is that everything radioactive is "bad" and that all radioactive substances (in whatever quantities) are equally as bad.

This is naieve and simplistic.

As environmental standards increase, the Nuclear Industry, like every other industry, makes improvements to its business such that it complies with the law on these issues. Mere compliance isn't all they reoutinely achieve anyway. But you wouldn't believe that.

If you want some facts, go here.

Interesting map and info at Radon Map.

You clearly havent spoken to anyone who lived anywhere near Chernobyl as I have. Hundreds of square kilometers around the place are unhabitable and the amount of birth defects in the area along the path of the fallout occured ALL THE WAY TO FRIGGING BRITAIN!

As to Nagasaki and Hiroshima, as I recall the entire city's top soil was removed and the human sufferring for decades after the fact is so documented that I find it preposterous that you would be so dismissive of it.

Even if nuclear power indeed did "little damage" as you claim, "litte" is a very relative term and I sincerely doubt that the general public holds your point of view on these matters. And I dont want to be offensive but you are starting to sound like a completely uncritical nuclear power nut who would let himself be irradiated and go "Look ma! Nothing happened to me!" and then die painfully out of press camera range.

This is just magnetic radiation. Get that? No "electro" involved. just like the poles of the earth, and magnets on your fridge. it won't hurt you any more than walking around with a magnet next to your head for 5 hours a day would.

That being said, what little I remember from Physics 310 tells me that the field energy from those lift magnets should be concentrated in the vicinity of the rail (since that's where the work is being done) with relatively little leakage up & to the sides. And any reasonable amount of shielding should keep what's left out of the passenger compartment. Note that a number of mass transit systems, e.g. the Detroit People Mover, have linear induction motors driving the cars. Lots of magnetic & electromagnetic activity, and yet the DPM web page notes no relevant precautions, even for pacemakers and such.

.

(..."magnetic radiation"?)

Sorry, but your logic is broken. No human being on earth can live without a 100% chance of dying. It's an inevitability. You're born, you're going to die.

Anyway, these sorts of comments are the result of the uneducated public misunderstanding the way that risk is calculated. You see, there is no such thing as a "safe" dose of radiation, much in the same way that there is no such thing as a "safe" speed at which to drive your car (other than zero). This concept is lost on most people.

The MOX safety records debacle was a storm in a teacup. The reason these things get so much attention is that nuclear safety standards are so high, the slightest erosion of them is taken very seriously. To put some perspective on the MOX records falsification, it was bored human operators missing out a final stage in the procedure because it was tedious. The MOX pellets are made entirely by machine to the highest possible engineering standards. Part of the manufacturing process involves measuring the dimensions of the pellets to ensure that they are within tolerance. This is done automatically using lasers. The final stage missed out by the operators was a manual check using a micrometer, which is orders of magnitude less accurate, but required by the procedure. They got bored so they wrote an Excel macro to generate false measurements complete with "random experimental error".

It is worth remembering that the BBC is vehemently anti-nuclear and likes a good bit of sensationalism, especially when it is "anti-establishment."

As for the contamination of the Irish sea, yes Sellafield has been discharging small qulantites of radioactive waste into it for deacdes, but if you care to check the facts you will see that the quantities have been reduced dramatically over the years, and continue to be revised downwards in accordance with the principles of constantly striving to improve safety and treatment of the environment. That article is a load of scaremongering FUD. Just look at the way it is written. A meltdown at Sellafield? What has that got to do with treating radioactive waste?

If you want the facts about nuclear power, nuclear waste, radiation, nuclear safety and regulation, you could do a lot wors than to start here:
The Nuclear Safety Directorate and the National Radiological Protection Board