Slashdot Mirror
Living In Nuclear Disaster Fallout Zone Would Be No Worse Than Living In London, Research Suggests (bristol.ac.uk)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from University of Bristol, England: New research suggests that few people, if any, should be asked to leave their homes after a big nuclear accident, which is what happened in March 2011 following the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster. Professor Thomas's team used the Judgement or J-value to balance the cost of a safety measure against the increase in life expectancy it achieves. The J-value is a new method pioneered by Professor Thomas that assesses how much should be spent to protect human life and the environment. The researchers found that it was difficult to justify relocating anyone from Fukushima Daiichi, where four and a half years after the accident around 85,000 of the 111,000 people who were moved out by the Japanese government had still not returned. After the world's worst nuclear accident at Chernobyl in 1986, in what was then part of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic of the Soviet Union (USSR), the J-value method supported relocation when nine months' or more life expectancy would be lost due to radiation exposure by remaining. Using the J-value method, 31,000 people would have needed to be moved, with the number rising to 72,000 if the whole community was evacuated when five per cent of its residents were calculated to lose nine months of life or more.
Philip Thomas, Professor of Risk Management in the Department of Civil Engineering at the University of Bristol, said: "Mass relocation is expensive and disruptive. But it is in danger of becoming established as the prime policy choice after a big nuclear accident. It should not be. Remediation should be the watchword for the decision maker, not relocation." For comparison, the average Londoner loses four and a half months to air pollution, while the average resident of Manchester lives 3.3 years less than his/her counterpart in Harrow, North London. Meanwhile, boys born in Blackpool lose 8.6 years of life on average compared with those born in London's borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The results are published in a special issue of Process Safety and Environmental Protection, a journal from the Institution of Chemical Engineers.
Philip Thomas, Professor of Risk Management in the Department of Civil Engineering at the University of Bristol, said: "Mass relocation is expensive and disruptive. But it is in danger of becoming established as the prime policy choice after a big nuclear accident. It should not be. Remediation should be the watchword for the decision maker, not relocation." For comparison, the average Londoner loses four and a half months to air pollution, while the average resident of Manchester lives 3.3 years less than his/her counterpart in Harrow, North London. Meanwhile, boys born in Blackpool lose 8.6 years of life on average compared with those born in London's borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The results are published in a special issue of Process Safety and Environmental Protection, a journal from the Institution of Chemical Engineers.
The stress caused by the panic and the relocation makes for a better hypothesis
fission is not only a pointlessly dangerous scam, it's an entirely unnecessary one.
Citation needed. Here's mine that says you're full of shit.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/...
Nuclear fission is the safest energy source we have available today. It's also cheaper than solar, hydro, and offshore wind.
https://www.instituteforenergy...
Nuclear also has a lower carbon footprint than solar.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/u...
If there is an energy scam out there then it's solar. Onshore wind and hydro aren't too bad but they are limited in utility by geography, nuclear energy is not. About the rest of your claims, I think you have your aluminum foil helmet on too tight.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Like radioactive cesium. Like radioactive IODINE.
Neither of these is a big problem with proper preparation and remediation. Cesium behaves biologically like potassium, so if you take potassium supplements your body will flush the cesium out in your pee. Iodine is a micronutrient, and you only need a small amount. So if you take iodine supplements, most of it will be excreted.
Potassium iodine tablets are readily available since KI can also be used for water sterilization. I have a vial in my home, and in the survival kit in my car. You can buy them at any camping store, or on Amazon for $5.
Instead of acting helpless and curling up in the fetal position when someone mentions "radiation", you should educate yourself and prepare. KI tablets are a sensible place to start.
My experience is that "wife" is used by women to denote ownership of their husband.
You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
Capacity factors are very important, that is why the industry uses them and will continue to use them. I know you want to wish them away because of the lower numbers associated with wind and solar. But you can't just decide on your own and dictate they are not important.
There is no rule a plant must be run at its full CF, I agree, and many are not. But CF signifies not only full capability, but also the availability of that resource, and availability is of utmost importance to grid reliability and management.
Its nice you brought up France, who has essentially proven that nuclear is a central element to low CO2 emissions. They kick Germany's ass every day, and have been doing so for quite some time. France is the leader in large industrialized countries when it comes to clean air electrical production. They also displace claims that nuclear cannot vary output.