New International Symbol for Radiation -- IAEA »
Posted By gpsea1 7 months ago in NewsAccording to the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) which promotes nuclear energy, the symbol means “you are in danger, stop, run away. So the message is actually “death immenent—RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!!!” If you watch the video that the IAEA released to explain the video, you’ll see that they decided to use this symbol to supplement the more common yellow ‘trefoil’ to protect people who encounter large sources of radiation without understanding that it can cause death. Apparently, many cases of death via ionizing radiation is attributed to this (illiterate people scavenging metal parts like lead from radioactive materials). Right now the world is accumulating hundreds of thousands of tons of nuclear waste all of which will use this symbol. So much for the argument that nuclear safety measures are airtight, huh?
Read Full Story at greenpeacesoutheastasia.wordpress.com »
329 Views Share Story 5 Comments Report
Who Also Submitted: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 5 (view all)
-
-
Neutral
engineer7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I agree with beavvith1 for a change
Reply
When nuclear plants are built correctly - not like Chernobyl -, there is NO danger. A flight from New York to Los Angeles will expose one to more radiation than being 15 years at the wall of Indian Point Nuclear power plant, which has been operating SAFELY since 1954. The renewables cannot supply enough energy right now and will not be able to be brought to the required levels for many, many decades. Coal, oil and natural gas will still do more damage in the long run as they have done already and must be replaced
-
-
Neutral
ForrestPhelps7 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
For clarity's sake, a couple of points.
Reply
Nuclear power does indeed produce radiation. Without neutrons ( a form of ionizing radiation), there would be no fission within the reactor, and no heat generated. Plus, many of the metals in a nuc plant become irradiated and emit radiation. Plus, the spent fuel is highly radioactive.
Yes, this symbol is not for nuclear power plants for the most part, but for other industrial and medical uses, so I don't see what the big deal is. There are some sources in use that can be deadly, and security of these devices is not always perfect.
As to nuclear power, saying there is no danger to a well-built reactor is probably falling on the side of hyperbole. There is some danger from any of man's effort to produce energy. I'm not going to get into the fossil-fuels are worse argument, but I do agree with engineer that the "damage" from fossil fuels is glossed over when discussing them versus nuc power.
Also, engineer, I have to take exception to saying "15 years at the wall of Indian Point Nuclear power plant" being less than the excess dose received from an airline flight. Most estimates of a long flight put the dose as between 5 and 10 mrem/hr. Depending on which wall one was near at Indian point, and using only the radiation caused by the nuclear plant itself (not background), then 10 mrem/hr divided by 131,400 (the number of hours in 15 years, if my math is correct) = 0.000038051750381 mrem/hr.
I haven't spent a lot of time around civilian nuc plants, but I'm sure there are areas in the plant that easily exceed that. Los Alamos has an Annual Dose Calculator, and it gives a number of 0.009 mrem/year for living within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant, therefore 15 * 0.009 = 0.135 mrem, which makes living next to the wall of Indian Point probably means exceeding 5 mrem.-
Neutral
beavith17 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i was more moaning about the way the article was written. it essentially equated civilian nuclear power plants as great emitters of radiation. as you and engineer note, the release/emission rises barely above background.
Reply
if it were a Chernobyl style RMBK, i'd be right there with greenpeace. its not. its a Westinghouse, like several here in the states.
i'd also be talking about outside the plant, as in the general public exposure. i don't have the figures at my fingertips, but i'm sure there are people living over granite foundations that have shockingly high radon exposure. currently, there's a warning that an unknown quantity of stainless steel from India is quite contaminated with cobalt 60.
for most of us, radiation exposure is moot.
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.