01.12.2012 Views

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear Energy

Nuclear Energy

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

These standards and those set by other governments worldwide are based on risk<br />

coefficients for ionizing radiation exposure promulgated by the International Commission on<br />

Radiological Protection. A few months ago, on May 6, 2009, a very important conference took<br />

place in Lesvos, Greece: the European Committee on Radiation Risk Conference. 16 world experts<br />

who participated in the conference issued a “The Lesvos Declaration” which unequivocally stated<br />

that existing methods to determine safe radiation doses are clearly outdated. The declaration states<br />

that the ICRP risk model was developed before the DNA structure was discovered and before new<br />

discoveries such as that “certain radionuclides have chemical affinities for DNA”. Therefore, the<br />

experts asserted, “the ICRP risk coefficients are out of date”, that “employing the ICRP risk model<br />

to predict the health effects of radiation leads to errors which are at minimum 10 fold”, that<br />

“damage to the cardio-vascular, immune, central nervous and reproductive systems” due to<br />

radiation exposure is significant but as yet unquantified, and called for more research into the health<br />

effects of radiation. lxxi<br />

This only means that all the health effects of radiation outlined above are also an<br />

underestimate, the full extent of effects of radiation on health of human beings is yet to be<br />

understood…<br />

Background Radiation and Man-made Radiation<br />

Cancers have always plagued the human race, and it is generally accepted that most cancers<br />

in the past and present are due to this background radiation. <strong>Nuclear</strong> authorities argue that there is<br />

nothing to fear from routine radioactive releases from nuclear plants as it is much less than the<br />

naturally occurring background radiation. lxxii Even if this fact is correct, that is a strange argument.<br />

While we cannot do anything about background radiation, and therefore cannot prevent a certain<br />

number of people from developing cancer due to this, should we not try and ensure that this number<br />

does not increase by preventing man-made radiation from adding to background radiation.<br />

We are exposed to a background radiation of around 100 millirems per year from the earth<br />

and sun. lxxiii The US NRC has decided that it is acceptable for the public to receive an additional<br />

100 millirems per year from man-made radiation created through generation of nuclear energy. This<br />

means that for the NRC, it is acceptable that the number of cancer patients double (as compared to<br />

the number of cancer patients that would have occurred due to naturally occurring radiation)!<br />

The US National Academy of Sciences estimates that man-made radiation in the United<br />

States accounts for 18% of human exposure. lxxiv But what is not realised is that as more and more of<br />

the huge quantity of radioactive waste accumulating near nuclear power plants leaks and<br />

contaminates the environment and enters the water and food chains around the world, the<br />

percentage of radiation exposure from these sources is going to increase. And since this radiation<br />

remains potent for tens of thousands of years, by using nuclear electricity today, we are bequeathing<br />

our descendants a radioactive legacy tomorrow.<br />

30

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!