Friday, July 8, 2011

U.S. vs Japan: the Threat of Radiation Speculation, June 26 2011

Fairewinds’ chief engineer Arnie Gundersen emphasizes the need to enlarge evacuation zones around US nuclear plants to 50 miles. Reducing US evacuation zones to only 10 miles during a nuclear power accident compromises public safety.

White House & NRC Recommend 50 Mile Fukushima Evacuation, Yet Insist US Safe With Only 10 from Fairewinds Associates on Vimeo.

On March 10th, the day before Fukushima happened, if you had asked me who were the best people on the planet to be prepared in the event that an emergency happened, I would have said it was the Japanese. And yet, look, here we are 3 months later and it is obvious that they were totally unprepared for the accident that actually occurred.

According to Gundersen:
“What I am proposing here is not that we take a look at the law. It is a good law, and it says 25 rem, and that will protect the population.

“But what is more important is to look at all the speculation that goes into developing all that implementing stuff that goes behind this. That goes into, let’s take a look, what did we learn from Fukushima about how much radiation can be released from an accident, what did we learn from Fukushima about the condition of the infrastructure after an accident. And take all of that and come up with better emergency planning. When I factor in all the things I just discussed, fuel failures, containment failures, winds that blow in more than one direction, irrational behavior, destroyed infrastructure, I reach the conclusion that the NRC needs to demand emergency plans out to 50 miles, not 10, just like the United States required in Japan.

“If it is good enough for Americans living in Japan, it is good enough for us back home. I am sure it will be more expensive. But the goal of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should be to protect us, not industry profits.”

For full transcript:…

No comments:

Post a Comment