>> > ... down right stupid in their fear of the nuke waste.

>> > Yes, it is dangerous, but it isn't THAT dangerous.

>> So you'd let them bury it in your back garden?

> Given reasonable containment and shielding, yes, I would.

And, what do you think parents from Sellafield would say.

These are cited in context below

    http://www.comare.org.uk/press_releases/comare_pr10.htm
    http://www.comare.org.uk/documents/COMARE10thReport.pdf

But, if you don't get that far, read the first, decide if you even 
need to bother with the second, and then decide if you REALLY would 
allow people to bury " reasonably contained and shielded waste" 
anywhere near your children. If anyone feels that playing the 
"children card" is unfair here, read the first reference and note 
which population group the cancer clusters concerned affected.

_____________

House for sale:
Garden contains significant quantities of reasonably contained and 
shielded waste.
Experts all agree that this is not only entirely safe now but will 
continue to remain safe for at least some time. Possibly a very long 
time. Possibly a very very long time. Possibly. (Acts of God 
excluded). Not only is and will it be and remain entirely safe, it 
will not affect your children, your wife your environment or anything 
else whatsoever in an adverse manner. Of this we are statistically 
certain!

In the unlikely advent of something adverse happening to any or all of 
the aforesaid a veritable army of experts will descend on you and 
yours and carry out extensive and indeed exhaustive tests and advanced 
statistical analyses that will verify beyond all reasonable, or indeed 
possible, doubt that the aforesaid waste is not in any way to blame 
for the unfortunate events your aforesaids are, or were while alive, 
experiencing.

        Just like happened (happens) at Sellafield / Windscale (what's 
in a name?)

where there has never been any statistical correlation between the 
"unusual" 'clusters' of childhood cancers and anything else that may 
or may not be happening nearby.

How many people on list would EVER go and live in Sellafield?

To spell it out.

- Nobody can 'scientifically' explain the reason for the childhood 
cancer clusters at Sellafield.

- According to the very very very best science available, all the many 
nasty things that happen or happened nearby appear NOT to have caused 
them - everything is 'reasonably contained and shielded'. But 
something did.

- [[I opine that]] Nobody, and certainly not the experts who wrote 
this report, doubt for a moment that the nasty stuff' is the cause. 
They just don't know how it managed to do it.

- ie the very best safety, measurement and analysis systems available, 
when they work according entirely to plan, end up not being able to 
explain how childhood cancers are being caused by the local nasties.

If you want to see why its utterly no surprise to anyone whatsoever 
that this happens and the words (alphabetical order) below don't tell 
you enough
see
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sellafield

and any amount of other stuff via gargoyle.

    B2O4 reprocessing
    Calder Hall
    MOX plant
    Magnox reprocessing
    Thorp plant leak
    WAGR
    Windscale
    Windscale fire

Note that Windscale 1 was destroyed in 1957, full decommissioning 
started in the 1990s and is now "partially complete".

________________________

The official word -

COMARE 10th Report: The incidence of childhood cancer around nuclear 
installations in Great Britain
[UK] Crown Copyright 2005
Produced by the Health Protection Agency for the Committee on Medical 
Aspects of Radiation in the Environment

    Intro

    http://www.comare.org.uk/press_releases/comare_pr10.htm

        Report proper (46 page pdf)

        http://www.comare.org.uk/documents/COMARE10thReport.pdf


        Russell 

-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist