Why Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl

Posted on July 18, 2011 by Radiation Truth

To summarize a few key points:

The radiation risk model used by the ICRP is too simple. It treats internal (that is inhaled or ingested) radiation emitters the same as external radiation emitters. Busby is convinced that internal radiation exposure can be “up to 1,000 times more harmful than the ICRP model.”
Using the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR) Busby calculates approximately 200,000 excess cancers within the next 50 years. Half will be diagnosed within 10 years. The ICRP model predicts 2,838 excess cancers. “The eventual yield will therefore be another test of the two risk models,”
Many studies done after Chernobyl showed much greater cancer rates than the ICRP model predicted.
“There will follow increased rates of ill health, including cancer and birth defects, which will be proportional to the overall air concentration. High in Japan, low in USA, and very low in Europe….”
“I believe that in the explosions at Fukushima Daiichi, huge amounts of spent fuel were blown sky high. The ground contamination out to 100 km at Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl, the dose rates higher. And Fukushima has contaminated Tokyo with 35 million people. The population of the 200 km radius is also enormous, about 10 million. Most of the Chernobyl stuff fell away from big population centers. Luckily it went north and west and not to Kiev which is south. Fukushima is still boiling its radionuclides all over Japan. Chernobyl went up in one go. So Fukushima is worse.”

Chris Busby was interviewed by Norimatsu Satoko and Narusawa Muneo for the Asia-Pacific Journal. He is Scientific Secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), Visiting Professor in the School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Ulster, and Guest Researcher at the Federal Institute for Crop and Soil Research, Julius Kuehn Institute, Federal Research Centre for Cultivated Plants in Braunschweig, Germany.

Facts to use when discussing nuclear power

Posted on July 6, 2011 by Radiation Truth

Want some nuclear power facts at your fingertips?

Study these 20 facts and be ready to spread the word

Here are two interesting facts from the article by Peace and Justice Online that are not well known: See all the facts.

• “Following the Three Mile Island accident, infant death rates increased dramatically in Pennsylvania’s nearby capital, Harrisburg. About 2,400 families sued, based upon the health impacts, which included cancer, leukemia, birth defects, stillbirths, sterility, malformations, open lesions, and hair loss. The Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture documented an increase in the death rate among farm animals and wild animals in the area surrounding the nuke.”

• “Although the generation of electricity through nuclear reactions does not produce carbon emissions, reliance upon nuclear power does significantly contribute to the release of carbon into our atmosphere. This is due to the substantial carbon emissions produced by the mining, transport, and processing of the fuel, as well as by the construction and decommissioning of the plant. Nuclear power is not the solution to global warming.”

Chernobyl Catastrophe: 25th Anniversary of World’s Worst Nuclear Accident

Posted on April 26, 2011 by Radiation Truth

Democracy Now, 4/26/11

Start at 10:32, End at 35:20

Last paragraphs of statement by PSR on the anniversary of Chernobyl

…While the risk of low dose exposure may be very low for a given individual, when large numbers of people are exposed, there are health consequences. If one person receives 1 rem of exposure, he or she has a one in one thousand chance of getting cancer. If a thousand people are exposed, one of them will get cancer. If a million people are exposed, one thousand of them will get cancer. While the dose of radiation in a glass of drinking water may be so low that any one person does not need to take specific protective measures, the cumulative impact on the whole community may be very significant.

“We cannot be asked to protect the public after the fact,” said Ira Helfand, MD, a member of the Board of Physicians for Social Responsibility. “The health system cannot respond adequately to a large scale disaster on the order of Fukushima. The risks to public health, the economy and our environment from nuclear power far outweigh the benefits.”