A word about Hanford:
Firstly the contamination problem at Hanford as at the Mayak site in the old Soviet Union has no relevance to a civil nuclear energy program.

The Hanford Engineering Works began in March 1943. The DuPont Company started to build the reactor called “pile” in those days. Testing started in July1944 and charged with the first uranium slugs on 26 September 1944.

The first reactor supplies of Plutonium date from November 1944. This was the plutonium source for the Nagasaki bomb.

The site was active for about 25 years some 8 reactors were built in all. The average life span of the reactors was about 22 years. In addition a chemical separation plat was built.

During the active operation of the reactors much was learnt about safe reactor operation, cooling etc. Much too has been learnt about cleanup operations and the movement of radio-nuclides in to the environment.
Source Wikipedia)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
A number of radionuclides were released during operation of site estimated as including 26 PBq of iodine-131. This raised considerable concern in local residence in respect to thyroid disease. Releases occurred from 1944 through to 1972. Dosimetry on 3440 persons born between 1940-6 was estimated (Health physics 2004; 87:15-32). Although there must be uncertainty in estimates the range is given as 0.0029 mGy to 2823 mGy. with mean and median of 174 and 97 mGy.
To be continued.

Hanford continued.

Davis et al (JAMA 2004; 292: 2600-2613) studied a total of 5199 persons divided into 9 cohorts on basis of geographical regions surrounding the Hanford plant. It was possible to locate 4877 of the subjects (4350 alive; 527 had died). Diagnosis was based on clinical examination, ultrasound and if appropriate fine needle biopsy. Subjects were young children at time of peak exposure namely: in 1945-1946. More then 60% were born between 1943and 1945. Essentially there was no significant statistical association between estimated thyroid dose and thyroid disease. Perhaps because the cumulated dose was received over a long time period.

A parallel study in this group showed no evidence of increased risk of hyperparathyroidism. (J clin endo metab 2005; 90:9545).

“Updated analysis of mortality of workers at the Hanford site provided little evidence of a positive correlation of cumulative occupational radiation dose and mortality from leukaemia and from all cancers except leukaemia.” (Gilbert ES et al Health Physics 1996; 64: 577). I have only read the abstract of the Gilbert paper.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>…
Lessons to be learnt:
1. Low level exposure below 50-100 mSv is not as deadly as is made out by Dr. Caldicott and her friends.
2. Many useful lessons on plant operation and storage have been learnt since those early days.
3. The proposal is for civil not military applications of nuclear technology.
4. Nobody can possible know for certain the future in terms of military application. However, Australia has stringent safeguards in place.
5. An Australian civil industry in my opinion is not a threat to world peace.

Thank God we have Dr Caldicot!

"Australia has stringent safeguards in place."

Anti-green, what evidence do you have to support the above claim?

Mt Walton, near Coolgardie WA, is a site for intractable hazardous waste, including low level radioactive waste.

Visitors to the site have advised that the site is un-manned. Interred at the site, in shallow graves, is plutonium 239. At what level would you deem Pu239 to be benign?

Contrary to your claim, I advise that regulatory agencies for hazardous waste in this country have an abominable record for protecting citizens.

The uranium industry's record for "safety" is of much concern and Lucas Heights does not have an exemplary record.

Many catastrophic releases of hazardous waste are only brought to citizens' attention by citizens, whilst governments and their environment agencies duck for cover as they are now doing during yet another WA parliamentary enquiry.

Recommendations from previous Parliamentary Enquiries, resulting from catastrophic environmental disasters, have been completely ignored by governments and their regulatory agencies.

Releases of these hazards over communities are insidious. As with radioactive releases, you cannot see them, taste them, smell them or hear them, therefore citizens remain asleep at the wheel.

The planet is now seriously contaminated from military and civil radioactive waste, resulting in untold misery.

Despite the US having the largest number of nuclear reactors on the planet, they remain the largest polluters on the globe.

The project for a repository site in the Yucca Mountains, Nevada, reveals that despite the billions of dollars expended to date, the site may already be incapable of interring the current radioactive waste strewn around America.

Do the Bush and Howard Reich have other plans to inter America's radioactive waste?

Will Hiroshima John and his Calabrian choirboys allow for a referendum on the advent of nuclear power in Australia?

Will Dad's Army, led by St. Kev, allow for a referendum?

Will the proposed nuclear waste dump be restricted to Australia's radioactive waste?

Will the federal government refrain from interfering with state policies on the mining of uranium?

"Don't be naive. It's the (he hem) 'environment' stoopid!"

.

As usual the discution turn into a dance around the bitter tree

the anti get into the " woes and ashes " circus ,
the pro get into the " those anti-sciences witches hunters " mood

there is not going to be any choices
all australian uranium is going to go oversea to a power hungry world
here the green movement has stood steadfastly beside the coal industry
never ever raising the small matter of Australia being the biggest coal exporter in the world ,
we are equal in economic importance to Saudi Arabia and pretty much equal in political influence ...zilch !!
we are in fact the carbon dealer of a carbon addicted world ,
wasting time talking about the " Evil " of the atom while the clock is ticking on the depletion bomb

.

Dr Caldicott has shown again that she can raise issues that the nuclear lobby + Liberal-Labor really just don't want raised. And - a spirited debate ensues.
And once again - as happened back in the 80s Dr. Caldicott attracts the same sort of flak from people who just can't answer her arguments.

I read with amusement of Dr Caldicott's " witchcraft and deception” and how "s she should stick to commentary about warts and appendicitis". And, Nigel who made these comments, goes on to confuse things.

Apparently, if someone speaks clearly and can be understood by others, then Nigel thinks they must be speaking with Pauline Hanson-like ignorance. On the contrary. It is because Dr. Caldicott knows her subject, that she is able to speak with clarity.

To give Dr. Ziggy Switkowski his due, it also because he knows his subject, that he does not speak with such clarity. Because Switkowski knows that nuclear power is unreasonably expensive (especially for the tax-payer), and very dangerous, and a poor investment risk - Switkowski glides over these areas with a degree of unclear doublespeak.

I am also fascinated at the double standards here - Nigel has sneered at Dr. Caldicott because she hasn't got a doctorate in geology. Why are we all not sneering at Ziggy Switkowsi for not having a doctorate in ecology, economics, health etc - while he pronounces on the virtues of nuclear power? Also, let's not forget - Ziggy is paid to spruik for that nuclear industry which is now in danger of closing down.

Anti-green’s comment recalls the good old days, when Dr. Caldicott was insulted as a “silly emotional woman” – unable to answer Dr. Caldicott’s argument – well – you just say “This woman is a liar and a deceiver!”

Now, who really does sound emotional and ignorant?
Christina Macpherson www.antinuclearaustralia.com

Christine,

The phrase “This woman is a liar and a deceiver!”
is not from my post.