Five Versions Of ‘truth’

Brenda Rosser

It is alarming to witness the parallels occuring in the fields of enviromental monitoring with that of the pesticide industry. Industry and government technicians seek out the areas where toxins are most likely to be watered down and base their observations and conclusions on studies in those areas. The vulnerability of individuals to narrow swathes of intense bands of poisons is ignored completely.

At this juncture in time I believe that it is justifiable for one to conclude – on the basis of a long history of disasters and accidents – that nuclear technology has been truly tested ‘in the field’. Like many other industrial sectors it has been found wanting and so have the associated regulatory and academic institutions. Governance has simply not kept pace with the dangerous technologies employed by the world’s transnational corporations.
Five versions of ‘truth’ for the Three Mile Island nuclear disaster

I had a phone call from a member of the Australian Citizens’ Electoral Council this morning. The CEC is the Australian arm of Lyndon La Rouche’s group and, as such, this branch is also heavily involved in the promotion of the expansion of nuclear power across the globe. When I questioned the wisdom of promoting such a dangerous and unsustainable form of energy I was assured by the caller that the science surrounding nuclear power is sound. I decided to have yet another look at some of the studies done. To simplify, I focussed on those related to Three Mile Island and specifically on the way the exposure levels of radiation were determined. What I found was a divergence of ‘objective’ observations clearly at odds with each other.

Harold Denton, Director of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation ““They are getting 63 curies per second…[in] the order of three times what they were yesterday, which would put us in the 1200 millirems per hour.” [1]

Joseph M Henri Chairman of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation: “To a distance of about five miles. I have got a reading. During one of these burst, releases up over the plant several hours ago, up over the plant about 1200 millirems per hour which seems to calculate out, by the time the plume comes to the ground where people would get it, would be about 120 millirems per hour. Now, that is still below the EPA evacuation trigger levels; on the other hand, it certainly is a pretty husky dose rate to be having off-site [2]

The American Nuclear Society: “in every instance, the level of exposure was deemed to be very low” – an average of approximately 10 millirems and projected maximum dose of 100 millirems. [3]

Jan Beyea (nuclear physicist involved in the Hatch-Susser study): He estimates the maximum was 200 millirems. He said the figure could be up to four times that much, but said that was “very, very unlikely.” Average doses in the area northwest of the plant – the direction in which the radiation plume traveled – were about 28 millirems, he said….. Some of the gauges simply were not able to measure amounts as high as what was released, said Jan Beyea…”It was insane,” Beyea said of the inadequate monitoring. “It was sort of a sign of the optimism that nothing would ever go bad.” [4]

Text from the scientific abstract of the Hatch-Susser study as published in the American Journal of Epidemiology: “the model of accident emissions was validated by readings from off-site dosimeters.” [5]

Brenda Rosser

[1] Pittburgh Post-Gazette Monday, April 16, 1979. The newspaper published a special report from the Associated Press that included excerpts of tape recordings of the proceedings of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission including the transcripts of the taped voices of Harold Denton, Director and Joseph M Henri Chairman of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Their voices were taped on 30th March 1979 as they responded to the enormous release of radioactive gases at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in the US. As published in ‘SECRET FALLOUT – LOW-LEVEL RADIATION FROM HIROSHIMA TO THREE-MILE ISLAND – Chapter 18 ‘Too Little Too Late’ by Ernest Sternglass.

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/SFchp18.html

[2] Pittburgh Post-Gazette Monday, April 16, 1979. The newspaper published a special report from the Associated Press that included excerpts of tape recordings of the proceedings of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission including the transcripts of the taped voices of Harold Denton, Director and Joseph M Henri Chairman of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Their voices were taped on 30th March 1979 as they responded to the enormous release of radioactive gases at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in the US. As published in ‘SECRET FALLOUT – LOW-LEVEL RADIATION FROM HIROSHIMA TO THREE-MILE ISLAND – Chapter 18 ‘Too Little Too Late’ by Ernest Sternglass.

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/SecretFallout/SFchp18.html

[3] Health Studies Find No Cancer Link to TMI. From the American Nuclear Socity website. Accessed on 26th November 2008.

http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/sptopics/tmi/healthstudies.html

[4] Gaps in research have angered some who were there in 1979

TOM AVRIL / Philadelphia Inquirer 26mar04

http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/Three-Mile-Island26mar04.htm

[5] American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 132, No. 3: 397-412

research-article

CANCER NEAR THE THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR PLANT: RADIATION EMISSIONS

MAUREEN C. HATCH1,, JAN BEYEA2, JERI W. NIEVES1 and MERVYN SUSSER1,3

http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/132/3/397

1Division of Epidemiology, Columbia University School of Public Health New York, NY