User profile: Sordid

Joined: Sept. 16, 2008

Contact Sordid (log-in required)

Recent Comments

Total Comments: 3 (view all)

Posted on: Science of Sci-Fi in storage plan?

But Shelley knows ALL about robotic technologies! She's close to being an expert.

http://i226.photobucket.com/albums/dd17/...

(Suggest removal) 12/19/08 at 10:57 a.m.

Posted on: EPA issues final Yucca Mountain radiation rules

I think the one thing the EPA's standard, and everyone else, is lacking is a matter of perspective. What is 100 millirems (mrem) and what does it mean to me? Here are some facts...

I certainly hope that no one's sleeping with anyone, because that will up your radiation dose by one mrem. Lead jammies, anyone? Likewise, put down that banana and glass of orange juice!!! They're deadly, upping your radiation dose by 2.4 mrem from naturally occurring potassium-40, (http://www.oystercreeklr.com/pdf/Cesium%...) which has a half life of 1.4 BILLION years, much longer than that of uranium or plutonium. And for God's sake, stay away from smoke detectors!!!!! The americium-241 inside can raise that dose even higher, another 10 mrem each and every year. (http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/lif...) And, I hope no one smokes as that would result in upping your annual dose by 2,000 mrem/year!!! We've now moved out of the realm of the mrem and into that of the rem. Remember, 1000 mrem make up a rem.

According to Nave and Nave (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/Hba...), there is no observable effect on the human body when absorbing 0-25 rem/year. That's why the federal standard for workers is set at five rem/year.

With this in somewhat of a more applicable format, does 100 mrem seem all that scary? Not to me, considering my house has five smoke detectors, I drink orange juice every morning. What frightens me more, are those that follow the herd like a mindless sheep and who refuse to do their own research on such an important aspect of our nation's energy matrix. People like Loux and Reid feed on ignorance when it comes to Yucca. Then again, some people can't be confused with the facts, because they've already made up their minds. Pity....

(Suggest removal) 10/1/08 at 3:30 p.m.

Posted on: Reading the fine print

Excuse me, but on what basis of fact is the statement "20 years of research by Nevada has proved would never be safe" made? To my knowledge, the only "facts" that the State has presented has been the fear-mongering and misinformation coming out of Loux's office. DOE's license application for Yucca Mountain has THOUSANDS of pages of research, all hard cold PROVEN facts about the safety of the repository. I might suggest the editors of the Sun do a little research on the topic.

(Suggest removal) 9/16/08 at 9:25 a.m.

(view all 3)