From: jgd@rsiatl.UUCP (John G. De Armond)
Newsgroups: sci.energy
Subject: More myth busting (was Re: The Nuclear equation)
Keywords: Nuclear Wastes, politics
Message-ID: <2132@rsiatl.UUCP>
Date: 8 May 90 04:55:16 GMT

ems@Apple.COM (Mike Smith) writes:

>In article <2098@rsiatl.UUCP> jgd@rsiatl.UUCP (John G. De Armond) writes:

>I, for one, will consider TMI to be a non-event in terms of nuclear
>safety only after it's dead carcass is safetly taken apart and put
>in a certified long term waste disposal site.  Till then the jury
>is still out on TMI.

Actually, the TMI event will be concluded when a new core is installed
and the reactor put back into service, as is the long range plan.


>Ask Silkwood how perfect nuclear safety has been ...

Funny you'd mention that, not that it has anything to do with nuclear
power. I have a friend and collegue, Dr. Louis Rancitelli, now Director
of the Nuclear Labs at the Battelle Memorial Institute in Columbus, OH.
Lou was the head of the independent investigative team that looked into
the circumstances of Silkwood. (Other achievements include heading up
the team of scientists that conducted the chemical evaluations of the Apollo
moon rocks.)  There were a few small details that came out in their report
that somehow managed to miss the media and missed being included in the
propaganda movie about her.  Let's look at a few facts uncovered in that
investigation:

First, the radioassay of body tissue done at autopsy showed some interesting
patterns.  There was a high concentration of refined Pu particles on the
surfaces of the upper bronchial (sp) tubes in her lungs.  There was almost
no concentration of any radioactive material in the deep recesses of her
lungs.  Secondly, there was very high concentrations of Pu dust in her
bathroom and bedroom but almost none anywhere else in her house and none
in her car or in her locker at work.  In case it has not dawned on you yet,
this is almost irrefutable evidence of intentional, acute, self-contamination
administered immediately before she died.

The particle sizes  found in her bronchial tubes would be rapidly eliminated
in normal lung discharge, normally in a few days.  The damaging particles,
those in the few-to-sub-micron size ranges, which penetrate deep and become
lodged, were non-existent.  Additionally, little contamination was found
in her digestive tract, a normal endpoint for excreted lung contamination.
The isotopic mix and particle sizes of the contamination indicate that
the source was refined sinter feed.  In other words, she probably stole
a small sample of Pu from the production area and self-contaminated herself.
This would be consistent with her behavior as a union activist and
troublemaker.

The other finding of significance is that the autopsy found a mixture of
booze and barbituates in her blood and stomach that if extrapolated
to full absorption, would have likely been fatal.  Of course, it made
much better press to say that she was run off the road and died under
mysterious conditions but the fact is, she simply stoned herself and
passed out at the wheel.

Anyone who is interested in the report should contact the Battelle
Institute and obtain a copy.  Sorry I don't have a number; my
nuclear papers are for the most part, in storage.

Though this is a pretty grevious fabrication on the part of the anti-nukes
and the media, it is by no means unusual.  For another example, one
should contact the public relations department of Illinois Power and
ask for the "60 minutes" rebuttal tape.  They will loan a copy to most
anyone interested.

In this incident, "60 minutes" came to IP obstensibly to film
a segment on construction delays at one of their facilities.  They
spent quite some time filming the utility president and the plant manager.
Illinois Power cooperated with CBS but because they had a well-founded
distrust of the media, they tagged a camera team of their own along to
film over the shoulders of the "60 minutes" crew.  As it turned out,
"60 minutes" was there to film material for a rabidly anti-nuclear
segment.  That's OK, or at least somewhat ethical if that is as far as
they go.

The really disgusting part is that they edited the statements of the
president and plant manager, even to the point of inserting or deleting
the word "not" in order to make them appear to say the opposite of
what was really said.  They also fabricated conversations by splicing
together sentences from several conversations taken in different  contexts.
And they mixed one question with another answer.

IP was so outraged that they produced a video which showed in split screen
format,  what was really filmed over the shoulder of the CBS crew, complete
with continous timecode, and on the other side, what "60 minutes" produced.
IP's intent was to buy commercial time on the networks to present their
case.  None of the networks would sell them time so they've resorted to
distributing the video through word-of-mouth.  Anyone truely interested
in the facts of this debate, especially as relates to the media, should
obtain a copy of this video, study it, and show it to as many people
as possible.

John

Oh, almost forgot...
((Poof!))      :-)