SJ Telegraph-Journal | Readers' Forum
As published on page D7 on February 26, 2005

LETTER
There's value in becoming educated about nuclear power

Ever since one horrible day in April 1986 anti-nuclear crusaders the world over have been taking the worlds worst ever nuclear accident and doing what many would consider impossible: making it worse. I have seen "studies" quoting Chernobyl death tolls which were in fact the death toll from every cause in the Ukraine, cancer statistics which were in fact from all sources of cancer in the Ukraine, and death tolls which were in fact the number of people evacuated. Janice Harvey continues this tradition in her recent column ("Chernobyl heart reminds us of Point Lepreau's real bottom line" - Feb. 17).

On the radiological health effects she is quoting statistics which definitely do not agree with the most authoritative study to date. The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) has been following the Chernobyl situation since its occurrence. Their conclusions, published in May 2000 (www.unscear.org), are in stark contrast to Ms. Harvey's assertions. In fact, when dealing with only radiological related health effects (this ignores stress and other mental effects which certainly did occur), they are quite clear that only one observable anomaly has been observed.

It is not in birth defects: they are no more common now than before the accident and are within the expected number. It is not in leukemia: this cancer is usually the first to develop after an extreme radiological exposure yet no increase has been observed. The only observed increase is in relatively easy to treat thyroid cancer and has resulted in approximately 1,800 extra cases of cancer than would have otherwise occurred. The death toll from the accident currently hovers around fifty. Immediate steam explosion and fire deaths account for 31, around 14 are radiation induced for fighting the fire, and the rest are cancer mortalities.

Ms. Harvey's insinuation that the nuclear industry has a "can't happen here" attitude makes it plainly clear that although she is one of the province's most vocal nuclear critics, she has likely never once in her life had or sought out a conversation with anybody who has anything to do with designing, maintaining, or operating a nuclear safety system.

If she had she would realize that despite her claims the first rule of reactor safety design is one fundamental assumption: "Accidents happen, equipment breaks, and people make mistakes." I can't tell you how many times this was drilled into my head by the nuclear engineering professors when I was at UNB-Fredericton, or subsequently as I took my training when I became employed in the nuclear industry.

Please educate yourself on nuclear power. You often hear the negative but there is another side. The definitive Canadian source is www.nuclearfaq.ca. You owe it to yourself, and considering the three million tonnes of air pollution Point Lepreau avoids every year, you owe it to the environment.

ANDREW DALEY
Toronto