3 ms·
> Low-level radioactive waste is not really big a problem. It does not pose any significant risk to anyone or anything At some abstract factual level that clai
by logifail 5y ago
> Low-level radioactive waste is not really big a problem. It does not pose any significant risk to anyone or anything
At some abstract factual level that claim may not be [that] wrong, but I'm not convinced that statements such as that help promote the nuclear cause.
- user-the-name 5y agoNothing abstract about it. Low-level waste is really not dangerous.
- teachrdan 5y agoThat's not necessarily the case. In Europe after Chernobyl, radioactivity accumulated in cow's milk via grass contaminated with strontium. Children were particularly at risk because strontium is absorbed into growing bones in a similar manner to calcium. Even a low-level of radioactivity in that context can be harmful. https://hidex.com/ebooks/liquid-scintillation-measuring-procedures/measuring-procedures/radionuclides-from-nuclear-fission-activities/2-3-4-strontium-in-milk/ https://hidex.com/ebooks/liquid-scintillation-measuring-proc... https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(96)76532-3/pdf#:~:text=The%20present%20study%20evaluated%20after,monthly%20from%201987%20to%201994.&text=Based%20on%20this%20result%2C%20the,of%2010%2C410%20d%20for%20goSr https://www.journalofdairyscience.org/article/S0022-0302(96)....
- logifail 5y agoI (believe I) appreciate the physics of that claim ... but why do we bother collecting it and handling it separately?