It's a shame it's lower than a dose from a CT. We could have free or low cost CT scans otherwise ... Nuclear plant could help reducing the high cost of health care!
(I am obviously mocking, but isn't this how these morons' minds work?)
Technically some of the contrast media are radioactive.
So what? The on-site disposal of nuclear generation waste is the specific designated site with much stricter controls than over medical waste. Don't see a real difference here.
There are three, and only three, deleterious health effects of radioactivity:
There has never been a case of a live birth with radiation-induced genetic mutations. With radiation sickness, you either get over it or you die. Cancer is probably the most-studied disease on the planet.
On the other hand, we don't even know the NAMES of all the stuff from a coal-fired power plant's chimney.
Right. Ten years of fuel for a nuclear reactor can be transported in one truck.
The coal required for one power station involves uncountably many railroad cars, trudging for a thousand miles (e.g., Montana to Chicago), with the attendant mishaps expected in mining and transporting such a huge amount of stuff.
It still may (and probably does at least indirectly).
We're on REC as well and the KS commission knuckled under a number of years ago and allowed the investor utilities to "cherry pick" individual loads from co-op territories w/ no compensation but didn't return the favor of allowing the co-ops to retain service to expanding residential areas they had historically served when they were too diffuse for the utilities to serve until they did grow.
Since co-ops typically have far fewer customer loads/mile and less concentrated industrial loads that would make more a higher revenue stream per mile than the investor utilities, the distribution costs for the co-ops is higher. Consequently their rates are generally forced to be higher to cover those costs.
The KS commission exacerbated the problem by allowing the taking of what few more concentrated loads away with the added insult of it being our lines still serving the loads.
--
It means _the site_ has been decontaminated sufficiently to be released which disproves the prior claims.
That there is long term storage and disposal at some location is a "doh!". There are waste disposal problems associated with virtually all activities of one kind or another.
Who knows? There is more than one "sun" in the universe and who the heck knows what progress humans will make in getting out there in all the time before this "sun" kicks the bucket.
Pure plug in cars are a bit of a joke too, what do you do if you become discharged in traffic, its not like you can walk to the gas station with a can? Unless battery packs are made modular and gas stations maintain a supply of pre-charged modules changeable in a minute, then plug in cars are dead before they even started. If the plug-ins are hybrids then they would be sellable, but nothing new is being developed here as we already have hybrids, these plug ins would just be hybrids with on-board AC chargers. For the vast majority of folks, a car with limited range and a refill-time of hours wont sell, period.
How about building a dozen or so reactors at the nevada test site? Then all the waste could be stored right there.
Your arguments are starting to sound like the age old question of rather you perfer to be killed with a rifle shot or a cannon shot. It really doesn't make a damn bit of difference if the end result is "you are dead".
Not the contrast medium (Gadolinium) used for MRIs.
That was the point, pinhead. There IS a long-term waste disposal system for LOW-level radioactive medical waste so that the risk-benefit ratio for that waste is acceptably low.
That is in dramatic CONTRAST with NO ACCEPTED LONG-TERM SYSTEM for the disposal of the HIGH-level radioactive waste from "decommissioned" nuclear power plants. That HIGH-level waste remains, in the majority of cases, STILL STORED "temporarily"(in some cases for 30+ years) ON THOSE SITES which are scattered around the US with no existing LONG-TERM plan for storage of that waste.
think
So, Mr. Ullman, exactly WHAT do you "Medical Communicators" communicate?
I hope it's not about MRI technology. LOL.
There are a number of plans, just none that are politically acceptable to someone. More a function of what started this discussion than technology.
I'm not convinced when I see those in "the know" speak out both sides of their mouth.
Just recently the local Mayor declared he would arrest, detain train conductors and await legal matters. The trains will not travel the tracks along the Vegas strip on the way to Yucca Mtn.
I'm not convinced the unknowing can lead the unwilling.
How 'bout you keep it in your own back yard?!!
Besides, Area 51 does not exist!
On 12/4/2008 10:43 PM Erma1ina spake thus:
True; the entity known as "scorpster" apparently doesn't know the difference between low-level and high-level rad waste, or is ignoring it or is confused on the issue.
Just to be clear, when we talk about such things as Yucca Mountain, we're talking about *high level* water disposal.
"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in news:UEOZk.5902$ snipped-for-privacy@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com:
18¢, eeek! Where is that Ed?NC, Public Works Commission, aka PWC
MONTHLY RATE - Basic Facilities Charge $9.00 Energy Charge For the first 500 kWh $0.0750 per kWh For all additional kWh $0.0815 per kWh
David Nebenzahl wrote in news:493884f4$0$21296 $ snipped-for-privacy@news.adtechcomputers.com:
Nahhhh, haven't you seen the movie Contact?! "Wanna go for a ride?" :-)
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.