Bishop Hill No objection
May 4, 2014 Energy: gas Greens Media Further to the last post, I emailed Dart Energy's PR people to ask for some details about the hearing. In particular, according to Rob Edwards at the Herald:
Dart’s predicted radioactive discharges were highlighted in a submission to the public inquiry by Dr Ian Fairlie, a radiation expert hired by local objectors. He didn’t present his evidence because Dart objected to inaccuracies in his submission.
What precisely were the objections, I wondered. Well, the response was a bit of an eye opener. It seems that there were no objections lodged at all. The true story was given in the closing submission of Dart's QC to the inquiry:
A detailed precognition was lodged by [Dart's radiation expert] Mr Saleh together with a commentary on third party evidence. In light of Mr Saleh’s evidence [Concerned Communities of Falkirk, the protest group that hired Fairlie] withdrew significant parts of the evidence of Dr Fairlie, accepting very properly that it was wrong, and exaggerated or overstated the position. Thereafter following discussion it was decided Dr Fairlie should not give evidence and instead a minute of a meeting was lodged. The Minute is before the Inquiry but amounts to “broad agreement” regard NORM. In all the circumstances I invite you to hold that CCOF had simply misunderstood the issue of NORM. In addition I invite you to accept the evidence of Mr Saleh which was unchallenged. His conclusions were:
“6.1 Overall, on the basis of literature reviewed, potential radiological impacts assessed the proposals for the management of NORM waste arisings put forward by Dart Energy, and Dart Energy’s commitment to complying with the regulatory requirements under the RSAO3, it is my professional opinion that the potential impacts that would arise from the management and disposal of NORM wastes from the proposed development can be considered to be insignificant.
6.2 The evidence presented above demonstrates compliance with regulatory requirements to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority, it is hoped that the evidence addresses the concerns put forward by Dr. Fairlie on behalf of CCoF, regarding potential radiological impacts that may arise from the proposed development.”
So Fairlie presented a load of bunk to the inquiry, withdrew it and failed to take the stand when he realised he was going to look an idiot if he did, and then managed to get a toned-down, but still bonkers version accepted. But as commenters observe, we are talking about an expected radiation release into the Firth of Forth of:
- 100 bananas per hour
- 3 bone scans per year
And this, ladies and gentlemen is considered worthy of an article in the Herald. No wonder nobody wants to read it any more.
Reader Comments (19)
It's "radiation" & billions of Becquerels. The journos, their editors & the general public have no idea about what a Becquerel is, but being radiation & a shed load of it, it's therefor very, very scary.
Job done as far as Watermelons are concerned.
My local Tesco displays & sells more than 100 bananas an hour. OMG. Should I contact 'Elf 'n Safety??
Yeah, you'll be laughing on the other side of your face, when they can't sail HMS Queen Elizabeth out of Rosyth, because the Firth of Forth is clogged up with rotting bananas.
Fyffe of Forth?
Game over!
ssat wins!
ssat - I think that was Fyffe four, Forfar Fyffe :)
Apparently for an average banana of 150g the decay rate of potassium is 15 Bq. Queensland banana benders harvest about 300,000 tonnes annually. This converts to an annual radiation level of 30 billion Bq.
It looks like my home state is positively **glowing**. Time to pack up my traps and get out of the joint before the mutations set in.
This is a great example of the concept that if enviro-extremists can't exaggerate they really have nothing at all to say.
Green Sand, I'm afraid you're right.
SOME INTERESTING Bq VALUES
100 Bq: Japan maximum iodine-131/liter for drinking water (babies)
300 Bq: Japan maximum iodine-131/liter for drinking water (older children, adults)
740 Bq: EPA maximum tritium/liter for drinking water, or 20,000 pCi of tritium/liter
1,000 Bq: one kg of coffee
1,000 Bq: one kg of granite (such as a kitchen countertop)
2,000 Bq: one kg of coal ash
2,000 Bq: Japan maximum iodine-131/kg of fish and vegetables
3,000 Bq: radon in a 100 sq meter Australian home
3,000 Bq: I.A.E.A. maximum iodine-131/liter for drinking water (older children, adults)
5,000 Bq: one kg superphosphate fertilizer
7,000 Bq: human adult (100 Bq/kg x 70 kg)
7,000 Bq: Canada (Ontario) maximum tritium/liter for drinking water
10,000 Bq: Switzerland maximum tritium/liter for drinking water
30,000 Bq: household smoke detector with americium
30,000 Bq: radon in a 100 sq meter European home
500,000 Bq: one kg uranium ore (Australian, 0.3%)
925,000 Bq: tritium in one wristwatch
1 million Bq: one kg of low level radioactive waste
25 million Bq: one kg of uranium ore (Canadian, 15%)
70 million Bq: radioisotope for medical diagnostic purposes
1,000,000 million Bq: one luminous EXIT sign with tritium (1970s) = 27 Curies
10,000,000 million Bq: one kg of 50-yr-old, vitrified, high-level nuclear waste
100,000,000 million Bq: radioisotope source for medical therapy = 2,700 Curies
From
http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/53939/radiation-exposure
Critical theory in practical use?
Radioactivity has had this poisoned chalice from its infancy in the service of Man.
The instrumental detection systems can be extremely sensitive.
This is a big benefit for research aand safety.
It is a weapon that is exploited for nefarious purposes.
If you do develop a new instrument for anything, do detune the version sold to the public so it responds only to levels above ambient.
The malady spreads. Look on TV for impossible magnifications and data gathering as fictionalised in some USA detective series, from CCTV cameras that outdo my pro Nikon.
There is ignorance at many turns in climate science. It will be interesting to chortle at the next round of global warming movies. Days of Living something??
In the anti-nuke days we had the stupidity of China Syndrome and Kryptonite with Clark Kent (Sorry, replace name with Superman.)
More ignorance everywhere, it is depressing. Radio talkback caller today, "Many years ago when the lad was much younger...."
It has to be remembered that, under pressure from anti-nukes, unnecessarily tight radiation limits were imposed on all activities involving radiation, based initially on inadequate data from the WW2 atom bomb results. With tough radiation limits, the anti-nukes could then claim that radiation must be very dangerous because of the tight limits.
In reality, we should start with a clean sheet and produce new, evidence-based limits. It isn't going to happen; rather there will continue to be creeping bureacratic increases based on alarmism. Sounds familiar!
Those poor succours who paid loads of shekels must be very disappointed.
Geoff Sherrington wrote:
If you do develop a new instrument for anything, do detune the version sold to the public so it responds only to levels above ambient.
I would argue the exact opposite. Sell millions of counters that respond to every last decay event until people finally get the point that they are living in a radioactive universe, and trivial increases are just that..trivial.
1.5 billion — the approximate number of bananas that Tesco sells each year in the UK which is 1,700 times the radiation released into the Firth of Forth, using your rate of 100 bananas / hour.
Tesco has 3,146 stores in the UK, so the DART radiation emissions are roughly equivalent to the banana sales of 2 Tesco stores.
This excludes the sale of other products rich in potassium, such as potatoes, kidney beans, and sunflower seeds.
May 5, 2014 at 5:36 AM | tom0mason
The curious (pun intended) thing about Becquerels is that the shorter the half-life of the radiating material the more Bq's hence tritium (half-life 12.3 years) appearing near the bottom of your table.
The unfortunate thing about Becquerels is that a disintegration is a disintegration; it counts whatever is emitted in the process. A 100 Bq from a gamma emitter is potentially much more damaging to humans than 100 Bq from a beta emitter.
This is very scarey - I will have to remove the Fyffes wagons from my son's model train set immediately. You must now how dangerous these models can be, they might reach a critical mass any moment!
This is very scarey - I will have to remove the Fyffes wagons from my son's model train set immediately. You must now how dangerous these models can be, they might reach a critical mass any moment!