22 August 2016

The Death Knell of the LNT Model?

The Death Knell of the LNT Model?

Biological and Environmental Research (BER)

Biological Systems Science Division (BSSD)

Radiobiology: Low Dose Radiation Research

Program Description

The Low Dose Program is unique within the US

 government in supporting experimental 

radiation biology research that studies the effects of 
very low dose exposures.

Program Accomplishments

Research from DOE's Low Dose Program re-examines

existing paradigms and provides the results that support

the development of new, biological paradigms.

One example that challenges an old assumption is the 
findings that exposure to a low vs. high dose of radiation 
results in both qualitatively as well as quantitatively 
different cellular and molecular responses, thus 
demonstrating non-linear response with respect to 

Another is the finding that in addition to high-dose 
biological damage that may lead to cancer, 
very low dose radiation exposure may participate in 
beneficial biological outcomes by stimulation of our 
natural tissue surveillance mechanisms
These processes are shaped by physical 
exposure parameters that include dose, dose-rate and 

The research has underscored the importance of the 
Low Dose Program's effort to study intact-tissue 
biological response to a stressor such as radiation 
exposure, rather than studying only the initial events 
within an individual cell.

11 March 2015

Causorrelation - Background Radiation and Flatlined Solid Cancers?

Surely it's a Genuine Causation Link !

"...Considering that evolution, it seems entirely natural to us that life on Earth accepts low dose radiation as a stimulus and has been endowed with biophylactic functions for this, and that low dose radiation may also produce positive effects such as suppressing cancer..."

And since the Earth's Background Radiation has been around for the best part of 4.5 billion years:

 It's Background Radiation First
Life's Resistance to Low Level Radiation by the Evolution of DNA Repair Mechanisms

ICRP Graph
The Flat-line is almost perfectly bracketed by
'Earth background'

As near as can be estimated from the flat-lined portion of graph, the Number of Solid Cancers among Survivors stayed the same, although the Dose received by the 13,494 Group was 150 Times Higher than the dose received by the 12,806 group.

Tourists bury themselves in the Sands of the Beaches of Guarapari, where The Natural Background Radiation is 875 Times Higher than the dose received 
by the 12,860 group ! 
Guarapari Brazil 

LNT Predictions is Not What Happens in the Real World !
There's just too  much Noise from so many other Mutaganic Sources:

08 February 2015

WindIdiots Stop Now - Stop Damaging Our Wild Spaces! Stop Delaying Solutions!

In 6 Slides - How Damaging, How Monstrous And How Useless Wind Turbines Are:

And That's Not All!

For the Whole Of 2014, all of the Performance Data for UK Wind Farms is detailed on this Page:

It's 1,008,000 kg Versus 190 kg!

Here's a 14 x 14 array of 3 kW kettles:

Now try to picture this payload at the foot of a 479 feet high Monstrosity:

Every Member of Greenpeace, every Member of Friends of The Earth and every Concerned Environmentalist should consider the Ridiculous Imbalance in the use of Precious Resources against the Pathetic Performance of Wind Turbines.

Think seriously about the Destruction of Eco-Systems and Wildlife. Think about the degradation of our Pristine Countryside and Coastline Environments.

Think how you've dragged back in the past and continue to delay the introduction of Gen IV Breeder Reactor Technology:


01 December 2014

Great Lives on Radio 4. Alvin Weinberg - Should He Feature On This Show?

Mathew Parris presents the biographical series in which his guests choose someone who has inspired their lives. Tuesdays at 4:30 pm, repeated Fridays at 11:00 pm.

From Winston Churchill to Kenny Everett.
Although many may be indifferent or even antagonistic to those chosen, in one way or another, humanity will owe most of them a debt of gratitude.

Should Gen IV MSBRs (Molten Salt Breeder Reactors) prove (over the coming 2 or 3 decades) to be the technology with the potential to solve all of humanities worst problems
What kind of debt will we owe to
Alvin Weinberg?
A couple of months ago, I emailed a suggestion to
The Alvin Weinberg Foundation 
That the 'Dream Team' of Baroness Worthington choosing Alvin Weinberg, supported by Kirk Sorensen's biographical expertise, would be excellent material for Great Lives.
Shortly afterwards, at a meeting of the 
All-Party Parliamentary Group on Thorium Energy 
I managed to corner Baroness Worthington and established that the notion of such a programme had made it through to her.

Will it happen - WATCH THIS SPACE!

07 November 2014

Steeliphobes Set To Push Radiophobes Into Second Place!

Pity the poor Radiophobes because they simply cannot see the wood for the trees.

They are utterly blind to the media driver: "If it bleeds, it leads". They believe the distortions and hyperbole put about by professional reporters and presenters needing scare-stories to peddle their wares.

These professionals possess unimaginable power and zero responsibility - What an unholy cocktail!
Has anyone ever seen this in the Headlines?
"...Hundreds of thousands of people worldwide live or work in close proximity to steel mills. Integrated steel production generates chemical pollution containing compounds that can induce genetic damage..."
Air pollution induces heritable mutations.

Or this?

"...Integrated steel millsproduce chemical mutagens that contaminate aquatic and atmospheric environments (1,2). and may pose a genetic hazard to humans and wildlife. Herring gulls (Larus argentatus) nesting near mill sites on the Great Lakes were shown to have higher germline mutation rates at minisatellite DNA loci than those at rural sites (3), and mutation frequency increased with colony proximity to integrates steel mills (4). It was postulated that inhaled airborne contaminents emitted from steel mills, such as polycyclic aromatic compounds, were largely responsible for mutation induction..."
"...Our results indicate that human and wildlife populations in proximity to integrated steel mills may be at risk of developing germline mutations more frequently because of the inhilation of airborne chemical mutagens..."

To Radiophobes Everywhere:

You poor Wretches!
Stop worrying about minute levels of radiation from remote nuclear power plants, calm the befuddled activities in your brain and concentrate on the 
far-from-imaginary problems of everyday life:

The chemical mutagens in every breath you take and every mouthful of food and liquid you consume. 

This should be of a thousand times more concern to you and your's than the screaming headlines about radiation that are hurled at you in the scare stories from the powerful media morons.

29 October 2014

Tons and Tons of Steel & Concrete & Stuff

Just What Goes Into A Wind Turbine?
Here's an Interesting Little Fact Sheet.
"What Mineral Products & Metals Are Needed To Make Wind Turbines"


Just What Comes Out Of A Wind Turbine
In the UK, over the past 12 months, on average, each Wind Turbine generated 386.56 kW: 

That's just enough to Power 1 of these:

Thousands and thousands of such motors power industrial based nations, to give us the lifestyle to which we aspire.

The purveyors of this technology, based on such an obscene imbalance in the use of precious resources, have succeeded in getting it past the specialist advisers to our Prime Ministers and Presidents.

Their wicked success has stalled the progress of Gen IV Breeder Reactor programmes, taking us to the edge of the several precipices - a sick race between water wars, energy security wars and/or climate change!

It's time to get angry - really angry - with these morons.

Certainly, these 2 contrasting images should be plonked in front of every politician we come across, up to ministerial level and beyond!

18 June 2013

Coal is dirty.

As studies show, electrical energy is directly correlated with economic prosperity and increased human lifespan.  As a result, it is no wonder that the trend across history has been toward increasing energy use and, more recently, electrification.  In the case of less-developed countries, with little access to "clean energy" systems like solar, wind, and nuclear, this electrification is frequently accomplished by burning coal.  Today, let's take a look at some of the health effects caused by the combustion of coal.

First of all, how much coal do we use worldwide?  The World Coal Association (2009) states that worldwide, about 41% of electricity comes from coal.  This number varies, from as high as 93% in South Africa to as little as 41% in Germany (home of the world's largest repository of solar panels).  On a worldwide, annual basis, that comes to a whopping 7678 megatons of coal.  In terms of volume, that's 307 BILLION cubic feet (about 8,300 Empire State Buildings) of coal per year.  Each ton of coal puts off 2.86 tons of CO2 -- a total of 22,000 megatons of carbon dioxide per year, assuming complete combustion.  It's no wonder that coal combustion is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions.

World energy use by source

Carbon dioxide isn't the only thing coal releases, though.  It also releases sulfur dioxide (a major cause of acid rain), nitrogen oxide (also acid rain, plus smog), small particulates (which aggravate the lungs and other systems), heavy metals (arsenic, cadmium, mercury, lead, and more), and particles of uranium.  In fact, due to the particles of uranium contained in coal, and released when it's burned, coal combustion releases 100 times as much radioactive material into the environment than an equivalent nuclear reactor.  Wow!  Of course, the actual amount of radiation involved (about 2 mRems / year) is trivial and hardly a health hazard...

The mining industry causes significantly more deaths than industry as a whole.

The real health hazard comes from those tiny particulates, sulfur dioxide, and heavy metals.  These materials mean that residents of areas near coal plants have elevated levels of health problems like chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), hypertension, lung disease, and kidney disease.  Odds are even worse for the miners -- 49.5 out of every 100,000 coal miners died in 2006.  That's an eleven-fold increase over private industry as a whole.

Want to see a really striking set of numbers?  Check out these mortality rates for different energy sources.  Worldwide, coal accounts for 160,000 deaths for each trillion kWh (10^12 kWh).  Given that we used about 143,000 TWh (1.43*10^14 kWh) worldwide in 2008, that's almost 10 million deaths worldwide due to coal combustion alone.  Compare that with nuclear power, which at 90 deaths per trillion TWh at 13% of worldwide capacity causes about 1700 deaths annually.  Even the renewables (listed in the graph above as 3% "other renewables"), assuming the low mortality rate of 150 / trillion kWh of wind, gives only 643 deaths at a remarkably tiny production rate.  Huge difference.

Energy Source Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal (elect,heat,cook–world avg) 100,000
Coal electricity – world avg 60,000
Coal (elect,heat,cook – China) 170,000
Coal electricity- China 90,000
Coal – U.S. 15,000
Oil 36,000
Natural Gas 4,000
Biofuel/Biomass 24,000
Solar (rooftop) 440
Wind 150
Hydro – global average 1,400
Nuclear – global average 90

Clearly, with all these health problems (not to mention CO2 emissions) we need a shift away from coal for power production.  There are many alternatives.  The United States is currently championing natural gas as the "clean" alternative -- and considering its relatively low death rate plus its lower emissions, it is definitely a step in the right direction as a transitional fuel.

But not even natural gas will provide us with the total non-reliance on carbon for energy systems, or with a truly indefinite supply of energy.  There are a handful of technologies that CAN.  Solar and wind are good, but they are currently limited by energy storage.  The most promising candidate for base load energy with zero emissions is nuclear power.  But given that you're reading a LFTR (Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) blog, you knew that.  Right?