UCB: Conflict of interest
Hypothetically, if dangerous amounts of fallout were raining on the public; Would UCB nuclear engineering students sacrifice their future career? Could they even afford to do so? That's an expensive school! Would they even be cognitive of denial?
My apologies for the
My apologies for the somewhat late response, but I was looking up info on proton therapy when I actually stumbled upon this conversation. I'm guessing it was your response that brought this thread into the search results. A close friend was just diagnosed with prostate cancer and proton therapy just so happens to be one of the options available. We've been studying up on this a lot since the diagnosis.
Your interest in radiation research is certainly not in vain, jmiller. While radiation has had some detrimental effects on our environment (to a degree), those same effects placed on a tumor can save lives. You don't want to hurt the human being but you DO want to "hurt" the tumor and do away with it. The same can be said for recycling some materials like plastics. Here's an interesting article to clarify my point: http://discovermagazine.com/2009/jul-aug/06-when-recycling-is-bad-for-th... ["Discover Magazine" - "When Recycling Is Bad for the Environment. discovermagazine.com Jul 6, 2009]. Recycling is a GREAT thing, but not for all materials!
Many hospital departments (ex: IU Health Proton Therapy center) throughout the U.S. are studying exactly what you are. The number of proton therapy recipients continues to grow as does research for this particular treatment method. Learning how to utilize radiation PROPERLY is imperative to the government approval and continuation of such studies. I know it's just one person's opinion, but I truly believe this. =)
Rather than speculate on the
Rather than speculate on the intentions, current or future, of the UCB team, we should be finding a way to share our own measurements. One good example are the private volunteer radiation detection networks.
I have a good geiger counter and have been using it with some interesting results. One thing that was disturbing was finding small but higher-than-normal readings from the dust along the bottom of the window where rain had accumulated and evaporated. After cleaning with a wet sponge readings returned to normal.
What I would really be interested in would be affordable test equipment for detecting the radionuclides we're interested in now, but I have very limited experience with spectroscopy and am not sure if there is any decent equipment that would do the job affordably.
I'm really, really glad the UCB team is on the case. I just think a lot of folks would like to see more data from more sources.
Yay! Radioactive dust, how
Yay! Radioactive dust, how about that. Guess it was time to clean that window after all.
Maybe we should spread around with the Geiger counters and share our results. Hey, let's even create a website to do so! And a forum! Now that's an idea. I bet Dr. Chivers already secretly regrets creating this one anyways.
My 2 cents.
Geiger-counterer
Go to google images and
Go to google images and search for "BABIES IN FALLUJAH" to see what happens when you inhale radioactive dust.
Here, I'll make it easy for you: http://images.google.com/images?q=BABIES+IN+FALLUJAH
You paid for it with your tax dollars, so take a good, hard look.
Alex
what did you measure?
what did you measure?
As of late, my measurements
As of late, my measurements mostly show that the number of posts is inversely related to the average IQ of the "Reference Forum Visitor".
Thank you for asking.
LOL!
...Sure, I'll take that "hit". There are reasons I, for one, never went into nuclear engineering, and indeed ORIGINALLY AND INTENTIONALLY majored in liberal arts at an engineering SCHOOL. (Texas A&M.) I may be able to USE big words, and, occasionally, even correctly; that doesn't mean I COMPREHEND them, though.
As Jamie Lee Curtis said in "A Fish Called Wanda": "Apes READ Nietzsche, Otto; they just don't UNDERSTAND it!"
It's all good, partner. I understand. Three weeks ago, I would have called myself a twit, too. And I hope to be able to do just that, actually, soon if I have a choice in the matter.
Be well.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
Please take your paranoia where it's needed
Question other authorities, not these good, honest folks. Your "issue" has long been resolved here.
If you don't like what a
If you don't like what a person has to say you don't have to read it now do you. What is your motive for wanting to shut people up anyway?
Are you a government official?
backup site
I think that most of us have been steered to this site since we cannot rely on our government to take this issue seriously. That should means a thorough and detailed analysis by objective scientists, whether they say "yes" or "no". But this is not happening by any means.
Except for one thread that had to do with "chemtrails", I do not see any paranoia here, just frightened and concerned folks. Is that a sin at this time to be worried for our health under the worst environmental disaster in history? Some posters are not happy that people are "emotional" and frightened, claiming they are not objective and causing panic. While panic is not a healthy reaction, fear is since it motivates a person to protect themselves. Panic on the other hand, immobilizes. Both emotion and objectivity can go hand-in-hand, and as a matter-of-fact it is better than being "aloof" and scientific.
One last point, and I believe an important one: If for some reason, this site gets "taken down", it would be great to have a parallel one that is independently maintained and active; since we have a collegial and educated community of like-minded folks, it would be a loss to be disconnected from each other, especially when there is so much disconnect from reality. At this point, I would like to nominate Rich Cromack to be in charge of that, since he has shown his commitment by his many interesting and personal posts here. Rick are you up to this and if I have overstepped my bounds, I'm sorry.
How about an IRC channel?
How about an IRC channel? For like, real time virtual discussions and data pondering. I'd suggest #geigercrazy, if you'd be kind enough to allow me. Rick could pick the network.
Thanks, but...
I'm WAAAY too close to this, and I fully recognize and realize that my ONLY meaningful "contribution" here may very well be to have stoked the fire of reasonable concern into irrational hysteria. If anyone has distracted the Forum from its pure, benign, original purpose, it's me. I am not a "flag" for ANYONE to rally around.
I have no problem admitting: I am afraid, deeply frightened, for me and mine and, actually, my nation, my species, and my planet. I have only the barest sliver of knowledge of what I'm talking about. I am not exactly emotionally stable at the moment -- anyone who drops fifteen pounds in a week, and has no other immediate health concerns, is wigging out, big-time. I think the notion of a separate "forum" is a fantastic idea; if anything, it might reduce the load on the Berkeley Lab folks. But I am, at present, nowhere near responsible, stable, or clear-headed enough to have anything to do with running it.
I would be happy to participate, however. I hope someone carries out this suggestion.
To persons who have been critical of me, my comments and my attitude: I'll just say: You may very well be right. I HOPE you're right, and that I'm just a cringing, obsessive fruitbat who can and will be mocked and derided and made fun of in less than a month's time, when the danger has passed. I will GLADLY accept being a fool for the rest of my life in exchange for having this be OVER AND DONE WITH, the faster the better.
It's only my real name, my reputation and my personal life I've put out there, folks. Say this for me at least: I may be a flake, but I'm a pretty honest, straightforward, reasonable flake, with just a skosh of integrity.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
Just stick to 50 words or
Just stick to 50 words or less, mate.
LOL...
You sound like my editors, back when I had 'em.
I have a saying I've used for years: I never use five words, when fifty-seven will do. It's just a function of my paranoia that I never know what I'm talking about: I figure, it's like spaghetti. Throw enough words at the reader, and some of 'em are bound to "stick".
I grew up reading James Michener, Leo Tolstoy, Stephen King, John Barth and Tom Clancy. So... Yeah. I talk. A lot.
Rick Cromack.
Allen, Texas
www.facebook.com/lonestarplano
RichardFCromackJr@gmail.com
972-746-8575
They don't have much of a
They don't have much of a conflict. There will be plentifull jobs in China, Russia and India. No matter what happens the industry will go on. Someone will find a safer and better way to do this. It may come out of the Gen IV designs. Hpefully some of these bright young enginers from Berkeley will make the discoveries and make nuclear power better.
They've already addressed this issue
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/2220
Let's not jeopardize an extremely reliable source of information given how hard these folks are working!
Submitted by dchivers on Thu, 2011-03-31 20:42.
Ok, here you go: We are funded primarily within our group by DHS for basic research of radiation detection systems that would be used to detect objects such as dirty bombs or materials that would be used to make dirty bombs. This research involves a great deal of work in trying to detect trace levels of radiation within a complex and varying natural radioactive environments. The nuclear engineering department does not act like a corporation so other professors are independent and are funded differently than us. There is not a chain of command here other than within our own groups.
As far as my previous work, I was a qualified naval nuclear reactor operator for 6 years prior to entering Berkeley. This gives me a unique perspective on how reactors operate and radiation in general as I have been qualified to work in high radiation areas since that time. Currently, I do not have any affiliation with DOD. I have also never been affiliated nor received any funding with any nuclear industry corporations such as GE, General Atomics, Westinghouse, etc.., I hope this clears things up.
Submitted by dchivers on Thu, 2011-03-31 20:50.
Also, most of our students are not bound for nuclear industry. Our students are geared towards research in the high energy physics, nuclear physics, medical imaging, and the national laboratories. There is absolutely no concern within our students that their research will be regarded as detrimental to their job prospects, just the opposite actually. We train our students to be able to understand at the greatest detail how to gain knowledge experimentally, and design optimal systems given the physics of a certain problem. We pride ourselves in our independence and we attract students that want to learn at a very high level and want to impact their world. This is a very special place and we would never let it be tainted by government or industrial intrusion.
DHS California Health and
DHS
California Health and Human Services Agency
Department of Health Care Services (includes Medi-Cal)
Q. Has CDPH found radiation in milk?
A. CDPH sampled milk on March 28 and preliminary results indicate a trace amount of iodine-131 which does not pose a threat to public health. California's full report and data will be posted on this site. These results are in line with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency tests of milk in the state of Washington.
Ummmm ya
nuclear industry
I suppose that when you say 'nuclear industry', what you are trying to relate is 'I'm not going to be operating a nuclear power plant'. However, surely you realize that 'nuclear industry' includes 'all things nuclear' and therefore if you are involved in nuclear processing, nuclear medicine, nuclear security, nuclear research, nuclear instruction, or any other subset starting with the word 'nuclear' you in fact are involved with the nuclear industry and are more likely to support to the production, maintance, use and propogation of nuclear material and therefore are subject to 'conflict of interests' and not completly subjective as you do have a personal interest in the nuclear industry, albiet not nuclear power production directly, but depend on it's production for your livelyhood...
I don't see that at all!
For example, to take one of your contentions that someone involved in nuclear medicine is somehow beholding or dependent on the "nuclear power industry".
Radio-pharmaceuticals are not produced by power reactors. When I was at MIT, one of the jobs the MIT reactor did was to produce radio-pharmaceuticals like Tc-99m. The reactor itself designed and built by MIT, so there's no link to the power reactor industry. Most universities that have reactors have TRIGAs which were designed and built by General Atomic which doesn't make power reactors...
I don't think you can use a broad brush and say anything with "nuclear" in its name is part of the "nuclear industry", which usually means the "nuclear power industry".
nuclear industry
I didn't say 'nuclear power industry'... here, read my letters...'nuclear industry'. Look closely, no 'power' mentioned! Yes, I think I can broad brush it. Just because you may not like the association with the rest of your field doesn't mean you can divorce yourself from it.(Perhaps you are uncomfortable with the suffering that comes from the 'power' part of it, or is it the mining, processing, or disposal; that's your problem, it's the industry you are in and therefore it's your industry; but that doesn't change the fact that you are part of the 'nuclear industry').
Nuclear medicine would not have any materials without the rest of the industry. A doctor injecting radioisotopes knows he is 'dependent' upon the supplier. Ask one. He knows where it comes from, and that it has to be handled carefully because it is dangerous and so stands behind his nurse while injecting it to avoid the 'no danger of low level radiation' that his and your nuclear industry continually claim. Everyone making a direct living in it is part of 'The Nuclear Industry'. It's all part of the same ball of wax.
If youre involved with military vehicles, military uniforms or military security for a living you are part of a 'military industry'. You don't have to ever fire a gun, you're still part of the industry.
I wonder... Do you believe that the 'power' part of the industry is so terrible that you'd rather think you have nothing to do with it? Is there a 'social stigma' associated with being part of the 'nuclear industry'? Is this why some people in the industry deny their association with the 'nuclear industry'? Are the ashamed of that part of your industry, the 'power' part?
OBJECTION!
(Perhaps you are uncomfortable with the suffering that comes from the 'power' part of it, or is it the mining, processing, or disposal; that's your problem, it's the industry you are in and therefore it's your industry;
==========
OBJECTION!! Assumption of facts not in evidence!!!
It's not my industry!! I do not work in the nuclear industry no matter how broadly you define it.
You made an unwarranted assumption, bonehead!!!
I pointing out to you that much of what you lumped in with the nuclear power industry under the moniker of "nuclear industry", doesn't have anything to do with the nuclear power industry.
Just because it has "nuclear" in the name doesn't mean that the health of a field is tied to, or needs the nuclear power industry.
Nuclear medicine is a good example. Radiologists can use X-rays to diagnose disease, and treat cancer irrespective of how the nuclear power industry is doing. X-ray machines are not made by the same companies that make reactors of necessity. Yes - GE makes both reactors and X-ray machines. However, Siemens makes X-rays but does not make reactors.
Self-righteous anti-nukes
Making an unwarranted assumption and basing an entire post on the faulty assumption does show a manifest lack of intellect.
However, you have to realize how self-righteous your average anti-nuke is.
If one says something about the nuclear industry that falls short of complete and utter condemnation, then the anti-nuke thinks you must work for the industry.
They can't fathom that most of us know that nuclear power is the largest source of non-polluting energy we have.
Even when the nuclear industry has an accident, with very low frequency ( 3 major accidents in over half a century of operation ) the consequences of those accident pale in comparison to even a single airliner crash.
We don't rise up and demand the end to commercial air travel when an airliner crashes. We don't demand the end of private automobiles when there's a major wreck on the highway.
We study what went wrong, and improve our processes to avoid the problem in the future.
Automobile accidents kill about 40,000 to 50,000 people each year in the USA alone. In half a century, that's about 2.5 million people. In the same time, nuclear power has done nowhere near that amount of carnage.
Auto's can kill millions of people in a half century. If nuclear power gives us an additional radiation dose that is a small fraction of what we already get, then some call for the elimination of the industry.
Again, a total lack of perspective. Go figure.
Addendum
The German reactors were made by Kraftwerksunion.
Upon investigation, I find that one of the partners in KWU was Siemens.
Still, one can imagine having a company that makes x-ray machines and not reactors.
We do not deny that the
We do not deny that the nuclear power industry is related in that they rely on the analysis and knowledge of nuclear physics and instrumentation as a basis to maintain their power systems safe and reliable. At the heart of the conflict question is if our group relies on the continuing viability of nuclear power for our own livelihood. That is an interesting question and, in my opinion, we are so loosely coupled to the nuclear power industry that the conflict is minimal at best. The test is a thought experiment: Imagine the complete removal of all nuclear power globally, would our group be viable in the study of nuclear instrumentation? I think the answer to that question would be yes. Our research feeds into many industries (e.g. medical) and government security programs that does not rely on the nuclear power industry. We are not funded by the any part of the nuclear power industry so our immediate livelihood is not effected by volatility in the nuclear power industry. However, one can make a long term argument that without nuclear power (and nuclear weapons) anywhere in the world, we would not need nuclear security detection systems and that our livelihood in the long term depends on these "threats" to be present. Long term, in this context, means 10 years or so because academic groups are never long term investments...that is our time horizon. I am not betting on the complete removal globally of nuclear power and weapons in the next 10-20 years and I don't think the monitoring program of BRAWM will have much effect on that dynamic.