Australian Background Radiation vs. California Background Ratiation.

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 2011-10-20 16:17

I read that background radiation in Australia is half that of California. How can that be if the sources of that background radiation are essentially the same?

‹ Excellent Reading Material What did you guys do? ›

How are the sources the

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2011-10-20 16:46.

How are the sources the same?

Open-pit uranium mines in Australia should be no match for surface a-bomb test fallout and nuclear plant "releases" in Cali.

Those aren't the big sources....

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Thu, 2011-10-20 17:22.

Open-pit uranium mines in Australia should be no match for surface a-bomb test fallout and nuclear plant "releases" in Cali.
====================================================

Those aren't the big sources. Courtesy of the Health Physics Society chapter at the University of Michigan:

http://www.umich.edu/~radinfo/introduction/radrus.htm

Nuclear power ("nuclear fuel cycle" in table) and fallout from nuclear tests(fallout in table) each contribute less than 0.03% of the USA's background radiation.

Coal plants are responsible for 100 times as much dose as nuclear power plants. Courtesy of scientists at Oak Ridge National Laboratory:

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

Thus, the population effective dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear plants.

The biggest source of background radiation is good old Mother Nature.