Reply #92: Yup it is cumulative like putting an elephant and feather on the same scale. [View All]

[Statistical]

The magnitude of radioactive material released from thousands of uncontrolled nuclear detonations far outweighs the effects of control nuclear power generation.

NRC, Nasa, and EPA all cite an annual exposure of 0.05mrems for the nuclear power generation (0.09 for those within 50 miles). Nuclear weapons testing contributes about 1mrem (about the same as watching TV from tube TV).

0.05 vs 1.00. Nuclear weapons testing is larger by a factor of 20x.

So if nuclear power is SOOOOOOOOOOO bad why would they include another factor 20x as large in the study?

It is obvious without including the much larger nuclear weapons testing numbers the outcome wouldn't be alarming. It would actually indicate how safe nuclear power is. The larger (20x larger) effect of nuclear weapons is necessary to "pad the stats".

However in the grand scheme of things exposure from past nuclear testing is relatively small.
Natural radiation is about 300mrems and most can't be avoided. Nuclear weapons testing fallout adds another 1mrem and nuclear reactors add another 0.05mrems (about the same as using a glow in the dark watch).