David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (4):518-520 (2005)
On August 22, 2005 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued proposed new regulations for radiation releases from the planned permanent U.S. nuclear-waste repository in Yucca Mountain, Nevada. The goal of the new standards is to provide public-health protection for the next million years — even though everyone admits that the radioactive wastes will leak. Regulations now guarantee individual and equal protection against all radiation exposures above the legal limit. Instead E.P.A. recommended different radiation exposure-limits for different time periods. It also recommended using only the arithmetic mean of the dose distribution, to assess regulatory compliance during one time period, but using only the median dose to assess compliance during another period. This piece argues that these two changes — in exposure-limits and in methods of assessing regulatory compliance — have at least four disturbing consequences. The changes would threaten equal protection, ignore the needs of the most vulnerable, allow many fatal exposures, and sanction scientifically flawed dose calculations.
|Keywords||atomic dose energy nuclear public health radiation regulation waste Yucca Mountain|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Colleen Murphy & Paolo Gardoni (2011). Evaluating the Source of the Risks Associated with Natural Events. Res Publica 17 (2):125-140.
Ethan Wilding (2012). Framing Ethical Acceptability: A Problem with Nuclear Waste in Canada. Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (2):301-313.
Similar books and articles
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1994). Equity and Nuclear Waste Disposal. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (2):133-156.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1998). Ethical Theory Versus Unethical Practice: Radiation Protection and Future Generations. Ethics and the Environment 3 (2):177 - 195.
Mats Andren (2012). An Uncomfortable Responsibility: Ethics and Nuclear Waste. The European Legacy 17 (1):71 - 82.
Alan Marshall (2007). Questioning Nuclear Waste Substitution: A Case Study. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (1):83-98.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1991). Ethical Dilemmas and Radioactive Waste: A Survey of the Issues. Environmental Ethics 13 (4):327-343.
Michael JG Farthing (2006). Authors and Publication Practices. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (1):41-52.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (1995). Environmental Risk and the Iron Triangle: The Case of Yucca Mountain. Business Ethics Quarterly 5 (4):753-777.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2004). Comparativist Rationality And. Topoi 23 (2):153-163.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2005). Radiobiology and Gray Science: Flaws in Landmark New Radiation Protections. Science and Engineering Ethics 11 (2):167-169.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads14 ( #115,725 of 1,102,699 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #296,833 of 1,102,699 )
How can I increase my downloads?