Skip to main content
Log in

The risks of radiation

  • Forum
  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The risks of radioactivity are a really complicated matter, yet they are much better known than are the risks relating to thousands of chemical poisons that occur in our environment. The greatest mistakes are probably made in the definition of safety margins. Except for the bombs dropped in Japan and one other case in the Marshall Islands, there has always—luckily—been a wide safety margin between fallout radiation and doses dangerous to health; the margin has actually been about 1000-fold. The Chernobyl dose of 0.5 mGy/year that we received is only 1/1000 of the acute dose of 0.5 Gy which would cause a slight and nonpermanent change in the blood picture.

There is no such safety margin with respect to many air pollutants. The safety standards for sulfuric or nitric oxides, ozone and so on, have been set only just below the level that already causes a health hazard, and these standards are exceeded once in a while. Otherwise, traffic would have to be forbidden and many industrial plants, especially power stations using coal, would have to stop working whenever a low-temperature inversion occurred. Environmental radioactivity does not represent a likely health risk in Finland unless a nuclear war breaks out. Air pollutants, on the contrary, are a real and almost daily health risk that should be carefully considered when decisions about our energy production are being made.

In spite of what happened at Chernobyl, global consumption of nuclear power will double by the year 2000, since there are about 140 nuclear power plants presently under construction. It is not likely that another catastrophe like Chernobyl will happen, yet nuclear plant accidents are of course possible, even if their likelihood is diminished by improving reactor safety and even if any eventual damage could be expected to be smaller. If a reactor is hooded by a containment structure, no significant release of radioactive materials should be possible even in case of an accident. However, we must be prepared to protect the population with carefully planned civil defense and radiation protection measures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I would like to sum up all of this as follows: The risks of radiation are a fact, but the fear they arouse is often disproportionate. There are risks related to all other methods of energy production as well; nuclear power is no exception in that respect. It is good that we aim at greater safety, but I hope that false presumptions will not lead us to mistaking a less safe alternative for a safer one.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Miettenen, J.K. The risks of radiation. Environmental Management 12, 1–3 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867371

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01867371

Key words

Navigation