Sellafield beach radiation monitoring cover up?
According to the UK HSA website, there is no extra risk associated with the alpha and beta particles because the new Synergy radiation monitoring vehicle for beaches did not find any increase in the particle amounts on the beach near Sellafield Nuclear repossessing plant . However, according to a report on the effectivness on this device appear to be found to be wanting.
The date of the test was 2010 but the publish date of the PDF is 2012 august.
Title: Large scale beach trials to evaluate the operational performance of the
Groundhog Synergy system
[…]
The detection of socalled ‘alpha-rich’ particles has improved since Synergy was brought into operation, but the trials have not demonstrated in what way the improvement was achieved. Nuvia is currently investigating why this is the case and how the performance can be improved.
[…]
http://sellafieldsites.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Synergy-report-Issue-1.pdf
and that curious paragraph says that they dont know how that it was achieved? yet they made this statement on the cover for the above PDF.
[…]
Good evidence was found that the increased object find rate of Synergy can be attributed to its increased sensitivity, rather than to any real increase in the number of objects present on the beaches.
New estimates were made of the health risks to beach users from the ingestion of alpha-rich objects and the changes in the estimated health risks were small and judged not to be significant. The conclusions of the original study therefore remain unchanged.
[…]
http://www.hpa.org.uk/Publications/Radiation/CRCEScientificAndTechnicalReportSeries/HPACRCE038/
Note;
but in early 2011 they gave the results instead, from the so called “inferior” testing system. maybe to hide the fact that the new synergy system was not worth the extra money? and no update on the companies findings into the failed results?
It doesnt sound like they managed to find the small alpha and beta particles if the are below the sand very well.. so it doesnt really work!
No comments yet.
-
Archives
- December 2025 (277)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS



Leave a comment