Agencies need to acknowledge problem

This is written in response to the March 3 article, “NRC tritium response is to emotion not risk.”

I am so tired of the media and the nuclear power stations making the following statement. “Tritium is a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that emits a very low level of radiation. It is found in more-concentrated levels in water used in nuclear generating stations.”

Although it is an accurate statement, it is misleading. THIS tritium is NOT naturally occurring. It is a man made by product produced by nuclear power plants.

A more accurate statement would be: “Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen and is generated in nuclear power reactors and is released in water and air and cannot be filtered. Tritium is a universal health threat released by nuclear reactors.” Tritium can be inhaled, ingested and absorbed through the skin.

While Chairman Jackzo went on record stating tritium is not a health concern I have several comments. Chairman Jackzo and others fail to recognize that the spill in Braidwood was not just tritium. It was Low Level Radioactive Waste containing many other radioactive isotopes at unknown levels. Unknown levels in Braidwood because they didn’t test it until several years after the leaks.

The article does not mention the exposure in Braidwood and other areas having problems is chronic long term exposure. That is not an emotional response it is a fact and it increases risk.

Furthermore, neither the author nor anyone quoted in the article bring to light, the fact that many scientists have studied and reported that any increased exposure to radiation increases the risk of cancer. There is much research that has shown tritium crosses the placenta and can cause birth defects as well as many other effects. Tritium is ionizing radiation which can become organically bound. It takes very little time to research and obtain evidence of these studies.

I realize we need the electricity provided by these plants along with the jobs and economic value. It would just be nice to see an honest, transparent report that includes the risks associated with them. It would be refreshing for the directors of agencies created to protect the public, to acknowledge potential increased risks and propose the beginnings of change to create a safer environment.