Sir, - I write in response to letters from Francis Mulligan, chair of the Radiological Protection Institute of Ireland, (March 10th) and Dr William Reville (March 14th), on the subject of radiation. With regard to radon, while I am happy to know that the RPII have become experts in sealant and extraction, and building regulations, what Irish people expect from them is serious radiological protection.
The danger of radon is extrapolated from high dose uranium mining data. It assumes a no-threshold model, extrapolated not only from high dose but also high dose rate data. What the RPII needs to do is to investigate low-dose chronic exposure, if they really want to make a contribution to radiation research. They have had money from the European Union for radon research, and this would be an important enhancement of that research.
I cannot agree that their work on Sellafield has been properly rigorous, and insulting me is simply a smokescreen for the chaotic nature of their reports of surveys of radiation in the Irish Sea. As contamination of the Irish Sea and further afield and radiation from Sellafield will be an important topic at this year's meeting of the OSPAR Convention in Copenhagen, I believe that the RPII have been insufficiently active in providing accurate data on radiation in the Irish Sea. I would contrast this with the activity of the Nordic states and Iceland, whose waters and fishing grounds are being contaminated by radiation from Sellafield, and who have protested much more loudly than the Irish Government. In fact the Danish government is particularly strong in their demands for zero emissions from Sellafield.
The representatives of the Dundalk Residents who are taking a case against Sellafield have also questioned the RPII's role in making a correct assessment of the effects of radiation from Sellafield. We have heard for a long time that the Irish Government could not take a case against THORP because there was insufficient evidence. However, now we hear that this evidence has been supplied by the UK's own Nuclear Safety Inspectorate.
The chairman of the RPII also refers to the fact that Dr William Reville is not on the board of the RPII. He neglects to inform the readers that Dr Reville had been a member of the RPII for a number of years, a fact stated by Dr Reville himself. Naturally I am happy to hear that Dr Reville is in agreement that Sellafield is dangerous. I look forward to reading future articles from him on the dangers of radiation with interest. - Yours, etc.,
Nuala Ahern, MEP, Green Party, Greystones, Co Wicklow.