Jim Green (activist): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m added an image
Issues
Line 50: Line 50:
}}
}}
'''Jim Green''' is the national [[anti-nuclear]] campaigner with [[Friends of the Earth Australia]] and Australian coordinator of the Beyond Nuclear Initiative.<ref>[http://www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/media/news-items/2008/forum-nuclear-power-renewables-or-clean-coal-energy-options-for-australia Nuclear Power, Renewables or Clean Coal? Energy Options for Australia]</ref> Green is a regular media commentator on nuclear waste issues.<ref>[http://www.abc.net.au/rn/perspective/stories/2008/2153906.htm Nuclear waste and indigenous rights]</ref> He has an honours degree in public health and was awarded a PhD in [[science and technology studies]] for his analysis of the [[High Flux Australian Reactor|Lucas Heights]] research reactor debates.<ref>[http://www.energyscience.org.au/contacts.html EnergyScience Coalition] energyscience.org.au</ref>
'''Jim Green''' is the national [[anti-nuclear]] campaigner with [[Friends of the Earth Australia]] and Australian coordinator of the Beyond Nuclear Initiative.<ref>[http://www.foe.org.au/anti-nuclear/media/news-items/2008/forum-nuclear-power-renewables-or-clean-coal-energy-options-for-australia Nuclear Power, Renewables or Clean Coal? Energy Options for Australia]</ref> Green is a regular media commentator on nuclear waste issues.<ref>[http://www.abc.net.au/rn/perspective/stories/2008/2153906.htm Nuclear waste and indigenous rights]</ref> He has an honours degree in public health and was awarded a PhD in [[science and technology studies]] for his analysis of the [[High Flux Australian Reactor|Lucas Heights]] research reactor debates.<ref>[http://www.energyscience.org.au/contacts.html EnergyScience Coalition] energyscience.org.au</ref>

==Issues==
Jim Green and Peter Karamoskos say there is growing scientific confidence in the [[Linear no-threshold model]] for ionising radiation, which is supported by the 2006 report of the Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation (BEIR) of the US National Academy of Sciences.<ref name=kargreen>{{cite web |url=http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/56842.html |title=Do we know the Chernobyl death toll? |author=Peter Karamoskos and Jim Green |date=18 April 2011 |work=The Drum }}</ref> The BEIR report comprehensively reviewed available data and concluded that:
<blockquote>
The balance of evidence from epidemiologic, animal and mechanistic studies tend to favour a simple proportionate relationship at low doses between radiation dose and cancer risk... The risk of cancer proceeds in a linear fashion at lower doses without a threshold and… the smallest dose has the potential to cause a small increase in risk to humans.<ref name=kargreen/>
</blockquote>
According to Green and Karamoskos, the alternative view, that low-level radiation is harmless, is limited to a small number of scientists "whose voice is greatly amplified by the nuclear industry". In Australia, for example, "uranium mining and exploration companies such as Toro Energy, Uranium One and Heathgate Resources have sponsored speaking tours by scientists who claim that low level radiation exposure is not only harmless but actually good for you".<ref name=kargreen/>


==Further reading==
==Further reading==

Revision as of 03:03, 19 April 2011

Jim Green
Green at the Melbourne's GPO in March 2011
NationalityAustralian
EducationPh.D.
Alma materUniversity of Wollongong
OccupationActivist
Known forAustralian coordinator of the Beyond Nuclear Initiative

Jim Green is the national anti-nuclear campaigner with Friends of the Earth Australia and Australian coordinator of the Beyond Nuclear Initiative.[1] Green is a regular media commentator on nuclear waste issues.[2] He has an honours degree in public health and was awarded a PhD in science and technology studies for his analysis of the Lucas Heights research reactor debates.[3]

Issues

Jim Green and Peter Karamoskos say there is growing scientific confidence in the Linear no-threshold model for ionising radiation, which is supported by the 2006 report of the Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionising Radiation (BEIR) of the US National Academy of Sciences.[4] The BEIR report comprehensively reviewed available data and concluded that:

The balance of evidence from epidemiologic, animal and mechanistic studies tend to favour a simple proportionate relationship at low doses between radiation dose and cancer risk... The risk of cancer proceeds in a linear fashion at lower doses without a threshold and… the smallest dose has the potential to cause a small increase in risk to humans.[4]

According to Green and Karamoskos, the alternative view, that low-level radiation is harmless, is limited to a small number of scientists "whose voice is greatly amplified by the nuclear industry". In Australia, for example, "uranium mining and exploration companies such as Toro Energy, Uranium One and Heathgate Resources have sponsored speaking tours by scientists who claim that low level radiation exposure is not only harmless but actually good for you".[4]

Further reading

PhD thesis

Recent publications

See also

References

  1. ^ Nuclear Power, Renewables or Clean Coal? Energy Options for Australia
  2. ^ Nuclear waste and indigenous rights
  3. ^ EnergyScience Coalition energyscience.org.au
  4. ^ a b c Peter Karamoskos and Jim Green (18 April 2011). "Do we know the Chernobyl death toll?". The Drum.

External links