Please Irradiate My Spinach

While we tend to focus here on commercial power, we shouldn't forget to mention other beneficial uses of nuclear science and technology. My colleague Todd Flowers recently wrote about food irradiation and the role it could play in preventing food-bourne illnesses related to bacteria like E.Coli in a letter-to-the-editor in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

For more information about food irradiation visit this page by the American Nuclear Society, this page from the Centers for Disease Control, and this page from the the USDA Food Safety Research Information Office. Here are a couple of quotes from that last link:

Currently irradiation is the only known method to eliminate E. coli O157:H7 bacteria in raw meat. Irradiation also significantly reduces levels of other pathogenic organisms including Cyclospora, Listeria, Salmonella, Campylobacter and the protozoan parasite Toxoplasma gondi on raw products.

and

Extensive studies have been performed by the World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), to determine the safety and quality of irradiated foods. It has been determined that there is no harm in the food itself or risk to the consumers, that the disease-causing germs are dramatically reduced or even possibly eliminated, and the food itself does not become radioactive.

The way I've explained it to people is that just like having an X-ray does not make a person radioactive, neither does food irradiation make what we eat radioactive.

Let's continue to spread the word!

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Technology, Health Physics, Food Irradiation

Comments

Anonymous said…

Irradiation can help prevent disease, but it doesn't get to the root of the source. We need to prevent contamination from happening. E. coli and other bacteria come from feces. Irradiating fresh produce is only a solution if you want to make sure the poop on the vegetables you're eating is safe - not if you want to make sure there isn't poop on the vegetables in the first place.

November 13, 2006 at 3:45 PM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog