Skip to main content

Food Irradiation and Agriculture










From the New York Times:
Pierre Lagoda pulled a small container from his pocket and spilled the contents onto his desk. Four tiny dice rolled to a stop.

“That’s what nature does,” Dr. Lagoda said. The random results of the dice, he explained, illustrate how spontaneous mutations create the genetic diversity that drives evolution and selective breeding.

He rolled the dice again. This time, he was mimicking what he and his colleagues have been doing quietly around the globe for more than a half-century — using radiation to scramble the genetic material in crops, a process that has produced valuable mutants like red grapefruit, disease-resistant cocoa and premium barley for Scotch whiskey.

“I’m doing the same thing,” he said, still toying with the dice. “I’m not doing anything different from what nature does. I’m not using anything that was not in the genetic material itself.”

Dr. Lagoda, the head of plant breeding and genetics at the International Atomic Energy Agency, prides himself on being a good salesman. It can be a tough act, however, given wide public fears about the dangers of radiation and the risks of genetically manipulated food. His work combines both fields but has nonetheless managed to thrive.

The process leaves no residual radiation or other obvious marks of human intervention. It simply creates offspring that exhibit new characteristics.
For more, see the section on Food and Agriculture on the NEI Web site.

Comments

Anonymous said…
"You seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been."

Mary Shelly
Frankenstein
Ah, Frankenstein...one of the most anti-technology books in existence.

If only you were legally allowed to burn down all the university nuclear engineering departments in the US. Wouldn't that be wonderful?
Matthew66 said…
Mary Shelly was a rather gifted novelist, and her monster was completely fictional.

In the real world, genetically modified organisms mean that more people have access to disease free food that has been exposed to fewer pesticides. Those who decry the beneficial effects of radiation are effectively arguing that we should return to the nineteenth and prior centuries, when most children died before reaching their fourth birthday, and cities were dependent upon migration in from the countryside to sustain their populations as the urban mortality rate was much greater than the urban birth rate.

I am fortunate to live in an age when I can drink water without fear of cholera, eat raw produce without much fear of botulism, salmonella or pesticide poisoning. If Gunter wants to live a primitive lifestyle, good luck to him, perhaps we'll be relieved of his contributions to this blog when he gives up his computer. (BTW Gunter aren't you scared of the radiation from your computer monitor?) The vast majority of the world's population want to enjoy the benefits of modern technology, including those associated with nuclear technology.
Anonymous said…
Imagine how history might have been different if the technology had existed during Mary Shelly's lifetime. The Irish Potato Famine might have been averted.
Anonymous said…
Yep, better give up on those other technological innovations, too. Things like the wheel, the lever, refined metals, medicines, plastics, electricity, computers, aircraft, geez, it's just too dangerous. Never know what kind of MONSTERS (ahhhhhh!) those might spawn.

Popular posts from this blog

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...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

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...