by KRISTIN SHRADER-TRECHETTE
Why do people disagree about atomic energy? In the 1787 Federalist Papers, James Madison warned: “No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment.” If Madison’s warning applies to this roundtable, two reasons might explain why scientific and market data contradict many roundtable claims:
* Conflicts of interest. One reason might be reliance on biased sources. Consider Tony Pietrangelo’s pro-nuclear citations. None is from a scientific journal. The first is a blog post, and sources for the remaining four claims — the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), Entergy, NEI again, and the World Nuclear Association (WNA) — have conflicts of interest. NEI is the lobbying wing of the US nuclear industry. WNA is the global nuclear industry’s lobbying arm. And Entergy is the second-largest US nuclear-electricity generator.
A second reason that might explain disagreement is failure to cite sources. Consider five examples of pro-atomic-energy claims — about nuclear-related radiation, terrorism, costs, fuel, and emissions. All lack citations. All are contradicted by classic scientific or market data.
* Radiation Harms. First, without citation, Charles Forsberg writes, “It’s easy to measure radioactivity at orders of magnitude below the levels hazardous to human health.” However, scientific consensus, articulated by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS), contradicts Forsberg. Risks from ionizing radiation are “without a threshold”; even “the smallest dose” can harm humans. Yet all reactors release radiation, including tritium, carbon-14, krypton-85, and iodine-129.
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists for more