That is, even according to EPA's own studies. They had one study in 1987 that determined that risks conformed--the EPA study in 1987 entitled, ``Unfinished Business'' says that they ``systematically failed to properly rank risks.'' They ranked them according to public opinion rather than science. Then they came back 3 years later, in 1990, had another study from EPA's Science Advisory Board, and said they were continuing to do the same thing. I submit they are continuing to do the same thing today. And this same crowd is coming in and saying, trust us, we are doing it right, and no change needs to be made.
David Cay Johnston: “That is, even according to EPA's own studies. They had one study in 1987 that determined that risks conformed--the EPA…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the EPA's risk assessment studies and their reliance on public opinion over scientific data.
Share
More from David Cay Johnston
nuclear waste traveling the country is, first of all, solid in form. It is sealed in a cask that, as I say, if you get a direct hit by something 30 times more powerful than an antitank weapon, what do you get? You get a third of an ounce…
I have not said the fund is sufficient. DOE has said the fund is sufficient. And many nuclear utilities do not believe it is sufficient. But the sufficiency of the fund has nothing to do with the damages to which a utility would be…
the Government cannot violate contractual rights. The second question is what is the duty of the Federal Government with respect to nuclear waste? It so happens that the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has decided that very…
the answer is, yes, these projects for biomass electric will be eligible, and the Department should give full consideration to these projects along with those mentioned in the committee report. These appear to be promising technologies…





