Jun 12
Self inflicted, to a point, and no nuclear because of ALARP and fish discos etc.
I hold both major parties responsible, but Miliwatt is speed running energy poverty.
1
8
we have a president who wants to get rid of regulations, he's already working on dismantling ALARP
1
34
May 19
It is dangerous though. They are exposed to hazard. Risk being ALARP does not mean the activity is not dangerous.
1
619
May 12
Anyways, since there was a big discourse recently about medical physicists being a made up job, I wanna yap about my favourite research paper I completed a couple of years ago and its related to cervical cancer and the pap smear discourse today.
Cervical cancer patients require x-ray imaging before every fraction (treatment episode) to ensure that radiation is being directed in the right place. X-ray images deliver a dose (albeit small) but that dose is not included in calculations for their actual radiotherapy treatment. There is legislation that suggests that if imaging is excessive for whatever reason (for example, if a patient has had a hard time with bladder control so their bladder volume constantly needs to be adjusted and then re-imaged) then the imaging dose should be included in the dose calculations for the treatment. This is because there are very sensitive organs near the cervix that may be negatively impacted by even a touch too much radiation, which is a problem because the number 1 radiation rule for medical physicists is ALARP (as low as reasonably practicable). We cannot ethically deliver radiation to kill cervical cancer if it nukes her bladder or rectum in the process. I was observing therapies across a large cohort of cervical cancer treatments and calculating how much radiation my cohort were receiving relative to their treatment plan to determine if my hospital was violating that guideline. I found that my hospital were not infringing on that guideline BUT they were right on the edge so they needed to adjust their treatment plans to make treatment safer for cervical cancer patients.
This is obviously a very simplified explanation but it’s just a TINY example of the important role medical physicists have. And get your pap smear so I never have to see you in my cohort. ❤️
3
3
49
1,652
May 11
There is also the risk of aliens descending and invading the cab.
Meanwhile, the rest of the railway runs on ALARP.
My advice is visit platform 10 at London Bridge and then visit Leeds. You’ll spot the “why” pretty quickly.
2
1
26
3,180
May 5
larp ! larp larplarp larp larp larp !!! larp larpl arp larparp larp larp LARP LARPB ALARP LARP
2
52
May 4
ゼロリスクでなければリスクの大小は関係ないという主張と、リスクをほんの少し低減すればそれ以上は不要という主張をころころ使い分ける「社会科教員」を名乗るアカウントが保護者に「恥知らず」と言い放つ、これが日本の学校のレベルなんですかね。いまどきの保護者はALARP原則くらい知っています。
1
1
9
218
Apr 6
im such alarp i never processed that ocho was literally chasing a naked goggles around r u serious. im giggling wtf
2
3
23
261
Mar 24
I'll just say this for Dan
Runway Entry Lighting System
Follow the Greens
Technology is out there. But this is not a zero risk industry. It's ALARP (look it up).
As Eric rightly states - stay in your lane.
2
40
Mar 13
ALARP isn't supposed to be constant reinvestment.
It should be quantifying risk and intervention against consistent and agreed value of life
Problem is court & regulatory overreach applying "proportionality" tests and safety margins on already conservative values of life
1
2
200
Mar 13
Overall this seems very good to me, with a couple of important exceptions. Good:
- Replacing ALARP, the principle of constant reinvestment of cost savings into more and more safety, with a safety threshold.
- Introducing one-and-done assessments rather than requiring constant changes throughout the lifetime of a project
- Indemnities for developers during Judicial Reviews (so they don't have to stop working while they're ongoing) and caps etc on JRs
The two main areas I am concerned about:
- The Habitats Regulations will be addressed with guidance rather than legislation. This means it'll be easy to reverse and won't give any certainty to new nuclear projects.
- The "community benefit" provision, which would allow the planning system to recognise contributions made by nuclear power projects to local communities, is being dropped entirely. That means we can't get any bargaining between nuclear projects and local authorities. This model could help get data centres built as well.
It's not an implementation "in full" as the Prime Minister promised, but it's certainly quite good and better than I expected.
Mar 13
BIG nuclear news: today the Government has released its plans to implement @JohnFingleton1’s landmark nuclear review.
The headline: ‘Building our Nuclear Nation’ is very good news for British nuclear, implementing almost all of the transformational recommendations, but not quite everything.
The Government has committed to almost every recommendation and outlined a detailed plan to implement them. The Government says it will fix the outdated radiation rules, revise effective ban on SMRs across swathes of the country, set up a nuclear regulatory commission and more!
Last year @BritishProgress launched our Nuclear Taskforce Tracker - today is the first HUGE update.
nuclear.britishprogress.org/…
3
13
82
32,244
Mar 13
ALARP (R6, 7 & 8): The Govt commits to FULLY REVIEWING outdated radiation rules
Maybe the BIGGEST news: the Government will fix our outdated rules that leave nuclear hugely expensive.
The ‘As Low as Reasonably Practicable’ standard, which forces any productivity gains and cost savings to be spent on more and more safety measures without appreciable benefit, will be reviewed with a view to creating a clear safety threshold.
Extremely safe nuclear plants that meet this level would then be able to make money and cut prices by improving efficiency.
nuclear.britishprogress.org/…
1
3
35
1,471