Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!seismo!mcvax!diku!storm
From: storm@diku.UUCP (Kim Fabricius Storm)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Re: Russian Nuclear Accident
Message-ID: <175@diku.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 13-May-86 23:04:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: diku.175
Posted: Tue May 13 23:04:55 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 15-May-86 06:47:31 EDT
References: <228@scbhq.UUCP> <144@comp.lancs.ac.uk> <642@argon.idec.stc.co.uk> <184@olamb.UUCP>
Organization: DIKU, U of Copenhagen, DK
Lines: 30

In article <184@olamb.UUCP> soren@olamb.UUCP (Soeren Rabbe) writes:

>>I think you will find that figure was 20 *times* not 20%.  However
>>that is still very low.  When it gets to 100 times, you start
>>worrying.

>According to the official statements in Denmark, it WAS 20%. It seems like
>the radiation in the air above Denmark has been about 20% to 40% above normal.
>And it is falling.

It was mentioned in the Swedish television this evening that the
radiation in Stockholm was now between 100-1000 times less than
immediately after the catastrophy in Tjernobyl.  I was a little
puzzled by this statement, since nobody have said that the radiation
was a 100-1000 times higher than normal, but perhaps they meant that
the increase in radiation is now 100-1000 times less than before?
I really hope so!

BTW. I heard that a soviet scientist compared the amount of 
radioactive material that have leaked out from Tjernobyl is
comparable to *ONE* atomic bomb test in the Atmosphere. 
Does anyone have any figures that indicates a world-wide
increase in the number of cancers as the result of the *MANY*
atomic bomb tests performed in the 60's and the 70's ?  Or
as a result of the Soviet sattelite that crashed in Canada a
couple of years ago ?

------------------
Kim F. Storm, storm@diku.UUCP  (seismo!diku!storm)
Institute of Datalogy(=CS), U of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 1, DK-2100 OE