australian report knocks lamp, page-40

Dear Moorookamick,
I can assure you absolutely that LAMP is completely immune to a 'Fukushima-like' event.
In my understanding:
1. There are no 'nuclear reactors' that can 'overheat' and 'blow the roof of'.
2. The radioactivity concentrations are millions(!) of times less than at nuclear power plants.
3. All radioisotopes are 'naturally existing' - there are no 'nuclear reactions' happening that can produce radioactive strontium, cesium, iodine etc.
4. I've answered the point on the issue of 'floods' before: basically - even if there is "one in 100,000 years event", the stuff is insoluble. Therefore, it cannot possibly be 'taken up' by plants (on the surface or in water) and by any fish as well. (Naturally, by humans too...)
5. The vast majority of 'residues' appear to have 12 parts per million of thorium or less - the average content of thorium in Malaysian soil is 20 parts per million, in accordance with the UN data. So if anyone is THAT concerned about 'radiation' - they should be lining up outside LAMP to place orders for the residue: if you build a house out of it, your background radiation exposure will decrease significantly...
---
All of the above is not to say in any way that everything is 150% 'safe' - as I keep saying, nothing is: I can point out about a dozen things that can kill you instantly when you are making a cup of tea in the morning. Where my point is - whatever possible 'impact' of LAMP may be: it should be "unmeasurable". Basically, you should not be able to see any difference in existing natural background - irrelevant of the fact if LAMP operates or it does not.
A couple of 'side' notes:
You are correct - I do not have any stock, never had and do not plan to get any (I would rather invest in my children, much better return all around, in my personal opinion).
The main reason for my interest in this issue is the fact that as one of the authors of the IAEA safety report on rare earths (2011) I am absolutely astonished at the level of opposition the plant gets. The plant that can be safely operated with minimal regulations anywhere in the world, in accordance with all possible guidelines... Some 'opponents' are perfectly fine (the majority I think) - they are asking good and very legitimate questions (that I would've asked myself if I would've been living in Kuantan), and I am trying to provide adequately good answers when I can. Some others are making statements that are perfect examples for my training courses on radiation protection, for the lectures on 'public and stakeholder involvement' - on where this communication may need to stop (as it may no longer have any effect on some audiences...)
And the last point, on the NTN documents - the main issue appears to be that the reports were not thoroughly checked for accuracy before publication (at least where the 'radiation issue' is concerned) and, in my personal opinion, as a result, the documents may have done more harm than good to the 'anti-Lynas' campaign.
Kind regards
nick