geojac That exactly mirrors my feelings against coal and support...

geojac That exactly mirrors my feelings against coal and support for alternatives.

In my past post I mentioned that Ramsar has the highest natural background radiation. This was an afterthought.
I followed it up by googling Ramsar background radiation". This gave series of scientific papers. The best and easiest understood is

http://www.angelfire.com/mo/radioadaptive/ramsar.html

I suggest that you read it.It confirms my comments and is worth reading.

I attach 3 quotes -

"Inhabitants who live in some houses in this area receive annual doses as high as 132 mSv from external terrestrial sources. The radioactivity of the high background radiation areas (HBRAs) of Ramsar is due to Ra-226 and its decay products, which have been brought to the surface by the waters of hot springs. There are more than 9 hot springs with different concentrations of radium in Ramsar that are used as spas by both tourists and residents. "


"Current radiation protection recommendations are based on the predictions of an assumption on linear, no-threshold dose-effect relationship (LNT).Beneficial effects and lack of detriment after irradiation with low levels of ionizing radiation, including a prolonged exposure to high levels of natural radiation of the inhabitants of HBRAs, are inconsistent with LNT (Mortazavi et al. 1999).
Our preliminary results suggest that prolonged exposure to very high levels of natural radiation could lead to the induction of radiation resistance among exposed individuals, which has interesting implications for many aspects of radiation protection policy. "


" The phenomenon of radioresistance in living organisms has long been a matter of interest for scientists. Experiments on Drosophila nebulosa collected in the woods of a high background radiation area in Brazil indicated the addition of some genes caused the radioresistance found in these flies compared to flies collected from adjacent control woods. In humans it is also possible that genetic alterations have occurred over the span of many generations to induce the radioresistance noted in our study. More research is needed to clarify the mechanisms that make individuals radioresistant. "

It is surprising that it suggests that high levels of radiation seem to be protective rather that damaging.
Note that this is not someone's assertion but the result of first hand observations.

I still prefer the HFR solution for Oz.

RB