On the value and costs of protective actions in a nuclear emergency

Abstract

This note discusses some recent reviews on the costs and benefits of the protective actions we plan to take in the event of a nuclear emergency and considers if there is any need to review current plans in the light of this learning.

It finds that the implications of dislocations on mental health have not been taken into account when setting action levels for evacuation and relocation and discusses how this finding should affect the way we determine and communicate protective actions.

It suggests a softer messaging when the doses experienced are likely to be a few tens of milli-sievert, a rethink of how to protect the occupants of care homes for the elderly in evacuation zones, and attempts to minimise dislocations possibly by raising the dose thresholds at which they are implemented and reducing the evidence base needed to withdraw protective actions.