Which sounds great till you realize that what’s reasonably possible is a constantly lowering standard - what I mean is as tech gets better the standard is always stricter. Which sounds great, but in reality isn’t how we regulate (as far as I know) anything else - we set a safety level and politically revisit it as makes sense.
That’s exactly how we regulate process safety in OSHA PSM facilities. Which is basically all of heavy industry, chemical, even some food and pharma.
I’m not opposed to a science based, well defined criteria for nuclear safety. But we don’t need to throw ALARP out to have it. There are exposure limits for various chemicals that guide how high the exposures can be and still be considered ALARP. If we can get a scientific consensus for each kind of radiation exposure, the same can happen for nuclear. AFAIK, we don’t have said consensus.
That’s exactly how we regulate process safety in OSHA PSM facilities. Which is basically all of heavy industry, chemical, even some food and pharma.
I’m not opposed to a science based, well defined criteria for nuclear safety. But we don’t need to throw ALARP out to have it. There are exposure limits for various chemicals that guide how high the exposures can be and still be considered ALARP. If we can get a scientific consensus for each kind of radiation exposure, the same can happen for nuclear. AFAIK, we don’t have said consensus.