Science versus educated guessing - Risk assessment, nuclear waste, and public policy

BioScience

Volumn 46, Issue 7, 1996, Pages

  Shrader Frechette, Kristin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0029739795     PISSN: 00063568     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/1312925     Document Type: Short Survey

References (8)

1. Albrecht SL, et al. 1992. Report of the Peer Review Panel on the early site suitability evaluation of the potential repository site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Report nr SAIC-91/8001. Washington (DC): US Department of Energy and Science Applications International Corporation.
2. Gross PR, Levitt N. 1994. Higher superstition: the academic left and its quarrels with science. Baltimore (MD): Johns Hopkins University Press.
3. Holton G. 1994. Science and anti-science. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.
4. [ICRP] International Commission on Radiological Protection. 1991. Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Publication nr 60. Oxford (UK): Pergamon.
5. Maddox J. 1994. Defending science against anti-science. Nature 368: 185.
6. [NRC] National Research Council. 1995. Technical bases for Yucca Mountain standards. Washington (DC): National Academy Press.
7. Weinberg A. 1988. Risk assessment, regulation, and the limits. Pages 121-128 in Woodhead A, Bender M, Leonard R, eds. Phenotypic variations in populations. New York: Plenum.
8. Whipple C. 1989. Nonpessimistic risk assessment. Pages 116-121 in Paustenbach DJ, eds. The risk assessment of environmental and human health hazards. New York: Wiley.