At the end of the day, the average person would be more exposed to radioactivity from walking by fly ash (in a pond, in a pile, in the air, wherever it is) than from shielded waste. &quot;[...] fly ash most definitely is not more radioactive than nuclear waste. Instead, I think he is saying that if you stood next to a pile of fly ash you’d probably get a bigger radiation dose than if you stood next to radioactive waste that is adequately shielded.&quot; [0]<p>Also statistics helps frame an accurate picture when looking at it in terms of energy, not mass: &quot;&#x27;In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.&#x27; Our source for this statistic is Dana Christensen, an associate lab director for energy and engineering at Oak Ridge National Laboratory as well as 1978 paper in Science authored by J. P. McBride and colleagues, also of ORNL.&quot; [1]<p>[0] <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cejournal.net&#x2F;?p=410" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.cejournal.net&#x2F;?p=410</a><p>[1] Ignore the incorrect headline: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.scientificamerican.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;coal-ash-is-more-radioactive-than-nuclear-waste&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.scientificamerican.com&#x2F;article&#x2F;coal-ash-is-more-r...</a>