Merged Depleted uranium

[RandFan]

That is true...but what the American public thinks can most definitely change what the American government does.

And this is important because?

If you think that you can successfully convince the American public that a little bit more radiation is not a problem then by all means go ahead...

I don't think I can get the American public to vote for an atheist President. What the hell does this have to do with anything. You are STILL making a fallacious argument. You are not going to stop are you?

I do....can you tell the difference between argument ad populum and what I wrote?

There is no difference. Your argument is an appeal to the majority. What the American public would or would not do means nothing.

...you don't believe there is any evidence it is dangerous?

HOW dangerous?

Why all the safe handling procedures?

It is fallacy to assume that just because there are safety procedures that something would otherwise be dangerous. I don't know why there are all the safety procedures. BTW, I'm not declaring DU safe. I'm asking for evidence that it is harmful. All anyone can provide is specious argument and fallacy.

further baiting ignored.

Not quite now is it?

I don't....see my previous explanation regarding personal choice and cumulative exposure.

Your explanation only illustrates that you are irrationally concerned only about DU. There are dangers everywhere that you can't escape. Driving is dangerous. The sun is dangerous. There is background radiation at your building from the materials. You don't really have a choice you only choose to make an issue of this one.

I have no concern about other radioactive products being spread about? glad you told me.

I'm not sure how you could ever leave a lead lined room. There are many real dangers that would preclude it.

...question....will inhalation of DU dust increase decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage?

I have conceded many times that it likely will. But to WHAT degree. There are many, many things that will to some small degree increase your likelihood of being harmed.

How many of those things do you care about?

question....is an increase to my radiation dosage desirable?

Not necessarily an easy question to answer. As opposed to what? Walking out your front door is inherently risky.

Question: Is it desirable to walk out your front door?

question...is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

{sigh} IT DEPENDS! What are the potential benefits and to what degree are you increasing the radiation dosage? Is the increase a minute fraction of the total background percent? If it is then YES it is absolutely irrational.

 

[clarsct]

*sigh*

They use U238 in radiation shielding, folks. I think I've posted it before. With a link. It protects you from the radiation in X-Ray machines and other such devices.

Fool, you're living on a radioactive blinking planet. Half-lives are the amount of time it takes to lose half the material to radioactive decay. It is a measure of just how radioactive a substance is. A subtsance with a half-life of, say, days is highly radioactive. A substance with a half life of say, 10^9 years, is so ridiculously low as to pose the same health threat as the radiation we receive from eating. (see the above comments on K 40) The words Depleted Uranium just sound scary, and is used by certain folks to promote a political agenda that has little to do with the health of anyone.


If you believe in the political agenda, then well and good, I suppose. But don't bring a bunch of BS to the table to support it.

BTW, don't you suppose that, after mixing with the other substances in the smoke and the atmosphere, that these DU fumes would be in homeopathic dilutions? I mean, unless you're standing on top of the tank and huffing the smoke. Which I wouldn't recommend.

 

[RandFan]

Oh, and BTW, I'm not baiting you. When you make asinine statements I'm going to point them out each and every time. I don't doubt that you will ignore them. But then I don't really point them out for your benefit. Sometimes we really are lauging at you. Ignore this post also. Others find it rather funny.

 

[RandFan]

They use U238 in radiation shielding, folks. I think I've posted it before. With a link. It protects you from the radiation in X-Ray machines and other such devices.

Fool doesn't care. These are just facts. Fool is more interested in specious argument and what the American public thinks. He forgets that the American public believed that Saddam was behind 9/11.

And no Fool, this post isn't for you so don't tell us that you are ignoring it (demonstrating that you in fact aren't).

Best nic I ever saw.

 

[The Fool]

Fool doesn't care. These are just facts. Fool is more interested in specious argument and what the American public thinks. He forgets that the American public believed that Saddam was behind 9/11.

And no Fool, this post isn't for you so don't tell us that you are ignoring it (demonstrating that you in fact aren't).

Best nic I ever saw.

well, it appears you have lost it....guess I'll look for others that can keep thier lid on eh?

 

[RandFan]

well, it appears you have lost it....guess I'll look for others that can keep thier lid on eh?

Why don't you find someone who doesn't care about facts and critical thinking?

http://www.hasbro.com/mylittlepony/

 

[The Fool]

*sigh*

They use U238 in radiation shielding, folks. I think I've posted it before. With a link. It protects you from the radiation in X-Ray machines and other such devices.

Fool, you're living on a radioactive blinking planet. Half-lives are the amount of time it takes to lose half the material to radioactive decay. It is a measure of just how radioactive a substance is. A subtsance with a half-life of, say, days is highly radioactive. A substance with a half life of say, 10^9 years, is so ridiculously low as to pose the same health threat as the radiation we receive from eating. (see the above comments on K 40) The words Depleted Uranium just sound scary, and is used by certain folks to promote a political agenda that has little to do with the health of anyone.


If you believe in the political agenda, then well and good, I suppose. But don't bring a bunch of BS to the table to support it.

BTW, don't you suppose that, after mixing with the other substances in the smoke and the atmosphere, that these DU fumes would be in homeopathic dilutions? I mean, unless you're standing on top of the tank and huffing the smoke. Which I wouldn't recommend.

why are you concerned about standing on the tank and huffing the smoke?

anyway...can I ask you the same three questions as Randfan?

1. Would inhaling DU dust increase, decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage.?
2. Is increasing my radiation dosage desirable?
3. Is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

If those 3 questions are a political agenda then yes, I do have a political agenda. I think it is my right to say "excuse me, please don't spread that crap around" preferably without having to constantly step over the randfan abusive argument that won't declare it safe and won't declare it dangerous, cannot comprehend that you cannot continue to add "safe" levels on top of "safe" levels without consequences but calls me irrational for not joining his position.

 

[AWPrime]

How about that DU exposure at realistic levels poses any more radiation risk than the K40 that is in every single person's body for every single day of their entire life? That stuff is roughly as radioactive as U238, and it's present inside you in significant quantities all the time.

Found it!

potassium-40

A naturally occurring (0.0117%) radioactive potassium isotope; beta emitter with half-life of 1.26 billion years; chief source of natural radioactivity of living tissue.
One out of every 10,000 Potassium atoms is radioactive Potassium-40 (K-40). These each have 19 protons and 21 neutrons in their nucleus. If one of these protons is hit by a beta particle, it can be converted into a neutron. With 18 protons and 22 neutrons, the atom has become Argon-40 (Ar-40), an inert gas. For every 100 K-40 atoms that decay, 11 become Ar-40.

decay:

Potassium-40
Halflife: 1277000000 years
Decay mode: Beta, Beta-absorb
Decay element: Calcium-40 (stable), Argon-40 (stable)



Mmmm.....wel it isn't toxic and it is a oneshot beta-emitter. So the repair function of the cells shouldn't have much trouble.

Now if you compare it to U238:

Uranium 238
Halflife: 4468000000 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Thorium-234

Thorium-234
Halflife: 24 days
Decay mode: Beta
Decay element: Protactinium-234

Protactinium-234
Halflife: 6.7 hours
Decay mode: Beta
Decay element: Uranium-234

Uranium-234
Halflife: 245500 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Thorium-230

Thorium-230
Halflife: 75380 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Radium-226

Radium-226
Halflife: 1600 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Radon-222

Radon-222
Halflife: 3.8 days
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Polonium-218

Polonium-218
Halflife: 3.1 minutes
Decay mode: Alpha, Beta
Decay elements: Lead-214, Astatine-218

Lead-214, Astatine-218
Halflife: 26,8 min, 2 sec
Decay mode: Beta, Alpha
Decay element: Bismuth-214

Bismuth-214
Halflife: 19,9 min
Decay mode: Beta, Alpha
Decay elements: Polonium-214, Thallium-210

--
Polonium-214
Halflife: 0.0001 sec
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Lead-210

Thallium-210
Halflife: 1.3 min
Decay mode: Beta , Beta+neutron
Decay element: Lead-210, Lead-209

--

Lead-210
Halflife: 22.3 years
Decay modes: Beta, Alpha
Decay elements: Bismuth-210, Mercury-206

Lead-209
Halflife: 3.25 hours
Decay modes: Beta
Decay elements: Bismuth-209 (stable )

--

Bismuth-210
Halflife: 5 days
Decay modes: Beta, Alpha
Decay elements: Polonium-210, Thallium-206

Mercury-206
Halflife: 8 min
Decay mode: Beta
Decay element: Thallium-206

--

Polonium-210
Halflife: 138 days
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Lead-206 (stable)

Thallium-206
Halflife: 4.2 min
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Lead-206 (stable)

--
Well that too a lot of time, I will add the K40 decay chain next.



edit: pressed reply too early.

 

[clarsct]

why are you concerned about standing on the tank and huffing the smoke?

anyway...can I ask you the same three questions as Randfan?

1. Would inhaling DU dust increase, decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage.?

This would depend, of course, on dosage. Which was the basis of my tank comment. What dosage are we talking about here? How many ppm, estimated? If we're talking about .1ppm, then I would say it is negligiable. Is the assumption that these people are huffing the smoke directly from the destroyed tank? If so, I would think it is flawed.

2. Is increasing my radiation dosage desirable?
It is inevitable. We're assessing the health risk. Being in a war is hazardous to your health. The risk, comparitavely, of DU radiation is negligiable compared to everything else you're exposed to. It's a smokescreen to hide an anti-military political agenda. And you've been taken in by it.
3. Is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

Of course not. We usually don't spend a lot of time in rooms with weapons-grade Plutonium. What we're talking about is a minor health risk. Your car is a greater risk to you than the radiation from DU in a wartime enviroment. Being HIT by DU is another matter, but by that time, the radiation is the least of your concerns. We must prioritize our risks.
If those 3 questions are a political agenda then yes, I do have a political agenda. I think it is my right to say "excuse me, please don't spread that crap around" preferably without having to constantly step over the randfan abusive argument that won't declare it safe and won't declare it dangerous, cannot comprehend that you cannot continue to add "safe" levels on top of "safe" levels without consequences but calls me irrational for not joining his position.

I'd be more worried about the burning fuel...Much more hazardous.

 

[AWPrime]

*sigh*

They use U238 in radiation shielding, folks. I think I've posted it before. With a link. It protects you from the radiation in X-Ray machines and other such devices.

Well any heavy metal will do that isn't emitting high amounts of gamma-radiation.

So if it wasn't for the gamma-radiation, plutonium would do quite nicely.

 

[clarsct]

Found it!

potassium-40

A naturally occurring (0.0117%) radioactive potassium isotope; beta emitter with half-life of 1.26 billion years; chief source of natural radioactivity of living tissue.
One out of every 10,000 Potassium atoms is radioactive Potassium-40 (K-40). These each have 19 protons and 21 neutrons in their nucleus. If one of these protons is hit by a beta particle, it can be converted into a neutron. With 18 protons and 22 neutrons, the atom has become Argon-40 (Ar-40), an inert gas. For every 100 K-40 atoms that decay, 11 become Ar-40.

decay:

Potassium-40
Halflife: 1277000000 years
Decay mode: Beta, Beta-absorb
Decay element: Calcium-40 (stable), Argon-40 (stable)



Mmmm.....wel it isn't toxic and it is a oneshot beta-emitter. So the repair function of the cells shouldn't have much trouble.

Now if you compare it to U238:

Uranium 238
Halflife: 4468000000 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Thorium-234

Thorium-234
Halflife: 24 days
Decay mode: Beta
Decay element: Protactinium-234

Protactinium-234
Halflife: 6.7 hours
Decay mode: Beta
Decay element: Uranium-234

Uranium-234
Halflife: 245500 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Thorium-230

Thorium-230
Halflife: 75380 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Radium-226

Radium-226
Halflife: 1600 years
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Radon-222

Radon-222
Halflife: 3.8 days
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Polonium-218

Polonium-218
Halflife: 3.1 minutes
Decay mode: Alpha, Beta
Decay elements: Lead-214, Astatine-218

Lead-214, Astatine-218
Halflife: 26,8 min, 2 sec
Decay mode: Beta, Alpha
Decay element: Bismuth-214

Bismuth-214
Halflife: 19,9 min
Decay mode: Beta, Alpha
Decay elements: Polonium-214, Thallium-210

--
Polonium-214
Halflife: 0.0001 sec
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Lead-210

Thallium-210
Halflife: 1.3 min
Decay mode: Beta , Beta+neutron
Decay element: Lead-210, Lead-209

--

Lead-210
Halflife: 22.3 years
Decay modes: Beta, Alpha
Decay elements: Bismuth-210, Mercury-206

Lead-209
Halflife: 3.25 hours
Decay modes: Beta
Decay elements: Bismuth-209 (stable )

--

Bismuth-210
Halflife: 5 days
Decay modes: Beta, Alpha
Decay elements: Polonium-210, Thallium-206

Mercury-206
Halflife: 8 min
Decay mode: Beta
Decay element: Thallium-206

--

Polonium-210
Halflife: 138 days
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Lead-206 (stable)

Thallium-206
Halflife: 4.2 min
Decay mode: Alpha
Decay element: Lead-206 (stable)

--
Well that too a lot of time, I will add the K40 decay chain next.



edit: pressed reply too early.

Bolding mine

Read the bolded part. U238 has a half life four times K40. So why are you worried about it? BTW, the bodies repair mechanism works just fine, no matter WHAT damaged the nucleotide chain. On top of the idea that it isn't the radiation that hurts the body. The body is some 70% water. More than likely, the radiation will hit a water molecule and form a peroxide or superoxide that actually does the damage.

We ingest C14 and a whole host of radioactive materials every day, folks. Our bodies can cope. It's when we overload these systems that we need to worry. U238 ain't going to do it.

 

[AWPrime]

Read the bolded part. U238 has a half life four times K40. So why are you worried about it?

Just because it has a long halflife doesn't mean it isn't emitting radiation until after it reached the halflife.

BTW, the bodies repair mechanism works just fine, no matter WHAT damaged the nucleotide chain.

1. Alpha radiation causes more damage.
2. Repair needs time and with the rapid decay of the decay products it is not getting any.
3. It is toxic, that disrupt the repair functions.

On top of the idea that it isn't the radiation that hurts the body. The body is some 70% water. More than likely, the radiation will hit a water molecule and form a peroxide or superoxide that actually does the damage.

You don't really think it will only hit one atom?

 

[The Fool]

Why don't you find someone who doesn't care about facts and critical thinking?

http://www.hasbro.com/mylittlepony/

pointless baiting ignored

 

[clarsct]

Just because it has a long halflife doesn't mean it isn't emitting radiation until after it reached the halflife.
Yes, but we're talking about RATE. Of course it is. And K40 is releasing radioactivity 4X faster. Therefore, by your reasoning, it is realeasing 4X the radiation. Yet no one dies from it. I wonder why?


1. Alpha radiation causes more damage
2. Repair needs time and with the rapid decay of the decay products it is not getting any.
3. It is toxic, that disrupt the repair functions.
How does U238 disrupt the proteins that repair nucleotides?
Per mole of DU, how much of those decay products are formed in a 100 year span? How much radiation is actually experienced by the body?



You don't really think it will only hit one atom?

Yes, one alpha particle hits one atom. Sometimes less. Do you think it bounces around like a pinball?

 

[The Fool]

I'd be more worried about the burning fuel...Much more hazardous.

I would be too if I was near the tank at the time... I suppose my 3 questions are angled more towards the people that will return to live in the battlefield. Those that live in cities that have had large amounts of DU thrown about and finely distributed. My point about the hypothetical of road repair crews in america leaving behind du dust and fragments is indeed essentially a political question. It is easier to dismiss a potential hazzard if it is not your hazzard. Finely divide Tonnes of DU and spread it around New York and the population would justifiably be annoyed...annoyed only because they are uninformed, irrational or simply pinko troublemakers?

There is only one set of simple answers to my 3 simple questions...the only dispute is the relative severities. Unfortunately with a cumulative damage problem dismissing something as not being the worst contributor is not really much comfort to those who we require to accept the stuff.

 

[Bruce]

When you make asinine statements I'm going to point them out each and every time.

Whoa, dude! If that's the case, you're going to need this:

and this:

I admire your stamina.

 

[The Fool]

I admire your stamina.

Hows your stamina holding up Bruce?
want to have a bash at my 3 questions?

1. Would inhaling DU dust increase, decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage.?
2. Is increasing my radiation dosage desirable?
3. Is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

 

[LW]

I remember making some nuclear radiation danger calculations during high school physics classes. Unfortunately, I've sold the books long ago and I can't remember the exact formulas and constants.

There was a table that described the relative dangers of different radiation types based on the damage that they do to cells. Gamma radiation had a factor of 1 and the other radiation types then had some other factors (I think that alpha was around 20 but I may be remembering incorrectly).

If someone remembers those formulas, it might be illuminating to compute the relative dangers of 1 g of potassium and 1 g of depleted uranium.

 

[Ziggurat]

Found it!

potassium-40

A naturally occurring (0.0117%) radioactive potassium isotope; beta emitter with half-life of 1.26 billion years; chief source of natural radioactivity of living tissue.
One out of every 10,000 Potassium atoms is radioactive Potassium-40 (K-40). These each have 19 protons and 21 neutrons in their nucleus. If one of these protons is hit by a beta particle, it can be converted into a neutron. With 18 protons and 22 neutrons, the atom has become Argon-40 (Ar-40), an inert gas. For every 100 K-40 atoms that decay, 11 become Ar-40.

decay:

Potassium-40
Halflife: 1277000000 years
Decay mode: Beta, Beta-absorb
Decay element: Calcium-40 (stable), Argon-40 (stable)

Beta absorb means electron capture: the radiation product for that is gamma. So it's both a beta and a gamma emitter.

At any rate, yes, on a molar basis, Uranium may be worse because it cascades. But let's try to get some more numbers. An adult body has about 14 mg of K40. That's the molar equivalent of about 80 mg of U238. Throw in a fudge factor of 10 if you want to account for U238 having active decay products, and you're looking at 8 mg still being inconsequential. Throw in a factor of 100, and a mg still looks irrelevant - several mg still shouldn't be a worry. But of course, we're being generous here, because U238 isn't going to stay in your body forever, but K40 will always be present. Now, how much U238 do you think troops (or surrounding civilians) are realistically going to inhale (since as you noted, ingested U238-oxide mostly passes through the system)?

Well, I don't have numbers for that. But I do have some comparison numbers with lead that we can use, to get an idea of the toxicity risk. OSHA puts limits of 0.4 micrograms of lead per liter of blood. A typical adult has about 5 liters of blood, which means about 2 mg of lead in the blood at any time poses a health risk large enough to regulate against. In contrast, 14 mg of K40 poses almost NO health risk over your entire lifetime. Call me crazy, but if I'm looking at the consequences of inhaling U238, I'm going to be a LOT more concerned about heavy metal toxicity than radiation risk.

 

[Ziggurat]

Hows your stamina holding up Bruce?
want to have a bash at my 3 questions?

1. Would inhaling DU dust increase, decrease or make no difference to my radiation dosage.?

Increase your radiation dosage. By how much? Depends on how much you inhale, but not by much.

Here are some other things that can increase your radiation dosage:
Taking an airplane trip.
Eating bannanas.
Living in colorodo.
Moving into a house with well-sealed windows.
Working in a concrete building.

2. Is increasing my radiation dosage desirable?

Not in and of itself. But neither is it harmful to any significant degree, if that increase is small.

3. Is it irrational to not want to increase my radiation dosage?

No. But it IS irrational to prioritize a small risk ahead of a larger risk. It's the equivalent of refusing to get dental xrays (despite the fact that oral health is a major contributor to longevity) because the xrays are radiation exposure. Heavy metal toxicity is a larger risk from DU than radiation.