[ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation in landfills

[Brennan, Mike (DOH)]

There are a couple of amusing (in a very sad way) things in this
article, beyond the obvious ignorance of the reporter (and her apparent
ignorance of her own ignorance).

The first is that large parts of Tennessee have karst geologic
formations under them, which can easily lead to radon levels that even
those who believe radon is over-blown would find excessive.  I would bet
a soda that the reporter would be uninterested, and that the activists
interviewed would be hostile and dismissive to the idea that natural
conditions routinely expose real people to dose levels many orders of
magnitudes higher than even the most absurd scenarios concerning the
dump could expose hypothetical people to.

The second is the statement "In 1994, Middle Point landfill was approved
for 200,000 to 400,000 pounds per month of spent ion exchange resin,
pellets that filter radiation out of water."  Usually this material
comes from water treatment plants, and collects up the radioactive
material (usually uranium and radium) incidental to other contaminants.
In a fair number of cases I understand that the water is not near the
limits, but it is being treated to be on the safe side.  In those cases,
if there is no place to dispose of spent filter media, of if the cost of
disposal is too high, the likely alternative is that the plant stops
filtering.  Some of the uranium and radium will still be filtered out of
the water in its journey from the well to the waste stream.  It will
just be filtered by kidneys rather than resin. 

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Phil Rutherford
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2007 9:18 PM
To: BLHamrick at aol.com; sandyfl at cox.net; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation in landfills

There may be some unreported "background subtractions" going on here.  A
typical gamma exposure meter these days would be a Bicron Microrem
meter.  Typical backgrounds with this instrument would be ~10
microrem/hr.  Coverting to an annual background dose would give 87.6
millirem/year.  Clearly, the reported 26 millirem/year background
appears very low.

As an aside, I was amused that the name Rutherford and landfills are
making news in Tennessee, given the attention the issue has generated
herte in California and to me personally in recent years.  Also,
googling some of the recent news stories about the issue, I see that
even UCLA is being accused of sending "radioactive waste" to the Middle
Point Landfill in Rutherford County, Tennessee
(http://www.wsmv.com/news/13318222/detail.html).  What goes around comes
around!!!

Phil Rutherford

email at philrutherford.com
http://www.philrutherford.com
http://apps.em.doe.gov/etec 


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: BLHamrick at aol.com 
  To: sandyfl at cox.net ; radsafe at radlab.nl 
  Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 7:09 PM
  Subject: [ RadSafe ] Re: Radiation in landfills



  I think that the survey measurements were just determining background
gamma  
  dose, so wouldn't include the many other contributions to background
from  
  inhalation (including radon) and ingestion.
   
  Barbara
   
  In a message dated 7/5/2007 6:43:13 PM Pacific Daylight Time,  
  sandyfl at cox.net writes:

  At least  the article did comment that there is radiation "evrywhere".
The 
  public does  react to this radiation when they are told that the 61
mrem 
  determined is 61  times what is allowed in landfills (if the limit is
1 mrem/year).

  What  really doesn't make sense is the other reading of 26 mrem/year 
  extrapolated  dose. Considering that natural background in the area is
much higher 
  than  that, the 26 mrem calculated dose, the survey performed is
highly  
  questionable. I question the other readings based on this as  well.


   



  ************************************** See what's free at
http://www.aol.com.
  _______________________________________________
  You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

  Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

  For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/