[ RadSafe ] Publication : Bioremediation of Radionuclides: EmergingTechnologies

[Brennan, Mike (DOH)]

Hi, John.

>From the following passage:

"Currently, no efficient technology is available that can store the
radioactive wastes with adequate safety. Therefore, bioremediation of
radionuclides/radioactive waste is an unavoidable necessity that has
been tried using biotransformation, bioaccumulation, biosorption,
biostimulation, and bioaugmentaion, with limited success. Genetic
engineering has been implemented to develop an organism that can
effectively detoxify radionuclides along with other organic pollutants
present as co-contaminants in the radioactive waste sites."

I have to conclude that the authors are being very, very sloppy with
their phrasing, or they are saying that genetically engineered organisms
can be made that would remove the risk, "detoxify" radionuclides.  There
are few radioisotope in which the chemical toxicity is a greater risk
than the radiological effects (uranium-238 is the only one that comes
readily to mind, though there probably are a few others).  Additionally,
if they are talking about remediation of a site contaminated with mixed
waste they should say that, and not repeatedly say radioactive waste
site.  Their use of the word "store" in connection with "radioactive
waste" certainly implies that they are talking about sites where
radioactive waste has been intentionally placed.  Some of these indeed
have contamination issues that need remediation.  But there is nothing
that I am aware of that can be done with living organisms that will
"detoxify" radioactive materials.  Concentrate them to make clean up
easier; yes (though this actually makes it more "toxic", in that the
activity per volume is higher and the radioactive material is more
readily available to be eaten by other organisms).  Alter the chemical
form of the isotopes; yes.  Speed up the breakdown of some toxic
co-contaminates; indeed yes.  If any of those are what they meant, then
that is what they should have said.  

-----Original Message-----
From: John Jacobus [mailto:crispy_bird at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 10:20 AM
To: Brennan, Mike (DOH); radsafe; know_nukes at yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] Publication : Bioremediation of Radionuclides:
EmergingTechnologies

Mike,
I did not see anything about conversion of radionuclides to stable
nuclides.  I believe it is about remediation of mixed waste sites.

--- "Brennan, Mike  (DOH)" <Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV>
wrote:

> I find the abstract and the introduction at the linked site 
> distressing.
> They are full of incorrect statements of the problems and implied 
> solutions that seem to defy some well demonstrated physical 
> properties.
> 
> "There are multiple radioactive waste dumping sites, that, if exposed 
> to the general population, may cause serious life-threatening 
> disorders."
> 
> Not exposing the general population to waste is the entire concept 
> behind waste control measure in every field, including hazardous 
> wastes, medical wastes, industrial wastes, municipal wastes, dead 
> bodies, and sewage.  Indeed, taken as a waste that is actually, at 
> this moment, shortening the lives of members of the general public, 
> radioactive waste may well be last on this list.  If you postulate the

> worst accident possible from a radioactive waste site you still won't 
> come close to what happens fairly frequently around the world when 
> drinking water gets contaminated with sewage.  Industrial waste 
> disposed of into the air and water are at this moment causing "serious

> life-threatening disorders" to millions, and will kill thousands this 
> year.  I am not saying that radioactive waste should be treated in a 
> careless manner, but get your priorities straight.
> 
> "Currently, no efficient technology is available that can store the 
> radioactive wastes with adequate safety."
> 
> Stockyard waste.  Efficient safe storage or disposal of radioactive 
> waste isn't even particularly difficult, though you have to pay 
> attention to what you are doing.  The problems are political, not 
> technical.
> 
> "Therefore, bioremediation of
> radionuclides/radioactive waste is an
> unavoidable necessity that has been tried using biotransformation, 
> bioaccumulation, biosorption, biostimulation, and bioaugmentaion, with

> limited success. Genetic engineering has been implemented to develop 
> an organism that can effectively detoxify radionuclides along with 
> other organic pollutants present as co-contaminants in the radioactive

> waste sites."
> 
> If this is discussing bio applications that make cleaning up 
> contamination easier (NOTE: "waste site" and "contaminated site" are 
> not synonymous), cool.  If this is talking about biologic processes 
> that convert radioactive isotopes into stable isotopes or changes the 
> rate of decay, then I must have missed a memo.  Last I heard there 
> wasn't even a theoretical basis for something like that.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
> Behalf Of John Jacobus
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2007 7:57 AM
> To: radsafe; know_nukes at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Publication : Bioremediation of
> Radionuclides:
> EmergingTechnologies
> 
> >From another list server
> 
> OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology Bioremediation of 
> Radionuclides: Emerging Technologies
> -------------------------
> 
> To cite this paper:
> Raj Kumar, Sompal Singh, Om V. Singh. OMICS: A Journal of Integrative 
> Biology. 2007, 11(3): 295-304.
> 
> 

+++++++++++++++++++
"If you guard your toothbrushes and diamonds with equal zeal, you'll
probably lose fewer toothbrushes and more diamonds."
- Former national security advised McGeorge Bundy
-- John
John Jacobus, MS
Certified Health Physicist
e-mail:  crispy_bird at yahoo.com


 
________________________________________________________________________
____________
Don't let your dream ride pass you by. Make it a reality with Yahoo!
Autos.
http://autos.yahoo.com/index.html