[ RadSafe ] Re: radiosemantics

Mon Sep 21 13:27:38 CDT 2009

Franz, Rick, et al.,

A few years ago, my colleagues and I became somewhat perplexed over what 
seemed to be an inordinate public concern regarding handling and disposal of 
"long-lived "radionuclides. For example, Pu-239, with its half-life of 
24,000 years, seemed to present a particularly unique and serious threat. 
Yet the fear of long-lived radionuclides made no sense because , carried to 
its extreme, the greatest level fear would be directed toward the stable 
nuclides that do not decay and will exist forever. Of course, such a fear 
does not exist, so we wondered why the confusion. We concluded that, at 
least part of the problem stemmed from the rather oversimplified distinction 
of radioactive vs. stable materials. To remedy the situation, we recommended 
a new classification of materials by first eliminating the idea of "stable" 
elements" (the neutron itself decays, so given enough time everything is 
unstable). We recommended a new classification as follows: Radioactive 
(definition:  any nuclide that decays with a half-life < 1 million years), 
Radiopassive (nuclides with half lives > 10E6 and <10E12 years), and 
radioquescent (half life >10E12 years).
Apparently, nobody bought the idea, but it still makes sense to me.
Jerry Cohen

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Franz Schönhofer" <franz.schoenhofer at chello.at>
To: "'Strickert, Rick'" <rstrickert at signaturescience.com>; "'Doug Aitken'"
<jdaitken at sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com>; "'Scott, Bobby'" <BScott at lrri.org>;
<radsafe at radlab.nl>
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 9:55 AM
Subject: AW: [SPAM][ RadSafe ] RE: What Are Radionuclear Materials?

Rick,

It might be 10 or 15 years ago, that "Health Physics" changed radically to
SI Units. So radically indeed that they even banned the cSv, cGy, not to
talk about the Ci in manuscripts submitted. The introduction of SI units was
an international task, almost world wide accepted. Unfortunately there is
still a country in this world, small indeed when taking the surface and the
population into account, which does not follow the international rules on SI
units .....

Inventing new units and terms seems to be a favorite pasttime for people who
have enough time for it. Sometimes they are nationalists, who want
scientists of their country to become immortal by naming a unit after them.
What became of the "Taylor"? Sometimes they obviously like to play - why
should "radioactive materials" be renamed to "radionuclear materials"? I
cannot see any reason.

I can only repeat that we have so many terms already, that we do not need
new ones, which do not improve the old ones very significantly. It is
already now difficult enough to distinguish different terms.

Best regards,

Franz

Franz Schoenhofer, PhD
MinRat i.R.
Habicherg. 31/7
A-1160 Wien/Vienna
AUSTRIA

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] Im Auftrag
von Strickert, Rick
Gesendet: Montag, 21. September 2009 18:00
An: Doug Aitken; 'Scott, Bobby'; radsafe at radlab.nl
Betreff: RE: [SPAM][ RadSafe ] RE: What Are Radionuclear Materials?

> So I think this position is a bit "we know best" rather than
> "let's try and be as clear as possible".

Doug,

The "let's try and be as clear as possible" viewpoint appears to be the case
from reading the Foreword and the Introduction in the linked IAEA Glossary,
which include the purposes (pp. 3-4), the limited scope of the Glossary (pp.
4-5), and the statement (p.7):

"Some terms and usages that have been used in the past and/or are used in
the publications of other organizations, but whose use is discouraged in
IAEA publications, are included in the Safety Glossary. Such terms are
listed in square brackets, and should be used only if they are essential to
refer to other publications; alternative terms for use in IAEA publications
are recommended."

The IAEA also encourages feedback on changes in terminology and usage for
future Glossary revisions.  The IAEA includes a link to a change form for
submitting suggestions on the webpage,
http://www-ns.iaea.org/standards/safety-glossary.htm

Rick Strickert
Austin, TX

-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Aitken [mailto:jdaitken at sugar-land.oilfield.slb.com]
Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 10:22 AM
To: Strickert, Rick; 'Scott, Bobby'; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: RE: [SPAM][ RadSafe ] RE: What Are Radionuclear Materials?

I can understand the position. However, is not all material (unstable -
radioactive - or not,  in reality "nuclear" (as in contains a nucleus...).
It only becomes radioactive if the nucleus is unstable...

So I think this position is a bit "we know best" rather than "let's try and
be as clear as possible".
Just because "nuclear" as an adjective (nuclear energy, etc) is clear, it
does not preclude (in my simple, non-professional mind) make it the only
correct usage.

And as for the statements " Radionuclear has also been used as a journalese
shorthand form for 'nuclear and/or radiological' - what is wrong with that
(other than the use of the semi-arrogant "journalese" - as in you dummies
have no right to mess with our lexicon...). And do they precisely define the
distinction between "nuclear" and radiological (or radioactive - as they use
the two terms in the same sentence...... )

Oh, well. I guess I am just having a bit of fun. We must remember that the
English language is a living thing and "usage" changes almost daily. If the
entire US establishment embraces the term "nucular", I don't feel too bad
about the use of radionuclear..
;~)
Doug

_______________________________________________
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/