[ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

Tue Jun 21 08:30:09 CDT 2011

It is interesting that all these disasters pale in comparison to the annual
deaths from automobile accidents, to give one example. It is unfortunate
that acute incidents distracts us from far more serious chronic devestation.

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry Cohen
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 9:01 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

How about the Johnstown flood [dam failure] in 1889 that killed 2200 people.
And radioactivity hadn't even been invented yet!

________________________________
From: Jim Hardeman <Jim.Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList 
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Mon, June 20, 2011 5:13:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

How about the Bhopal, India release of methyl isocyanate in 1984? The
official 
immediate death toll was 2,259. Estimates are than anywhere from 3,000 to
8,000 
died of gas-related injuries w/in the first few weeks.

Jim Hardeman, Manager
Environmental Radiation Program
Environmental Protection Division
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
4220 International Parkway, Suite 100
Atlanta, GA 30354
(404) 362-2675
Fax: (404) 362-2653
Personal fax: (404) 521-4485
E-mail: Jim.Hardeman at dnr.state.ga.us 

>>> "Busby, Chris" <C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk> 6/20/2011 16:38 >>>

What industrial catastrophes are bigger than Fukushima?
I cant think of one. But maybe there is one. Certainly not 9.
I mean Industrial right. Not earthquakes and stuff like that.
If we call the atmospheric tests an industrial catastrophe then that one 
certainly. 

Also the use of uranium weapons in GW2. 
But thats probably not as bad in terms of health effects as Fukushima will
be. 
You wait. 

Chris Busby

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Brennan, Mike  (DOH)
Sent: Mon 20/06/2011 21:35
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

While I don't choose to guess at the amount of activity released at
either Chernobyl or Fukushima beyond "a whole hell of a lot", I don't
think I agree that Fukushima has or will result in "higher collective
exposure".  Firstly, there was some hours between the end of criticality
and the beginning of release at Fukushima.  This means that many of the
isotopes with the shortest half-lives had enough time to decay away
before release began, unlike Chernobyl.  Second, at Fukushima the first
portion of the release, which is potentially the hottest, was blown out
to sea, as opposed to at Chernobyl, where there was inhabited land in
every direction (some, obviously, more densely inhabited than others).
Third, a significant portion of the released activity is in water, going
to the ocean, where the impact on human health will be limited.

I am not for a moment saying that Fukushima isn't a disaster.  I am not
even saying that it is unreasonable to compare it to Chernobyl.  Heck, I
am not even saying that something can't happen and make Fukushima worse
than it is.  However, I don't believe that it is useful to engage in
hyperbole.

This morning a concerned citizen sent me an article from Al Jezeera in
which an activist claimed, "Fukushima is the biggest industrial
catastrophe in the history of mankind".  It certainly is not, and
probably isn't in the top ten.

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu 
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Busby, Chris
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 11:15 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing
List; The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

My estimate is
Chernobyl
about 10^19 Bq
Fukushima about 10^19Bq but more local so density greater and higher
collective exposure due to Tokyo
Hiroshima more difficult, maybe 10^14 including the Uranium
But I agree, not easily comparable with Hiroshima since that involved
high level prompt gamma and neutrons
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Brennan, Mike
(DOH)
Sent: Mon 20/06/2011 17:41
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

I am not sure if the question of how much radioactivity was released at
Hiroshima is a meaningful question, at least when trying to put it in
perspective with Chernobyl and Fukushima.

There are several reasons for this.  The first is that the explosion at
Hiroshima produced blast and heat that killed people (though not
everyone) out to a range past where the radiation dose would cause acute
problems.  At Chernobyl the blast killed a few people (I am not sure how
many), and at Fukushima no one was killed by blast.  

Second, at Hiroshima much of the radiation was produced by fission, so
"curies" isn't an appropriate unit, in much the same way it isn't for
machine produced radiation.  There was a substantial amount of
radioactive material produced, and there was some exposure to people
from the fallout, but that wasn't the main source of dose.  At Chernobyl
a reactor core that was (for a brief time) at more than 100% power was
blasted into the air, then roasted in a graphite fire for days.  At
Fukushima there was a release into the air some hours after criticality
ceased, and a large amount of the radioactive material has been trapped
in water that either went into the ocean or is still on site.  

Third, the isotope mix of what was released is very different between
the three.  This come into play in that the release of, say, 1,000 Ci of
I-131 has different consequences than the release of 1,000 Ci of I-129.
Weapons tend to have a higher percentage of very short half life
isotopes, reactor fuel that has been use a while has a higher percentage
of longer half-life isotopes.  Also, with reactors the amount of time
between the end of criticality and the release will impact both the
amount of activity and the isotope mix.  

I bring all this up because it is a natural tendency to ask questions
like this, then equate "more" with "worse".  In this case, I don't think
that the intentional attacks of Hiroshima and Nagasaki can be
meaningfully compared to Chernobyl and Fukushima.  

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu 
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Theo Richel
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2011 11:17 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList;
The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima

Could anyone please give me some facts on how much radioactivity
(curies) was released in: Fukushima, Hisoshima, Chernobyl

Much appreciated

Theo Richel
_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html 

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu ( http://health.phys.iit.edu/ )
_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html 

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu ( http://health.phys.iit.edu/ )

_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html 

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu ( http://health.phys.iit.edu/ )
_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html 

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:

http://health.phys.iit.edu ( http://health.phys.iit.edu/ )

_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:

http://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
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://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu