[ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
neilkeeney at aol.com
neilkeeney at aol.com
Fri Jun 24 21:18:26 CDT 2011
Jeff et al:
I agree wholeheartedly. I consider a great many more people die in preventable events techologically enhanced by industry each year. For example the following excerpt is from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_motor_vehicle_collisions
"Worldwide it was estimated in 2004 that 1.2 million people were killed (2.2% of all deaths) and 50 million more were injured in motor vehicle collisions.
India recorded 105,000 traffic deaths in a year, followed by China with over 96,000 deaths.
This makes motor vehicle collisions the leading cause of injury death among children worldwide 10 – 19 years old (260,000 children die a year, 10 million are injured) and the sixth leading preventable cause of death in the United States (45,800 people died and 2.4 million were injured in 2005). In Canada they are the cause of 48% of severe injuries."
Granted these events occur in singular incidents or small groups yet they share a common element - an automobile, mass produced in industry. And this occurs each year...
Do these statistics possibly qualify under "Industrial Event(s)" in terms of this discussion? Each year, one-million plus people - dead as the result of variable circumstances but involving a common denominator.
Regards,
Neil Keeney
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Terry <terryj at iit.edu>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Mon, Jun 20, 2011 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
Well, if we are using radiation related fatalities to date as the metric in
ukushima, we cannot leave out:
"Jackass" co-star dies in car crash in Pennsylvania as its one fatality exceeds
he radiation tally in Fukushima.
ttp://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/sns-rt-us-jackass-dunntre75j4u2-20110620,0,5962651.story
Jeff
On Jun 20, 2011, at 4:01 PM, Brennan, Mike (DOH) wrote:
> Here are some from Wikipedia. I am not saying these are the biggest, as they
nly cover a brief slice of time, are mostly Northern Hemisphere, and are mostly
atastrophic events, as opposed to long term health crushers like Black Lung
isease (so if you are going to say, "but Fukushima potentially will have long
erm effects," I suspect I could come up with 10 of those without much problem,
oo.)
December 3, 1984: The Bhopal disaster. Estimates of its death toll range from
,000 to 20,000. The disaster caused the region's human and animal populations
evere health problems to the present.
April 16, 1947: Texas City Disaster, Texas. A minimum of 578 people lost
heir lives and another 3,500 were injured as the blast shattered windows from
s far away as 25 mi (40 km). Large steel pieces were thrown more than a mile
rom the dock. The origin of the explosion was fire in the cargo on board the
hip. Detonation of 3,200 tons of ammonium nitrate fertilizer aboard the
randcamp led to further explosions and fires.
1932-1968: The Minamata disaster was caused by the dumping of mercury
ompounds in Minamata Bay, Japan. The Chisso Corporation, a fertilizer and later
etrochemical company, was found responsible for polluting the bay for 37 years.
t is estimated that over 3,000 people suffered various deformities, severe
ercury poisoning symptoms or death from what became known as Minamata disease.
August, 1975 The Banqiao Dam flooded in the Henan Province of China due to
xtraordinarily heavy rains, killing over 26,000
April 26, 1986: Chernobyl disaster. At the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in
rypiat, Ukraine a test on reactor number four goes out of control, resulting in
nuclear meltdown. The ensuing steam explosion and fire killed up to 50 people
ith estimates that there may be between 4,000 and several hundred thousand
dditional cancer deaths over time. Fallout could be detected as far away as
anada. The Chernobyl Exclusion Zone, covering portions of Belarus and Ukraine
urrounding Prypiat, remains poisoned and mostly uninhabited. Prypiat itself was
otally evacuated and remains as a ghost town.
January 15, 1919: The Boston Molasses Disaster. A large molasses tank burst
nd a wave of molasses rushed through the streets at an estimated 35 mph (56
m/h), killing 21 and injuring 150. The event has entered local folklore, and
esidents claim that on hot summer days the area still smells of molasses.
March 25, 1911: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire in New York City. This was a
ajor industrial disaster in the U.S., causing the death of more than one
undred garment workers who either died in the fire or jumped to their deaths.
March 10, 1906: Courrières mine disaster in Courrières, France. 1,099 workers
ied, including children, in the worst mine accident ever in Europe.
October 21, 1966: Aberfan disaster was a catastrophic collapse of a colliery
poil-tip that occurred in the Welsh village of Aberfan, killing 116 children
nd 28 adults.
September 21, 2001: Toulouse, France. An explosion at the AZF fertilizer
actory killed 29 and injured 2,500. Extensive structural damage to nearby
eighbourhoods.
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu]
n Behalf Of Busby, Chris
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 1:39 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] How many curies were involved in Hiroshima
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
ertainly.
Also the use of uranium weapons in GW2.
But thats probably not as bad in terms of health effects as Fukushima will be.
ou 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
hernobyl or Fukushima beyond "a whole hell of a lot", I don't think I agree
hat Fukushima has or will result in "higher collective exposure". Firstly,
here was some hours between the end of criticality and the beginning of release
t Fukushima. This means that many of the isotopes with the shortest half-lives
ad enough time to decay away before release began, unlike Chernobyl. Second,
t Fukushima the first portion of the release, which is potentially the hottest,
as blown out to sea, as opposed to at Chernobyl, where there was inhabited land
n every direction (some, obviously, more densely inhabited than others).
Third, a significant portion of the released activity is in water, going to
he 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
aying that it is unreasonable to compare it to Chernobyl. Heck, I am not even
aying that something can't happen and make Fukushima worse than it is.
owever, 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
n activist claimed, "Fukushima is the biggest industrial catastrophe in the
istory 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
nternational 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
ollective exposure due to Tokyo Hiroshima more difficult, maybe 10^14 including
he Uranium But I agree, not easily comparable with Hiroshima since that
nvolved 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
iroshima is a meaningful question, at least when trying to put it in
erspective with Chernobyl and Fukushima.
There are several reasons for this. The first is that the explosion at
iroshima produced blast and heat that killed people (though not
everyone) out to a range past where the radiation dose would cause acute
roblems. At Chernobyl the blast killed a few people (I am not sure how many),
nd 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
roduced radiation. There was a substantial amount of radioactive material
roduced, and there was some exposure to people from the fallout, but that
asn't the main source of dose. At Chernobyl a reactor core that was (for a
rief time) at more than 100% power was blasted into the air, then roasted in a
raphite fire for days. At Fukushima there was a release into the air some
ours after criticality ceased, and a large amount of the radioactive material
as 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
hree. 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,
eactor fuel that has been use a while has a higher percentage of longer
alf-life isotopes. Also, with reactors the amount of time between the end of
riticality and the release will impact both the amount of activity and the
sotope mix.
I bring all this up because it is a natural tendency to ask questions like
his, then equate "more" with "worse". In this case, I don't think that the
ntentional 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
nternational 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
adSafe 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
adSafe 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
adSafe 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
adSafe 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:
ttp://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
adSafe 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:
ttp://health.phys.iit.edu
_______________________________________________
ou are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
adSafe 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:
ttp://health.phys.iit.edu
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list