[ RadSafe ] Ongoing Criticalities InsideLeaking FukushimaDaiichi Unit 2

Wed May 4 06:18:00 CDT 2011

I believe the first method for producing I-131 for medical use was  
with the cyclotron. Saul Hertz at Mass General Hospital pioneered the  
treatment of hyperthyroidism with I-131 in 1941 using the MIT  
cyclotron which had just been completed in 1940.

See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saul_Hertz>.

Mike

On May 3, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Philip Simpson wrote:

> A third method is a Xe-131(n,p)I-131.  Xe-131 is a naturally  
> occurring isotope of Xe.  I believe this technique is being used at  
> McMaster University to produce I-131 for medical use.
>
> Phil Simpson
> Asst. Reactor Manager (Ret.)
> University of Michigan
> Ford Nuclear Reactor
>
> On May 3, 2011, at 12:51 AM, Edmond Baratta wrote:
>
>> There is another method.  It is neutron bombardment of Tellurium  
>> (Te).  A company in South Africa produces Iodine-131 by this method.
>>
>> Ed Baratta
>> Consultant - Radioactivity
>> edmond0033 at comcast.net
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Jim Darrough
>> Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 8:21 AM
>> To: 'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)  
>> Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Ongoing Criticalities InsideLeaking  
>> FukushimaDaiichi Unit 2
>>
>> Pardon my ignorance, Bob. Are you saying that I-131 can be created  
>> in some
>> manner other that fissioning? I was always led to believe that  
>> I-131 is
>> strictly a fission byproduct/fragment. Looking at an old copy of  
>> Nclides and
>> Isotopes Chart of the Nuclides, (16th edition) it seems to me that  
>> I-131
>> would not be readily created by neutron absorption.
>>
>> Cesium 137 on the other hand has a long half life, relatively  
>> speaking so
>> any release from broken or leaking fuel rods (such as those in the  
>> pools)
>> could release plenty.
>>
>> In short, I do not think there is enough spontaneous fission going  
>> on in the
>> reactor(s), especially with Boron injections, to produce I-131 in any
>> meaningful amount.
>>
>>
>> Am I wrong about this?
>>
>>
>> Regards, Jim Darrough
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Bob Hearn
>> Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 7:55 PM
>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)  
>> MailingList
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Ongoing Criticalities Inside Leaking
>> FukushimaDaiichi Unit 2
>>
>> The I-131 / Cs-137 ratios or absolute concentrations are not  
>> adequate to
>> make any inference regarding criticality or production rate. These
>> radioisotopes may be released at varying rates with no criticality  
>> from fuel
>> in defected cladding depending on the nature of cladding defects,
>> temperature, pressure, fuel burn history, etc. We do not even know  
>> for sure
>> how much of the source term for these materials is the spent fuel  
>> versus
>> that in the reactor vessel.
>>
>> These is an entire area of study on radioisotope release from BWR  
>> reactor
>> fuel, dating from the earlier days of GE's A/y-lambda modeling for  
>> fuel
>> warranty validation, and further advanced in more recent decades.  
>> These
>> sparse observations do not provide adequate characterization for  
>> any of the
>> speculation raised in this thread.
>>
>> btw: How is "fresh" I-131 distinguished from any other state of  
>> I-131?
>>
>> Bob Hearn
>> pedigreed expert
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Randy Parker" <randy at atomicwizard.com>
>> To: "'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)  
>> MailingList'"
>> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
>> Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 9:17 PM
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Ongoing Criticalities Inside Leaking
>> FukushimaDaiichi Unit 2
>>
>>
>>> Greetings!
>>>
>>> Viewing the graphical data for the samples from the six units, I  
>>> see:
>>>
>>> Unit 1 has I-131 in the range of 50 to 500 Bq/cc, decreasing  
>>> relative to
>>> Cs-137 by a (very approximate) factor of 20 in 20 days.
>>>
>>> Unit 2 has I-131 in the range of 50 to 800 Bq/cc, not decreasing  
>>> relative
>>> to
>>> Cs-137 until 4/22/2011, then decreasing relative to Cs-137 by a  
>>> (very
>>> approximate) factor of 5 in 6 days.
>>>
>>> Unit 3 has I-131 in the range of 2 to 20 Bq/cc, decreasing  
>>> relative to
>>> Cs-137 by a (very approximate) factor of 3 in 12 days until  
>>> 4/18/2011,
>>> then
>>> increasing relative to Cs-137 by a (very approximate) factor of  
>>> 10 in 8
>>> days.
>>>
>>> Unit 4 has I-131 in the range of 0.06 to 20 Bq/cc, decreasing  
>>> relative to
>>> Cs-137 by a (very approximate) factor of 20 in 20 days.
>>>
>>> Unit 5 has I-131 in the range of 0.05 to 1.1 Bq/cc, decreasing  
>>> relative to
>>> Cs-137 by a factor of 2 (or less) in 20 days.
>>>
>>> Unit 6 has I-131 in the range of 0.08 to 0.9 Bq/cc, maintaining a  
>>> roughly
>>> constant level relative to Cs-137.
>>>
>>> If any of these 6 reactors is presumed to be making new I-131,  
>>> why not
>>> pick
>>> Unit 3?
>>>
>>> The only conclusion I can derive from these graphs is  
>>> "insufficient data".
>>> The data that I need are those that would give a production RATE  
>>> of the
>>> fission isotopes.  These results are for water concentration, but  
>>> they
>>> provide no clue about total quantities without some way to  
>>> measure the
>>> total
>>> volume of the water represented by each sample.  Since they are  
>>> water
>>> samples, they give no clue as to the amount of I-131 potentially  
>>> released
>>> by
>>> gaseous pathways.  Also, I'm certain there would be other fission  
>>> products
>>> present such as I-133 which (with a shorter half-life) would more  
>>> clearly
>>> indicate an on-going fission process.  Since I don't know why  
>>> these are
>>> not
>>> plotted, I can draw no conclusion from such information.
>>>
>>> If I were to speculate on the information I actually have, I would
>>> speculate
>>> that the author of the article prefers speculation...
>>>
>>> Not a pedigreed "expert", but my opinion -
>>> Randy Parker
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Doug  
>>> Huffman
>>> Sent: Sunday, May 01, 2011 10:10 AM
>>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)  
>>> Mailing List
>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Ongoing Criticalities Inside Leaking  
>>> Fukushima
>>> Daiichi Unit 2
>>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> A definition of criticality, a practical one that I used to  
>>> determine
>>> criticality, was "a constant positive change in neutron  
>>> population (Start
>>> Up
>>> Rate) with no reactivity addition."  Subcritical multiplication and
>>> spontaneous fission might explain "fresh" I-131 but the whole  
>>> spectrum of
>>> fission fragmants should be present and as detectable.
>>>
>>> On 5/1/2011 07:20, Ahmad Al-Ani wrote:
>>>> TEPCO Data Shows Ongoing Criticalities Inside Leaking Fukushima
>>>> Daiichi Unit 2 April 28, 2011 Analysis by: GLG Expert Contributor
>>>>
>>>> Data released on April 28, 2011 by TEPCO is now unequivocal in  
>>>> showing
>>> ongoing criticalities at Unit 2, with a peak on April 13. TEPCO  
>>> graphs of
>>> radioactivity-versus-time in water under each of the six reactors  
>>> show an
>>> ongoing nuclear chain reaction creating high levels of "fresh"  
>>> I-131 in
>>> Unit
>>> 2, the same reactor pressure vessel (RPV) with a leak path to  
>>> reactor
>>> floor,
>>> aux building, and outdoor trenches, that is uncontrollably  
>>> leaking high
>>> levels of I-131, Cs-134, Cs-137 into the Pacific Ocean.
>>>>
>>>> Source:
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/663j24z
>>>>
>>>> TEPCO Data:
>>>> http://tinyurl.com/5sz375o
>>>>
>>>> Can the experts on the RADSAFE list comment on this analysis,  
>>>> please.
>>>>
>>>> Ahmad Al-Ani
>>>> Radiation Physicist
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (MingW32)
>>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>>>
>>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNvZPlAAoJEIpOLnult3mge+4H/1o3YiF770X4lPYFdXZ+4sKG
>>> fDNZ49oYrUhUtCMfFiDoTwUuz1PPN2hiC4xNoaMV02TV12fD9vA+Ur7n/FHbYQAB
>>> Gzpl5Mp4FWA/ScPDr7aytDWz8n6CFXXDvT/vf8fSQAEOQ9EX6zLvpRBN0KGRP6e6
>>> 56yMWMTqfuCVt06htvkPslmteec+AnlVubCB5fOiiKCHSs7xsMJeFQvPK1JyPU4+
>>> dFTHegp18QcPCFdty+uftVEFKpzBHQpLpx+nzwxTuGHgDQgbMhFPdxArwtnm04y6
>>> 2EaIotbqBM+8t2NcPdjecOYTKEmyEIqGVjhIGr4JySWMfEAHJIWualQkeEFpcOQ=
>>> =6Zy4
>>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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