[ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed atformerrockettest site n...
JPreisig at aol.com
JPreisig at aol.com
Mon Dec 31 12:25:32 CST 2012
Radsafe,
I expect, if you put such a sophisticated reactor in a bomber
aircraft, one of the real problems is
how to cool the reactor well. On a submarine or aircraft carrier, you can
always??? readily get
cooling water. In a spaceship in space, one could cool the reactor by
using the cold
temperatures of outer space (circulate a water loop outside of the
spaceship???).
As for a ramjet having two speeds, that is a really neat problem.
Clearly, you change the power
level in the reactor using the control rods. But in a ramjet, or bomber,
or whatever, you really need the
ability to change power levels quickly --- there are times when a ramjet, a
jet or a bomber needs to
accelerate or decelerate quickly. In a jet the inertial guidance system
has been specifically designed
(using ring laser gyroscopes and/or accelerometers) to respond quickly ---
and one wants the ability
to make flight control surfaces (i.e. flaps etc.) respond quickly. A
reactor, even a sophisticated one,
doesn't lend itself to making rapid changes (on demand). Really pretty
interesting.
I guess dive planes in a submarine usually move pretty slowly????
Regards, Joe Preisig
In a message dated 12/31/2012 12:26:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
Mike.Brennan at DOH.WA.GOV writes:
I had a professor who worked on the nuclear powered ramjet. He said it
could power a bomber to supersonic speeds, but not with the mass needed to
shield the reactor enough to service the plane. They looked at a lot of
different possible work-arounds, but never came up with anything that was good
enough.
He said one of the real deal-killers was the acknowledged fact that
airplanes sometimes crash, and no one wanted to be involved in cleanup of a
particularly hot reactor after it hit the ground at a couple hundred miles per
hour.
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry Cohen
Sent: Saturday, December 29, 2012 4:20 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed
atformerrockettest site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
I believe you are refereing to the "Pluto" program managed by the Los
Alamos Lab. Pluto was a rocket powered by liquid hydrogen by running it through
a nuclear reactor expanding its volume to provide the necessary thrust. It
worked, but I assume because it invoved nuclear energy, it was
politically unacceptable to the politicians in Washington. During the same period
(the 60's), Livermore Lab was working on a nuclear powered ramjet engine.
Following its first sucessful test, this project was also killed by the federal
government.
Jerry Cohen
________________________________
From: Edmond <edmond0033 at comcast.net>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Sat, December 29, 2012 10:20:06 AM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed
atformerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
I think (not very sure) at one time the DOE or (AEC) was trying to develop
a rocket engine that was to be powered by radioactivity. It was canceled
for whatever reason.
Ed Baratta
edmond0033 at comcast.net
-----Original Message----- From: Douglas Minnema
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 3:44 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed
atformerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Just curious, what about tritium?
Twelve or so years ago, when I was doing a safety management system review
of the DOE-funded cleanup operations at that site, there was clear (and
acknowledged) evidence of a tritium plume moving from the site into
off-site areas. I was surprised at the time because there had not been any
active reactors or other obvious sources for the tritium at the site for many
years before that time, but it was equally clear that the plume was
associated with one of the old test reactor locations.
I understand that the intervening half-life of time will have reduced the
quantities further (please, no lectures on radioactive decay :-) but at
that time the quantities were easily measurable. I'm not sure that one
half-life would have been enough to "make it go away." Physical dispersal of the
plume might be enough to reduce it to below detectable, but I don't have a
good feel for that.
Doug Minnema, PhD, CHP
US Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Cary Renquist
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2012 1:54 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed at
formerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Here is the EPA's Fact Sheet on the study results:
EPA Radiological Characterization Study Results http://j.mp/12dBJrt
It lists some of the specific results in a table.
e.g.
Am-241: 3 positive in the 0.05-0.06 pCi/g range
Cs-137: 291 positive in the 0.2-200 pCi/g range
Pu239/240: 14 pos in the 0.02-0.19 pCi/g range
Sr90: 153 pos in the 0.08-21 pCi/g range Etc.
---
Cary Renquist
cary.renquist at ezag.com
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Cary Renquist
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012 10:35 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed at
formerrocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
U.S. EPA's Final Technical Memorandum Look-Up Table Recommendations This
is a link to a pdf that seems to have the background threshold values for
the nuclides of interest (Table 2 of attachment 1).
http://j.mp/QYILg4
Pursuant to an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE) and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), the USEPA has
conducted a Radiological Background Study to determine the background levels
for radionuclides in surface and subsurface soils associated with Area IV and
the Northern Buffer Zone (Area IV Study Area1) of the Santa Susana Field
Laboratory (SSFL), located in Ventura County, California. In addition, the
USEPA is currently conducting a radiological characterization of the Area IV
Study Area to identify areas that exhibit radionuclide concentrations in
surface and subsurface soil and sediment above background levels (herein,
"soil" shall mean surface and subsurface soil as well as surface and
subsurface sediment unless otherwise specified).
I didn't see a doc that has the presented results of the soil samples,
however, this article at least has some details:
Latest soil tests at Santa Susana Field Lab site shows radioactive
material remains - LA Daily News http://j.mp/TSusGW
The EPA researchers collected 3,735 samples of mostly surface soil and
found that of those, 500 contained concentrations of radioactive materials
that exceeded what is known as background standards - or the levels occurring
naturally in the environment. Almost all were man-made radionuclides. Most
of those samples contained Cesium-137, and of those one sample reached
levels up to
1,000 times above background standard. There were 153 samples of
Stronium-90 and of those some hits reached levels that were 284 times higher than
background.
Both radioactive elements are considered dangerous to human health when
present at high levels.
"There were some hits that were elevated but for the most part, they were
in the range that we expected," said John Jones, federal project director
with the Department of Energy.
Cary
---
Cary Renquist
cary.renquist at ezag.com
-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Robert J Gunter
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012 6:38 AM
To: 'Robert Atkinson'; 'The International Radiation Protection (Health
Physics)Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed atformer
rocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Not a very informative statement: "10 percent contained radioactive
concentrations exceeding background levels."
This could easily be fill from another location or different aggregate
based on this statement alone. Is it NORM or Cs-137?
Robert J. Gunter, MSc, CHP
CHP Consultants/CHP Dosimetry
www.chpconsultants.com
www.chpdosimetry.com
Toll Free: (888) 766-4833
Fax: (866) 491-9913
Cel: (865) 387-0028
rjgunter at chpconsultants.com
________________________________
From: Steven Dapra <sjd at swcp.com>
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
<radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Friday, 14 December 2012, 2:53
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Radioactive contamination unearthed at former
rocket test site near Los Angeles - U.S. News
Dec. 13
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list