RE: background vs man-made emmissions - fallout

["Franta, Jaroslav" <frantaj@aecl.ca>]

Thanks for the information Glenn....

....but I'm very dubious about its veracity.

The doses absorbed by the bombing victims are estimated to have been in the
range of a few hundred rem (depending on location, any shielding effects,
etc. (deaths were due to CONVENTIONAL thermal burns from the light flash and
from building fires, and from other forms of physical trauma, NOT due to ARS
!! ).

Even if all of this exposure were due to neutrons - which it certainly was
not (there was a large gamma constituent) - it would have been very, very
far from sufficient to cause "High levels of residual radiation ...on the
ground...in the 
> form of induced radioactivity produced secondarily as a result of the
> nuclear reaction of neutrons."
> 
Trust me, its BS. 
We have the recent example of the Tokaimura criticality accident, where the
absorbed doses were about ten times higher than those in Japan (actual
deaths from ARS), yet even there the levels of neutron-induced radioactivity
inside the building were negligible ( escaped airborne radioactivity was due
to vapours issuing from the precipitation tank containing the critical
solution of 20% U235 & FPs ).

Radioactive fallout rain in Japan reportedly occurred, but far outside the
cities, after much dilution.
Any fallout soot from "intense firestorms" would NOT have been radioactive,
for the reasons given above.
 
Glenn, the quotations you provide look to me like the same sort of
self-delusion that is practiced in the Ukraine and Belarus on account of the
Chernobyl disaster. Its amazing how many people believe THAT nonsence (tens
of thousands dead as a result, etc.). I take it you're NOT one of them ?

Thanks again,

Jaro
frantaj@aecl.ca

> ----------
> From: 	GlennACarlson@aol.com[SMTP:GlennACarlson@aol.com]
> Reply To: 	radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> Sent: 	Sunday April 30, 2000 12:01 PM
> To: 	Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: 	Re: background vs man-made emmissions - fallout
> 
> _From http://www.city.hiroshima.jp/C/City/ABombDamage/07.html
> 
> "7.2 Residual Radiation 
> 
> High levels of residual radiation were present on the ground for a certain
> 
> period of
> time starting one minute after the explosion.  Residual radiation came in
> the 
> form of
> induced radioactivity produced secondarily as a result of the nuclear 
> reaction of
> neutrons when initial radiation collided with the soil and building 
> materials, and it
> also came from nuclear fission products and unfissioned uranium scattered
> by 
> the
> bomb. 
> 
> It is quite likely that anyone entering the area within 1 km of the 
> hypocenter within
> 100 hours after the explosion to search for people or help with relief 
> efforts was
> affected by radiation coming from the soil and other such places due to 
> induced 
> radioactivity. In addition, soot and dust saturated with induced radiation
> 
> from nuclear fission products and unfissioned uranium scattered at the
> time 
> of the bombing were carried high into the atmosphere and later fell to the
> 
> ground as radioactive fallout, giving rise to further possibilities for 
> contamination. 
> 
> 7.3 Black Rain
> 
> As the downtown area erupted in huge fires after the explosion, intense 
> firestorms
> and whirlwinds developed. After 20-30 minutes, black rain began to fall in
> a 
> wide area
> stretching from downtown to the northwest.
> 
> Large amounts of fallout, referred to as "Ashes of Death" were contained
> in 
> the rain
> in the form of radioactive soot and dust and caused contamination even in 
> areas
> remote from the hypocenter.
> 
> According to a study after the bombing, heavy rain fell in a 19km x 11 km 
> area and
> light rain fell in a 29km x 15km area, but there have been testimonies
> that 
> black rain
> fell in places outside these areas as well."
> 
> Glenn A. Carlson, P.E.
> glennacarlson@aol.com
> 
> > Subj:  RE: background vs man-made emmissions - fallout
> >  Date:    4/30/2000 7:18:00 AM Central Daylight Time  
> >  >  
> >  > Regarding your comment, what about exposure from fallout?
> >  > 
> >  > Glenn A. Carlson, P.E.
> >  > glennacarlson@aol.com
> >  >
> ************************************************************************
> >  > 
> >  Reply :  as far as I know, there wasn't any, since in both cases it was
> a
> >  high-altitude explosion. This was confirmed by radiation surveyors on
> the
> >  ground there soon after the explosions.
> >  
> >  Jaro
> >  frantaj@aecl.ca
> >  *************************************
> >  
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html