RE: re a real solution

["Heinmiller, Bruce" <heinmillerb@aecl.ca>]

This explanation for the statement questioned in the original post about
spent fuel "being no more radioactive than the original unirradiated fuel in
about 300 years" provides a classic example of how factoids get distorted
during their propagation.  The radioactivity of unirradiated fuel is quite
different from that of the ore from which it was derived, and neither
reprocessing nor toxicity is mentioned in the quote above.  The quote above
not only lacks qualification with respect to any reprocessing option, but,
if derived from the source cited, would appear to have lost fidelity in any
case.  Consequently, it should be dispatched to the dust bin containing
other factoids such as the recently dispatched spousal-irradiation-from-K-40
factoid.

Bruce Heinmiller CHP
heinmillerb@aecl.ca

> ----------
> From: 	dkosloff1[SMTP:dkosloff1@email.msn.com]
> Reply To: 	radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> Sent: 	Saturday, August 19, 2000 6:49 PM
> To: 	Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: 	Re: re a real solution
> 
> I believe the article is "The Disposal of Radioactive Wastes from Fission
> Reactors" by Bernard L. Cohen, "Scientific American", June 1977.  It was
> printed again in a book called "Energy and Environment" in 1980 by W. H.
> Freeman and Company.  ISBN 0-7167-1052-8 and ISBN 0-7167-1053-6 pbk.
> 
> Part of one of the charts from Dr. Cohen's article is on the cover of the
> paperback.  The chart is "Deaths per year in U.S. if all wastes were to be
> dumped randomly in rivers" and "Total fatal cancer doses in ingested
> wastes"(i.e. somehow all the waste gets eaten by humans) plotted against
> "Years after reprocessing".  It includes curves for eleven isotopes and
> the
> combination of all isotopes.
> 
> I believe the statement about 300 years may have come from the book
> "Energy
> from Heaven and Earth" by Dr. Edward Teller, published in 1979, based on
> lectures given in 1975.  The following paragraph appears on page 181:
> "After approximately three hundred years in this deep burial place the
> radioactivity would have become less than that of the original uranium ore
> from which it was derived.  It would continue to decay through passing
> time.
> The crust of the earth would actually be depleted of radioactivity.  Thus
> we
> would have permanently freed the biosphere, the region of the living, from
> the radioactive products."  A review of the preceeding pages indicates
> that
> this conclusion is based, in part, on reprocessing.
> 
> Dr. Cohen also assumed reprocessing in his article but he did not mention
> 300 years.  He does include the following statement:  "In fact, one can
> calculate that after 600 years a person would have to ingest approximately
> half a pound of the buried waste to incur a 50 percent chance of suffering
> a
> lethal cancer."  So this would probably cut down on people selling spent
> fuel pudding.  Dr. Cohen's article also has several nice graphs.
> 
> I have both books if additional details or questions arise.
> 
> Don Kosloff dkosloff1@email.msn.com
> 2910 Main St. Perry OH 44081.
> 
> ---- Original Message -----
> From: "Sherman, Conrad" <ShermaC@ttemi.com>
> To: "Multiple recipients of list" <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> Sent: Saturday, August 19, 2000 5:25 PM
> Subject: re a real solution
> 
> 
> > Mike:
> >
> > Bernard Cohen (I think) wrote an article for Scientific American.  As I
> > recall, in this seminal article, he showed toxicity curves for uranium
> > bearing ore vs. fission products, proving that nuclear power plants were
> a
> > valid method for reducing the health threat from in situ naturaly
> occuring
> > radioactive material, in only about 300 years. This is something some
> > regulatory authorities are still trying to do, to this day, without much
> > success. He used contemporary dosimetry for the day, which was, rather
> > primitive.  I thing this article is very old, you may have to go back
> more
> > than 20 years, but it is worth finding.
> >
> > PS.  If you find it online, could you shoot me a copy.
> >
> > Conrad Sherman
> > ************************************************************************
> > 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
> 
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html