Re: CO2 emissions/atmospheric increase -C-14 Dose reduction

[SAFarberMSPH@CS.COM]

In a message dated 11/22/01 10:24:06 AM Pacific Standard Time, RuthWeiner@AOL.COM writes:



> The CO2 taken up in 
>
> photosynthesis can of course come from coal burning as well as wood burning.  
>
> So forest fires can add to the CO2 burden of the atmosphere.


While folks are posting extensively on general aspects of atmospheric CO2 issues, I recall reading long ago while in grad school [early 1970s]  about what I believe was termed the "Suess" effect whereby increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere were lowering  [i.e.: a negative Suess effect as I recollect it being termed] the specific activity of C-14 present in the atmosphere and thereby reducing the C-14 dose to humanity from natural and manmade C-14 by some slight margin over all time. Aha --a radiological issue related to CO2 emissions that can keep the CO2 thread going.


This negative Suess effect is a subtle point when discussing radiation dose from the coal vs. nuclear fuel cycle wherein coal would have to get some credit for "reducing" C-14 dose due to increasing CO2 levels while both coal and nuclear result in some oft debated increase in radiation exposure during routine operations.


Any input on this point from list members who have some familiarity with the Suess effect and  population dose from airborne environmental C-14 [since this is a radiation protection discussion group and this point is hopefully relevant to the list's purpose]?


Stewart Farber

Public Health Sciences

email: SAFarberMSPH@cs.com