Re: LNT and resources [Was: Scientific responsibility]

[BLHamrick@AOL.COM]

It was rather rudely and abstrusely (and privately) brought to my attention 

that I may have overstated things in my message below.  In my experience, 

hundreds of microcuries (and less) of medical isotopes have been identified at 

landfills, scrapyards, medical waste processors and waste transfer stations.  

Nonetheless, even 500 microcuries of I-131 on a corn cob, apple core, toothbrush, 

and/or kleenex, generated by a radiotherapy patient poses negligible 

theoretical risk to the waste collector or landfill employees, and will decay to 500 

femtocuries in about eight months.



I challenge someone (no reward) to provide an example of a routinely-used, 

remote (i.e., while the waste is still in the truck) detection system that would 

detect a hazardous waste entering these same facilities with a comparable or 

lower overall risk.



Barbara



In a message dated 7/6/2003 8:25:03 PM Pacific Standard Time, BLHamrick 

writes:



> I disagree with this, based on the fact that first order control (i.e., 

> licensure for manufacture and distribution), and ultimate detection of 

> radioactive materials is so much more effective than for nonradiological hazards.

> 

> In California (and many other states) many landfills, scrapyards, medical 

> waste processors, and waste transfer stations have installed radiation 

> monitors, which can detect microcurie (or less) quantities of medical isotopes.  On 

> the other hand, for the control of nonradiological hazards, these facilities 

> rely primarily on visual identification of labeled containers, or other visual 

> clues, rather than any sophisticated detection system.  Thus, radioactive 

> materials, in these venues are controlled far more stringently, not because 

> they pose a greater hazard, but because they are so much easier to identify.

>