[ RadSafe ] Michael Kent on coal fumes vs. uranium inhalation poisoning

[James Salsman]

Michael Kent asks:

>... I suggest you go after the power plants which burn coal first. 
> The population as a whole receives a heck of a lot more uranium
> from these gems, then lets say, depleted uranium shells used in
> a  specific theater half a world away.

On the contrary, the entire population of male GWI veterans --
many hundreds of thousands of people -- are already experiencing
more than a 50% increase in birth defects, increasing with time.

> ... And their is a lot of medical research that DEFINITIVELY
> proves this!

Clusters of congenital malformations due to coal plant emissions
are so minor that I can't find any record of them -- this is the
closest mention I can find:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=11359199

 >>       UO2 + 2 NO + 2 O2 --> UO2(NO3)2
 >>
 >>       UO2 + 2 NO2 + O2 --> UO2(NO3)2
 >>
 >>       2 UO3 + 4 NO + 2 O2 --> 2 UO2(NO3)2

Since uranium munitions burn at temperatures well in excess of 1100
degrees Celsius, this simpler reaction is perhaps more likely:

      U + 4 O2 + N2 --> UO2(NO3)2

Sincerely,
James Salsman