Re: rad outreach programs

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Ron Kathren wrote:

<snip>

> Re the Mt. St. Helens eruption:  National Geographic notwithstanding, the 
> radioactivity concentration in the the Mt. St. Helens ash was about the 
> same as in soil in the surrounding countryside.  There was much confusion 
> and some erroneous (in some cases deliberate) statements by scientists.  
> Suggest you look up the article by Soldat et al. in Science about 1982.
> 
> Ron Kathren
> 
> On Tue, 4 Oct 1994, Free Spirit wrote:

<snip> 

> >       You might try telling them about current unusual sources of
radiation. > > 

> >       1/ Mt St Helens emitted something like 1000 times the radiation of
> >          three mile island. I seem to remember an issue of National
> >          Geographics that mentioned that.
> > 

It doesn't seem relevant that the ash=soil if the issue is releases.
Conversely, 
since the ash=soil, then we can assume that the radium/radon/progeny that 
would have been born and died below about 18 inches of the soil/rock surface 
 was ALL discharged into the atmosphere! (and then the raw ash dispersed 

on the ground). This is a LARGE net discharge to the biosphere above routine 
 background discharge rates (only 1000 times the TMI releases?) 


What then collected on the ground covered what was below, so the top 18
inches 
was then still the source of radon/progeny releases to the atmosphere. Was
the 
release of radium/radon/progeny by this material any greater or lesser than
the covered soils, especially with subsequent rain and weathering before
plant life 
returned? Does any one have any data? 

Is there 50,000 Ci of radon/progeny in a cubic mile? How many cubic miles?

Thanks.

Regards, Jim Muckerheide 



concentrations,