Radioactive Carcasses, The Results

[John Livingston <jlivgstn@execpc.com>]

Dear Radsafer's,

My sincerest thanks to all of you who contributed to my education on this
subject.  It has been fun.  If anyone cares to correct my assumption on
these issues or twist resolution of this problem into a new direction,
please do not hesitate to comment.

For those who missed the earlier installments on this topic, this is about
my research of the feasibility of physically reducing the volume of
radioactive carcasses and the costs for disposing of same.  The following is
a brief synopsis of what I have learned.

Yes, carcass disposal is a costly problem for many research facilities.
Depending on the nature of the organization, the magnitude of the disposal
issues faced by an RSO ranges from manageable to unbelievable.  Almost
everyone uses refrigeration or incineration to resolve their carcass
problem.  Virtually all complained about the cost and bother of
refrigeration and incineration with its high maintenance, utility expense
and attendant emotional sensationalism. 

In talking with people around the country, it became clear that the
complexities of disposal bear heavily on the kinds of research that can be
done.  The implication of this is that these complications mute the creative
instincts of some researchers while stimulating others to find answers that
involve less pollution.  Obviously, adding complexity to research that is
tough enough already is unfortunate but necessary in todays abused
environment.  Believing it a worthy challenge to remove as many constraints
against learning how things work as possible, I tried to discover a
manufacturable, safe, clean and creative solution for reducing the cost of
carcass disposal.

I figured that the best way to find out what to do with radio active
carcasses was to ask the people who know most about the problem.  Many of
you responded with what you knew of chemical digestion processes that have
been tried in the past.  Some of these processes were very simple, requiring
only easy to get equipment. Most required the addition of heat and a
chemical(s) that on the best of days would be considered nasty.  All were
interesting to hear about but none sounded safe enough for anyone I care
about to be around.

If you are interested, a commercially available system is reputed to exist,
although I have yet to receive any of the promised literature from the
inventors.  Doctors Gordon Kaye (518-262-5380) and Peter Weber
(518-262-5370), of the Albany Medical College have built a device that is
supposed to be available in a variety of sizes to accommodate anything from
a rabbit to a cow.  The machine is semi automated, and uses chemicals that
to my uneducated eye (goggles required) sound nasty.  The output from this
device is intended to be sewerable and leaves nothing behind but an unseemly
ring around the tub!  I understand that the price of the device is in the
$100K+ area.  I'm sure they would welcome your call with any questions you
may have.

Not content with these solutions (pun) I looked into vacuum drying; not
freeze drying carcasses with the thought that the animals would be greatly
reduced in volume if treated this way.  By comparison, the freeze drying
process is very slow and results in a carcass that accurately retains its
shape, size and color.  The Smithsonian among other museums, uses freeze
drying on everything from alligators to bugs for this reason.  Like freeze
dried product, a mummified vacuum dried carcass would require no follow up
refrigeration, require no absorbent or gas space for shipment and with
compaction, a lot of critters could be shipped to Barnwell or wherever in
the same container.  

The process would work like this:  The researcher would freeze the specimen
and once solid, quarter it with a butchers saw if it weighs more than a few
pounds.  The sections would be put in disposable plastic containers, like
the things they serve airline food in. The unthawed (that's how they say it
around here!) trayed, carcass sections would then be put into the vacuum
chamber where they would be allowed to boil free of water.  This water would
be trapped, filtered and theoretically, poured down the drain.  The filter
would be put with the dehydrated carcass which when dry, will be much
smaller and lighter than it was.  

At minimum, a vacuum drying chamber like this would have to be equipped with
traps, filters, a vacuum pump, and monitoring equipment to assure that no
radioactive material was allowed to leave the device.  A completed drying
cycle could be determined by weighing the sample throughout the process.
Sounds simple and almost affordable!

However...I have been told by more than one researcher that volatiles with
lower vapor pressure than water may also leave the carcass.  It is suggested
that these complex molecules could drag an isotope or two along with them.
I don't know how significant this would be in the long run, but it sounds
like a condition that should be guarded against.

The long and short of it is this...I think that the vacuum drying approach
makes more sense than chemical digestion, incineration, refrigeration or
long term storage in bulky containers.  Would that be your opinion too?

I also think that the machine is going to be too expensive for cash crunched
universities and many research institutions to afford...probably in the
$20K-40K area.  Do you think this affordability range is out of sight?

What do you think the regulators would make of such a device?

Do you think we should put time and money into developing a device like this?


Best wishes to all...
Sincerely,
John Livingston
S&G Enterprises, Incorporated
N177 W19000 Edison Drive
Germantown, Wisconsin  53022
Phone: 414-251-8300
Fax: 414-251-1616
http:/www.execpc.com/jlivgstn/index.html
jlivgstn@execpc.com