RE: Well logging/Tracer Operations

[jatalbq@ix.netcom.com (Joseph A Tompkins )]

Actually what happens is that some well meaning soul tries to retreive 
the source, which has a great deal of potential for release since we 
are talking about very crude methods of extraction.  The release occurs 
if the bullplug and sealed source are violated by the extraction tool.  
The result is contaminated drilling mud which is spread around the 
drill site.  What follows after that is extensive litigation over who 
is going to pay for the cleanup!

You wrote: 
>
>
>Good summary, Wes.  Our e-mail has been down since August 29 until 
today, and I've not received RADSAFE for that period of time.  So, I 
did not see the original post, I think.  About the only  thing you did 
not cover is what happens when sealed sources get stuck downhole and 
can't be retrieved.  This is probably the forerunner of the WIPP 
facility in the case of Pu-Be and Am-Be sources, and it certainly is a 
form of LLW disposal we don't talk about in polite society.  <GRIN>
>
>Not trying to open a can of worms, but whatcha' think?
>
>CULater......
>
>Bill Spell
>bills@deq.state.la.us
> ----------
>From: radsafe
>To: Multiple recipients of list
>Subject: RE: Well logging/Tracer Operations
>Date: Thursday, September 05, 1996 8:00AM
>
>Actual logging is done with sealed sources (Cs-137 for gamma logs, Am-
>241(Be) for neutron logs).  However, they also use various isotopes
>for tracer operations to determine oil field flow characteristics.  I-
>131 is a very commonly used tracer isotope.  You can put it down this
>hole, and monitor another hole to see how the oil moves.
>
>If you have poor flow, you can do a "fracture" job, whereby you push
>a lot of Ir-192 tagged sand into the zone, hoping to crack it for
>better oil flow.  By monitoring the Ir-192, you can see whether it is
>working or not.
>
>If you really want to get complex, you pour different isotopes down
>different holes.  This can give you a very good diagram of the field
>characteristics.
>
>(Disclaimer: I haven't much effort in this area for some time, so my
>descriptions are necessarily general - and I can't find my best
>reference book at the moment)
>
>Wes
>
>> Date sent:      Wed, 4 Sep 96 19:08:39 -0500
>> Send reply to:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
>> From:           Slaback@micf.nist.gov
>> To:             Multiple recipients of list 
<radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
>> Subject:        RE: crosspost: OEM: Carcinoid tumour of thymus /
>radioisotope exposure
>
>> My first impression is that there is a major
>> misunderstanding by this individual.  These
>> sources are usually sealed sources so the description
>> of 'spilling on clothing...' etc would seem
>> erroneous.
>>
>> Is anyone aware of unsealed usage of these long-
>> lived radionuclides in well logging?
>> I believe some (tritium?) have been used in
>> injection/dilution studies.  Would appreciate
>> comments from well logging experts.
>>
>> A little risk adds spice to life.
>> slaback@MICF.NIST.gov
>>
>*********************************************************************
>Wesley M. Dunn, CHP                        512-834-6688
>Deputy Director, Licensing                 512-834-6690 (fax)
>(Texas) Bureau of Radiation Control        wdunn@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us
>*********************************************************************
>