Re: See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does not bother the French anymore, it is normal.
Jim Yanik
news:guh9749pra3u1001e...@4ax.com:
> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 13:53:31 GMT, in sci.electronics.design Jan
> Panteltje <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0700) it happened John
>>Larkin <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
>><toe974hee2tmhd2ct...@4ax.com>:
>>
>>>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:55:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>><pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does
>>>>not bother the French anymore, it is normal.
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/a,p/20080708/ap_on_re_eu/france_nuclear_leak
>>>>It is 'only' 30000 liters of non enriched (oh well :-) ) uranium.
>>>>So if you plan a holiday to Avignon or plan to eat something
>>>>produced there for the next 1000 years, dont.
>>>>
>>>
>>>It was "Liquid containing traces of unenriched uranium" and "some of
>>>the solution ran into two rivers." What constitutes "traces"?
>>>
>>>Doesn't sound like armageddon to me. I doubt it will statistically
>>>produce one milli-cancer. Natural radiation is everywhere.
>>>
>>>Coal mines kill people, and burning coal releases radiation into the
>>>air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is
>>>dangerous.
>>>
>>>John
>>
>>Well, it is also here::
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
>> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
>>for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there,
>>and it will radiate for millions of year.
at what LEVEL of radioactivity? compared to what background level??
it's most likely that the radiation level is negligible.
"OOOHHH,OOOHHH,RADIATION!!!! OOOHHH,OOOOHH. We're all gonna die,or get
cancer,OOOHHH,OOOOHHH."
I suspect some basements have more REAL radiation hazard from radon gas
leaking from the ground,than this spill.
>
>
>
>>The river will take it to the north-sea, where my herrings come from,
> Not for long!
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/08/fishing.climatechan
> ge
>
>>the plants will absorb it and it will end up in the grapes and the
>>French wines, basically why very old wines are better ;-)
>>
>
>
>
> martin
>
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
Jan Panteltje
<jya...@abuse.gov> wrote in <Xns9AD67B9DB77...@64.209.0.85>:
>>>Well, it is also here::
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
>>> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
>>>for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there,
>>>and it will radiate for millions of year.
>
>at what LEVEL of radioactivity? compared to what background level??
>it's most likely that the radiation level is negligible.
If you had cared to read the links, or the nws even, you would know it
started at 1000 times, and now is at 100 times.
>"OOOHHH,OOOHHH,RADIATION!!!! OOOHHH,OOOOHH. We're all gonna die,or get
>cancer,OOOHHH,OOOOHHH."
Everybody is going to die one way or the other,
>I suspect some basements have more REAL radiation hazard from radon gas
>leaking from the ground,than this spill.
Sure, some die from maybe their basement's radiation ;-)
Joel Koltner
news:toe974hee2tmhd2ct...@4ax.com...
> Coal mines kill people, and burning coal releases radiation into the
> air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is dangerous.
I was surprised to learn that it's estimated the Chernobyl disaster killed (or
will kill) about 10,000 people. That's horrible, of course, but low compared
to other "technology-related deaths" -- four times that many people die yearly
on U.S. highways, many, many times have died from dam breaches, the Bopal,
India disaster, etc.
Jan Panteltje
<zapwireD...@yahoo.com> wrote in
<VK5dk.234705$6i4....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com>:
And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
Jeff Liebermann
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does not bother the French anymore,
>it is normal.
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/a,p/20080708/ap_on_re_eu/france_nuclear_leak
>It is 'only' 30000 liters of non enriched (oh well :-) ) uranium.
>So if you plan a holiday to Avignon or plan to eat something produced there for the next 1000 years,
>dont.
Well, let's play with the numbers.
The current uranium leakage stands at 74kg of natural uranium. That
will certainly change as political pressure is applied. Natural
uranium (0.72%) runs about 1500 kg per curie. It belches mostly alpha
particles, which have miserable penetration properties. You have to
ingest natural uranium before it will do any (theoretical) harm. It's
the isotopes of common biological elements that really do the damage.
<http://physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm>
So, the 74kg leaked will produce 0.05 curies of radiation or 5*10^10
pico curies, which is not a very large amount.
By comparison, the common brick contains about 1*10^5 pico curies/kg.
Each brick weights about 2.7kg or 3.7*10^4 pico curies per brick. So,
if you worked in a building made from 1.35 million such bricks, you
would get exactly the same radiation exposure as if the building were
made with the 74kg of leaked natural uranium. Assuming the building
were a 4 sided cube, at 60 bricks per square meter, that would be 75
meters per side, which is not unusually large:
<http://diydata.com/general_building/brick_calculator/brick_calculator.php>
I would need to know the volume through which the uranium is dispersed
in order to estimate the exposure.
Radiation exposure by source (for US):
<http://physics.isu.edu/radinf/popdose.htm>
54% from radon gas. Avoid basements.
(Someone please check my numbers as I was interrupted about a dozen
times while writing this mess).
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Jan Panteltje
John Larkin
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
><toe974hee2tmhd2ct...@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:55:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>><pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>It was "Liquid containing traces of unenriched uranium" and "some of
>>the solution ran into two rivers." What constitutes "traces"?
>>
>>Doesn't sound like armageddon to me. I doubt it will statistically
>>produce one milli-cancer. Natural radiation is everywhere.
>>
>>Coal mines kill people, and burning coal releases radiation into the
>>air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is dangerous.
>>
>>John
>
>Well, it is also here::
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
>for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there,
>and it will radiate for millions of year.
>The river will take it to the north-sea, where my herrings come from,
>the plants will absorb it and it will end up in the grapes and the French wines,
>basically why very old wines are better ;-)
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Occurrence
"An additional 4.6 billion tonnes of uranium are estimated to be in
sea water (Japanese scientists in the 1980s showed that extraction of
uranium from sea water using ion exchangers was feasible).[37][38]"
So relax.
John
John Larkin
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
It was "Liquid containing traces of unenriched uranium" and "some of
Jan Panteltje
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
<toe974hee2tmhd2ct...@4ax.com>:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:55:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje
Well, it is also here::
Martin Griffith
Panteltje <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Not for long!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/08/fishing.climatechange
>the plants will absorb it and it will end up in the grapes and the French wines,
>basically why very old wines are better ;-)
>
martin
John Larkin
Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
John
John Larkin
wrote:
I had a friend who lived in Opelousas, Louisiana, and he had a geiger
counter. So we walked around town looking for radiation. The local
post office, red bricks, was very hot.
Jan seems to have radiation phobia. Lots of people do.
John
Jan Panteltje
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
<0no974lufktli9v8v...@4ax.com>:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Occurrence
>
>"An additional 4.6 billion tonnes of uranium are estimated to be in
>sea water (Japanese scientists in the 1980s showed that extraction of
>uranium from sea water using ion exchangers was feasible).[37][38]"
>
>So relax.
OK, I will just refrain from eating herrings and drinking wine :-)
Jan Panteltje
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
<rh1a741e2r893ft3n...@4ax.com>:
>>And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
>
>Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
>than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
>
>John
A depleted uranium bullet kills just like a lead one.
It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
Joerg
Same for the huge natural rocks many houses in Scotland are built with.
Geiger counters begin to really rattle in those. I lived in one for a
while. Oh, oh ...
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.
Jan Panteltje
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
<cn1a749jsmookdo6b...@4ax.com>:
>I had a friend who lived in Opelousas, Louisiana, and he had a geiger
>counter. So we walked around town looking for radiation. The local
>post office, red bricks, was very hot.
>
>Jan seems to have radiation phobia. Lots of people do.
>
>John
Well, I worked in a big linear accelerator project.
Some radioactve material was used.
Shortly after I left, the place turned out to be completely contaminated,
the doorman's cat hat misformed kittens, etc..
Did not surprise me in the least, the way they managed the stuff.
Now it may be nothing to you, but if you had a kid born with some
strange birth defect you would likely reconsider.
You'd be dead scared if you heard the stories I did hear when I worked there,
how the stuff was handled, and I have first hand experience too.
Ignorance, and over estmating the way scientists take their responsibilities is
a dangerous thing in the real world.
It has been for radioactive material ever since that big US project in WW2.
John Larkin
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:42:44 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
><rh1a741e2r893ft3n...@4ax.com>:
>
>>>And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
>>
>>Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
>>than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
>>
>>John
>
>A depleted uranium bullet kills just like a lead one.
No, much better against hard targets.
>It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>
"U"? Does that mean me?
John
Michael A. Terrell
The only joke is the spineless countries and individuals without
enough gut to wipe out all terrorists.
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.
John Fields
---
And, umm, much less concentrated.
JF
John Fields
---
An ounce of prevention...
JF
Jeff Liebermann
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>I had a friend who lived in Opelousas, Louisiana, and he had a geiger
>counter. So we walked around town looking for radiation. The local
>post office, red bricks, was very hot.
>
>Jan seems to have radiation phobia. Lots of people do.
>
>John
In 2002, I had the body mechanics do a triple bypass on my inside
plumbing. After I recovered, the cardiologist decided to run a
"Thallium Stress Test" (which was actually done with technetium). They
injected me with radioactive whatever, ran the tests, and warned me
not be too intimate for about 12 hours.
I had my Korean War era Geiger counter with me, but didn't have the
guts to take it into the hospital. I've created havoc with it (such
as in a supermarket after Chernobyl) in the past and didn't want to
deal with the inevitable hassles. So, I get out to the car, turn it
on, and find that it's pegged on the highest scale. Nifty.
Some of my customer are conveniently located near the hospital.
Technicium 99 has a half life of 6 hours. If I was going to terrorize
my friends and customers, I would have to move fast. It was lots of
fun, but I also learned a few odd things about people and
radioactivity.
When I fired up the Geiger counter, many members of the younger
generations didn't have a clue what the clicking meant. Few had even
seen a Geiger counter. Apparently, they don't teach radioactivity in
the skools any more. Most of them asked "what's that noise"? Duh.
However, anyone over about 50 knew exactly what the high rate clicking
meant and usually jumped back several feet in horror. One older
gentleman nearly fell over backwards in his chair because he couldn't
get out of the way fast enough. The baby boomers all had some
experience with radiation in the skools during the early daze of the
cold war. The younger generations have not.
Incidentally, before terrorizing my friends and customers, I did a
rough calculation of the exposure and found that I had received a dose
of roughly a months worth of allegedly safe radiation exposure (500
milli-rems). No way is a few minutes of that going to adversly affect
anyone. (5,000 milli-rems/year is considered safe).
I also had a substantial number of people ask me "Why do you have a
Geiger counter". I didn't catch the significance of the question
until somewhat later, when I realized that they suspected that I was
conducting dangerous radioactive experiments at home.
One problem with radioactivity is that the units of measure are
generally confusing to the GUM (great unwashed masses). I had no idea
if 74Kg of natural uranium was trivial or devastating until AFTER I
ran the calculations and comparisons. Most fail to distinguish
between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation. I get that all the time
in the wireless and wi-fi newsgroups. I suspect the media has a
similar problem.
Ominous looking sign on my wall:
"Danger 1,000,0000 ohms"
with a 1M resistor taped to the sign.
Light reading:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hahn>
The book is well worth reading, even though it's full of intentional
inaccuracies and omissions intended to prevent other aspiring Scouts
from trying to duplicate the same experiments.
<http://pubs.acs.org/cen/books/8232/8232books.html>
John Larkin
Do you really *like* herrings?
John
John Larkin
Stay out of old destroyed tanks and you'll be fine. Stay away from
bricks and old colored ceramics, too. And don't cook with sea salt.
John
Jeff Liebermann
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>Do you really *like* herrings?
>John
You'll probably like it even less after you find out that it's
sometimes *RAW* herring. Think of it as Dutch sushi. I grew up on
the stuff so it's no big deal. The pickeling, raw onions, and sour
cream kinda kill the fishy taste:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herring>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soused_herring>
Looking in the fridge, I have several plastic tubs of Lascco "Sour
Cream Herring Fillet". (Los Angeles Smoking & Curing Company).
<http://www.oceanbeauty.com/Brands/lascco.htm>
(On the right under Herring Salads). Hmmm... radioactivity isn't
listed under the nutritional info. If you don't like the herring, the
plastic tubs are resealable and can be used to store hardware and
components.
Jim Thompson
On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:41:39 -0700, John Larkin
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
Herring in sour cream! Yummy!!
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
Liberalism is a persistent vegetative state
Due to excessive spam, gmail, googlegroups, UAR, and AIOE blocked!
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
Topsoil contains several tonnes per sq km of undepleted Uranium
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
Jeff Liebermann
There's plenty more that's hot:
<http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/consumer%20products/consumer.htm>
Most of these can only barely be detected with a common Geiger
counter. You'll need a scintillation counter, which is more
sensitive.
Joerg
It is absolutely excellent, for example with the Northern German dish of
Labskaus. Of course you have to overcome the optical illusion. It looks
as if someone just had an upchuck situation:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labskaus
We do that about once a month or so. Herring out here ain't the same as
where Jan lives but it's ok. The way it's pickled in Europe the FDA guys
would come waltzing in immediately.
Michael A. Terrell
John Fields wrote:
>
> An ounce of prevention...
>
> JF
Would have prevented Sloman?
Jonathan Kirwan
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>
>"U"? Does that mean me?
I thought he was referring to the use of DU ammo. See: "Depleted
Uranium Weapons and International Law: A Precautionary Approach,"
edited by Avril McDonald, Jann K. Kleffner and Brigit C. A. Toebes.
That is a 2008 book providing an in-depth analysis of international
legal aspects on using DU ammo. Also in August 2002, there was also
a report out by the UN subcommission identifying laws breached by the
use of DU shells. If you want, I suppose I could track down a copy
for you to read up on.
While the Pentagon has admitted that 320 metric tons of DU were left
on the battlefield after the first Gulf war, Russian military experts
argued 1000 metric tons as a more accurate figure. Each may be biased
in their assessments, of course, so perhaps somewhere between those
two figures would be a safer bet.
Also in 1991, almost a million DU rounds were fired in Iraq, close to
a net of 2700 tons of DU, I believe. The UK Atomic Energy Authority
reported out an estimate back then that some half-million additional
deaths would occur by 2000, due to radioactive debris left in the
desert. No idea if any of that was confirmed or just someone making
guesses. But it was the UK AEA making the statement, so you have to
assume that at least _some_ informed thought went into the statement,
even if it was no more than an educated guess. Suggests more than 1
death, anyway.
Jon
John Larkin
Lead bullets would have left more dangerous debris.
http://www.janes.com/defence/news/jdw/dutoxic010112_1_n.shtml
John
Joerg
And don't visit Scotland. Or most other countries for that matter. Even
better, buy one of those sea islands in Dubai, should be very save. But
as you said, don't go swimming. Of course that only works if none of the
dudes in other countries go berserk and push the button.
Jonathan Kirwan
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
I can't debate the science. I don't have a comprehensive view and it
takes one to have an informed opinion.
Just wanted to point out what I suspected Jan meant with the term 'U
war crimes.' Apparently, there are some strictures in law in place
already. Perhaps there should be for lead bullets, too. ;)
Jon
Jeff Liebermann
<dirk....@gmail.com> wrote:
>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>> See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does not bother the French anymore,
>> it is normal.
>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/a,p/20080708/ap_on_re_eu/france_nuclear_leak
>> It is 'only' 30000 liters of non enriched (oh well :-) ) uranium.
>> So if you plan a holiday to Avignon or plan to eat something produced there for the next 1000 years,
>> dont.
>Topsoil contains several tonnes per sq km of undepleted Uranium
[Q] How much dirt is in a square kilometer?
[A] None. A square km is infinitely thin.
Plagerizing:
<http://physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm>
Natural Radioactivity in soil
How much natural radioactivity is found in a volume of soil that is 1
square mile, by 1 foot deep? The following table is calculated for
this volume (total volume is 7.894 x 105 m3) and the listed
activities. It should be noted that activity levels vary greatly
depending on soil type, mineral make-up and density (~1.58 g/cm3 used
in this calculation). This table represents calculations using typical
numbers.
| Natural Radioactivity by the Square Mile, 1 Foot Deep
| Uranium 0.7 pCi/g ( 25 Bq/kg) 2,200 kg 0.8 curies (31 GBq)
| Thorium 1.1 pCi/g ( 40 Bq/kg) 12,000 kg 1.4 curies (52 GBq)
| Potassium 40 11. pCi/g (400 Bq/kg) 2000 kg 13. curies (500 GBq)
| Radium 1.3 pCi/g ( 48 Bq/kg) 1.7 g 1.7 curies (63 GBq)
| Radon 0.17 pCi/g ( 10 kBq/m3) 11 痢 0.2 curies (7.4 GBq)
| Total: >17 curies (>653 GBq)
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558 je...@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS
bill....@ieee.org
wrote:
> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>
> > On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:42:44 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> > <rh1a741e2r893ft3n3q4aljvoejlu3m...@4ax.com>:
>
> > >>And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
>
> > >Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
> > >than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
>
> > >John
>
> > A depleted uranium bullet kills just like a lead one.
> > It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>
> The only joke is the spineless countries and individuals without
> enough gut to wipe out all terrorists.
There is a joke to made about irrational countries without enough
brains to wipe the terrorists it knows about.
When Dubbya took his attention away from Osama ben Laden and Al Qaeda
in Afghanistan - who were a threat - to invade Irak (which wasn't, as
everybody except Dubbya and his crew knew at the time) he was
definitely taking his eye off the ball. Al Gore has spelled it out in
his fine diatribe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assault_on_Reason
but he's the last man to make a joke out of it.
There has to be something irresistably comic about an intelligent man
diverting the resources of the most powerful country in world to the
humilation of a tin-pot dictator of a tin-pot republic in the Middle
East for no better reason than a visceral dislike, but the incidental
- pointless - deaths of a few hundred thousand bit players and spear
carriers makes it difficult to produce a really rib-tickling punch
line.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
bill....@ieee.org
wrote:
> John Larkin wrote:
> > On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 14:29:01 -0500, John Fields
> > <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:42:44 -0700, John Larkin
> >> <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:54:14 GMT, Jan Panteltje
> >>> <pNaonStpealm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >>>> On a sunny day (Wed, 9 Jul 2008 09:32:52 -0700) it happened "Joel Koltner"
> >>>> <VK5dk.234705$6i4.96...@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com>:
>
> >>>>> "John Larkin" <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:toe974hee2tmhd2ct...@4ax.com...
> >>>>>> Coal mines kill people, and burning coal releases radiation into the
> >>>>>> air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is dangerous.
> >>>>> I was surprised to learn that it's estimated the Chernobyl disaster killed (or
> >>>>> will kill) about 10,000 people. That's horrible, of course, but low compared
> >>>>> to other "technology-related deaths" -- four times that many people die yearly
> >>>>> on U.S. highways, many, many times have died from dam breaches, the Bopal,
> >>>>> India disaster, etc.
> >>>> And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
> >>> Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
> >>> than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
> >> ---
> >> And, umm, much less concentrated.
>
> > Stay out of old destroyed tanks and you'll be fine. Stay away from
> > bricks and old colored ceramics, too. And don't cook with sea salt.
>
> And don't visit Scotland.
<snip>
Scotland is mostly built on granite, so radon in the basement is a
real health risk, if you live long enough.
The Scots, being rational people, have acted to minimise their
exposure by adopting a life style that minimises their chances of
dying of radiation-induced cancers - they don't eat green vegetables
and they do eat lots of saturated fats, while smoking and drinking to
excess, which all tend to kill them off before the radon can get them.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4156/is_20080413/ai_n25348470
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Jim Thompson
My principal lineage is MacTavish ;-)
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
It's what you learn, after you know it all, that counts.
Jim Thompson
Except it's just come to light that a substantial nuclear "stash" from
Iraq was quietly moved to Canada last week, for disposal.
John Larkin
Jonathan Kirwan
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
I'm not one to ask about nuances, so I'll repeat myself. See:
"Depleted Uranium Weapons and International Law: A Precautionary
Approach," edited by Avril McDonald, Jann K. Kleffner and Brigit C. A.
Toebes, June 2008. It has an in-depth analysis of international legal
aspects on using DU ammo. I also mentioned that in August 2002,
there was also a report out by the UN subcommission identifying laws
breached by the use of DU shells. If interested, google it? I'm not,
because it is already enough to tell me that the subject has some
content to discuss for those interested in digging deeper.
Jon
krw
Use-The-En...@My-Web-Site.com says...
But Jim, *that* nuclear material was old (pre-GW1) stuff. It wasn't
nearly as dangerous in Saddam's hands as *new* WMDs that "weren't
found".
--
Keith
Tim Williams
news:t86a74p4v3eosel1u...@4ax.com...
> There's plenty more that's hot:
On a web page I have pictures of molten potassium chloride, which has a high
vapor pressure -- in other words, I'm breathing some KCl aerosol in the
room. I joke that "I'm a little more radioactive for it" (since K40 is a
small part of natural potassium).
Tim
--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
Jeff Liebermann
<tmor...@charter.net> wrote:
>"Jeff Liebermann" <je...@cruzio.com> wrote in message
>news:t86a74p4v3eosel1u...@4ax.com...
>> There's plenty more that's hot:
>
>On a web page I have pictures of molten potassium chloride, which has a high
>vapor pressure -- in other words, I'm breathing some KCl aerosol in the
>room. I joke that "I'm a little more radioactive for it" (since K40 is a
>small part of natural potassium).
Just drink some milk. That's about 2000 pico Curies per liter.
Here's a spreadsheet with foods that contain Potassium 40.
<http://www.ciwmb.ca.gov/part2000/events/06Conf/Presentation/Day2/Radioactive/Greger/K40Food.pdf>
Yummmm.... The good news is that the body does a good job of keeping
total potassium levels fairly constant. Therefore, overdosing on
potassium rich foods, that happen to have some small percentage of
radioactive K-40, isn't going to increase the overall radioactive
exposure.
Also, next time you're at the farm supply store, the high potassium
fertilizer is probably fairly radioactive.
Jan Panteltje
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
<r15a741jglv8vukrb...@4ax.com>:
>>>So relax.
>>
>>OK, I will just refrain from eating herrings and drinking wine :-)
>
>Do you really *like* herrings?
>
>John
Oh yes.
Jan Panteltje
<To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
<t2qa74lus9nedfj71...@4ax.com>:
>Except it's just come to light that a substantial nuclear "stash" from
>Iraq was quietly moved to Canada last week, for disposal.
>
> ...Jim Thompson
I think it was for processing and then export to the US.
Jan Panteltje
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
<824a74dp7t0bh4dbb...@4ax.com>:
>>A depleted uranium bullet kills just like a lead one.
>
>No, much better against hard targets.
>
>
>>It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>>
>
>"U"? Does that mean me?
>
>John
No John, not intended to offend you, 'U' was supposed to be 'US'.
Difficult typing on a small eeepc keyboard in the middle of wherever....
John Larkin
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:24:46 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
><824a74dp7t0bh4dbb...@4ax.com>:
>
>>>A depleted uranium bullet kills just like a lead one.
>>
>>No, much better against hard targets.
>>
>>
>>>It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>>>
>>
>>"U"? Does that mean me?
>>
>>John
>
>No John, not intended to offend you, 'U' was supposed to be 'US'.
That's equally offensive.
John
Richard Henry
> "Jeff Liebermann" <je...@cruzio.com> wrote in message
>
> news:t86a74p4v3eosel1u...@4ax.com...
>
> > There's plenty more that's hot:
>
> On a web page I have pictures of molten potassium chloride, which has a high
> vapor pressure -- in other words, I'm breathing some KCl aerosol in the
> room. I joke that "I'm a little more radioactive for it" (since K40 is a
> small part of natural potassium).
Or just eat a banana.
Jim Thompson
Jan IS offensive. That's why I've kill-filed him.
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian
> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 13:53:31 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0700) it happened John Larkin
>>>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:55:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>>>
>>>>See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does not
>>>>bother the French anymore, it is normal.
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/a,p/20080708/ap_on_re_eu/france_nuclear_leak
>>>>It is 'only' 30000 liters of non enriched (oh well :-) ) uranium. So
>>>>if you plan a holiday to Avignon or plan to eat something produced
>>>>there for the next 1000 years, dont.
>>>>
>>>solution ran into two rivers." What constitutes "traces"?
>>>
>>>Doesn't sound like armageddon to me. I doubt it will statistically
>>>produce one milli-cancer. Natural radiation is everywhere.
>>>
>>>Coal mines kill people, and burning coal releases radiation into the
>>>air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is dangerous.
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
>> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
>>for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there, and it will radiate
>>for millions of year. The river will take it to the north-sea, where my
>>herrings come from, the plants will absorb it and it will end up in the
>>grapes and the French wines, basically why very old wines are better ;-)
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Occurrence
>
> "An additional 4.6 billion tonnes of uranium are estimated to be in sea
> water (Japanese scientists in the 1980s showed that extraction of uranium
> from sea water using ion exchangers was feasible).[37][38]"
>
> So relax.
And besides, if something does "radiate for millions of year[SIC]", it
can't be "radiating" very damn much!
Hell, if it was, why not just capture that free energy forever?
Cheers!
Rich
Rich Grise
> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 18:49:17 GMT, Jan Panteltje
> <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:15:05 -0700) it happened John Larkin
>><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
>><0no974lufktli9v8v...@4ax.com>:
>>
>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Occurrence
>>>
>>>"An additional 4.6 billion tonnes of uranium are estimated to be in sea
>>>water (Japanese scientists in the 1980s showed that extraction of
>>>uranium from sea water using ion exchangers was feasible).[37][38]"
>>>
>>>So relax.
>>
>>OK, I will just refrain from eating herrings and drinking wine :-)
>
> Do you really *like* herrings?
>
Somebody talked me into eating some pickled herring once - I was afraid
it would be like sweet gherkins (which I can't stand), but it was "pickled"
in brine.
It was delicious, and had a really meaty mouthfeel. I liked it. :-)
And small herring are sometimes packaged as sardines, which I also like
with cheese and crackers or pretzels. Yum!
Cheers!
Rich
Rich Grise
> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:08:45 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
>
>
> [Q] How much dirt is in a square kilometer? [A] None. A square km is
> infinitely thin.
No, he said "topsoil", which can be anywhere from 2 to 24 or more inches
thick. ;-)
Here's just one example:
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/bio99/bio99881.htm
Cheers!
Rich
Jan Panteltje
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
<7tbc74p3k80obreof...@4ax.com>:
>>>"U"? Does that mean me?
>>>
>>>John
>>
>>No John, not intended to offend you, 'U' was supposed to be 'US'.
>
>That's equally offensive.
>
>John
'US' as in 'United States'.
If that still offends you, then perhaps you were brought up saluting a flag,
I dunno.
But in my view bombing innocent civilians ( I am sure many did not even
know where US was, vote for Saddam, or even have political interests),
killing those people, and destroying a whole country, just so the price of
oil stays high, and the multinationals can now grab it, IS a war crime.
However the right of the strongest applies, the native Americans were
genosided (word??) away too.
The winner writes history, self justification, the winner is right, and says so,
by default.
Joerg
Only if you've got the clan colors and kilt at home and wear the kilt on
proper occasions. Oh, and consume haggis on a regular basis.
Jan Panteltje
<To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
<0mec749jorodr7c2p...@4ax.com>:
>>>>>It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"U"? Does that mean me?
>>>>
>>>>John
>>>
>>>No John, not intended to offend you, 'U' was supposed to be 'US'.
>>
>>That's equally offensive.
>>
>>John
>>
>
>Jan IS offensive. That's why I've kill-filed him.
The moron will possibly one day kill file himself.
He still seems to lurk on my texts though.
Jim Thompson
On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 10:23:22 -0700, Joerg
<notthis...@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
>Jim Thompson wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> My principal lineage is MacTavish ;-)
>>
>
>Only if you've got the clan colors and kilt at home
Yes (*)
> and wear the kilt on
>proper occasions.
No ;-)
> Oh, and consume haggis on a regular basis.
I love Haggis!
(*) Two brothers MacTavish came over on the 1607 boat and settled what
is now Culpeper, VA.
Due to British anti-Scot sentiment, changed name to Thompson (which
was actually a sub-clan name).
You can view this history at a Scottish shop in Williamsburg, VA,
where we bought the kilt and matching ties 15 years ago... while
heading back from Germany going to my 35th HS reunion in WV... 50th in
August ;-)
Michael A. Terrell
Jan Panteltje wrote:
>
> However the right of the strongest applies, the native Americans were
> genosided (word??) away too.
More Eurosheep Bullshit.
--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html
If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.
Michael A. Terrell
Joerg wrote:
>
> Only if you've got the clan colors and kilt at home and wear the kilt on
> proper occasions. Oh, and consume haggis on a regular basis.
If you don't eat the haggis, it'll eat you! Kind of like in the
movie, "The Blob!" ;-)
Jim Thompson
>
>Joerg wrote:
>>
>> Only if you've got the clan colors and kilt at home and wear the kilt on
>> proper occasions. Oh, and consume haggis on a regular basis.
>
>
>
> If you don't eat the haggis, it'll eat you! Kind of like in the
>movie, "The Blob!" ;-)
It's good stuff ;-)
Jim Thompson
>
>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>
>> However the right of the strongest applies, the native Americans were
>> genosided (word??) away too.
>
>
> More Eurosheep Bullshit.
Jan Panteltje is your typical bastard-family-tree Europeon
anti-Semitic while claiming otherwise. In other words a lot like
Slowman, but even more ignorant.
I ignore him completely... please do likewise.
Martin Griffith
Thompson <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>
>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:14:10 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
snip
>I ignore him completely... please do likewise.
>
> ...Jim Thompson
In that case he must be quite sensible, rational and a very good
person to have a beer with.
I'll have a beer with any one on Jim's list, that will be a lot of
beers.... dunno about dimbulge though, there are limits (:
martin
Michael A. Terrell
Jim Thompson wrote:
>
> On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:14:10 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Jan Panteltje wrote:
> >>
> >> However the right of the strongest applies, the native Americans were
> >> genosided (word??) away too.
> >
> >
> > More Eurosheep Bullshit.
>
> Jan Panteltje is your typical bastard-family-tree Europeon
> anti-Semitic while claiming otherwise. In other words a lot like
> Slowman, but even more ignorant.
>
> I ignore him completely... please do likewise.
Actually, I'd like to see him come to Florida and tell all the tribes
they don't exist, and that they have to give up their protected land,
and government assistance, as well as all their casinos. They would
scalp him, then give him an enema. After letting what was left dry out,
they would mail what was left to his family in a standard airmail
letter, with room left for the hearts of 1000 lawyers. Florida is full
of Native Americans, and the ones I know despise today's Europeans.
Jim Thompson
I have now fixed it so you can have a beer with yourself ;-)
Martin Griffith
Thompson <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>
>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 23:43:08 +0200, Martin Griffith
><mart_in...@yah00.es> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 13:25:54 -0700, in sci.electronics.design Jim
>>Thompson <To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 15:14:10 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
>>><mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>snip
>>>I ignore him completely... please do likewise.
>>>
>>> ...Jim Thompson
>>
>>In that case he must be quite sensible, rational and a very good
>>person to have a beer with.
>>
>>I'll have a beer with any one on Jim's list, that will be a lot of
>>beers.... dunno about dimbulge though, there are limits (:
>>
>>
>>martin
>
>I have now fixed it so you can have a beer with yourself ;-)
>
> ...Jim Thompson
And who really cares about your not really important block list,
1) Jim T
2) nobody and Florida
Come on , you don't own this NG, Doctor Who and the Daleks are more
important than your block list.
Oh I forgot the :)
sorry
martin
YD
<To-Email-Use-Th...@My-Web-Site.com> penned this immortal
opus:
>
>On Wed, 9 Jul 2008 18:10:57 -0700 (PDT), bill....@ieee.org wrote:
>
>>On Jul 10, 5:26�am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
>>wrote:
>>> Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>>
>>> > On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:42:44 -0700) it happened John Larkin
>>> > <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
>>> > <rh1a741e2r893ft3n3q4aljvoejlu3m...@4ax.com>:
>>>
>>> > >>And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
>>>
>>> > >Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
>>> > >than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
>>>
>>> > >John
>>>
>>> > A depleted uranium bullet kills just like a lead one.
>>> > It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>>>
>>> � �The only joke is the spineless countries and individuals without
>>> enough gut to wipe out all terrorists.
>>
>>There is a joke to made about irrational countries without enough
>>brains to wipe the terrorists it knows about.
>>When Dubbya took his attention away from Osama ben Laden and Al Qaeda
>>in Afghanistan - who were a threat - to invade Irak (which wasn't, as
>>everybody except Dubbya and his crew knew at the time) he was
>>definitely taking his eye off the ball. Al Gore has spelled it out in
>>his fine diatribe
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assault_on_Reason
>>
>>but he's the last man to make a joke out of it.
>>
>>There has to be something irresistably comic about an intelligent man
>>diverting the resources of the most powerful country in world to the
>>humilation of a tin-pot dictator of a tin-pot republic in the Middle
>>East for no better reason than a visceral dislike, but the incidental
>>- pointless - deaths of a few hundred thousand bit players and spear
>>carriers makes it difficult to produce a really rib-tickling punch
>>line.
>
>Except it's just come to light that a substantial nuclear "stash" from
>Iraq was quietly moved to Canada last week, for disposal.
>
> ...Jim Thompson
Source? Not doubting, just curious.
- YD.
--
Remove HAT if replying by mail.
Spehro Pefhany
http://uk.reuters.com/article/burningIssues/idUKL0768496820080707
"The Tuwaitha nuclear complex was dismantled after the 1991 Gulf War.
But tonnes of nuclear material remained there under the seal of the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), until the 2003 U.S.-led
invasion of Iraq when it was left unguarded and looted by Iraqi
civilians."
Then, of course, the professional looters got around to it. ;-)
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Jim Thompson
It was covered by our leftist weenie newspaper, The Arizona Repugnant,
but buried deep in section B.
Fox News also covered it.
James Arthur
> On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:46:27 -0700) it happened John Larkin
> <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
> <cn1a749jsmookdo6b...@4ax.com>:
>
>> I had a friend who lived in Opelousas, Louisiana, and he had a geiger
>> counter. So we walked around town looking for radiation. The local
>> post office, red bricks, was very hot.
>>
>> Jan seems to have radiation phobia. Lots of people do.
>>
>> John
>
> Well, I worked in a big linear accelerator project.
> Some radioactve material was used.
> Shortly after I left, the place turned out to be completely contaminated,
> the doorman's cat hat misformed kittens, etc..
>
> Did not surprise me in the least, the way they managed the stuff.
> Now it may be nothing to you, but if you had a kid born with some
> strange birth defect you would likely reconsider.
>
> You'd be dead scared if you heard the stories I did hear when I worked there,
> how the stuff was handled, and I have first hand experience too.
>
> Ignorance, and over estmating the way scientists take their responsibilities is
> a dangerous thing in the real world.
> It has been for radioactive material ever since that big US project in WW2.
Tell that to Mdme. Curie.
Cheers,
James Arthur
James Arthur
> I had a friend who lived in Opelousas, Louisiana, and he had a geiger
> counter. So we walked around town looking for radiation. The local
> post office, red bricks, was very hot.
That's how you find radioactive contamination: easily.
It's the chemical stuff that's insidious.
James Arthur
JosephKK
>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
><toe974hee2tmhd2ct...@4ax.com>:
>
>>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 10:55:45 GMT, Jan Panteltje
>><pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>>See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does not bother the French anymore,
>>>it is normal.
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/a,p/20080708/ap_on_re_eu/france_nuclear_leak
>>>It is 'only' 30000 liters of non enriched (oh well :-) ) uranium.
>>>So if you plan a holiday to Avignon or plan to eat something produced there for the next 1000 years,
>>>dont.
>>>
>>
>>It was "Liquid containing traces of unenriched uranium" and "some of
>>the solution ran into two rivers." What constitutes "traces"?
>>
>>Doesn't sound like armageddon to me. I doubt it will statistically
>>produce one milli-cancer. Natural radiation is everywhere.
>>
>>Coal mines kill people, and burning coal releases radiation into the
>>air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is dangerous.
>>
>>John
>
>Well, it is also here::
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
>for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there,
>and it will radiate for millions of year.
>The river will take it to the north-sea, where my herrings come from,
>the plants will absorb it and it will end up in the grapes and the French wines,
>basically why very old wines are better ;-)
>
That is a lot of liters. 12 g per liter is a fairly high amount of
uranium per liter. It was spilled on the ground not directly into the
river(s). No one can calculate risk in a reasonable way without
knowing the isotope percentages, and the ground perfusion rates. Even
knowing this little i expect it to be a very local (a few square miles
/ hectares) class issue. Nearly nothing compared to Chernobyl,
perhaps comparable to other more direct spills.
Still very ugly to be honest.
JosephKK
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On a sunny day (9 Jul 2008 16:09:07 GMT) it happened Jim Yanik
><jya...@abuse.gov> wrote in <Xns9AD67B9DB77...@64.209.0.85>:
>
>>>>Well, it is also here::
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
>>>> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
>>>>for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there,
>>>>and it will radiate for millions of year.
>>
>>at what LEVEL of radioactivity? compared to what background level??
>>it's most likely that the radiation level is negligible.
>
>If you had cared to read the links, or the nws even, you would know it
>started at 1000 times, and now is at 100 times.
What isotopes are involved that have that fast of a decay rate, and
what do the decay into? And what do the emit during decay? Use a
search engine for known isotopes and decay rates.
>
>
>>"OOOHHH,OOOHHH,RADIATION!!!! OOOHHH,OOOOHH. We're all gonna die,or get
>>cancer,OOOHHH,OOOOHHH."
>
>Everybody is going to die one way or the other,
>
>
>>I suspect some basements have more REAL radiation hazard from radon gas
>>leaking from the ground,than this spill.
>
>Sure, some die from maybe their basement's radiation ;-)
JosephKK
wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:41:39 -0700, John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
>>Do you really *like* herrings?
>>John
>
>You'll probably like it even less after you find out that it's
>sometimes *RAW* herring. Think of it as Dutch sushi. I grew up on
>the stuff so it's no big deal. The pickeling, raw onions, and sour
>cream kinda kill the fishy taste:
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herring>
><http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soused_herring>
>
>Looking in the fridge, I have several plastic tubs of Lascco "Sour
>Cream Herring Fillet". (Los Angeles Smoking & Curing Company).
><http://www.oceanbeauty.com/Brands/lascco.htm>
>(On the right under Herring Salads). Hmmm... radioactivity isn't
>listed under the nutritional info. If you don't like the herring, the
>plastic tubs are resealable and can be used to store hardware and
>components.
Thirty or more years ago really liked kippered herring. Used to eat
it every chance i got. Haven't had any for over ten years. I think i
have some in my cupboards though. I still eat smoked oysters.
JosephKK
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 16:54:14 GMT, Jan Panteltje
><pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>On a sunny day (Wed, 9 Jul 2008 09:32:52 -0700) it happened "Joel Koltner"
>><zapwireD...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>><VK5dk.234705$6i4....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com>:
>>
>>>"John Larkin" <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
>>>news:toe974hee2tmhd2ct...@4ax.com...
>>>> Coal mines kill people, and burning coal releases radiation into the
>>>> air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is dangerous.
>>>
>>>I was surprised to learn that it's estimated the Chernobyl disaster killed (or
>>>will kill) about 10,000 people. That's horrible, of course, but low compared
>>>to other "technology-related deaths" -- four times that many people die yearly
>>>on U.S. highways, many, many times have died from dam breaches, the Bopal,
>>>India disaster, etc.
>>
>>And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
>
>Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
>than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
>
>John
>
>
It burns rather easily though. Part of the reasons the US military
abandoned DU in favor of hypervelocity techniques.
JosephKK
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 11:42:44 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
><rh1a741e2r893ft3n...@4ax.com>:
>
>>>And one million from among other US ammo of depleted urnium in Iraq.
>>
>>Closer to zero. DU is not especially dangerous. It's even less active
>>than natural uranium which is, umm, natural.
>>
>>John
>
>A depleted uranium bullet kills just like a lead one.
>It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>
They are rather frangible don't you think?
John Larkin
wrote:
Several reference say that the major hazard from DU is its chemical
toxicity, not its radiation. But lead is much more toxic.
John
JosephKK
wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 21:08:45 +0100, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax
><dirk....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Jan Panteltje wrote:
>>> See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does not bother the French anymore,
>>> it is normal.
>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/a,p/20080708/ap_on_re_eu/france_nuclear_leak
>>> It is 'only' 30000 liters of non enriched (oh well :-) ) uranium.
>>> So if you plan a holiday to Avignon or plan to eat something produced there for the next 1000 years,
>>> dont.
>
>>Topsoil contains several tonnes per sq km of undepleted Uranium
>
>[Q] How much dirt is in a square kilometer?
>[A] None. A square km is infinitely thin.
>
>Plagerizing:
><http://physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm>
>
>Natural Radioactivity in soil
>
>How much natural radioactivity is found in a volume of soil that is 1
>square mile, by 1 foot deep? The following table is calculated for
>this volume (total volume is 7.894 x 105 m3) and the listed
>activities. It should be noted that activity levels vary greatly
>depending on soil type, mineral make-up and density (~1.58 g/cm3 used
>in this calculation). This table represents calculations using typical
>numbers.
>
>| Natural Radioactivity by the Square Mile, 1 Foot Deep
>| Uranium 0.7 pCi/g ( 25 Bq/kg) 2,200 kg 0.8 curies (31 GBq)
>| Thorium 1.1 pCi/g ( 40 Bq/kg) 12,000 kg 1.4 curies (52 GBq)
>| Potassium 40 11. pCi/g (400 Bq/kg) 2000 kg 13. curies (500 GBq)
>| Radium 1.3 pCi/g ( 48 Bq/kg) 1.7 g 1.7 curies (63 GBq)
>| Radon 0.17 pCi/g ( 10 kBq/m3) 11 痢 0.2 curies (7.4 GBq)
>| Total: >17 curies (>653 GBq)
Gosh, lots of numbers. Can you explain what they might really mean.
Like what does a Curie (Ci) mean in terms of "allowed maximum
exposure". What is a "Bq"?
Tim Williams
news:97cd74do3ohto81mi...@4ax.com...
> No one can calculate risk in a reasonable way without
> knowing the isotope percentages, and the ground perfusion rates. Even
As I recall, uranium tends to bind to things. Soil's CEC (Cation Exchange
Capacity) should hold on to it, at least for a while. Low CEC and acid rain
(which are often more than coincidence, because acid rain reduces CEC) will
be more of a problem. Uranium, when it gets into solution, tends to stay in
solution pretty well I think. It also tends to stay out when it doesn't
want to go into solution (e.g., UO2 is really insoluble). An interesting
element to be sure...
Tim
--
Deep Friar: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms
Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 15:26:17 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
>>Plagerizing:
>><http://physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm>
>>
>>Natural Radioactivity in soil
>>
>>How much natural radioactivity is found in a volume of soil that is 1
>>square mile, by 1 foot deep? The following table is calculated for
>>this volume (total volume is 7.894 x 105 m3) and the listed
>>activities. It should be noted that activity levels vary greatly
>>depending on soil type, mineral make-up and density (~1.58 g/cm3 used
>>in this calculation). This table represents calculations using typical
>>numbers.
>>
>>| Natural Radioactivity by the Square Mile, 1 Foot Deep
>>| Uranium 0.7 pCi/g ( 25 Bq/kg) 2,200 kg 0.8 curies (31 GBq)
>>| Thorium 1.1 pCi/g ( 40 Bq/kg) 12,000 kg 1.4 curies (52 GBq)
>>| Potassium 40 11. pCi/g (400 Bq/kg) 2000 kg 13. curies (500 GBq)
>>| Radium 1.3 pCi/g ( 48 Bq/kg) 1.7 g 1.7 curies (63 GBq)
>>| Radon 0.17 pCi/g ( 10 kBq/m3) 11 痢 0.2 curies (7.4 GBq)
>>| Total: >17 curies (>653 GBq)
>Gosh, lots of numbers. Can you explain what they might really mean.
>Like what does a Curie (Ci) mean in terms of "allowed maximum
>exposure". What is a "Bq"?
I'll try. I don't do this for a living.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curie>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becquerel>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sievert>
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gray_(unit)>
Ci and Bq are measurements of radioactive decay, where 1 Bq = 1
nuclear disintegration per second. This is different from the counts
per minute on a Geiger counter which can generate multiple counts from
a single disintegration, and also has a sensitivity factor to
consider. Curies and Bq are directly related to the amount of
radioactive material involved. Counts per minute are not. It's the
rate, not the energy.
Radioactive "strength" varies with the type of radiation, exposure
time, distances, occupation, and political orientation. The old
system used Rads. The new is Gray's. (I'm still using Rads and
Curies).
1 Gray = 100 Rads = 1 joule absorbed per kilogram of body mass.
1 Curie = 37 GigaBq
Radiation damage potential or "dose equivalent" is measured in
Sieverts, which includes fudge factors for the particle energies. This
article cover the exposure basics and issues (for Canada):
<http://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/phys_agents/ionizing.html>
Note that radiation damage is heavily dependent on the type of
radiation and the energy involved. Alpha particles are just going to
bounce off the skin. Accelerated heavy ions will turn you into Swiss
cheese.
List of exposure limits in sieverts:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ionizing_radiation#Ionizing_radiation_level_examples>
I won't pretend to understand how to calculate exposure and exposure
limits as it involved considerable physiology and biological effects.
For example, here's a very good attempt at untangling the muddle:
<http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060623054613AABfm36>
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Martin Brown
> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 13:53:31 GMT, Jan Panteltje
> <pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 06:27:16 -0700) it happened John Larkin
>> <jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
>>>
>>>> See Bill Sloman, as I stated South of France being radioactive does not bother the French anymore,
>>>> it is normal.
>>>> http://news.yahoo.com/s/a,p/20080708/ap_on_re_eu/france_nuclear_leak
>>>> It is 'only' 30000 liters of non enriched (oh well :-) ) uranium.
>>>> So if you plan a holiday to Avignon or plan to eat something produced there for the next 1000 years,
>>>> dont.
>>>>
>>> the solution ran into two rivers." What constitutes "traces"?
>>>
>>> Doesn't sound like armageddon to me. I doubt it will statistically
>>> produce one milli-cancer. Natural radiation is everywhere.
>>>
>>> air. People die on oil rigs. Tankers run aground. Energy is dangerous.
>>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
>> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
>> for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there,
>> and it will radiate for millions of year.
>> the plants will absorb it and it will end up in the grapes and the French wines,
>> basically why very old wines are better ;-)
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Occurrence
>
> "An additional 4.6 billion tonnes of uranium are estimated to be in
> sea water (Japanese scientists in the 1980s showed that extraction of
> uranium from sea water using ion exchangers was feasible).[37][38]"
Feasable but not very rewarding. Uranium is fairly common in the
environment but it is mostly well spread around as a trace constituent
in everything. Decent quality minable ores are quite rare and prized.
> So relax.
This is essentially correct. Uranium and daughter products are a lot
more common than most people imagine. And modern analytical instruments
are so sensitive that detecting uranium in most drinking water is easy.
Natural Uranium at an average 2ppm abundance in the crust is fairly
common. That makes it more common than rare metals like tungsten or
molybdenum. Thorium (10ppm) which also weakly radioactive is roughly 3x
more common than Tin (3ppm).
I would be a lot more worried if they had lost waste Uranium solution
from inside the fuel cycle. That tends to have all sorts of nasty hot
fission impurities in it. Hanford is the canonical example of a nuclear
cess pit. Although I am sure there are worse ones in the former Soviet
Union.
Regards,
Martin Brown
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
John Larkin
And the biologicals are worse. The most toxic and the most
carcinogenic substances known are made by bacteria and molds.
John
Joerg
Out here it's rattlesnakes and brown recluses.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.
JosephKK
<pNaonSt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On a sunny day (Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:41:39 -0700) it happened John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
><r15a741jglv8vukrb...@4ax.com>:
>
>>>>So relax.
>>>
>>>OK, I will just refrain from eating herrings and drinking wine :-)
>>
>>Do you really *like* herrings?
>>
>>John
>
>Oh yes.
OK. I have had a jones for "kippered herring" at times in my life. I
would really like to understand the difference, if any.
JosephKK
<jki...@easystreet.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 12:24:46 -0700, John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
>>>It was ment as a joke, if you can joke about U war crimes.
>>
>>"U"? Does that mean me?
>
>I thought he was referring to the use of DU ammo. See: "Depleted
>Uranium Weapons and International Law: A Precautionary Approach,"
>edited by Avril McDonald, Jann K. Kleffner and Brigit C. A. Toebes.
>That is a 2008 book providing an in-depth analysis of international
>legal aspects on using DU ammo. Also in August 2002, there was also
>a report out by the UN subcommission identifying laws breached by the
>use of DU shells. If you want, I suppose I could track down a copy
>for you to read up on.
>
>While the Pentagon has admitted that 320 metric tons of DU were left
>on the battlefield after the first Gulf war, Russian military experts
>argued 1000 metric tons as a more accurate figure. Each may be biased
>in their assessments, of course, so perhaps somewhere between those
>two figures would be a safer bet.
>
>Also in 1991, almost a million DU rounds were fired in Iraq, close to
>a net of 2700 tons of DU, I believe. The UK Atomic Energy Authority
>reported out an estimate back then that some half-million additional
>deaths would occur by 2000, due to radioactive debris left in the
>desert. No idea if any of that was confirmed or just someone making
>guesses. But it was the UK AEA making the statement, so you have to
>assume that at least _some_ informed thought went into the statement,
>even if it was no more than an educated guess. Suggests more than 1
>death, anyway.
>
>Jon
Strange, 1 million rounds is far to low total rounds expended. Yet 1
million rounds of depleted Uranium sounds absurdly high. The stuff is
a real drag to make, and is really only a byproduct of making fuel
grade (and higher grades of) Uranium. Moreover, it is best used as
anti-armor class weapons, a limited use.
Jonathan Kirwan
wrote:
The numbers came from an article in "The Sunday Herald" (Scotland),
published on March 30th, 2003. I'm in no position to argue with them,
but you may be. I agree with your point about anti-armor, by the way.
That's the main motivation, from my own recollections from years back.
Jon
JosephKK
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
Similar to what i found, but even lower on the chemical toxicity for
DU. One major difference seems to be that DU does not seem to be
bioaccumulative, like lead, PCBs, mercury,and many others.
JosephKK
No, man beat them out with PCBs. (that is poly chlorinated
bi-phenyls)
JosephKK
wrote:
>On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 21:32:32 -0700, JosephKK <quiett...@yahoo.com>
OK, looking through the links. I will see what i can learn.
Jan Panteltje
<quiett...@yahoo.com> wrote in
<2ofg741u8jvti8vlv...@4ax.com>:
>>>Do you really *like* herrings?
>>>
>>>John
>>
>>Oh yes.
>
>OK. I have had a jones for "kippered herring" at times in my life. I
>would really like to understand the difference, if any.
Kippered is sort of smoked right?
I like them raw, with onions, in this time of year we have 'new herring'
here, freshly catched.
Ever since I was a little kid I liked those herrings.
John Larkin
wrote:
>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:07:19 -0700, John Larkin
><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:02:33 GMT, James Arthur
>><bogus...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>John Larkin wrote:
>>>
>>>> I had a friend who lived in Opelousas, Louisiana, and he had a geiger
>>>> counter. So we walked around town looking for radiation. The local
>>>> post office, red bricks, was very hot.
>>>
>>>That's how you find radioactive contamination: easily.
>>>It's the chemical stuff that's insidious.
>>>
>>
>>And the biologicals are worse. The most toxic and the most
>>carcinogenic substances known are made by bacteria and molds.
>>
>>John
>
>No, man beat them out with PCBs. (that is poly chlorinated
>bi-phenyls)
PCBs are positively nutritious compared to botox or tetanus toxin. And
aflatoxin, from a common peanut mold, is far more carcinogenic than
plutonium.
John
JosephKK
I don't remember any smokiness in kippers.
I like most sea food, no anchovies though.
Herring really fresh with onions; remands me of a "cannibal" sandwich,
fresh beef patty, equally thick slice of onion, on rye; condiments
like mustard etc., optional.
Eeyore
Jan Panteltje wrote:
> Well, it is also here::
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7496998.stm
> 30000 liters with 12g per liter makes 36 kg non-depleted,
> for you to calculate how much bad stuff is in there,
> and it will radiate for millions of year.
> The river will take it to the north-sea,
Looks more like the mediterranean to me, at which point it will become so diluted as to make it an
insignificant fraction of natural background radiation.
Graham
Eeyore
Jim Yanik wrote:
> I suspect some basements have more REAL radiation hazard from radon gas
> leaking from the ground,than this spill.
This is very true, especially in regions containing lots of granite IIRC. In
the UK Cornwall is especially noted for this. They may require active
ventilation to prevent health risks.
Graham
James Arthur
In the USA half of all lung cancer deaths are in
non-smokers. Mostly from radon, it's thought.
James Arthur
JosephKK
<jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:08:46 -0700, JosephKK <quiett...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 11:07:19 -0700, John Larkin
>><jjla...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 01:02:33 GMT, James Arthur
>>><bogus...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>John Larkin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I had a friend who lived in Opelousas, Louisiana, and he had a geiger
>>>>> counter. So we walked around town looking for radiation. The local
>>>>> post office, red bricks, was very hot.
>>>>
>>>>That's how you find radioactive contamination: easily.
>>>>It's the chemical stuff that's insidious.
>>>>
>>>
>>>And the biologicals are worse. The most toxic and the most
>>>carcinogenic substances known are made by bacteria and molds.
>>>
>>>John
>>
>>No, man beat them out with PCBs. (that is poly chlorinated
>>bi-phenyls)
>
>PCBs are positively nutritious compared to botox or tetanus toxin. And
>aflatoxin, from a common peanut mold, is far more carcinogenic than
>plutonium.
>
>John
>
Really? Prettyness doctors advertise doing botox injections.
John Larkin
wrote:
The amounts used are minute.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botox
"It is possibly the most acutely toxic substance known, with a median
lethal dose of about 1 ng/kg[3], meaning that a few hundred grams
could theoretically kill every human on earth (for perspective, the
rat poison strychnine, often described as highly toxic, has an LD50 of
1,000,000 ng/kg, and would thus take about six metric tons to kill
every human).
It is also remarkably easy to come by: Clostridium spores are found in
soil practically all over the earth."
The standard 100 unit vial, as used for inter-muscular injection,
contains about 5 nanograms of toxin. One unit is one LD50 rat dose.
John
Richard Henry
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 22:15:48 -0700, JosephKK <quiettechb...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 09:21:10 -0700, John Larkin
>
> >>On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 23:08:46 -0700, JosephKK <quiettechb...@yahoo.com>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Botox "works" by killing off muscle cells near injection site. As a
result, the victims end up with curiously unique facial expressions.
Reminds me of novocaine paralysis, except it is more or less
permanent, until the body "heals" the injury.
John Larkin
No. It's a neurotoxin, and a temporary one at that.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Botulinum_toxin#Medical_uses
John
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian
>
> And who really cares about your not really important block list, 1) Jim T
> 2) nobody and Florida
>
> Come on , you don't own this NG, Doctor Who and the Daleks are more
> important than your block list.
>
> Oh I forgot the :) sorry
>
Eventually, he'll have everybody blocked, and can pass the time having
conversations with his ego. ;-)
Cheers!
Rich