Rise in nuclear particles detected in the Baltic
Discussion
Can't see a lot about this, Reuters are going with it though
https://twitter.com/SinaZerbo/status/1276559857731...
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-nuclear-particle...
https://twitter.com/SinaZerbo/status/1276559857731...
https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-nuclear-particle...
tedmus said:
They do have form for that when s
t goes bandy!*cough Chernobyl*
would of course fit with how 2020 is playing out though to have a Nuclear Reactor melt down!
The release of Ru103 is a bit odd - this isn't normally something released from a reactor accident. To vaporise ruthenium requires strong oxidation, so ruthenium releases have generally come from reprocessing accidents, or accidents while manufacturing medical or industrial radiation sources (where strong chemicals like oxidising acids are used). Additionally Ru103 has a very short half life, so can only have come from processing of very fresh used nuclear fuel.
Due to practical considerations, conventional nuclear fuel reprocessing is normally only done on used fuel which has "matured" for a decade or so, so that the radioactivity declines to more manageable levels. However, if the processing is intended for medical or industrial use where short lived isotopes are required, then it may be necessary to perform processing on fresh used fuel (or more usually, dedicated "targets" made from uranium which are more manageable than bulk reactor fuel).
For example, in 2017, a ruthenium release (Ru106 - with a longer half life, but still relatively short) was detected coming from the Urals. Although no responsibility was ever claimed, the timing of the event corresponded to a Russian radiochemical plant cancelling an extremely large order for radioactive cerium intended for a physics experiment in Italy, citing "technical difficulties". The only credible method of obtaining such a cerium sample is by industrial scale processing of used nuclear fuel of unusual freshness.
I suspect that this is probably not from a power reactor, but an accident during manufacture of medical or industrial radioactive materials.
Due to practical considerations, conventional nuclear fuel reprocessing is normally only done on used fuel which has "matured" for a decade or so, so that the radioactivity declines to more manageable levels. However, if the processing is intended for medical or industrial use where short lived isotopes are required, then it may be necessary to perform processing on fresh used fuel (or more usually, dedicated "targets" made from uranium which are more manageable than bulk reactor fuel).
For example, in 2017, a ruthenium release (Ru106 - with a longer half life, but still relatively short) was detected coming from the Urals. Although no responsibility was ever claimed, the timing of the event corresponded to a Russian radiochemical plant cancelling an extremely large order for radioactive cerium intended for a physics experiment in Italy, citing "technical difficulties". The only credible method of obtaining such a cerium sample is by industrial scale processing of used nuclear fuel of unusual freshness.
I suspect that this is probably not from a power reactor, but an accident during manufacture of medical or industrial radioactive materials.
Edited by WatchfulEye on Sunday 28th June 22:24
WatchfulEye said:
The release of Ru103 is a bit odd - this isn't normally something released from a reactor accident. To vaporise ruthenium requires strong oxidation, so ruthenium releases have generally come from reprocessing accidents, or accidents while manufacturing medical or industrial radiation sources (where strong chemicals like oxidising acids are used). Additionally Ru103 has a very short half life, so can only have come from processing of very fresh used nuclear fuel.
Due to practical considerations, conventional nuclear fuel reprocessing is normally only done on used fuel which has "matured" for a decade or so, so that the radioactivity declines to more manageable levels. However, if the processing is intended for medical or industrial use where short lived isotopes are required, then it may be necessary to perform processing on fresh used fuel (or more usually, dedicated "targets" made from uranium which are more manageable than bulk reactor fuel).
For example, in 2017, a ruthenium release (Ru106 - with a longer half life, but still relatively short) was detected coming from the Urals. Although no responsibility was ever claimed, the timing of the event corresponded to a Russian radiochemical plant cancelling an extremely large order for radioactive cerium intended for a physics experiment in Italy, citing "technical difficulties". The only credible method of obtaining such a cerium sample is by industrial scale processing of used nuclear fuel of unusual freshness.
I suspect that this is probably not from a power reactor, but an accident during manufacture of medical or industrial radioactive materials.
Genuinely interesting post. Due to practical considerations, conventional nuclear fuel reprocessing is normally only done on used fuel which has "matured" for a decade or so, so that the radioactivity declines to more manageable levels. However, if the processing is intended for medical or industrial use where short lived isotopes are required, then it may be necessary to perform processing on fresh used fuel (or more usually, dedicated "targets" made from uranium which are more manageable than bulk reactor fuel).
For example, in 2017, a ruthenium release (Ru106 - with a longer half life, but still relatively short) was detected coming from the Urals. Although no responsibility was ever claimed, the timing of the event corresponded to a Russian radiochemical plant cancelling an extremely large order for radioactive cerium intended for a physics experiment in Italy, citing "technical difficulties". The only credible method of obtaining such a cerium sample is by industrial scale processing of used nuclear fuel of unusual freshness.
I suspect that this is probably not from a power reactor, but an accident during manufacture of medical or industrial radioactive materials.
Edited by WatchfulEye on Sunday 28th June 22:24
Either this is something you have deep knowledge about. Or you get an a star grade in googling. Either way deeply impressive.
milkround said:
WatchfulEye said:
The release of Ru103 is a bit odd - this isn't normally something released from a reactor accident. To vaporise ruthenium requires strong oxidation, so ruthenium releases have generally come from reprocessing accidents, or accidents while manufacturing medical or industrial radiation sources (where strong chemicals like oxidising acids are used). Additionally Ru103 has a very short half life, so can only have come from processing of very fresh used nuclear fuel.
Due to practical considerations, conventional nuclear fuel reprocessing is normally only done on used fuel which has "matured" for a decade or so, so that the radioactivity declines to more manageable levels. However, if the processing is intended for medical or industrial use where short lived isotopes are required, then it may be necessary to perform processing on fresh used fuel (or more usually, dedicated "targets" made from uranium which are more manageable than bulk reactor fuel).
For example, in 2017, a ruthenium release (Ru106 - with a longer half life, but still relatively short) was detected coming from the Urals. Although no responsibility was ever claimed, the timing of the event corresponded to a Russian radiochemical plant cancelling an extremely large order for radioactive cerium intended for a physics experiment in Italy, citing "technical difficulties". The only credible method of obtaining such a cerium sample is by industrial scale processing of used nuclear fuel of unusual freshness.
I suspect that this is probably not from a power reactor, but an accident during manufacture of medical or industrial radioactive materials.
Genuinely interesting post. Due to practical considerations, conventional nuclear fuel reprocessing is normally only done on used fuel which has "matured" for a decade or so, so that the radioactivity declines to more manageable levels. However, if the processing is intended for medical or industrial use where short lived isotopes are required, then it may be necessary to perform processing on fresh used fuel (or more usually, dedicated "targets" made from uranium which are more manageable than bulk reactor fuel).
For example, in 2017, a ruthenium release (Ru106 - with a longer half life, but still relatively short) was detected coming from the Urals. Although no responsibility was ever claimed, the timing of the event corresponded to a Russian radiochemical plant cancelling an extremely large order for radioactive cerium intended for a physics experiment in Italy, citing "technical difficulties". The only credible method of obtaining such a cerium sample is by industrial scale processing of used nuclear fuel of unusual freshness.
I suspect that this is probably not from a power reactor, but an accident during manufacture of medical or industrial radioactive materials.
Edited by WatchfulEye on Sunday 28th June 22:24
Either this is something you have deep knowledge about. Or you get an a star grade in googling. Either way deeply impressive.
milkround said:
Genuinely interesting post.
Either this is something you have deep knowledge about. Or you get an a star grade in googling. Either way deeply impressive.
Indeed... but if the cause is some relatively (no pun intended) benign industrial accident, how has it reached the Baltic?Either this is something you have deep knowledge about. Or you get an a star grade in googling. Either way deeply impressive.
abzmike said:
Indeed... but if the cause is some relatively (no pun intended) benign industrial accident, how has it reached the Baltic?
It has only been detected in extremely small trace amounts. The traces are so small, it is difficult to describe them in any kind of meaningful terms - quite literally, the concentrations detected are billions or trillions of times smaller than legal limits; never mind levels at which health effects might be relevant. There are a number of monitoring stations around the world intended for enforcement of the nuclear test ban treaty. These use extraordinarily sensitive techniques to measure radioactive materials in the air; and it is these stations which have detected it.
They work by sucking a vast quantity of air through very fine filters over the course of several days or a week. The filter is then washed (or chemically dissolved) and the extract tested with a super sensitive radiation detector, often counting for several days or a week.
For airborne contamination, these systems can detect releases from hundreds of miles away. For example, a release of I131 detected in late 2011 across the Czech republic and parts of Germany. This was traced to a factory in Budapest manufacturing radioactive materials for medical use, where a faulty filter had allowed some material to escape through the ventilation system.
Darkslider said:
Isn't there a decomposing nuclear sub on the sea bed round there somewhere? I wonder if any radioactive particles from that could end up in the atmosphere, or would they remain in the water?
Kursk? North of there I think and wasn't it mainly recovered?Informative post WatchfulEye
Reciprocating mass said:
parchin going bang in Iran and they claim a gas explosion, rumour has it Israel dropped a neutron bomb on parchin to stop Iran building nukes
That's one of the more bonkers things I've read this year, and I've been reading some of Trump's tweets so that's a high threshhold. Neutron bombs kill people preferentially over destroying buildings, the opposite of what you want if you're trying to put a reactor or enrichment plant out of action.hidetheelephants said:
Reciprocating mass said:
parchin going bang in Iran and they claim a gas explosion, rumour has it Israel dropped a neutron bomb on parchin to stop Iran building nukes
That's one of the more bonkers things I've read this year, and I've been reading some of Trump's tweets so that's a high threshhold. Neutron bombs kill people preferentially over destroying buildings, the opposite of what you want if you're trying to put a reactor or enrichment plant out of action.ks tacked on for good measure!! tedmus said:
Darkslider said:
Isn't there a decomposing nuclear sub on the sea bed round there somewhere? I wonder if any radioactive particles from that could end up in the atmosphere, or would they remain in the water?
Kursk? North of there I think and wasn't it mainly recovered?Informative post WatchfulEye
Devonport and rosyth dockyards both have cold war nuclear submarines sitting alongside... They are still fuelled and are being "maintained" as so far they can't get the facilities up at standard to deal with them.
Some have been there longer than they were in service!
Plymo said:
Decomposing nuclear submarines? Nothing to see here
Devonport and rosyth dockyards both have cold war nuclear submarines sitting alongside... They are still fuelled and are being "maintained" as so far they can't get the facilities up at standard to deal with them.
Some have been there longer than they were in service!
The RN sub decommissioning scheme is an enduring disgrace but IIRC the ones at Rosyth do not have fuel in, the ones at Devonport are waiting until there's a slot available at the refueling facility, which is naturally prioritised for the subs in service and there's been a problem there 'because reasons' i.e. it's old and creaky(mostly in a 'not working' way rather than a 'Plymouth disappearing in a mushroom cloud' way) and there is reluctance to spend money upgrading when the in-service subs that need it are due to be out of service within a decade or so. While it looks untidy having old subs laying about the danger presented to the public by them is nugatory, the radioactive bits are all secured inside the enginerooms and reactor compartments and are doing what radioactive things do, decaying and becoming less radioactive. Perhaps the bullet should be bit and the subs taken somewhere that does have the capacity to chop them up and make razor blades, the US seem to be getting on well with chopping theirs up.Devonport and rosyth dockyards both have cold war nuclear submarines sitting alongside... They are still fuelled and are being "maintained" as so far they can't get the facilities up at standard to deal with them.
Some have been there longer than they were in service!
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff