On the natural radioactive materials

[Hugo Gavarini]

Hello friends,

In a thread devoted to separators we discussed advantages and characteristics of different materials. One of them, zirconium, carries naturally occurring radioactive elements of the uranium and thorium series. In fact, zirconium MSDS advises to avoid inhalation to prevent from radioactive contamination.

I would like to differentiate between NATURAL and ARTIFICIAL radioactive things.

Actually, we cohabit with natural radioactivity. Radioactivity from zirconium comes from impurities which it carries, like uranium. However, uranium is the colorant for the worldwide loved Vaseline glass.

A common stone, granite, which is present in almost all the houses, has a slight natural radiation too.

Furthermore, we are always exposed to cosmic radiation, from the sun and the stars. And you can measure that radiation with simply an industrial nuclear detector, not a very sophisticated one.

With these lines I would like to share my thoughts especially with people who are afraid of natural radioactivity. I believe we actually cohabit with natural radioactivity and that we are prepared for this fact.

Of course, one should be careful and take adequate protection measures. MSDS's are of great use to do so.

I believe that ARTIFICIAL radioactivity is far more dangerous. From nuclear weapons debris to nuclear plants leakage, from industrial gammagraphies(sp?) to X-ray diagnosis methods. There are at least two classifications for that exposures. Occupational personal, who are allowed to receive a certain “secureâ€

[charlie]

this isn't correct, and may be coming across as wrong due to language differences. there is no such thing as artificial radioactivity. it is all natural.

radioactivity comes from 3 types of particles: alpha, beta, and gamma. these particles are produced by the breakdown of various radionucleotides, some of which may be man made. however, when the particles hit a cell, the cell doesn't care where it was produced.

it's about dosage. the more you get, the more cell damage. the concrete in your cellar walls may have more radioactivity than places in reactor containment shells.

[Jim Robins]

Good point. However, I can tell you that for most people the exposure they receive from naturally occurring radiation can be much higher than they will ever receive from artificial radiation sources. I often would have patients that had exposure concerns from Nuclear Medicine tests or x-ray procedures, but had no problem with spending hours in the sun tanning, or who frequently fly on airplanes. Occupational exposure does have limits which are much higher than those who are not in a at risk profession.

I agree that exposure to hazzardous chemicals like glass dust, kiln wash, fiber paper, mica dust.... are far more of a concern for the glass artist. Best to take precautions both occupationally and in our daily lives.

Jim

[Jim Robins]

this isn't correct, and may be coming across as wrong due to language differences. there is no such thing as artificial radioactivity. it is all natural.

radioactivity comes from 3 types of particles: alpha, beta, and gamma. these particles are produced by the breakdown of various radionucleotides, some of which may be man made. however, when the particles hit a cell, the cell doesn't care where it was produced.

it's about dosage. the more you get, the more cell damage. the concrete in your cellar walls may have more radioactivity than places in reactor containment shells.

I am sure that Hugo is refering to artificially produced radiation (man made) as opposed to elements which emit radiation naturally as they decay. Particle accelerators produce radiation artificially. However you are 100% correct as usual that there is no difference in a radioctive particle regardless of how it is produced and the body doesn't know either. The key to reducing radiation exposure is Time, Distance, and Shielding. Decrease exposure time, increase your distance from the source or increase your shielding will decrease your exposure.

Jim

[Hugo Gavarini]

Hello,

When I wrote natural and artificial radioactivity, I meant the SOURCE from which it came. I agree with all of you in most of your posts, adding neutrons as the most killing radioactive agent because of its high energy and penetration. That’s the point. Natural (occurring) and artificial (artificially man made) radiation are not of equal composition, energy and intensity.

One precaution with low radiation materials is to avoid ingestion or inhalation, because a radioactive nuclei would set in the organism and you will have no distance, no shield, and all the time.

I have made a mistake, at least, including X rays in my post because these are not of nuclear origin and they use to be of lower energy than gamma. Besides, medical diagnosis X-ray machines have dramatically diminished the radiation output and that´s good news. I am not concerned with these valuable machines and I thank for their existence.

Radiation from natural sources are commonly of very low intensity at sea level. I tried to say that we are cohabiting with that form of radiation and that the problem arises when modern life lead us to be exposed to higher “naturalâ€

[charlie]

Natural (occurring) and artificial (artificially man made) radiation are not of equal composition, energy and intensity.

Hello,

When I wrote natural and artificial radioactivity, I meant the SOURCE from which it came. I agree with all of you in most of your posts, adding neutrons as the most killing radioactive agent because of its high energy and penetration. That?s the point. Natural (occurring) and artificial (artificially man made) radiation are not of equal composition, energy and intensity.

One precaution with low radiation materials is to avoid ingestion or inhalation, because a radioactive nuclei would set in the organism and you will have no distance, no shield, and all the time.

I have made a mistake, at least, including X rays in my post because these are not of nuclear origin and they use to be of lower energy than gamma. Besides, medical diagnosis X-ray machines have dramatically diminished the radiation output and that´s good news. I am not concerned with these valuable machines and I thank for their existence.

Radiation from natural sources are commonly of very low intensity at sea level. I tried to say that we are cohabiting with that form of radiation and that the problem arises when modern life lead us to be exposed to higher ?natural? radiation (flying all the time) or working into a cloud of zirconium without due protection.

Nuclear reactors are artificial sources or radioactivity, in opposition of natural occurring ones. And the high safety procedures they follow are in proportion with its high potential. In fact, a nuclear power plant has much more uranium and plutonium in its fuel elements than a 3 megaton nuclear weapon. I must acknowledge its outstanding efforts and achievements towards safety. I live downstream two hydroelectric plants, 200 feet high each. I would feel safer living close to a nuclear power plant, but not working to fix some problem in its steam generator.

With regard to nuclear weapons, other no-natural occurring source, I can?t add words over its exposed nakedness.

instead of artifical, you really mean man-made. however, even that is not accurate, since all elements are, or have existed, in the past. a lot of died out due to half-life constraints a long time ago in the naturally occurring universe. however, when we recreate them, they are still natural elements; that's what 'element' means.

the statement:

Natural (occurring) and artificial (artificially man made) radiation are not of equal composition, energy and intensity.

is just wrong. naturally occurring and man-made radiation are identical. they are not different strengths, are composed identically, and have the same energy. it's just that most natural radiation sources are either dispersed, or far away (see jim's previous post). a sun is a nuclear reactor. it's natural, but far away. it's also the largest reactor in our local vicinity. some of the radiation it emits that we depend upon to stay alive is light; there's a lot of other radiation wavelengths that it gives off that we don't see but are still necessary to us, and lot that is harmful to us directly.

neutrons (along with electrons and protons) are simply particles made up of other subatomic particles. they, in themselves and sitting still, aren't dangerous. they're in every type of matter we have contact with, bound up in the atoms with electrons and protons. however, when they move at speed, they emit gamma photons when they strke something, which causes the damage, along with the kinetic energy (heat, and splitting other particles due to the force of the strike) released when they actually do hit something.

[Jim Robins]

True. Low energy Alpha particles don't have enough energy to do much damage. Beta radiation can cause a great deal of damage because there is enough energy to enter the cellular walls and then the impart all of their damaging energy to the cell (That is why they are used in cancer treatment) but they don't have enough energy to travel far. High energy radiation like gamma and x-rays for the most part pass through the human body (that is why they are used for diagnostic imaging) If a radioactive particle passes through you at high velocity then it probably won't cause any cellular damage. It is when these particle are slowed down enough by passing through things like walls...then they can impart their energy on the cell and destroy it or damage it enough to create a free radical which can cause other problems including types of cancers.

Nuclear reactors and weapons produce massive amounts of radiation which includes all of the different types of radioactive particles. But as Hugo said the Neutrons are the most biologically destructive. God willing none of us will ever be subjected to this kind of exposure.

Jim

[Bert Weiss]

Come on guys The jist of Hugo's statement is that a little radon is not going top effect you like a little nuclear fallout from a bomb would.

I have actually heard a new ager friend say that she didn't want to wear a battery powered watch because of the effects of the electric radiation. I was rolling on the floor laughing because if her watch was a problem my 130 amp kiln must be a real monster. Maybe that is why I'm such an idiot

The whole point is that strong radiation is more of a problem than weak radiation. My wife is a realtor and many of her clients get all bent out of shape about radon levels in homes. The homes are built in New Hampshire where there is a lot of naturally occuring radon. The mitigation process is to tape plastic sheeting in the basement. IMHO this is about as effective as calling duct tape and plastic sheeting "Homeland security".

Bert

[Hugo Gavarini]

Hello,

I have found a nice site to see on the matter of nuclear radiation.

http://www.uic.com.au/ral.htm

Yes Bert, that is what I meant.

My apologies if I couldn't express it better.

[Cynthia]

Come on guys The jist of Hugo's statement is that a little radon is not going to effect you like a little nuclear fallout from a bomb would.

The whole point is that strong radiation is more of a problem than weak radiation. My wife is a realtor and many of her clients get all bent out of shape about radon levels in homes. The homes are built in New Hampshire where there is a lot of naturally occuring radon. The mitigation process is to tape plastic sheeting in the basement. IMHO this is about as effective as calling duct tape and plastic sheeting "Homeland security".

Bert

So I take it you didn't stock up on platic sheeting and duct tape.

[Jim Robins]

I have actually heard a new ager friend say that she didn't want to wear a battery powered watch because of the effects of the electric radiation.

Bert

When the first glow in the dark watches came out they did end up effecting people's health because of radiation. Not the people wearing the watches, but the people who painted the radium (radioactive) on the dials to make them glow. They would put the brushes in their mouth to wet them as they painted. Many developed mouth cancer. Old watches with glow in the dark dials will set off a geiger counter.

I would be more concerned with protecting myself from hazardous material dust and some of the leaded products we use, or a nice shard of glass in the eye for that matter.

Jim

[Bert Weiss]

So I take it you didn't stock up on platic sheeting and duct tape.

Are you kidding, I already have that stuff. How can you run a glass shop with out Duck tape?

i don't think that the terrorists are going to terrorize the forest any time soon. Oops I let it out of the bag that this forest is a safe zone. The big bad wolf likes the city better.

Piggy in wood house

[Ron Coleman]

I have actually heard a new ager friend say that she didn't want to wear a battery powered watch because of the effects of the electric radiation.

Bert

When the first glow in the dark watches came out they did end up effecting people's health because of radiation. Not the people wearing the watches, but the people who painted the radium (radioactive) on the dials to make them glow. They would put the brushes in their mouth to wet them as they painted. Many developed mouth cancer. Old watches with glow in the dark dials will set off a geiger counter.

I would be more concerned with protecting myself from hazardous material dust and some of the leaded products we use, or a nice shard of glass in the eye for that matter.

Jim

See the attached link and be sure to read about cerium oxide.

http://www.survivalunlimited.com/radiationenv.htm

Ron

[Jim Robins]

Great link Ron. Alpha particles can't travel far because of their low energy, but if inhaled or ingested they can do a lot of damage to cells. Read the MSDS(Material Safety Data Sheet) for all of the chemicals you use (The manufacturer has to provide them to you) and they will tell you what the hazards are and what personal protective Equipment you should wear.

Jim