The end of the empire of Japan

[-1=e^ipi]

Would you eat a gram of K-40 or a gram of uranium?

Uranium 235 or Uranium 238. Uranium 235, obviously not, but let's compare Uranium 238 with Potassium 40:

U 238:

Half life: 4.5 billion years

Photon Energy:4.267 MeV

Atomic Mass: 238

K 40:

Half life: 1.2 billion years

Mean Photon Energy: 1.343 MeV (90% chance of 1.33 MeV and 10% chance of 1.46 MeV)

Atomic Mass: 40

So a gram of U 238 produces 1.22 x 10^-8 W of power from radioactive decay.

Similarly, a gram of K 40 produces 8.55 x 10^-8 W of power from radioactive decay.

So the U-238 is only about 4x as radioactive as the K-40. So obviously I would rather ingest the K-40 (let alone the fact that uranium is a heavy element like lead).

[-1=e^ipi]

Would you eat a gram of K-40 or a gram of uranium? The comparison is terrible. We've been living with potassium for centuries. We have not been living with uranium, plutonium, tritium and the like for very long.

Uhhh yeah we have. Uranium has been on earth since the earth's formation and originates from the dust of a super nova that occurred billions of years ago before our sun's formation.

Heck 1.7 billion years ago, uranium concentrations were high enough for natural nuclear fission reactors to occur.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor

Also, I love how you say we've been living with potassium for centuries. What are you, a young earth creationist? K-40 has always been on earth since the earth formed 4.5 billion years ago.

Yes we live with constant background radiation. That is not the issue, never was and cannot be compared to radiation given off from nuclear reactors.

If you live in an area with more naturally occurring background radiation then you are at higher risk of getting cancer.

Which is more likely to cause you cancer? A banana or uranium?

Depends on how much vs how much.

[GostHacked]

http://www.raw-food-health.net/Natural-Radiation.html

For those using the banana comparison. Understand the difference between alpha, beta and gamma radiation.

Using the banana to compare with the radiation emitted by a nuclear power plant or any other potentially dangerous radiation exposure is downright deceptive and gives people a false sense of security.

Natural Radiation SymbolThe comparison implies that all radioactive isotopes are created equal, and that there is no difference between our 3520 picocuries for a kg of bananas and the same amount of radioiodine, a major hazard involved in the production of nuclear power.

The first major problems with the comparison is that different types of isotopes have different characteristics in terms of half life, and whether it is alpha, beta, or gamma radiation.

The second is that the potassium in bananas does not stay in the body, but other types of radiation can, accumulating in organs and being absorbed by the blood stream.

Although it doesn't have a nice ring to it, if someone decided to create the Brazil Nut Equivalent Dose, it would actually make more sense than using bananas. Brazil nuts get their radiation from Barium, which the body can accumulate.

Potassium, however, is something the body easily excretes, always striving to maintain homeostasis (4). Sure, when you eat a banana the amount of potassium in you does go up, but only for a short amount of time before it is excreted.

Now you could argue that I'm being overly picky here. You still get radiation exposure just by sitting next to a banana, after all, and the Banana Equivalent Dose is about the natural radiation in our food and environment generally, not bananas specifically.

[-1=e^ipi]

For those using the banana comparison. Understand the difference between alpha, beta and gamma radiation.

Wow! I never knew that! *sarcasm*

Your knowledge of science is so large!

High energy photons (gamma radiation) is the main concern when it comes to health effects.

The second is that the potassium in bananas does not stay in the body, but other types of radiation can, accumulating in organs and being absorbed by the blood stream.

Did I not say "let alone the fact that uranium is a heavy element like lead"? If you want to argue the negative effects of bio-accumulation of heavy elements then that is fine, but that doesn't make radiation from say Cs-137 any worse than radiation from K-40.

[TimG]

Understand the difference between alpha, beta and gamma radiation.

Except Uranium and Potassium both emit alpha radiation so your examples above are pretty silly in context.

[GostHacked]

I love the condescending attitude.

Banana is alpha .. meaning stopped by even minimal things, and your body breaks it down easily. Not harmful.

Cesium 137 is beta and gamma, gamma being the DNA destroying radiation, penetrates the body. Your body cannot break it down. Bio accumulation, we have already talked about that here. This is harmful.

I am no scientists, but after watching a few things on this, I understand it a lot more. The banana analogy is really really terrible and misleading.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium-137

[GostHacked]

Except Uranium and Potassium both emit alpha radiation so your examples above are pretty silly in context.

The silliest thing here is the banana analogy.

Equal quantities of uranium and K-40 .. which one would you ingest? Not a very hard question to answer.

[TimG]

Banana is alpha .. meaning stopped by even minimal things, and your body breaks it down easily. Not harmful.

Very harmful:

Ionizing radiation comes in three flavors: alpha particles, beta particles and gamma rays. Alpha particles are the least dangerous in terms of external exposure. Each particle contains a pair of neutrons and a pair of protons. They don't penetrate very deeply into the skin, if at all -- in fact, clothing can stop alpha particles. Unfortunately, alpha particles can be inhaled or ingested, usually in the form of radon gas. Once ingested, alpha particles can be very dangerous. However, even then they don't typically cause radiation sickness -- instead, they lead to lung cancer.

http://science.howstuffworks.com/radiation-sickness1.htm

Last I checked bananas are usually ingested which nullifies the hypothetical advantages of alpha radiation over gamma radiation.

[TimG]

Equal quantities of uranium and K-40 .. which one would you ingest? Not a very hard question to answer.

I would not ingest equal quantities of non-radioactive lead so you comparison is silly. The question is the radiation effects and the radiation effects are basically the same and no one who eats bananas should fear uranium because of the radiation. Edited January 14, 2014 by TimG

[-1=e^ipi]

Banana is alpha .. meaning stopped by even minimal things, and your body breaks it down easily. Not harmful.

" About 89.28% of the time, it decays to calcium-40 (⁴⁰Ca) with emission of a beta particle (β⁻, an electron) with a maximum energy of 1.33 MeV and anantineutrino. About 10.72% of the time it decays to argon-40 (⁴⁰Ar) by electron capture, with the emission of a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino."

So it will either emit a 1.33 MeV electron or a 1.46 MeV photon. How is this alpha radiation?

[GostHacked]

Come on guys, maybe you should go back to beating up waldo in the climate threads, you guys got nothing here.

[-1=e^ipi]

I forgot to mention this earlier but heavy elements tend to sink to the bottom of the ocean. So my simplistic calculation vastly overstates the increase in radioactivity from Fukushima Daiichi compared to natural sources cause most of the radioactive isotopes are at the bottom of the ocean by now.

[GostHacked]

I forgot to mention this earlier but heavy elements tend to sink to the bottom of the ocean. So my simplistic calculation vastly overstates the increase in radioactivity from Fukushima Daiichi compared to natural sources cause most of the radioactive isotopes are at the bottom of the ocean by now.

Stuff has been sinking then for 3 years. And will continue to sink. Meanwhile the plant is out of control and they are dumping the water into the ocean now. Along with contamination of the ground water from the water waste (underground river flows right under the plant) and the melted nuclear reactors that are now meltthroughs.

The sinking wont stop until Fukushima is cleaned up. Estimated at another 40 years. Those are TECPOs predictions, not mine. Meanwhile on its travel to the bottom of the ocean it will affect sea life as it progresses down. Bacteria and algea will be affected first, then bio accumulation as each link in the chain is eaten by the next bigger lifeform in the chain.

[GostHacked]

Sinks to the bottom, care for lobster?

[-1=e^ipi]

@ GostHacked, do you retract your claim that K-40 emits alpha particles?

The sinking wont stop until Fukushima is cleaned up. Estimated at another 40 years. Those are TECPOs predictions, not mine. Meanwhile on its travel to the bottom of the ocean it will affect sea life as it progresses down. Bacteria and algea will be affected first, then bio accumulation as each link in the chain is eaten by the next bigger lifeform in the chain.

No it doesn't take 40 years for stuff to sink the the bottom of the ocean.

[GostHacked]

@ GostHacked, do you retract your claim that K-40 emits alpha particles?

No, K-40 does in fact emit alpha particles. Overall not a concern. And not the issue. We are talking about stuff that happens in an uncontrollable nuclear reaction. Plutinium, Cesium, uranium.

No it doesn't take 40 years for stuff to sink the the bottom of the ocean.

I understand, but that was not a claim I made. I said they will take 40 years to clean up the site, meanwhile radioactive waste is pouting into the ocean until then. Stop the leak, stop the radiation. At this point they have no idea where all the leaks are, and they have no way to start a proper clean up, because a lot of the technology has not been invented.

This is 100% uncharted territory. Three full core meltdowns, one melt through, along with 300+ tons of radioactive water flowing into the ocean every day since the disaster.

[-1=e^ipi]

No, K-40 does in fact emit alpha particles. Overall not a concern. And not the issue.

Please tell me where it says K-40 emits alpha particles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-40

And lol at overall not a concern. Just a while ago you were arguing that K-40 isn't as bad as Cs-137 cause K-40 emits alpha particles. Now suddenly it doesn't matter?

Why don't you just stop with your dogmatic approach to this thread before you embarrass yourself more.

I understand, but that was not a claim I made. I said they will take 40 years to clean up the site

You said that in response to me mentioning that heavy elements sink to the bottom of the ocean.

Stop the leak, stop the radiation. At this point they have no idea where all the leaks are, and they have no way to start a proper clean up, because a lot of the technology has not been invented.

I love how all your 'arguments' don't ever take into account the quantity of what is being leaked or the quantity of radiation. If it were a leak at a rate of 1 atom per second you would still probably complain.

Edited January 14, 2014 by -1=e^ipi

[GostHacked]

OH I see my error. K-40 is beta. Well.

Still is a terrible comparison to what we have coming out of Fukushima. Gamma.

[GostHacked]

Please tell me where it says K-40 emits alpha particles:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium-40

And lol at overall not a concern. Just a while ago you were arguing that K-40 isn't as bad as Cs-137 cause K-40 emits alpha particles. Now suddenly it doesn't matter?

I made a mistake. K-40 emits beta. And yes it still does matter. K-40 is not dangerous to humans.

Why don't you just stop with your dogmatic approach to this thread before you embarrass yourself more.

Nah, I like embarrassing myself.

You said that in response to me mentioning that heavy elements sink to the bottom of the ocean.

I could have clarified. Either way you have radioactive waste flowing into the ocean for the next 40 years.

I love how all your 'arguments' don't ever take into account the quantity of what is being leaked or the quantity of radiation. If it were a leak at a rate of 1 atom per second you would still probably complain.

But this is part of the problem in the reporting in which I talked about before. The media uses different measurements to get a point across. Nothing is consistent. So it confuses the average person. We only found out last year that they now make the claim of over 300 tons of contaminated water is flowing into the ocean.

I should not have to tell you. This was the water that they were cycling through the plant to keep it cool. This was the water they flowed over the fuel pools.

The numbers have already been put out here. I have taken into account quantity and amount of radiation.

Edited January 15, 2014 by GostHacked

[-1=e^ipi]

Still is a terrible comparison to what we have coming out of Fukushima. Gamma.

This is silly. K-40 emits a 1.33 MeV electron 90% of the time and a 1.46 MeV photon 10% of the time.

Cs-137 emits a 0.5120 MeV electron & 0.6617 MeV photon 95% of the time and a 1.174 MeV electron the other 5% of the time.

They both emit gamma and beta radiation.

I made a mistake. K-40 emits beta. And yes it still does matter. K-40 is not dangerous to humans.

Of course K-40 can be dangerous. It is just a matter of 'how much' as with any radioactive isotope.

If you had a banana that in which all of the potassium was K-39 and another banana in which all of the potassium was K-40, which would you rather eat? The K-39 banana obviously.

Heck even non-radioactive isotopes can kill you. If you drink enough heavy water, you will die.

I could have clarified. Either way you have radioactive waste flowing into the ocean for the next 40 years.

Why does the question of 'how much' never enter your mind? I threw a banana in the ocean a year ago, it's going to leak K-40 into the ocean and make the ocean radioactive.

We only found out last year that they now make the claim of over 300 tons of contaminated water is flowing into the ocean.

Why does the tonnage of water mater? That water could be highly radioactive or not that radioactive. If I take 1 ton of radioactive water and mix it with 1 ton of non-radioactive water, I now have 2 tons of radioactive water. Did I increase the amount of radioactive isotopes? No.

This was the water that they were cycling through the plant to keep it cool. This was the water they flowed over the fuel pools.

Yes, that is radioactive. But when mixed into the entire Pacific Ocean, it isn't an issue.

The numbers have already been put out here. I have taken into account quantity and amount of radiation.

Yeah, and I've done some calculations for you. 0.02% increase in radiation compared to natural sources and that is not taking into account that most of it has sunk to the bottom of the ocean by now. Not to mention the radioactive isotopes of most concern have a short half life (2-30 years).

[GostHacked]

Of course K-40 can be dangerous. It is just a matter of 'how much' as with any radioactive isotope.

You can eat a gram of K-40 at it wont do any damage. Eat a gram of uranium, plutonium, cesium.....

The banana analogy is just terrible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose

Criticism

The validity of the banana equivalent dose concept has been challenged. Critics, including the EPA,[9] pointed out that the amount of potassium (and therefore of 40K) in the human body is fairly constant because of homeostasis,[10] so that any excess absorbed from food is quickly compensated by the elimination of an equal amount.[1][11]

It follows that the additional radiation exposure due to eating a banana lasts only for a few hours after ingestion, namely the time it takes for the normal potassium contents of the body to be restored by the kidneys. The EPA conversion factor, on the other hand, is based on the mean time needed for the isotopic mix of potassium isotopes in the body to return to the natural ratio after being disturbed by the ingestion of pure 40K; which was assumed by EPA to be 30 days.[9] If the assumed time of residence in the body is reduced by a factor of ten, for example, the estimated equivalent absorbed dose due to the banana will be reduced in the same proportion.

Your body cannot handle uranium, plutonium, or cesium in any amount.

Know the difference.

[-1=e^ipi]

You can eat a gram of K-40 at it wont do any damage. Eat a gram of uranium, plutonium, cesium.....

The banana analogy is just terrible.

Yeah it will. I would definitely not eat that Banana.

"Potassium is the eighth or ninth most common element by mass (0.2%) in the human body, so that a 60 kg adult contains a total of about 120 g of potassium."

"Potassium-40 (⁴⁰K) is a radioactive isotope of potassium which has a very long half-life of 1.248×10⁹ years. It makes up 0.012% (120 ppm) of the total amount of potassium found in nature."

So a 60 kg adult has about 14 milligrams of potassium 40 in their body. If you want to eat a gram of K-40 and increase the amount of potassium in your body by 70x then be my guest.

Want me to convert that 1 gram into sievarts for you?

Your body cannot handle uranium, plutonium, or cesium in any amount.

Know the difference.

Wrong. You body can take 1 atom of each of those with no issue.

[GostHacked]

Right now explain what 'hot particles' are and why they are different from things like K-40.

[-1=e^ipi]

Right now explain what 'hot particles' are and why they are different from things like K-40.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hot_particle

I'll convert that 1 gram of K-40 into Sieverts for you:

1 gram of K-40 contains 1.5055 x 10^22 atoms.

These atoms have a half life of 1.248 billion years = 3.938 x 10^16 seconds.

And average of 1.343 MeV = 2.152 x 10^-13 J of energy is released when an atom decays.

Therefore, the radioactive decay power of 1 gram of K-40 is ln2*1.5055 x 10^22*2.152 x 10^-13 J/(3.938 x 10^16 s) = 5.70 x 10^-8 W.

For a 60 kg adult, this is about 9.50 x 10^-10 Gy/s.

Again, using a weighting factor of 20 for approximately 1 MeV energies we get 4.75 x 10^-11 Sv/s.

Even if that K-40 is only in your system for a week and then 'passes through' (though more likely this will take longer than a day), you will still receive 2.87 x 10^-5 Sv of radiation, which is about 1% of the sieverts you receive from background sources in a year.

[GostHacked]

Your focus on the banana is great, but we are not dealing with K-40. We are dealing with uranium, plutonium, cesium. Specifically the types of radiation from 3 nuclear reactor meltdowns.

The radiation from Fukushima is more than just your background radiation.

The banana analogy is a joke.