Published: August 27th, 2012 at 2:50 pm ET
|
Regarding the recent news that Japanese officials report concerns about gamma rays being emitted from Fukushima plant debris, Fairewinds’ Arnie Gundersen writes to ENENews:
Gamma rays from rubble implies that the rubble was activated by neutrons or that activation products like Co60 are in the rubble. Interesting.
Published: August 27th, 2012 at 2:50 pm ET
|
sending...
Not true. Not interesting.
Report Comment
Why do you say that this theory about neutron activation or Cobalt-60 presence is not true?
Report Comment
Oh I can guarantee that huge amounts of cobalt-60 is true…the underground debris and surface level is loaded with it. Saltwater is acclerating the corrosive effects of the debris.
So now we have a conundrum at Fukushima…how to get to the deadly stuff to neutralize it.
The Americans are spending billions a year and 15,000 workers on their own nightmare at Hanford. Digging out leaky tanks of high level radioactive waste.
The Germans meanwhile have their own national catastrophe at Asse II in lower Saxony (Our erudite poster BnB's home and my ancestral home).
3.7 million Euros is the tentative price tag on removing radioactive waste from the salt cavern. It's leaking now and full of cobalt-60 and a raft of other deadly nuclear poisons.
Pictures of the horrible barrels thrown down into a deep hole (literally thrown and broken open because it was so radioactive hot when they unloaded it 40 years ago):
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/07/photogalleries/100708-radioactive-nuclear-waste-science-salt-mine-dump-pictures-asse-ii-germany/
More info: http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sc=2057290
SP: These three enormous economy-draining projects represents a tiny percentage of the longterm cleanup and decommission costs for the rest of the nasty nuclear plants in each of these three countries. The politicians who have approved this mess for 60 years did it all for the military and for greed. We will all be bankrupt soon.
Report Comment
Yes, Asse II is a bad thing.
Officially the politicians plan to recover the waste, but actually they don't want to do anything.
They just wait and do nothing, until water gushes into the mine like it happened in the neighboring salt mines so that it needs to be abandoned (cheaper in short term view).
Here a 3d picture of the mine, pink marked the areas where nukewaste has been stored: http://www.braunschweiger-zeitung.de/archiv/zentimeterarbeit-in-800-metern-tiefe-id410761.html?view=gallery
It's "only" 2 kilograms of plutonium in the mine, not to mention the other goodies like radioactive animal carcasses, chemical hazwaste and other undeclared stuff.
Only 139,000 barrels.
Report Comment
Meine Fresse – good I don't live in Niedersachsen anymore. I now live on an island where billions of liters of radioactivity are on their way to its shores .. feels soo much better (or doesn't it)?
Report Comment
Dear SP and Atomfritz,
It is so commendable that Germany is stopping NPP's but oh, what problems still!
Aloha.
'German's warn of cancer near nuclear dump site'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUioTZ-6ioE
Report Comment
Hi Sickputter, the information regarding the German salt mine in which is stored at least 100,000 barrels of low to medium radioactive waste was valuable to those of us who are following a mirror situation in the US, Louisiana, Bayou Corne. It too is a salt mine used to store nuclear waste, and came to the attention of the residents when a sinkhole began over the mine. The DNR had allowed the storage and has known about the problems with the mine for over a year and kept quiet; only to assure the residents that there were no health risks. Testing has shown that the radioactivity is 15x the safe measurement.
The sinkhole continues to grow and as yet there is no plan to resolve the crisis. Currently, Hurricane Isaac is on a path directly through the location of this environmental disaster.
Report Comment
*bnb looking up "erudite"
LOL
Report Comment
I take philipupnorth to be saying Arnie's use of the word "interesting" is too light of a description. But, i think Arnie means to imply that the presence of cobalt 60 is problematic and further indication that the crisis is being underplayed, not that he finds it intellectually stimulating.
Report Comment
Iam335,
I would guess that philipupnorth said that because he claimed, back when Tepco was demolishing Reactor 4 with no mitigation, that the concrete dust was was no problem, yet even Tepco.guv is admitting that there is a problem.
"Reality Check Part 1: Concrete was poured during building of nuke plant, and contains few radioactive isotopes. No problem with dust."
"it is only cement dust. Probably not even radioactive, as the concrete was poured before fuel was put into reactor."
When I posted Bobby1's analysis of isotopes present, "The concrete in these walls have been subject to neutron bombardment for the past 15 months. This makes the chemical elements in this material radioactive. The main isotopes to be found in this dust, among others, would include cobalt-60, europium-152 and -154, cesium-134, scandium-46, zinc-65, barium-133, and manganese-54…
http://optimalprediction.com/wp/
philipupnorth responded: "Bobby1 includes in is list of isotopes various daughter products of nuclear fission that simply cannot be within the concrete columns being demolished at Fuku4… Didn't happen."
http://enenews.com/happening-now-large-dust-clouds-blowing-from-no-4-reactor-during-removal-work-videos
Yet now even Japan is saying cobalt-60 is in the debris.
Report Comment
NoNukes: Good memory.
We were talking, as I recall, about dust from cutting and removal of concrete columns above the equipment level of Building4. Some were concerned at the time that neutron bombardment since 311 had created a whole host of uranium fission daughter products in the concrete dust that was blowing away from Building4, as a danger for workers and the public. (I still maintain that you can subject a concrete column to all the neutrons you want, without creating even a single atom of cobalt-60 or any other isotope of uranium fission inside the concrete of the column). Not to worry. If there are radioisotopes about, they were scattered by the explosions when Buildings1,3,&4 were destroyed.
In this instance, it's about proportion and perspective. We are "concerned" about a tiny bit of gamma emitting cobalt scattered among the debris, while ignoring beta emitting cesium that is orders magnitude more prevalent and dangerous. Classic TEP.gov disinformation. When we say that neutrons may have activated debris to produce cobalt-60, we are dealing with fiction, rather than reality.
Report Comment
Maybe they name it co-balt because the little buggers are having some woo woo in there, without wearing condoms.
All those babies that cobalt is making are bound to end up causing mischief because the bad apple never lands far from the tree.
"Nuclear weapon designs could intentionally incorporate 59Co, some of which would be activated in a nuclear explosion to produce 60Co. The 60Co, dispersed as nuclear fallout, creates what is sometimes called a cobalt bomb.[72]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt
Wiki makes radioactive cobalt sound like some kind of neat toy, meant to be played with by little boys.
Report Comment
TEPCO is claiming that the Fukushima Daiichi plant in its entirety is emitting 0.1 Bq/h of cesium (all combined).
*sigh*
Report Comment
Pardon me, a typo. 0.01 Bq/h.
Report Comment
Ain't that amazin" dosdos? And, the media is sending in reporters who haven't done their homework and who wouldn't even know the difference between an alpha particle and a gamma one yet unabashedly summarize the situation at Fukushima all the same.
Report Comment
Dunno why Arnie talks about cobalt-60.
He should have talked of cesium.
Report Comment
He is responding to a recent finding of cobalt 60 by TEPCO.
Report Comment
From my brief google searches and wiki research, cobalt 60 is intentionally made from cobalt 59. Since cobalt 60 is created within a nuclear reactor from a pellet of cobalt 59 being lowered, activated, then immediately removed and stored as a source of radioactivity for a variety of uses, perhaps Arnie is wondering why the cobalt 60 is being found in the reactor. And, cobalt 60 puts out gamma radiation that decays as a beta particle and is highly lethal. Why was either cobalt 59 or cobalt 60 in the reactor at the time of the explosions, or perhaps, was it being stored nearby and got mixed into the debris. I find that interesting, too, in the same vein as Arnie does – curiouser and curiouser. Either recriticality is ongoing above ground in the debris piles as many have suggested here on enenews, as well as Arnie, or cobalt 60 was being stored on site or in the process of being made.
Report Comment
At nuclear plants the cobalt problem originates from steel impurities (niobium-59 and cobalt-59) in the reactor metals.
These impurities catch a neutron and become Co-60.
So nuclearists try to use steels that contain as little niobium and cobalt, but even the normal impurities are sufficient to make working without water difficult.
Report Comment
Personally I have been surprised we have not heard much about Co60 so far. That is the most prominent isotope of interest in the day to day operation at a nuclear power plant. When they had the explosions at the plant a lot of Co60 had to go airborne. Why is Arnie surprised? That is kind of weird.
Report Comment
In this context the few grams of Co-60 don't really matter in contrast to the 500-1000kg of cesium per reactor.
Report Comment
Probably more than just a few grams. While smaller than the big dog isotopes when Arnies soil and building dust samples were taken in Tokyo they turned up cobalt-60 in the American labs. So it is flying around hundreds and thosands of miles just like the other 1,000 little devils.
So is cobalt-60 a significant health hazard?
"All ionizing radiation, including that of cobalt-60, is known to cause cancer. Therefore, exposures to gamma radiation from cobalt-60 result in an increased risk of cancer.
Because it emits such strong gamma rays, external exposure to cobalt-60 is also considered a significant threat. The magnitude of the health risk depends on the quantity of cobalt-60 involved and on exposure conditions:
length of exposure
distance from the source (for external exposure)
whether the cobalt-60 was ingested or inhaled"
The above excerpt from our American Sadnet eggheads:
http://www.epa.gov/rpdweb00/radionuclides/cobalt.html#affecthealth
Report Comment
Just because the atom is small does not necessarily mean that it isn't nasty. I had one weapons engineer tell me that tritium was worse than plutonium. Hydrogen has been found to have at least seven isotopes. Of which tritium is only the third most neutron populated.
Nuclear decay produces many daughter products. While plutonium is in no way safe to deal with nor an insignificant hazard, we must understand that the other daughter products of nuclear reactions, even after the fuel has left the reactor, can far overshadow the danger of plutonium. Plutonium is not the worst just because it has made the biggest bombs. Some of the other daughter products can too and we had better hope no one starts collecting and enriching them.
A used piece of medical equipment with a Cobalt rod in it was melted down in Mexico and the rerod was used in a large high end community. I've included some links to show how serious a small amount of cobalt is.
http://www.nytimes.com/1984/05/01/science/nuclear-spill-at-juarez-looms-as-one-of-worst.html?pagewanted=all
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/radevents/1983MEX1.html
http://listverse.com/2011/08/07/10-more-cases-of-deadly-radioactive-exposure/
Report Comment
If Gundersens' measurements can be verified, they would indeed be interesting. But I cannot find any peer verification of his findings. So, these seem still unproved.
And, the distribution of Cobalt in the measurements points to some cobalt source incinerated accidentally, it's just too much to originate from Fuku-I.
http://enenews.com/gundersens-tokyo-test-results-radioactive-cobalt-majority-samples-1481-bqkg-about-ramifications-nations-capital-like-kneeling-radioactive-waste-pick-flowers-video-chart
Report Comment
Cesium is a lot easier to identify than cobalt in a field of contamination.
Report Comment
He's not surprised. It's as he expected.
Report Comment
It is a little weird. A pile of rubble containing cesium will give off a lot of Gamma also, yes? – What's it all about then Arnie?
Report Comment
Yes the cesium will also give off a lots of gamma radiation. If there was no gamma radiation then we could all walk into the drywell and clean up the mess (well almost). Something is going on with Arnie's statement and Tepco's about gamma radiation, something very strange.
Report Comment
Actually, Arnie's reputation is so low because he usually talks crap, but sometimes he talks something good (rarely).
He probably needs more donations.
Report Comment
lol when was the last time CNN called u up for a interview?
Report Comment
@ Atomfritz, maybe something is being lost for you in translation. Few people talk more clearly about nuclear radiation than Arnie Gundersen. He's responding to the findings of cobalt 60, a gamma radioisotope, which is usually more lethal than alpha or beta radiation though it doesn't travel as far. His comment that it is "interesting" is his way of understating that an even more serious problem exists than what is being reported by TEPCO. It's proof positive for the likes of folks at the IAEA, NRC, NISA, etc. It's a polite and professional invitation to these people to look further. He's not our mascot or mouthpiece saying things how you or i want them said. That's our job, not his. He has his own work to do. Don't judge him as though he were our errand boy.
Report Comment
The apparent problem that nobody else found significant cobalt contamination undermines Gundersen's findings.
It could even be a hoax.
And such doesn't contribute to good reputation.
Report Comment
Very well said Vic.
Report Comment
Arnie bases his statements on the facts at hand and not wild speculation. He deserves our respect. Anyone who would bash Arnie needs to post their own credentials before making their comments.
Report Comment
He has gone from believing that there was still a future for nuclear energy to becoming opposed to all nuclear power within a year's time. He is walking and demonstrating the path that his colleagues need to follow. Were he not taking this path, were he not making the difficult transition from nuclear supporter who became whistleblower, and now, change agent, the journey that other professionals must take to save this world would not be so illuminated.
Report Comment
@mix: "…post their own credentials before making their comments." Really? It's due to such elitism that we find ourselves here. Society trusted these people precisely because of their discipline. Now, we find there's no limit to the deception of these 'learned' ones…
Report Comment
The'learned ones' evidently need help..as all continue to be incorrect or 'politically correct'.
Cobalt-60= isotope of the week.
One of many..dancing girls in the chorus line.
Specialty educations..often narrow the scope of vision.
"That's our job, not his"..(VicFromOregon)
Every day..Mr. Gundersen does not impress upon the people the true criticality of Fukushima..the longer and less chance there is of getting the children evacuated from the hot spots. (at the very least!)
The rest is scientific debate..necessary but secondary.
Our job..my job..is mighty rough.
Report Comment
PS.ummm..This is about life-saving for Heart of the Rose.
And although I love a good scientific debate.
I do wish Mr. Gundersen..could stand out on my way a bit.
Report Comment
@Heart: as we moved into the 'modern' age, it was necessary that the parameters of expertise be formalized; where trust came in. But now we've all seen example-after-example of one profession after another being compromised. Seems trust is inversely proportional to ones education…
Report Comment
"http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/2011/08/arne-gundersen-lethal-levels-of.html"
Arne said this in 2011 about gamma……
Report Comment
Wasn't that always the largest threat and concern, that the entire site would become unapproachable and unworkable due to radiation? Hardened robots can't even survive ground zero(s).
Chopper flyovers dropping water and for observations reported back neutron beams being seen and glowing after the explosions. Of course, TEPCO won't release the ground monitor readings or findings of the material found around the plant so you can't confirm how much radiation is really being produced or released from debris even though TEPCO saw fit to concrete the bottom of the adjacent small harbor that a lot of debris floated over and fell into after the Unit 3 explosion.
Report Comment
The explosion threw hot fuel rods out of #3, 2 to 3 miles in all directions. The harbor is just a short distance away..
What % of those radioactive fuel rod pieces did they cover up in the harbor?
Maybe 5%?
Comparing Contaminated Zones Around Chernobyl And Fukushima Ocean Radiation Released; via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/05/comparing-contaminated-zones-around.html
What really happened at Fukushima? via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-really-happened-at-fukushima.html
Report Comment
Yes, good memory razzz. This is a serious finding. One he expected to be found nevertheless. It makes dealing with the site all that much harder and more dangerous.
Report Comment
Well named German nuclear toxic waste dump;
Asse
nothing sweet or lovely there…. just lots of stinky, smelly, toxic stuff…
kind of fits behind FUKU in the …..
I wonder what kind of horrible story all of these names of these places could tell, if they were all strung together?
Report Comment
i almost shudder every time i clik on enenews, it's really maddening that a (relative) handful of people can keep this devastating industry alive. i found a fuku symposium from this last spring, this was held at U of Chicago…….thanks everyone for all the scary news and links !
…..http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh1lJCHRXms&feature=em-uploademail
Report Comment
After entering a living mammal (such as a human being), some of the 60Co is excreted in feces. The remainder is taken up by tissues, mainly the liver, kidneys, and bones, where the prolonged exposure to gamma radiation can cause cancer. Over time, the absorbed cobalt is eliminated in urine.[7]
Cobalt is an element of steel alloys. Uncontrolled disposal of 60Co in scrap metal is responsible for the radioactivity found in several iron-based products.[10][11]
In 2000, a disused radiotherapy head containing a 60Co source was stored at an unsecured location in Bangkok, Thailand and then accidentally was sold to scrap collectors. Unaware of the dangers, a junkyard employee dismantled the head and extracted the source, which remained unprotected for a period of days at the junkyard. Ten people, including the scrap collectors and workers at the junkyard, were exposed to high levels of radiation and became ill. Three of the junkyard workers subsequently died as a result of their exposure, which was estimated to be over 6 Gy. The source was safely recovered by the Thai authorities.[12]
In August, 2012, Petco recalled several models of steel pet food bowls after US Customs and Border Protection determined that they were emitting low levels of radiation. The source of the radiation was determined to be 60Co that had contaminated the steel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobalt-60
Report Comment
apropos Bangkok Cobalt-60 adventurers.
Look at the horrific photos, especially in chapter 4 and 5!
http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1124_scr.pdf
(It was 0.3 gram of Co-60, resembling 425 curies, resp. 15.7 TBq)
Report Comment
Arnie is an nuclear engineer and that is his background and field of expertise. He has the cajones to speak up, which is rare in the field, and has been of great service. But he is not an expert or experienced with radiation safety. He knows much more than the vast majority of people, but he has not been in the field and worked with radiation on a day to day basis. And he has said a few things that have shown that lack of knowledge in this area. But I really do not care because of all the good work he has done.
Just like someone asking me about engineering issues, I have some knowledge but that is not my area of expertise.
Report Comment
I agree, chrisk9. He wants the questions asked, He doesn't suggest that he has all the right answers. He's the first to say that this is beyond our known science at this point. He can educate the masses on the basics of nuclear reactors and the things that go wrong. That is enough and I, for one, am grateful.
Report Comment