Depleted Uranium Again

[a_unique_person]

So far in this thread and in both the others nobody stepped forward to defend Rokke's view very strongly if at all.

It looks like only AUP is left to defend the Rokke view and argue that America once again is up to its old evil empire tricks. But where is AUP? Is it possible that not even he can figure out how America is guilty on this issue. Maybe, the evil empire is innocent this time or maybe AUP is just mellowing.

I just read the article in the newspaper, and I already knew there were several people here who did not subscribe to that idea. The guy, however, appeared to have good credentials. That is, had good credentials. I was wondering if he was now persona-non-grata due to being wrong, or because he was saying things people didn't want to know about.

 

[Jon_in_london]

Depleted uranium shells are primarily a beta emitter -

I dont think so. Do you have a reference for that?

 

[TillEulenspiegel]

All the tracts I have read state that DU's are primerally an alpha emitter. The effects of handling the shells seem to so small as to be irrelevant. The main concern again is the inhalation of particulates from the impact of the shell. Others here have listed that in the norm the exposure is relatively harmless ( equivalent to a few X-Rays) with a rising risk of cancers later in life. The exposure or inhalation of contaminants however is possibly more dangerous.

The two suspected metals of main concern are Americium 241/243 and Plutonium 239/240 both are extremely toxic in minute amounts and represent a significant health threat over time , especially if ingested or aspirated.
snip------------------------------------------------------------
" Geneva, 16 February 2001 - Traces of plutonium have been detected in the DU penetrators found at sites in Kosovo that were investigated in November 2000 by the United Nations Environment Programme's Depleted Uranium Assessment Team, which included the International Atomic Energy Agency, UNEP reported here today.

The existence of plutonium was confirmed by the two laboratories tasked with analyzing the penetrators - the Swiss AC-Laboratory Spiez and the Swedish Radiation Protection Institute (SSI). Together with three other European laboratories, these labs have been analyzing a total of 340 soil, water, and other samples taken during the November field mission.

The traces of isotopes Pu-239/240 were found in four different penetrators (ammunition tips). The amount of plutonium in the penetrators varied from 0.8 to 12.87 Bq/kg. In January, UNEP confirmed that some labs had also found the uranium isotope U-236 in the penetrators. (Note: Bq = becquerel, a measure of radioactivity.)

The presence of these transuranic elements in the DU indicates that at least some of the material has been in nuclear reactors. However, the amount of plutonium found in the DU penetrators is very low and does not have any significant impact on their overall radioactivity.

"According to an assessment by the Swiss AC-Laboratory Spiez, these newest findings about the composition of the depleted uranium only lead to a minor change in the overall radiological situation and should therefore not cause any immediate alarm," said UNEP Executive Director Klaus Töpfer.

"As we stated earlier, UNEP's recommendations on what steps should be taken next will be based on the full set of laboratory analyses, which are still ongoing, and will be presented in early March in the report on the environmental effects of DU in Kosovo."

Some time ago there was a question about the relative toxicity of Pu.
> In 1976, Dave Myers and I wrote a paper titled,
> "Selected Aspects of Plutonium in the Environment, and Its Toxicity."
> Table 17, from this paper, gives the following:
>
> Agent Action & Site Approximate amount to cause
> death in hours to days.
> Pu (ingest) GI tract 500 mg
> Pu (inhal) Pul. edema 25 mg
> HCN Blood anoxia 50 mg
> Parathion Blocked synapses 100 mg
> Arsenic Chemical poison 120 mg
> Botulism toxin Resp. paralysis 5 E-5 mg
endsnip-------------------------------------------------------

Ameriecuim seems to generate more of a chemical poisoning risk VS a cancer risk. I could not find any large scale dedicated study's exclusively for Am241\243.

The over all health concerns SEEM to conclude that the greatest risk from these weapons (other then being hit by one) is one of simple heavy metal poisoning rather then the frightful spector of radiation poisoning so many raise.

 

[a_unique_person]

An interesting and more in depth interview with the guy involved.

Yes, he was sacked for saying the wrong thing. He does believe it is highly toxic, not because of radiation, necessarily, but just the empirical evidence. People working with or just in contact with this stuff get severe health reactions.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/06/27/1056683904035.html

A former US military researcher tells Gay Alcorn of his crusade to expose the health risks of depleted-uranium weapons used in the Gulf wars.


Doug Rokke sits on the edge of his chair in a beige, could-be-anywhere hotel room in Carlton. He stares at you with an almost embarrassing intensity and is close to tears.

"It's lonely," he says slowly. "It's very lonely. I made a decision. I was given a job. I did my job. I learned something. I gave them an answer they didn't want. I became persona non grata. And the better parts of my life ended."

What remains is an obsession with proving he is right about the dangers of depleted uranium (DU) weapons. A waste produced from the uranium enrichment process, depleted uranium has become increasingly contentious since American and British militaries first used it in the 1991 Gulf War and, since then, in the Balkans, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Rokke, a health physicist who became the Pentagon's most senior DU expert during the first Gulf War, became convinced it had contaminated the battlefield and could be a factor in Gulf War Syndrome, the mysterious mix of illnesses that have afflicted returning soldiers. Rokke acknowledges DU's brilliance as a weapon - because it is an extremely dense metal that sharpens and burns as it hits its target, it is used on the ends of tank shells and missiles to penetrate steel and concrete much more easily than conventional weapons. But he also believes that he and the research team became contaminated. "Everybody is sick," he says. "We've all got rashes, respiratory and kidney problems. It's there; there are no two ways about it."

Rokke is a military veteran. He joined the US Air Force in 1967 and bombed Vietnam targets "before I could shave". Years later, with a master of science and expertise in environmental health, he was ordered to the Gulf to help protect American soldiers if chemical and biological weapons were used and, later, to oversee DU clean-up. He became convinced DU was causing illnesses such as cancer, and that the Pentagon was downplaying its dangers. When he went public with his views, he was sacked.

He is still campaigning, and this week urged the Australian Government, which doesn't allow weapons to be made with DU, to test returning troops for contamination and to campaign for it to be banned globally.

DU is only slightly radioactive - far less than uranium itself - but it is also chemically toxic, and scientists are divided about whether the combination poses a serious or remote health risk to soldiers and civilians who come in contact with it or inhale its dust. Little rigorous research has been done, and Rokke's theories remain unproven.

Note the reference to little research being done. That would be the first thing that should be done, even if it is a good weapon.

 

[kookbreaker]

An interesting and more in depth interview with the guy involved.

Yes, he was sacked for saying the wrong thing. He does believe it is highly toxic, not because of radiation, necessarily, but just the empirical evidence. People working with or just in contact with this stuff get severe health reactions.

Please, he's just a wanabe maverick who gets off on playing doomsayer. The juicier he tells the tale, the better it book and article deals he gets. Do you realise that none of his work and study has been peer reviewed?

Note the reference to little research being done. That would be the first thing that should be done, even if it is a good weapon.

Gee, ya think?

 

[John Harrison]

Do you realise that none of his work and study has been peer reviewed?

And here we get to the nitty gritty. He says "everybody is sick". That's a somewhat nebulous claim, but I reckon he needs to do this to back up his other claims about GWS.

 

[Thumper]

Decay modes of Uranium:

Isotope Half-life Spin Parity Decay Mode(s) or Abundance
218U 1.5 ms 0+ %A=100
219U 42 us %A=?
220U
221U
222U 1.0 us 0+ %A=100
223U 18 us %A=?
224U 0.9 ms 0+ %A=100
225U 95 ms %A=100
226U 0.35 s 0+ %A=100
227U 1.1 m (3/2+) %A=100, %EC+%B+ < 0.001
228U 9.1 m 0+ %EC<5, %A>95
229U 58 m (3/2+) %EC+%B+ ~ 80, %A ~ 20
230U 20.8 d 0+ %A=100, %SF < 1.4E-10
231U 4.2 d (5/2-) %EC=100, %A ~ 0.0055
232U 68.9 y 0+ %A=100, %24NE=9E-11 7
233U 1.592e+5 y 5/2+ %A=100, %SF < 6E-11, %24NE < 9.5E-11
234U 2.455e+5 y 0+ %Abundance=0.0055 5, %A=100, %SF=1.64E-9 22, %NE=9E-12 7, %MG=1.4E-11 3
235U 7.038e+8 y 7/2- %Abundance=0.7200 12, %A=100, %SF=7.0E-9 21, %20NE=8E-10 4
235m1U 25 m 1/2+ %IT=100
236U 2.342e7 y 0+ %A=100, %SF=9.4E-8 4
237U 6.75 d 1/2+ %B-=100
238U 4.468e+9 y 0+ %Abundance=99.2745 60, %A=100, %SF=5.45E-5 7, %BB=2.2E-10 7
238m1U 225 ns 0+
238m2U 1 ns
239U 23.45 m 5/2+ %B-=100
240U 14.1 h 0+ %B-=100
241U
242U 16.8 m 0+ %B-=100

Thanks to the Berkeley Laboratory Isotopes Project

So, in depleted uranium, which isotope is used? As you can see, none are stable. (Well, it would probs be best if you went to the original site, as this didn't format too well.)

 

[rwguinn]

Yes, he was sacked for saying the wrong thing. He does believe it is highly toxic, not because of radiation, necessarily, but just the empirical evidence. People working with or just in contact with this stuff get severe health reactions.

Name me One heavy metal which is not toxic if the metal or its oxides are inhaled? Lead is extremely nasty, too--and that's what plain old bullets are made of...

 

[kookbreaker]

234U 2.455e+5 y

<....>

So, in depleted uranium, which isotope is used? As you can see, none are stable. (Well, it would probs be best if you went to the original site, as this didn't format too well.)

You do realise what the 2.455e+5 y means, don't you?

 

[John Harrison]

So, in depleted uranium, which isotope is used? As you can see, none are stable. (Well, it would probs be best if you went to the original site, as this didn't format too well.)

DU is 238. As I mentioned before the long half life (4.5b yrs) means that the decay is so slow that compared to a human lifetime it's indistinguishable from "stop". Sort of like the danger of being run over by a glacier.

 

[Thumper]

<....>



You do realise what the 2.455e+5 y means, don't you?

Yes I do. Do you understand what stable means?

 

[kookbreaker]

Yes I do. Do you understand what stable means?

Apparently my definition is not the same as yours!

I can be wrong, but I figured once you are into exponential figues for half lives...

 

[Agammamon]

Given that DU is an alpha emitter and the armor and projectiles are encased, the exposure calculations I've seen show that the average tankers yearly dose is equal to a day on the beach. People make a big deal about its radioactivity, but DU is 40% less radioactive than natural uranium. And exposure to high levels of alpha radiation cause normal radiation sickness in the short term and cancers in the long. The real problem with DU (if there actually is one) is that its a heavy metal and inhalation/ingestion of the dust from impacts may cause heavy metal poisoning, but again, yoou will get this problem from just about any high density penetrator including Tungsten.
As a matter of fact this may explain why so many have come down with GWS despite not having any credible exposure to DU. After DU, Tungsten is the material of choice for AP rounds and is used by western militaries in tank rounds, CIWS rounds, shipboard guns, aircraft guns, etc. These people may be suffering from heavy metal poisoning brought about by exposure to Tungsten.

 

[Thumper]

Apparently my definition is not the same as yours!

I can be wrong, but I figured once you are into exponential figues for half lives...

Then you figured wrong. Unlike most political discussions, there are definite limits on 'fuzziness' in physics. Uranium has a half-life in and of itself (above and beyond whether protons have one, too), thus it is not stable.

Yes, the activity rate is extremely small, but it still changes to another element. Would I hold a glump of U-238 in my hand? Sure. But that doesn't mean it is stable.

 

[John Harrison]

Would I hold a glump of U-238 in my hand? Sure. But that doesn't mean it is stable.

Ok, it's not stable.

Your point is?

 

[rwguinn]

Then you figured wrong. Unlike most political discussions, there are definite limits on 'fuzziness' in physics. Uranium has a half-life in and of itself (above and beyond whether protons have one, too), thus it is not stable.

Yes, the activity rate is extremely small, but it still changes to another element. Would I hold a glump of U-238 in my hand? Sure. But that doesn't mean it is stable.

Ok, so the stuff decomposes. That fact, while relevant is a physics discussion, is totally beside the fact that DU is not dangerously radioactive by any stretch of the imagination, which was what the topic of this thread was about. Quibbling over trifles is ridiculous, when the trifles are not germane to the topic. Note it, and move on!

Why nitpick?

 

[a_unique_person]

Name me One heavy metal which is not toxic if the metal or its oxides are inhaled? Lead is extremely nasty, too--and that's what plain old bullets are made of...

The article does not claim he is getting sick from radiation, and points out that DU is low on radiation. What it is saying is that once it is used and vapourises, it is extremely toxic, even for a period of time later.

It doesn't really matter why it is toxic, I suppose, just that it is extremely toxic. It is kind of like the cluster bomb problem. The weapons guys want the best weapons, with no consideration for the after effects of their use.

 

[rwguinn]

The article does not claim he is getting sick from radiation, and points out that DU is low on radiation. What it is saying is that once it is used and vapourises, it is extremely toxic, even for a period of time later.

It doesn't really matter why it is toxic, I suppose, just that it is extremely toxic. It is kind of like the cluster bomb problem. The weapons guys want the best weapons, with no consideration for the after effects of their use.

Again-
Lead, the material regular ball ammunition for the m-16's, AK-47's, etc, etc, is extremely toxic-always. The oxide is even more so-which is why lead pellets are illegal for use in waterfowl hunting.
I mold bullets for a muzzle loader. Getting rid of the Lead Oxide slag from the melt is a real problem-you can't just throw it in the trash or toss it on the ground! And I always do the melting outdoors.
Heat lead up, and Pb Oxide forms. Bullets hit dirt, sand, steel, just about anything, and get hot enough for it to form. There are shooting ranges which have been in use so long that the problem is very real. So it isn't just DU.

 

[Thumper]

Jeez

Well, there was a discussion of the level of radioactivity of DU shells. It was stated that certain isotopes of U were stable (thus not radioactive). This was in error. In fact, neutrino_cannon
stated that DU is moderately radioactive. As this discussion is in the Science Forum, I figured that accuracy was important.

 

[John Harrison]

Jeez

Well, there was a discussion of the level of radioactivity of DU shells. It was stated that certain isotopes of U were stable (thus not radioactive). This was in error. In fact, neutrino_cannon
stated that DU is moderately radioactive. As this discussion is in the Science Forum, I figured that accuracy was important.

Ah, I see your point, however the "stable" comment and the "moderately radioactive" comment are about equally accurate. Like rwguinn said, it was about whether DU radiation was dangerous.