Depleted Uranium Weaponry

[WildCat]

PS: I made an extensive search on JREF Forum and found allusions and links to in depth discussions about this issue prior to 2003. Unfortunately the links don't work anymore, and the search engine(s) don't return results prior to 2003. How then to find them without resorting to paranormal means?

A lot was lost last year when the forum was down, some older threads were lost.

Maybe you could find it in a google cache.

 

[Alphaba]

An interesting review paper:

• Bleise, A. et al. (2003). "Properties, use and health effects of depleted uranium (DU): A general overview". Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 64: 93–112.

I must add that at this point I don't consider to have an informed opinion about this issue. Yet I am already retaining a few things from my search:

• The main issue is not about the effects of external exposure to DU but about the ones of fine to ultrafine particles penetrating into the organism (well, not so fine in the case of shrapnels).
  
  
• As it is manifestly a 'hot' topic, I was surprised by the limited number (~ 20 indexed in PubMed) of published in vitro and preclinical studies on DU toxicity (in retrospect this is not totally surprising as DU ammos started to be significantly used 15 years ago). This means there currently are no true working models of DU particles toxicity. Even a reasonably clear and comprehensive picture of the range and kinds of effects of DU particles on relevant biological material and processes is not really available.
  
  
• Long term effects of inhaled, embedded, and ingested particles are still poorly known. Currently, long term effects of a limited kinds of well-established exposures (e.g. shrapnels) are thoroughly studied, and only in Gulf War veterans, who represent thus the first cohort ever followed.
  
  
• Conflicting agendas are pervasive around this issue, meaning that 1) extra cautiousness must be exercised in reviewing the literature, and 2) every categorical statement has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Maybe you could find it in a google cache.

Thank you for the tip. I'll try that.

 

[Aepervius]

Then reading the above...

...What do you mean about the last paragraph in the monde-diplomatic :

In Jefferson County, Indiana, the Pentagon has closed the 200-acre (80-hectare) proving ground where it used to test-fire DU rounds. The lowest estimate for cleaning up the site comes to $7.8bn, not including permanent storage of the earth to a depth of six metres and of all the vegetation. Considering the cost too high, the military finally decided to give the tract to the National Park Service for a nature preserve - an offer that was promptly refused. Now there is talk of turning it into a National Sacrifice Zone and closing it forever. This gives an idea of the fate awaiting those regions of the planet where the US has used and will use depleted uranium.

Also googling around I saw a lot of scare web site (uranium ! Booo ! nuklear !!!) and a few site which correctly cited concern of the resident that what is indicated as danger in the WHO docs (mainly contamination as an heavy element of food chain and table water) is clearly underestimated by the army which want to leave 70K tons of U there buried...

Actually I think le monde was exagerating, but OTOH the US army seems quite a bit taking it "easy" on the subject... Heavy metal contamination is no joke...

 

[Hamradioguy]

The Health Physics Journal (Peer reviewed publication of the Health Physics Society) has carried several detailed articles on the impact to human health of DU in war zones- Both Gulf War and Kosovo. Findings echo what Clarsct and other say above. Highly technical but good reading for those who are willing to wade through. Not available on line but any larger library should have back issues...or be able to obtain them.

 

[Beausoleil]

It's a common place that depleted uranium is an alpha emitter. It's overlooked that it's also a beta emitter.

This is because alpha decay of 238U produces 234Th (23 day half life) and 234Pa (1.2 min half life), both beta emitters. These reach equilibrium on timescales similar to their half lives, and at equilibrium there are as many 234Th decays as 234Pa decays as 238U decays. So even if you start with pure 238U , you will end up with more activity from beta emitters than alpha emitters in a few months.

 

[luchog]

And, since it hasn't been brought up, the US military has been phasing out the use of DU projectiles, converting to tungsten for various reasons. DU is still used as armour on many vehicles.

 

[phildonnia]

Oh by the way:
Also...any green translucent glass?

Incidentally, the antique stuff is not DU; it's natural uranium containing U235. Still totally harmless of course.

 

[DRBUZZ0]

Incidentally, the antique stuff is not DU; it's natural uranium containing U235. Still totally harmless of course.

Yes, that's true. But it's basically the same, since natural uranium contains less than 1% u-235 anyway. in actuality, it's slightly *more* radioactive than the depleted stuff.


And as far as U-238 producing betas. Yes, this is true as well. It also produces some gamma. I suppose it's normally through of as *primarly* an alpha emitter.

In natural uranium ore, most of the radiation is produced by daughter products like radium-226, bismuth-214, lead-210 ect. Those are removed during refining. And it would take a long time for those to build up to signifficant levels.

Nobody is saying that uranium is not radioactive. It certainly is, but as far as radioisotopes go, it's on the low end. I'd rather have a ton of U-238 sitting next to me than a few grams of co-60 any day ;-).


Just....don't eat it and you oughta be fine

 

[marting]

Yep anything "radioactive" scares people. Refined U, or DU (essentially the same) seems to have even more scare factor. Probably because of the association with weapons. Bet you can't get natural U or DU to illuminate a sheet of paper like I demonstrate with a $20 brush purchaseable all over the country like demonstrated here:

As demonstrated in this thread:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29455
Perfectly harmless even though it will peg a GM survey meter.

 

[Beausoleil]

And as far as U-238 producing betas. Yes, this is true as well. It also produces some gamma. I suppose it's normally through of as *primarly* an alpha emitter.

Odd really, since if you keep your ammunition for a year what you have is *primarily* a beta emitter and what ends up dusted round the environment is also primarily a beta (and gamma) emitter.

 

[Stitch]

PS: I made an extensive search on JREF Forum and found allusions and links to in depth discussions about this issue prior to 2003. Unfortunately the links don't work anymore, and the search engine(s) don't return results prior to 2003. How then to find them without resorting to paranormal means?

http://www.archive.org/

 

[CyCrow]

...What do you mean about the last paragraph in the monde-diplomatic :

In Jefferson County, Indiana, the Pentagon has closed the 200-acre (80-hectare) proving ground where it used to test-fire DU rounds. The lowest estimate for cleaning up the site comes to $7.8bn, not including permanent storage of the earth to a depth of six metres and of all the vegetation. Considering the cost too high, the military finally decided to give the tract to the National Park Service for a nature preserve - an offer that was promptly refused. Now there is talk of turning it into a National Sacrifice Zone and closing it forever. This gives an idea of the fate awaiting those regions of the planet where the US has used and will use depleted uranium.

Also googling around I saw a lot of scare web site (uranium ! Booo ! nuklear !!!) and a few site which correctly cited concern of the resident that what is indicated as danger in the WHO docs (mainly contamination as an heavy element of food chain and table water) is clearly underestimated by the army which want to leave 70K tons of U there buried...

Actually I think le monde was exagerating, but OTOH the US army seems quite a bit taking it "easy" on the subject... Heavy metal contamination is no joke...

Remember that the average content of Uranium in the earths crust is about 3 ppm. Found this link about the site: http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/Jefferson-Proving-Ground.htm It says 2000 acres, not 200, and 77 tons of DU, not 70000 tons. Assuming 2000 acres, that's about 8 million square meters. 1 metre of soil depth gives 8 million cubic metres, assume density of 2.5 to gives 20 million tons of soil. 3ppm of that is 60 tons. So the extra DU is about the same as natural U, doubling average uranium concentration. In addition, DU doesn't have the whole decay-series, so there is less added than natural radioactivity.

So I fully understand the Army not wanting to spend an insane amount of money on digging it up. The DU area is also a small part of a much larger proving ground, full of unexploded munitions. This makes it unsuitable for human activities, but wildlife thrives. So the best thing to do is probably simply leave the fences and warnings, keep people out and let it nature take its course.

// CyCrow

 

[CyCrow]

Odd really, since if you keep your ammunition for a year what you have is *primarily* a beta emitter and what ends up dusted round the environment is also primarily a beta (and gamma) emitter.

The DU decay chain effectively stops at U-234 (alpha, 245000 years), after th-234 (beta, 24.5 days) and Protactinium-234m ( beta, 1.17 minutes). So we have 2 beta decays per alpha. Not sure about the energies though, but I believe the alpha decay is the most biologically significant. At any rate, harmless externally. As others have stated, you want to avoid breathing the dust, but compared to other battlefield hazards, it's negligible.

// CyCrow

 

[CurtC]

One thing I've noticed is that there is a marker for an uneducated source about DU. If it makes a point of the long (4.5 billion year) half-life of U238 as a bad thing, then the person who wrote it fundamentally does not understand radioactive decay.

 

[marting]

Another thing that most people don't realize is that U is not that rare. It's more common than mercury or silver, let alone gold. Lead is more common, but not by a lot. Potassium is slightly radioactive and the radiation from K is far higher simply because humans need a fairly large amount of it.

So drink your OJ (which contains more K than bananas) and enjoy the healthy glow.

 

[bobdroege7]

originally posted by CyCrow

The DU decay chain effectively stops at U-234 (alpha, 245000 years), after th-234 (beta, 24.5 days) and Protactinium-234m ( beta, 1.17 minutes). So we have 2 beta decays per alpha. Not sure about the energies though, but I believe the alpha decay is the most biologically significant. At any rate, harmless externally. As others have stated, you want to avoid breathing the dust, but compared to other battlefield hazards, it's negligible.

You have either forgotten the initial U-238 alpha or the last U-234 alpha which are all in equilibrium in about 120 days, so its 2 alphas and 2 betas

DU is also used in shielding for transporting medical isotopes which is what I make- replace my nice Tungten with DU and you better give me an alpha detecting survey meter even though the DU pigs are sealed to prevent contamination.

thanks

 

[Lynx2174]

One thing I've noticed is that there is a marker for an uneducated source about DU. If it makes a point of the long (4.5 billion year) half-life of U238 as a bad thing, then the person who wrote it fundamentally does not understand radioactive decay.

seriously, that's always bugged me. Whenever I read some kind of media which states that radioactive materials/waste would remain radioactive for thousands or millions of years, I can't help but think that this means that the radioactive materials in question are all but harmless unless ingested.

It's like people think that radioactivity doesn't come in quantifyable levels, but instead is just basically on or off. present or not. as if it would be better to spend your life standing next to a block of something with a half-life of 200 years instead of with something with one of a half-billion years.

just keep it out of the water supply, don't eat it, don't make it an aerosol to breathe, and don't spread radioactive calcium over dairy fields and everything should turn out peachy.

EDIT: isn't tungsten dust (ie, perhaps from hitting an enemy tank with a tungsten AP flechette) a possible carcinogen? even if not, would not it also carry the risk of heavy metal poisioning? or is it too light a metal. as element 74, it's lighter than lead.

regardless, tungsten is an inferior armor piercer, so I'd prefer my troops use DU, to reduce their risk of death by enemy fire. also it makes a fine armor.

 

[DRBUZZ0]

Unfortionately, people do not really have a very good idea about radiation saftey in general. Such as not understanding that "radioactive" is not a binary term. Things can be very slightly radioactive.

Often I am asked questions like: How much radiation does it take to kill you?

Well...there's no real good answer to that. How much does it take to kill you imediatly? Depending on the conditions, a real lot. How much does it take to bring a 90% chance of death in an hour....a lot less (don't remember off the top of my head).

Also: How much radiation would it take to give you cancer?

Again...impossible to answer. Radiation does not give you cancer, as such. It increases the likelyhood of it, yes. But expose different people to a certain dose, will it give them cancer? Even if somebody does come down with leukemia...how do you know it was radiation?

Of course...this gets more complicated when you get into internal and external hazards. Some materials are harmless outside the body byt very dangerous if absorbed. (for example, plutonium). In this case, mamy variables come into play, including how easily the material is absorbed and the body's ability to excete it.

There are a lot of myths out there. A friend of mine recently bought a bottle of potassium iodine, becasue he was afraid of dirty bombs. I had to explain to him that KI is a general purpose radiation treatment, but only works in preventing uptake of Iodine 131 (an especially nasty fission product)

 

[bobdroege7]

CyCrow ignore my last post, you are correct 2 to 1

Lynx, Tungten is heavy, about 18.5 g/cc almost as heavy as U

 

[Euromutt]

EDIT: isn't tungsten dust (ie, perhaps from hitting an enemy tank with a tungsten AP flechette) a possible carcinogen? even if not, would not it also carry the risk of heavy metal poisioning? or is it too light a metal. as element 74, it's lighter than lead.

I'm pretty certain I read somewhere that, counterintuitive as it may seem, tungsten is not chemically toxic. Sorry, correction:

Tungsten and its compounds show generally low toxicity compared to most other metals and their compounds.

Source.
So comparatively low toxicity.

regardless, tungsten is an inferior armor piercer, so I'd prefer my troops use DU, to reduce their risk of death by enemy fire. also it makes a fine armor.

Actually, tungsten (mono)carbide (WC), according to that same page "has a hardness close to diamond," which makes it a damn fine penetrator, though of course it lacks the pyrophoric properties of DU. It may also be more expensive, at least for the US government; three weeks ago, ammonium paratungstate was going for up to USD270/mtu (metric ton unit), though admittedly I have no clue what DU costs.

I think the thing with DU munitions is that they were adopted in the latter days of the Cold War, when NATO forces needed the biggest technological edge they could get over the Warsaw Pact. For the US and UK, that included DU munitions. These days, though, it may be overkill to some extent; I sincerely doubt that any potential future military adversary of the US will be able to field anything against which tungsten carbide rounds won't do just as good a job. And DU remains a political hot potato, even if that is largely due to misinformation regarding its radioactive properties.