Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jimlup

(8,009 posts)
7. As a physicist I would say that this was a "source"
Tue May 15, 2012, 06:51 PM
May 2012

And not a reactor - if it were a reactor it would have been submerged in water and have control rods. It appears to me that the author of this piece is going for sensationalism and doesn't have a great deal of nuclear physics knowledge. I doubt very seriously that the Californium 252 was enclosed in "weapons grade uranium". Most full scale reactors in the United States don't even have "weapons grade uranium". Also it should be noted that while it sounds like a great deal 3.5 pounds of "weapons grade uranium" is not close to enough to make a real bomb. More likely it was "depleted uranium" used for shielding. My guess is that the author misunderstood the references to the materials.

This was an alpha source. I understand why Kodak wanted an alpha source. They made film for radiation detectors like the film in the film badge I wore for many years when I worked at a national laboratory.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»WTF? Kodak Had a Secret ...»Reply #7