From: John Woodgate
Subject: Re: eer
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 08:00:06 +0000
Organization: JMWA Electronics Consultancy
Reply-To: John Woodgate
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 10:10:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Newsreader: Turnpike (32) Version 4.01 <5Z8C9wtxbnpWyFnyfFzqmVF739>
I read in sci.electronics.design that StevJensen
wrote (in <firstname.lastname@example.org>) about 'eer', on
Wed, 30 Oct 2002:
>For how long would it be more energetically active?
>You note that the energetic isotopes have short half lives.
The well-known 10000 years is in the right ball-park.
>It seems, at least to me, that it must be missing something in the energy
>department, otherwise there wouldn't be any point in removing the
Its heat-generation is *uncontrollable*, unlike that of the original
fuel. This is a *good* reason to eliminate it!
>A page on Google lists a half life of something around 200k years for
>Pu239. If I had a block of it hidden on my desk would I be able to
>tell it was there by measuring an increase in the background radiation?
>Would I have to know exactly what the original background was
>or would it be obvious?
How big is the 'block'? A sugar-cube sized block would certainly give
levels well above background. A brick could be above critical mass for
the fission chain reaction, so as to eliminate your desk, you and much
of the surrounding countryside.
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!