|
Thank you very much for opening this fantastic
forum to benefit students from all over the world.
My question is if the planet Earth emits heat
from radioactive decay, I will also be right to
say that it emits all the dangerous radiation as
well. If so, why are humans more afraid of a
nuclear explosion when we have been exposed to
dosage and dosage of nuclear radiation naturally?
And we seem to careless about it. |
Question Date: 2013-05-03 | | Answer 1:
That is an interesting question! You are
correct that most of the heat flux of the earth
(heat lost from an area of the surface over time)
is thought to originate from the decay of
radioactive elements. When radioactive elements
decay to their daughter products they emit energy,
often in the form of gamma radiation, which can be
harmful to humans. The reason that we are much
more concerned about things like nuclear
explosions than background radiation from rocks is
because the energy released is much greater. It
all comes down to the concentration of radioactive
elements in a nuclear weapon or energy reactor
versus in typical rocks in the earth’s crust.
Nuclear weapons and reactors use highly
concentrated nuclear fuel, such as uranium. In the
case of uranium, the fuel has also been enriched
in the isotope 235U (uranium with 92
protons and 143 neutrons in the nucleus); this is
because 235U is more likely to decay by
fission than 238U (uranium with 92
protons and 146 neutrons in the nucleus). In
nature, 235U makes up less than 1% of
all uranium, but weapon and reactor grade uranium
contains more than 20% 235U.
The concentration of uranium in average
continental crust is 1.7 parts per million (that’s
0.00017%; Wedepohl, 1995). That means that there
is 1.7 grams of uranium in 1 million grams of
rock, and only about 0.7% of it is fissile
235U. Let’s do a simple calculation to
determine how rock (average crust) it would take
to produce enough 235U for a nuclear
weapon.
concentration of U density of typical
crust 235U in natural uranium
(1.7g U / 106 g rock) x (2.8x106 g rock / 1
m3) x (0.007 g 235U / 1 g U)
= 0.03332 g 235U/m3
This means that there is only about 0.033 grams
of 235U in a cubic meter of rock in the
earth’s crust. The critical mass of
235U (the amount needed to cause a
sustained nuclear reaction) is 52 thousand grams
(wikepedia.org).
concentration 235U
critical mass
(1 m3 / 0.03332 g 235U) x
(5.2 x 104 g 235U) = 1,560,000
m3 rock
Over 1.5 million cubic meters of rock contains
amount of uranium-235 used in a nuclear weapon.
The result of this calculation is actually
surprising to me; 1.5 m3 is a lot of
rock, but it’s not that much. However, nuclear
reactions require that the fuel is very
concentrated; that is, that the 52 thousand grams
of 235U is closely packed together. The
low concentration in average crust means that the
intensity of radiation is very low.
The element potassium is a more important
source of heat in the crust than uranium. The
isotope potassium-40 (19 protons and 21 neutrons
in the nucleus) only makes up about ~0.01% of
natural potassium, but the element is over ten
thousand times more abundant in the crust. The
type of decay that 40K undergoes emits much less
energy than 235U fission, and is not
harmful to humans in the concentration of natural
crust.
references
Wedephohl, K.H. (1995). The composition of the
continental crust. Geochimica et Cosmochimica
Acta, 59, 1217–1232.
| | Answer 2:
There is lots of radioactive decay inside the
earth but it is spread over a huge volume, and
much of the radiation is shielded by the crust so
we get only a very low-level dose which is not a
big health concern. Nuclear energy disasters can
potentially generate lots of radiation in a very
small space so the dose people receive is very
large and can cause health problems.
| | Answer 3:
So you're curious about radiation, that's
excellent. First we have to clear up a few
language issues that scientists are sometimes not
so careful about. Scientists sometimes use certain
words to mean very specific things, but it's not
always obvious what they mean.
"Radiation" is a great example of this.
Strictly speaking, "Radiation" refers to energy
that can be carried through a vacuum (ie:
nothingness) by either particles or waves. This
doesn't seem to help us much because it's pretty
vague, but it does show why the word can be
misunderstood sometimes. The light coming from the
sun is radiation, and so is the heat coming from
it. When you toast bread in a toaster, it's being
heated up largely through radiation, nuclear power
plants also create radiation, but it is of a very
different kind. When we are talking about
radiation it is important to know what kind of
radiation we are talking about. Some of it is
harmless, like the electromagnetic radiation
coming from a light bulb (which we call light).
Some of it can be dangerous, like the radiation
coming from plutonium. We can generally classify
radiation as ionizing radiation (the harmful kind)
or non-ionizing radiation (the harmless kind). The
difference between the two is that ionizing
radiation carries enough energy to cause real
changes in the matter that they interact with.
It's like the difference between a spitball and a
bullet. Ionizing radiation is powerful enough to
knock the electrons right off of an atom,
sometimes powerful enough to disrupt the protons
and neutrons in an atom.
So let's get back to your question. The earth
does indeed emit radiation, most of it is thermal
radiation, in other words, radiation in the form
of heat. This is the same kind of radiation that
heats up your toast in the toaster. So most of it
is not immediately harmful to humans. But you are
right, the earth does emit some amount of harmful,
ionizing radiation. Most of this is produced
through radon gas, which is naturally found in the
ground. As a matter of fact, most of the radiation
that US citizens will ever encounter comes from
this naturally occurring radon gas. And if there
is too much of it, it can pose a health risk, but
we know that there is a certain amount of it that
does not seem to produce any ill effects.
Now we have to talk about something called
dosage, or radiation dosimetry, which is the study
of how big of a dose of ionizing radiation someone
can take without any negative side effects. The
truth is that ionizing radiation is everywhere.
Grass and trees are slightly radioactive in this
way because of the carbon that goes into them. The
truth is that some tiny amount of the carbon in
the air is radioactive... 0.0000000001% to be
exact! Bananas are radioactive too and so are you!
Both bananas and people contain potassium (it's a
natural building block for bones), and potassium
is naturally gives off tiny amounts of ionizing
radiation. Of course none of this ionizing
radiation is anything to worry about, because it
all depends on the dose. Just like you can eat a
cookie and it's yummy, but eat 40 cookies and you
might have a stomach ache. Eat nothing but cookies
for years and years and you might face more
serious side effects. With radiation it is all
about the dose.
People are afraid of nuclear explosions because
they worry that they might be exposed to large
amounts of the dangerous ionizing radiation. In
the rare cases when nuclear power plants do fail,
there is a risk of people being exposed to
dangerous amounts of radiation, but in general
every reasonable safety measure is taken to ensure
that even in the case of disasters, people are
shielded from harm. You may have heard of some
nuclear power plants melting down in Fukushima,
Japan. These did recently cause some amount of
harm, but it must be understood that the Fukushima
disaster was about the worst of the worst that
could happen. In the United States there are some
nuclear power plants, but they are well built and
well maintained and the risk of harm coming to
anyone from them is absolutely tiny. In life,
there are always risks. What we as a society need
to do is decide which risks are acceptable and
which are not. This means that people need to
learn about and understand the risks, and decide
whether it's worth it. As a scientist and a former
nuclear worker (someone who works in a place where
they may be exposed to ionizing radiation) I
decided long ago that it was worth it. But I
encourage you to read more and make up your own
mind. Here are a few links you may find
interesting and helpful to you. Thanks for the
question.
understand
radiation
radioation
dose chart | | Answer 4:
You are correct: most of the radioactivity we
are exposed to on a daily basis is of natural
origin, either radon gas (a decay product of
uranium in the Earth's interior) or carbon 14
(created by high-energy sunlight and cosmic rays).
Close proximity to a nuclear blast will expose you
to a great deal more harmful radiation than you
would ordinarily, but that doesn't make natural
sources any less dangerous.
Due to the propaganda against nuclear weapons
during the Cold War, many people are more afraid
of artificial nuclear energy than is appropriate -
which, again, isn't to say that the danger of that
isn't real either.
| | Answer 5:
The INTENSITY of radiation is VERY, VERY low
due to natural radioactive decay of U, Th, K, and
other radioactive elements. The intensity of
emitted radiation in CONCENTRATED elements that
have a short half-life is very, very large and
kill organisms in a few minutes. So it all has to
do with the INTENSITY of radiation... in other
words the number of radioactive emissions per unit
time.
| | Answer 6:
The graphic found in this link explains very
clearly your question as to why people are afraid
of nuclear meltdowns at nuclear power plants or
nuclear explosions more than they are afraid of
natural background radiation. The answer is that
we do not get immediately sick and die from lower
radiation dosages but we can get sick very quickly
and die from higher radiation dosages
radiation-dosage
| | Answer 7:
It's all about the dose. Over several million
years, most advanced organisms (including mammals,
like humans!) have evolved ways to detect and
repair the radioactive damage and mutations that
occur. Cellular organisms that weren't able to
repair this damage were less likely to reproduce
and have viable offspring, so this led to an
evolutionary pressure. Mammals, being relatively
complicated multicelullar organisms, have many
ways to deal with mutations and ensure the
affected cells are destroyed. Click Here to return to the search form.
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright © 2020 The Regents of the University of California,
All Rights Reserved.
UCSB Terms of Use
|
|
|