From: future@nor.com.au (Hans-Peter Schnelboegl)
Subject: DU

Thanks for all the information on DU. I personally did some investigation into uranium tailings, which have a lot in common with DU. After a few hundred thousand years, when the full decay chain of the parent isotope U-238 has been re-established (some 13 radioactive isotopes), the isotope ratio will be actually the same for DU and for uranium tailings.

However, DU will remain highly concentrated, while the uranium in uranium tailings remains some ten thousand times diluted by powdered rock (from the original uranium ore). Consequently, the bulk of uranium tailings is much larger. I would guess that we have produced about 500 to 800 million tonnes of uranium tailings worldwide - 60 million tonnes in Australia alone. And we may have produced 600 000 tonnes of the highly concentrated DU (a rough guess).

The radioactivity of uranium - be it DU or uranium tailings - is not man-made but rather derived from the uranium in the uranium ore. There is no increase in activity. However, mainly due to the modified consistency of the uranium (in the case of DU highly concentrated powder or gas, or combustable metal, and in the case of uranium tailings vast quantities of powder) the radiation from DU and uranium tailings is millions of times more dangerous than that from the original uranium ore. For more details see my paper "Long-term Consequences of Uranium Mining", chapter 1 (available on www.nor.com.au/community/future).

I consider DU to be the biggest curse from our nuclear age. Integrated over all future, it produces most harm of all radioactive wastes (extremely long half life of 4500 million years for the main isotope, continuous production of radioactive decay products including the gaseous radon-222). While the future of life on this planet may not last that long, we have no right to simply discard life and health of countless future humans and animals. The Precautionary Principle has to be given priority over greed and power. Instead, we allow sixty years of nuclear age to harm all life for billions of years (reminds me of the story of Adam and Eve and the end of paradise).

The health effects of DU are both radiological and toxicological. The radiological health effects can be quantified by the use of an extremely complex system of conversion factors and biological transfer models, established by the ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). This organisation is arguably the most criminal organisation of humans ever established, being responsible for the death of hundreds of millions to trillions of humans from future generations. For more details on this organisation see my paper "Long-term Consequences of Uranium Mining", chapter 5.1 (available on www.nor.com.au/community/future). Unfortunately, their system is the only system available to calculate radiological health effects. Other organisations in this field (UN-SCEAR, BEIR, etc) are intrinsically connected with the ICRP.

As far as DU is concerned, the credibility of the ICRP model is further undermined by the fact that they decreased the conversion factors for the uranium isotopes considerably after the Golf War, about by a factor of four. This allows a four times higher exposure to uranium. Simple. Obviously, they claim scientific reasons for this, which certainly would have been supplied by scientists selling their brains to the highest bidder.

More likely, the reasons for increased conversion factors are twofold: the eternal contamination of vast areas with DU by the US army, and the difficulty of the mining industry to comply with the previous dose limits in underground uranium mines.

Using the ICRP's models to quantify the health effects of DU, we find indeed that the recent leukemia cases couldn't possibly be connected to DU ammunition. The ICRP model suggests a leukemia risk (considering the short time lag between exposure and disease) some 100 times lower, with various uncertainties. I suggest we have to maintain an open mind in this as the ICRP model may be somewhat valid - or it may be utterly ridiculous as in other repect. The future may show. While it is beyond our means to do the research ourselves and to establish alternative models, epidemiological evidence has repeatedly proven the ICRP model wrong in the past, for example:

* more recent Hiroshima statistics have discredited the ICRP's model for low level radiation

* fatalities from the major US nuclear research facilities are far higher than can be expected from the dose received by the workers using the ICRP's model.

It would be extremely important to get epidemiological evidence for DU because of its eternal effects. Unfortunately the situation in Iraq and in the US army is not conducive for the collection of such evidence. The situation should be better for the people in Bosnia / Kosovo and for the European armies involved.

Peter

However, the activity of DU comes to
some 49% from U-238
some 49% of U-234
about 1% from U-235.

There may be some variations in this ratio.
After some 300 000 years the activity of DU will have increased about sevenfold due to the generation of its radioactive decay products. After 1000 million years the activity of DU will still be about six times higher than it is today, and after 4500 million years the DU's activity will be about three times higher than it is today.

PS: The WISE - website <www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium> includes a calculator  for radiation fatalities, which uses the ICRP model: Please don't forget to refer to the criminal aspects of the ICRP when publishing results calculated with their model - otherwise you contribute to their crimes

Prof. Wolfgang Koehnlein gives more details on the ICRP in "Kurzer historischer Ueberblick ueber die Aktivitaeten and Empfehlungen der Internationalen Strahlenschutzkommission (ICRP)", Institut fuer
Strahlenbiologie der Westfaelischen Wilhelms-Universitaet, 48149
Muenster, Germany