Depleted Uranium: Army Use & Radioactivity Risk

[Arctic Fox]

Could the DU be recycled for use in something like an RTG?

I’m thinking that DU wouldn’t get (temperature)hot enough to run an RTG... comments?

 

[russ_watters]

Could the DU be recycled for use in something like an RTG?

I’m thinking that DU wouldn’t get (temperature)hot enough to run an RTG... comments?

I don't think so either - it has an extremely slow decay rate.

 

[flylake]

As one poster to this forum was so fond of noting, one single particle of radiation can cause a fatal cancer. It is not a question of whether DU ammunition is dangerous, it is a question of whether it is better or worse than the alternatives. The alternative to DU ammunition is not peace. The alternative is lead. Lead is so toxic, that without even being radioactive it is a far greater environmental hazard than DU. However, depleted uranium has a much scarier sound to it, and that mobilizes the howlers. Granted, we'd all be better off not shooting any high-velocity, heavy, metal objects around, but if we're going to be doing it anyway, we're better off with DU than lead.

Njorl

I question everyone's paranoia about lead. I've worked around lead my entire life and show no ill effects. My grandfather worked lead for 60+ years and was alert, healthy and physically and mentally active well into his 90s (died in an auto accident - hit by a drunk driver, not of illness). New England's only natural resource is lead, and if you live anywhere in northern New England you are exposed to it every time you hike through the mountains or fish in a river.

Sure, if you sit down and ingest a meal of lead every day, you'll have issues, as you would if you were hit by a lead bullet, but I have never seen any documented studies that legitimately show "lead pollution" is creating any sort of hazard to humanity.

 

[Francis M]

I noticed the next to last post on this was in July. Question did anybody actually answer the persons question in the first place or did this degenerate into an argument (as usual)? I can only hope that this "discussion" ended up in either the trash heap or was moved to the POLITICAL/OPINION section of the forum. The health risks from DU rounds are worse as a heavy metal than from the radiaton, no doubt. But that would be from inhalation or ingestion. SO unless we're grinding these bullets up and sniffing/eating them I wouldn't worry. Id' be more worried about the health risk of getting hit wiht a DU round. YOu know there has been a proven corollation to getting shot with one of these things and death. The AP round a tank uses is a thin metal rod (about 40mm)? shot out of a 105-120mm cannon. It's nothing more than a kinetic kill weapon. Also if you were close enough to breathe the vapor/dust from a DU tipped cruise missile or cannon round the cuncussive blast would kill you. There's more of a health risk from the general vaporized smoke and debris from the destroyed target. How do we separate that possible health risk from that of the DU? PLease let's answer this persons question and take the political discussion to that section of the forum?

 

[russ_watters]

I question everyone's paranoia about lead...

Sure, if you sit down and ingest a meal of lead every day, you'll have issues

Well, that's just it: with DU, the trouble happens when you inhale it. With lead, the trouble typically happens when you eat it. That's why lead paint was a problem (kids would eat it), lead pipes - and in the middle ages in England, lead utensils.

I have never seen any documented studies that legitimately show "lead pollution" is creating any sort of hazard to humanity.

"Lead pollution" would be difficult and that's where most criticism of DU comes in: DU oxidizes and vaporizes easier. Nevertheless, I have seen studies of lead-linked illness in shooting ranges.

 

[russ_watters]

There's more of a health risk from the general vaporized smoke and debris from the destroyed target. How do we separate that possible health risk from that of the DU?

This is my biggest criticism of anti-DU arguments. War is unhealthy, period. Whether you're standing next to a tank that just blew up, breathing everything from DU to burning plastic, to burning diesel fuel, or just inhaling the fumes your rifle gives off when you fire it, soldiers are exposed to a lot of hazardous chemicals.

I doubt DU makes up a significant fraction of reports of "Gulf-war syndrome," for example.

 

[Francis M]

This is my biggest criticism of anti-DU arguments. War is unhealthy, period. Whether you're standing next to a just blewtank that up, breathing everything from DU to burning plastic, to burning diesel fuel, or just inhaling the fumes your rifle gives off when you fire it, soldiers are exposed to a lot of hazardous chemicals.

I doubt DU makes up a significant fraction of reports of "Gulf-war syndrome," for example.

I Also have to wonder what kind of health risks and problems are brought on by psychological trauma and stress.

On a side note I also saw a post with a poll asking if war was good or necessary? Boy is that a slippery slope to get on.

 

[Dayle Record]

Sure, if you sit down and ingest a meal of lead every day, you'll have issues, as you would if you were hit by a lead bullet, but I have never seen any documented studies that legitimately show "lead pollution" is creating any sort of hazard to humanity.
flylake is offline Reply With Quote


There is significant danger from lead, in every pediatrician's office in Salt Lake, there is a map, showing that you should be tested for lead poisoning if you live in the older area of town.