Found a bottle of uranium nitrate, safe to be around?

[arivero]

What do you mean "catching a powder"?

If you are concerned that a particular site might have radioactive contamination, then soil samples can be tested to determine if radiation is present, and chemical analysis can be performed to determine what elements might be present.

It was a bit of understatement, but i was thinking about a very old leak, 1970; the nuclear labs next to the university campus have got some produce from a Swiss central to experiment, and a conduct broke so that about sixty liters of a dissolution were sent down to the sewer system. Usual stuff, Cesium etc with some salts of uranium and traces of plutonium. The mix eventually dissolved into the main sewage channel of the capital and went to the river after it, where the government was forced to buy the vegetables of the area and forbid the seasonal fish competition.

It was a very remarkable event at that age, and I have always wondered if it could be possible to detect/measure some remnants, expectedly very diluted. In the river there is still a pond called by the locals "the radioactive pond", and some other memory of the event. In the university campus there was not really measurement of impact, as it was assumed that the sewer system did its work, but few years later some of the tubes were observed to be broken by roots and some possibility of leaking to the fields and flow via the local trees and irrigation system was possible. A secondary problem is that in 1977 the Prime Minister residence and office staff was moved to the university site, so now some extra layers of authorisation should be required to be able so sample the area. Some cops from the sewer vigilance in the eighties actually protested about perceived increase in cancer rate. The prime minister wife, all their sons and daughters, as well as the wife of the next prime minister were positive for cancer years later, but it could had been just a statistical fluke.

 

[jack476]

I thought I'd offer a follow-up of what happened after I brought this to the attention of the department chair.

Out of concern for a potentially improperly contained source (the bottle was marked as being from the 50s, therefore the concern was that an exposed radiation source had been lurking around the science building for decades) some people from the state came and tested the entire building with Geiger counters, as well as the bottle. Thankfully, it turned out that the salts in one of the bottles were made from depleted uranium and that the amount of radiation it was producing was no cause for alarm, and the rest of the building had not been contaminated.

The other bottle, apparently, contained sulfur. The memo left in the department by the people who tested the building stated in no uncertain terms that getting sulfur and uranium nitrate mixed up was a careless mistake.

I understand that the department ended up getting fined for both of these points. Either way, everything turned out fine...at least for me, what with relief at not having been exposed to radiation.

 

[arivero]

getting fined for both of these points.

Well I expect a reduced fine, or some waive, given that there was not repercussions and surely at the time the bottle come there was a different legislation.

 

[jack476]

Well I expect a reduced fine, or some waive, given that there was not repercussions and surely at the time the bottle come there was a different legislation.

I really think it was mostly just that they were required to pay for the testing, and a stern telling-off to be more careful.

I should say that I'm just a student working for the department, not a faculty member, so any penalties that were leveled did not affect me.

 

[arivero]

I really think it was mostly just that they were required to pay for the testing, and a stern telling-off to be more careful.

I should say that I'm just a student working for the department, not a faculty member, so any penalties that were leveled did not affect me.

Ah yes, a professional, regulated testing surely does not come cheap. Which on the other hand can be the main reason for this kind of potential dangers still existing. At the end of the day, surely admins puts faith on the safety of ancient users and in half-life decay cycles, before paying for a false alarm.

 

[jack476]

Ah yes, a professional, regulated testing surely does not come cheap. Which on the other hand can be the main reason for this kind of potential dangers still existing. At the end of the day, surely admins puts faith on the safety of ancient users and in half-life decay cycles, before paying for a false alarm.

I don't think that's it. I have no reason to think that my professors were being intentionally deceptive, from what I have seen they are honest people who would not put themselves or their students at that kind of risk. I really think that this was an honest mistake, a pair of bottles were thoughtlessly tossed in a drawer in an unused laboratory a long time ago and forgotten. I would definitely call the surrounding circumstances very careless, but not malicious.

 

[arivero]

I don't think that's it. I have no reason to think that my professors were being intentionally deceptive, from what I have seen they are honest people who would not put themselves or their students at that kind of risk. I really think that this was an honest mistake, a pair of bottles were thoughtlessly tossed in a drawer in an unused laboratory a long time ago and forgotten. I would definitely call the surrounding circumstances very careless, but not malicious.

Got your point. I was not thinking deception, but in generic case I think that there are some external factor weighting in; the perception, driven for custom, that a false alarm is the most usual result. And of course the point of being unjustly blamed for mistakes of another administration from long time ago. In the example I have narrated before, the labs currently in the campus have the experience that each time the event is remembered in the press, they get some criticism, even though the mistake was a pre-democratic government decades ago with a different management of the state labs and their research goals.