Isfahan UCF Trouble: Confirmed or Denied?

  • Thread starter Thread starter zapperzero
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the safety concerns related to the Isfahan UCF and the potential health effects of uranium hexafluoride (UF6). It is noted that while UF6 radiation is negligible, inhalation of uranium particles poses heavy metal toxicity risks rather than radiation concerns. The volatility and toxicity of UF6, particularly its reaction with water to produce hydrofluoric acid, raise safety issues for workers. Additionally, pollution levels in the region are high, complicating the attribution of smog problems solely to the Isfahan plant. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for caution regarding the chemical hazards associated with UF6.
Engineering news on Phys.org
I can do neither, but I can say that the radiation from UF6 if virtually negligible and should not be capable of causing short term health effects.

When I was visiting a US nuclear fuel manufacturing facility, many people working with the pellets either had no ventilation, or one of those small paper masks.

Now if they are inhaling Uranium particles, they may be subject to some sort of heavy metal issues (we know heavy metals can be bad on the body), but if that is the case, it is not a radiation concern and a toxic/chemical one.
 
Hiddencamper said:
I can do neither, but I can say that the radiation from UF6 if virtually negligible and should not be capable of causing short term health effects.

When I was visiting a US nuclear fuel manufacturing facility, many people working with the pellets either had no ventilation, or one of those small paper masks.

Now if they are inhaling Uranium particles, they may be subject to some sort of heavy metal issues (we know heavy metals can be bad on the body), but if that is the case, it is not a radiation concern and a toxic/chemical one.

Don't forget their leaders treat mistakes as treason and they work at ground zero for Israel. Stress kills!
 
UF6 itself is volatile and highly toxic. It reacts with water producing (between other things) HF - so it is going to burn the skin on contact, even if in low concentrations in the air. Not something safe to work with, regardless of the radioactivity level.
 
I'd be careful attributing smog problems to Isfahan plant.
At this annual season pollution seems to be at its high, see http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/12/04/276119/tehran-air-pollution-shud-down-schools-offices/.

As Borek explained, UF6 forms hydrofluoric acid, which is probably even worse than HCl that is being produced in the lungs when chlorine gas being inhaled.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Tepconium-311 said:
I'd be careful attributing smog problems to Isfahan plant.

Well, I did no such thing.
 
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...

Similar threads

Back
Top