Moon Dust & Cosmic Radiation: Risks of Bringing it to Earth's Surface

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter bwinter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Moon Radiation
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the hazards of lunar dust when brought to Earth's surface, specifically addressing misconceptions about its radioactivity. Participants clarify that while lunar dust is not made radioactive by UV or cosmic radiation, its surface chemistry and sharp edges pose significant health risks, likening it to asbestos in terms of danger. The conversation references the scientific article "Toxicity of lunar dust" by D. Linnarsson et al. (2012) as a credible source for understanding these risks.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of lunar geology and surface materials
  • Familiarity with radiation types and their effects
  • Knowledge of asbestos and its health implications
  • Basic concepts of material toxicity and chemical reactivity
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the chemical composition of lunar dust and its effects on human health
  • Study the differences between UV radiation and cosmic radiation
  • Explore the implications of sharp particulate matter on respiratory health
  • Read the article "Toxicity of lunar dust" by D. Linnarsson et al. for in-depth scientific insights
USEFUL FOR

Writers, scientists, and educators interested in planetary science, health risks associated with particulate matter, and the implications of lunar exploration on human safety.

bwinter
Messages
27
Reaction score
1
This article mentions moon dust as "subjected to a millenia of UV radiation" as if it's a bad thing. UV would simply irradiate the dust, not make it more hazardous correct?

Perhaps they meant "a millenia of cosmic radiation" which would be much more problematic, no?

If this line of questioning seems pedantic, it's because I'm trying to suss out some details for some fiction writing. Any input would be helpful, specifically, what are some of the hazards of moon material coming to Earth's surface?
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
bwinter said:
Perhaps they meant "a millenia of cosmic radiation" which would be much more problematic, no?

Not really.

I'd be inclined to blame that meaningless-in-context comment about radiation on uninformed copy-editing.
 
I assumed as much. Ugh, my favorite kind of journalism...

So is lunar dust particularly radioactive at all?
 
Ugh. That's one bad popsci headline.

The issue isn't that UV radiation and the solar wind make the dust radioactive. That's nonsense. The issue is that it alters the surface chemistry and shape of the lunar dust. It turns the already hazardous lunar dust into stuff full of even sharper edges and loaded with free radicals. The lunar dust apparently makes asbestos look downright safe. The general public is clueless with regard to why asbestos is dangerous. They're also clueless about why radiation is dangerous, but they do know that radiation is even scarier than asbestos. Hence the title.

Here's the scientific article on which this popsci article was based:
D. Linnarsson et al., Toxicity of lunar dust, Planetary and Space Science 74:1 57-71 (2012)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0032063312001365
arxiv preprint: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/1206.6328
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
11K
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K