What happened to that report of high radiation near Russia

  • Thread starter Thread starter HowlerMonkey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radiation Report
AI Thread Summary
Recent reports indicated high levels of the radioactive isotope ruthenium-106 detected across Europe, prompting concerns reminiscent of the Chernobyl disaster. Investigations by various European agencies suggest the source of the emissions is linked to Russia's southern Urals, although Russian authorities have disputed these findings. The detected ruthenium-106 is primarily associated with its use in cancer therapy and does not indicate a nuclear reactor accident, as it was the only isotope found. The release levels, estimated at 3-8 curies, are significant but pale in comparison to the catastrophic amounts released during Chernobyl. Overall, the situation appears to be under control, with no harmful effects expected for the general population in Europe.
HowlerMonkey
Messages
368
Reaction score
17
A few weeks ago, there were reports of super high levels of radiation similar to what sweden found when chernobyl ejected core material.

Were these reports in error or have they not yet found the source?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Google "ruthenium radioactivity". You will get many news articles about it.
 
I heard something about high levels of a Ruthenium isotope having been detected.
That would not indicate a Chernobyl type of event.
Last I heard was that `it could be accidental release of material intended for use in radiotherapy treatment.
 
The isotope ruthenium-106 (106Ru) was detected by various European agencies.

From Euronews (http://www.euronews.com/2017/11/21/explained-ruthenium-106-and-europe-s-radioactive-cloud)
Both IRSN and Germany’s radiation protection agency said the source of the emission was in Russia’s southern Urals.

Rosatom, Russia’s nuclear energy corporation, contradicted these findings, saying there were no traces of ruthenium 106 anywhere apart from at St Petersburg from September 25 and October 7.

But then Russia’s meteorological agency, Roshydromet, published data on November 20 that was consistent with the German and French conclusions.

From IRSN, Detection of Ruthenium 106 in France and in Europe: Results of IRSN’s investigations
http://www.irsn.fr/EN/newsroom/News...in-Europe-Results-of-IRSN-investigations.aspx
As soon as it became aware of the first detections of Ruthenium 106 in the atmosphere in Europe, IRSN mobilized all its means of radiological monitoring of the atmosphere and conducted regular analysis of the filters from its monitoring stations. For the period from September 27 to October 13, 2017, only the stations of Seyne-sur-Mer, Nice and Ajaccio revealed the presence of Ruthenium 106 in trace amounts. Since October 13, 2017, Ruthenium 106 is no longer detected in France.

Measurement results from European stations communicated to the Institute since October 3, 2017, have confirmed the presence of Ruthenium 106 in the atmosphere of the majority of European countries. The results obtained for sampling periods later than October 6, 2017, showed a steady decrease in Ruthenium 106 levels, which is currently no longer detected in Europe.

From Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz, Deutschland
https://www.bfs.de/SharedDocs/Kurzmeldungen/BfS/EN/2017/1003-ruthenium-106.html

Ruthenium-106 (Ru-106) is used as a radiation source in cancer therapy for the treatment of ocular tumours. Ruthenium can also occur during the reprocessing of nuclear fuel elements. In addition, ruthenium-106 is used in radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTG), which serve for the power supply of satellites.

Ruthenium-106 is one of many fission products, and by itself would not indicate an accident of a nuclear reactor. We would also expect isotopes of Te, I, Cs, Xe, Br, Kr, and others.

If it comes from Mayak, then perhaps there was a process upset.

Russia admits spike in radioactive ruthenium-106 over Ural Mountains amid fears of nuclear accident
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-22/russia-admits-ruthenium-106-spike-near-ural-mountains/9178446
 
I looked up ruthenium
106 has half life about a year
shorter half life isotope wasn't mentioned so i figured it's not from an operating reactor and pretty much dismissed it as ' a curiosity ' ...
 
The Ru-106 was from a leak at a waste processing facility. The only isotope leaked was Ru-106. So it's nothing like chernobyl.
It has a half life of less than a year.
Decays into Rh-106 with a half life of 30 seconds which decays into Pd-106 which is stable.
In two years only 25% will remain. In ten years it'll be entirely gone.

The levels released were about 3-8 Ci. Which is a pretty significant release but no where near the 150 million Ci released during chernobyl. They'd have to take precautions within a few km of the facility but levels in Europe are harmless. Has little to no impact on dose already received from natural background radiation.
 
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...
Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...
Back
Top