Anon said:

I thought natural Uranium had 0.7% ²³⁵U and that depleted was typically around 0.3% or 0.4%.

You might be right. There is no standard. It all depends on the economics of a given enrichment technology and the price of uranium at the time.

um…

Ohhhh kay..

First, regarding plutonium-239 in depleted uranium. Pu-239 occurs in uranium ores in the most minute of quantities, and it won’t be found in detectable amounts in most uranium. There are stories of tiny amounts of Pu-239 in some French depleted uranium stocks. It may be that this material was contaminated with uranium sent for re-enrichment after being recovered from spent fuel fuel.

U-238 is not fissile. It’s not fissile at all, by the normal definition of “fissile.” Uranium-238 will fission when it is exposed to super high energy neutrons. This can happen in fast spectrum reactors and in nuclear bombs, but it is still not fissile because it can’t sustain a chain reaction on its own. It does not produce enough neutrons to do so. It therefore may be regarded as “fissionable” by fast spectrum.

It is “fertile” meaning that if it absorbs a neutron it will become Pu-239, which is fissile.

        Matthew said:

Maybe it’s a way to cool things off really quickly?

Actually, I had thought that the reference was made to an outdated version of a Gillette razor.

As anyone who has used an old razor might understand, that could explain the “leaky” part. I, myself, have spent some time leaking after a bad shave.

4. “Mach I cooling systems” are very leaky. If I ever run across one, I’ll be sure to wear my galoshes. Fortunately, however, I’ve never heard of a “NPP” with a “Mach I cooling system.” It must be new.

Maybe it’s a way to cool things off really quickly?

        “R” Addison said:

Thanks for your comment(s):

And thank you for yours.

I learned that

1. Uranium 238 is 60% fissile and sometimes is actually plutonium-239!

2. Uranium 238 also creates “anti-mater [sic] particulates” which are dangerous for some reason because of the lack a “vacuum-cleanor” [sic]. Why this is dangerous remains a mystery.

3. Not knowing how to spell is now known as a “typo.” Not knowing how to think is apparently now realized by posting comments under the pseudonym “‘R’ Addison.”

4. “Mach I cooling systems” are very leaky. If I ever run across one, I’ll be sure to wear my galoshes. Fortunately, however, I’ve never heard of a “NPP” with a “Mach I cooling system.” It must be new.

5. Israel was the first country to use nuclear weapons, and they did so in 1973. Apparently, all of those people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki must have been lying all this time.

“depleted uranium” is not depleted of fissile matter, as Uranium-238 has 60% fissile, and other radionuclides–sometime plutonium-239 from NPP’s. This matter has a “first: half-Life’ of 4.46 “billion” years’. I call this extreme “contamination aspect not-so-depleted uranium, i.e. NSDU-238 because it, ur-238 is also “natural uranium”! This matter also is low-level contamination which is proven to be more susceptible to women but 5X more than women found in children.

So, ur-238 made into munitions kills by cancers and encephalogic “anti-Mater particulates” which means there is no vacuum-cleanor for use of this anti-matter: mentality. The particulates have been found 1,000’s miles away in northern Europe from both Iraq and from Yugoslavia.

(also)
Sorry for the typos…NPP’s are nuclear power plants… those that have the Mach I cooling system leak immensely. Tritium gas or H3, they are radionuclide as well…all periphery areas from 10-feet (as well as inside buildings and especially beneath) must be measured to distances as far as 100 to 200 miles, as well. This cannot be done w.o. a “digital” metering system which incorporates the proper adjustment of particles. CS-137 and 134. Lastly, this presents there is a need for measurements thruout the continent of north-America, as the “plumes” from Daiichi’s meltdowns have presented a new cache of data, as well as necessity! Since this is not concept from h-Bombs ‘fallout” and a new geographical area is in need of distribution, but of blanket emphasis i.e. everywhere on the continent, due all three correlatives, in other words!

May be these ’stats’ will give some substance to your “lack of research” on the contaminations-Issues ever-so-prevalent, since the first “nuclear-Weapons usages in 1991 by u-s and 1973 by IDF.

        drbuzz0 said:

The natural concentration of U-235 is about .3%. In depleted uranium it is usually no more than .1% and most often it is much less.

I thought natural Uranium had 0.7% ²³⁵U and that depleted was typically around 0.3% or 0.4%.

From what I can tell that idiot was advertising its web site and thinking that opposing a single weapon used in very limited circumstances and which doesn’t cause much collateral damage is actually going to significantly help the cause of peace (all that opposition to DU could realistically do is cause it to be replaced as an anti-tank weapon by something more dangerous to civilians).

        “R” Addison said:

NSDU-238 stands, equitably for “not-so-depleted uranium-238″ which is 60% fissile. Yet, this is not exact because the munitions comprise 4-5-6 radionuclides,and are also of varying isotopic-Discrepancy. How is there a possibility of a gdigital-Meter for measuring these “on site” and what investment levels>

As there are many examples of “illegal-usages of NSDU-238″ in Iraq, in Bosnia-Hercegovina, in Kosovo and in Yugoslavia, as well as in Libya, what coercion can be deduced for needs of “defensive-Protecting” of civilian populations, since these usages, and civilian-Exposures and deaths?

I’m not so sure what you mean by “not so depleted uranium.” Depleted uranium has had most of the U-235 separated out. The natural concentration of U-235 is about .3%. In depleted uranium it is usually no more than .1% and most often it is much less. The amount present is dictated by the economics of further separation.

There would never be 60% fissile material. That would qualify as “highly enriched” and, if nothing else, it’s very expensive. All I can think is you’re saying that perhaps 60% of the uranium-235 naturally there is still present? I guess that’s possible, although it’s usually less than that.

Any U-235 present doesn’t really matter though. It has a minimal effect on the radiological characteristics since it’s such a tiny proportion. Depleted uranium is only slightly less radioactive than natural uranium.

Uh… what?

Probably an inexpensive geiger-muller detector. That works fine for simple surveying. It will detect elevated concentrations of uranium.

It depends on what you are trying to determine. Different instruments tell you different things. If you want to know the quantity of uranium present, that’s a little tricky, because it depends on how it is distributed. Some of the emissions can be shielded. I don’t think simple surveying is a reliable method of determining how much is present, actually. For that you would probably need to take some soil samples for analysis.

Uh… well, the meters in this case don’t actually tell you what radionuclide is there. A geiger counter can’t tell the difference between uranium and anything else. For that you need some kind of spectrometer that can measure the characteristic energy levels and then compare them to a database of isotopes. There are ones that are portable but they’re expensive.

Wait… what?

Wipe them with a tissue and avoid chopping onions.

uh… wait.. what? You lost me

As there are many examples of “illegal-usages of NSDU-238″ in Iraq, in Bosnia-Hercegovina, in Kosovo and in Yugoslavia, as well as in Libya, what coercion can be deduced for needs of “defensive-Protecting” of civilian populations, since these usages, and civilian-Exposures and deaths?

There was also usage of uranium-Bombs, some tipped w DU heavy-Metal use in Afghanistan in 2001; Libya last year, Yugoslavia in the 79-Days bombings, 1999. What the radio-isotopes range on those differing geography entails is in need of “assaying by measuring” and the solicitation is how would humanity be to be able to encompass actual rasty use for that radioisotopic-Amount.

What kind of digital-Meter would that be? What kind of metering are those available, as all “uranium”is radiation?

Seems to me the more that radionuclides are measured, the better chances in defining what is over-Contaminated. However, this is not an easy task, and means better garments and much better micron-Pores sized masks. What of eyes that water? There is not yet a set-pattern, about measuring which should be useful for the aging N{{S starting in 2000. UNless manufacturers are quasi solicitous in holding back their own degeneracy! You may want to see what ilk-Rebukes one can amalgamate into why not-so-depleted uranoum should be considered “radilogic-Uranium: first” @ http://nukiemole.org

“R” Addison, the peace-Warrior

Soeks geiger counter is very good and chip!

        Matthew said:

I’m in. A couple thousand bucks would be pretty useful.

Also, would I get to keep the DU? I could use a paperweight.