Longlasting radiation catastrophe

  • Thread starter duraluminium
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Radiation
In summary: Even if I shielded myself from radiation with a strong electromagnetic field, would I be safe?In summary, the expert summarizer believes that if an environment contained an abundance of beta emitters, it would lead to an increase in the exposure time to lethal doses of radiation for those unlucky enough to enter it. Additionally, the expert believes that the radiation received would remain consistent even if one were shielded from it with a strong field.
  • #1
duraluminium
3
0
Greetings everyone!

I have been reading the forums for a while now, however I have just registered and this will make my first post.

While thinking of a science fiction novel that takes place in contaminated setting, originating from our day world, I have found myself stuck on how to provide a scientifically justifiable explenation on how the contamination came to be.

"Mad science Q&A" are abundant on the internet, but read as I might, I can not identify the bellow clearly.

I already did some reasearch on radiation, nuclear disasters, etc. and came up with the frame within which I hope to identify a single radioactive element of the following properties:

a) half-life of 7000+ years (preferabely at least twice that but that's the minimum i hope for)

b) alpha/beta (preferabely both, but if i have to make a pick, then beta) radioactive decay, sufficient to deliver a terminal dose within hours of internal exposure (breathing in unseen dust particles), resulting in death after around 14 to 30 days. Other radiation that is harder to shield from is not desirable

c) Sufficient quantities to cover the entire surface of the Earth (thinking fallout) with more of the dust drifting in the atmosphere. Not necesserily available on Earth in such quantities and can be of an extraterestrial origin - an asteroid of some sort or some other form of cataclysmic delivery (supernova debri, or some quantum experiment involving matter discharge from the sun gone terribly terribly worng, perhaps?)

In addition to the above, I have some general things i want to ask:

Coud (in theory)alpha/beta radiation be held back by a strong enough electromagnetic field?
Radiation does not mess with unshielded electronic devices, right?

Basically I am looking to (semi)scientifically justify a Chernobyl (city of Pripyat) like radioactive environment (with, relatively speaking, more immidiate consequences for the misfortunate individual that strides into it unprotected) that prevents people living in spaces open to radioactive dust, thus calling for more drastic measures, alternating the way people live by forcing them into long term (a few 1000 years) refuge in large confined spaces, but letting them walk around in the open if wearing protective clothing.

Would radiation in the above scenario (before the half-life period is reached) steadily decrese? If it would, how long before the half-life point would it be at human-tolerable levels (i.e. so that the deadly dose exposure time would go from a few hours to a week or something?).

I would really like to get a better picture on how a cataclysmic nuclear event would influence our civilisation on a few thousand year scale. Would we in compharison plunge into a modern medival age (contless hollywood plots) lasting until the half-life point or would we be back on our feet in a few decades / a century? The scene I'd like to give a logical history to would be survival through use of present and future technology, but with limitations (technological, economical and sheer size) on just how much area could be sheltered.

I kindly ask for your suggestions.

Cheers
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Greetings to all again.

It seems I have misunderstood some things I have read...

A correction to b) , looking for Alpha/beta RADIATION.

Can anyone suggest any potential candidates? I am looking at some ANL Factsheets that hold much information presented in a form that comes of quite a lot of use to me, but I do not know which element to search for... and there is no particular index on the site, I am just googling each individual element :(

Cheers
 
  • #3
Here is some information on radioactive decay series.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/radser.html

and data on specific nuclides - http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/chart/
Beta emitters are below the line of black dots, and alpha emitters toward the top right. Place cursor over chart, click and select Zoom 1 for specific details.

The alpha emitters are heavy elements, with polonium being the lightest. Beta emitters are more abundant.

Essentially the only way to have a large volume of alpha and beta emitters dispersed over a large area would be to have a large scale use of nuclear warheads or a catastrophic breach of a repository of spent fuel (e.g. an asteroid striking the repository).

Activity is a function (product) of decay constant and the number of atoms of a particularly radionuclide present.
 
  • #4
Thanks Astronuc,

This narrows my search down to beta emitters i guess.

I'm looking at the links, now, searching for the best candidate... however...

1) Would I be correct to presume that long half-lives go hand in hand with lower levels of radiation?

and

2) Amount of radiation a person would receive depends on the quantities of the material and time of exposure?
What I mean is:

a) A 2 second exposure to a highly radioactive beta emitter that breaks down in 2 seconds would be on pair with twice the exposure time to a radioactive beta emitter that breaks down in 4 seconds, providing they give away the same amount of particles in the space of 2 seconds.

b) 2 second exposure to a highly radioactive beta emitter (of a certain mass) that breaks down in 2 seconds would be on pair with 1 second exposure to twice the mass of the same beta emitter.

If so, the same result could be achievable with more mass of along lived beta emitter as with less mass of short lived beta emitter... correct?

Also... I have stumbled over a few sources that contradict each other. Some say beta radiation is easily stopped by a sheet of aluminum foil... some say that it easily passes through it... Which is it?

Thanks again for your help

Cheers
 

Related to Longlasting radiation catastrophe

1. What is a longlasting radiation catastrophe?

A longlasting radiation catastrophe refers to a large-scale event in which a significant amount of radioactive material is released into the environment, causing long-term and potentially irreversible damage to living organisms and ecosystems.

2. What causes a longlasting radiation catastrophe?

A longlasting radiation catastrophe can be caused by a variety of factors, including nuclear accidents, nuclear weapons testing, and improper handling and disposal of radioactive materials.

3. What are the effects of a longlasting radiation catastrophe?

The effects of a longlasting radiation catastrophe can include increased risk of cancer and other health issues, genetic mutations, damage to the environment and ecosystems, and displacement of populations.

4. How can we protect ourselves from a longlasting radiation catastrophe?

The best way to protect ourselves from a longlasting radiation catastrophe is to prevent it from happening in the first place. This includes strict regulations and safety measures for handling and storing radioactive materials, as well as proper disaster preparedness and emergency response plans.

5. Can a longlasting radiation catastrophe be cleaned up?

The cleanup of a longlasting radiation catastrophe can be a long and difficult process, but it is possible. It involves removing and properly disposing of contaminated materials, decontaminating affected areas, and monitoring the environment for lingering radiation. However, some areas may remain unsafe for human habitation for an extended period of time.

Similar threads

  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
935
Replies
46
Views
4K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
49
Views
7K
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
2
Views
911
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
562
  • High Energy, Nuclear, Particle Physics
Replies
7
Views
817
Back
Top