| | #1 (permalink) | |
| Curious | A question about Nuclear pollution Hello all, its my first post and i believe i writte in the correct place. If not please remove it. So here is the question. Suppose we have two Nuclear devises of equal power. The first explodes 300 metres over the surfase and the other many miles away, in the surface of the ground. Which bomb, will be responsible for the bigger pollution? Why? I have hear that this that will explode on the surface, will be responsible for about 10 times bigger pollution. Is this true? Why? Please explain. Thank you. ![]() | |
| ||
| | #2 (permalink) | |
| Creating | Re: A question about Nuclear pollution Fission products from a fission warhead are a given quantity. An air burst disperses the stuff through a tremendous volume of air over a tremendous surface area below before it hits the ground. The fission products are largely short-lived beta- and gamma-emitters. Delay to exposure is good. The solution to pollution is dilution. A ground burst mixes fission products with a huge mass of pulverized dirt which then dumps down. Rapid, concentrated, and nasty if you are under it. The dirtiest bomb is a three-stage hydrgen bomb. A dozen kilos of fissile material is the trigger for the fusion stage. The fusion stage is quite clean aside from its plutonium carrot detonator. Excess fast neutrons, lots of them, fission the U-238 bomb case. A big H-bomb is a uranium burner of essentially unlimited size. The fission product fallout is immense, even for air bursts. -- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz3.pdf ---------------- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/lajos.htm#a2 | |
| ||
| | #4 (permalink) | |
| Medicinal Chemist | Re: A question about Nuclear pollution I suppose it really depends on what you consider to be the most damaging "form" of pollution. A bomb detonated above the surface would definitely cause more immediate damage from radioisotopes... at least to people and other "terranean" organisms. An underground detonation would cause more long term damage if the fission products penetrated underground wells and aquifers. Also, nearby crops and other flora would be greatly affected... that is if they survived the blast... haha ![]() | |
| ||
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
« Adding NaCi?
|
copper crystals? »
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Nuclear Energy? Safe or No Way! | Racoon | Chemistry | 54 | 05-18-2006 10:48 AM |
| China's Serious Pollution Problem | chenyu | Medical Science | 5 | 12-12-2005 03:50 AM |
| Nuclear Half life | matrixscarface | Physics and Mathematics | 5 | 03-02-2005 07:02 PM |
| Disposing of nuclear waste | infamous | Watercooler | 10 | 02-26-2005 09:04 PM |
| Nuclear fission | Stargazer | Space | 4 | 12-14-2004 01:43 AM |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:35 AM.

















