potassium chloride getting lots more radioactive?
I am flabbergasted by the level I get with my little geiger counter ("RadAlert Inspector"). I know potassium is radioactive, always has been, etc. And I know my testing methods are beyond crude and sloppy but it looks bad, and I am hoping somebody has some insight.
Last June I tested the potassium chloride I have been using as salt substitute for 15 years and was distressed to find that yes, it was radioactive, about twice background levels. (I am very ignorant about the technicalities, and just use the geiger counter to make basic comparisons, with a tiny 10-minute test.)
But now it seems a lot worse. I decided to test it again (a new jar of it, NOW Foods Potassium Chloride Powder) as I was already getting out the geiger counter to test some potassium bicarbonate I had just obtained. Now I find that the potassium chloride is TEN times what a test of sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) registers as. The numbers are 410 for baking soda vs 4,073 for potassium chloride. (the potassium bicarbonate was 1,511)
The geiger counter seems to be performing as it always has when testing other items. So what is up with this "salt substitute"??
I have no idea what potassium chloride is derived from. Anybody know? Or have any ideas about this? Thanks.
Everything is more radioactive after 311!
Everything in the Northern Hemisphere is more radioactive after 311! Everything near Fukushima became more radioactive following 311. The air, seas, Northern Hemisphere, and Honshu Island water ALL have increased radiation levels. The Fukushima Daiichi Reactors and Spent Fuel Pools were cooled with Sea Water. This leads to many adverse effects, including:
“The spent fuel pools have had so many foreign materials introduced that it is very difficult to pinpoint the chemical makeup of the water.”
http://www.simplyinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Spent-Fuel-Pools-At...
http://www.simplyinfo.org/?page_id=8544
http://enenews.com/report-research-shows-accelerated-failure-at-fukushim...
Title: Spent Fuel Pools At Fukushima; Follow On Report – Corrosion
Source: SimplyInfo
“Chloride levels in the SFP’s were extremely high (in the 6900’s ppm as opposed to normal of 30 ppm or less) and were left unchecked for months. (10) Every worst case corrosion analysis assumes Chloride levels at least a factor of 10 lower for their extreme conditions. Some corrosion rates have gone from 1mm to 10mm/yr which would suggest potential corrosion of the structural parts of the fuel elements (lattice holders, springs, handling assemblies, pellet holding tubing and fuel pellet cladding. The spent fuel pools have had so many foreign materials introduced that it is very difficult to pinpoint the chemical makeup of the water. Season conditions around Fukushima have contributed to the addition of dust and other foreign materials which can change the chemistry in the pools.”
“Impurities in the water of the basins used for fuel decay or interim storage can have several consequences. Aggressive ionic species, un-dissolved particulates (if settled on the fuel cladding), and several microorganisms can accelerate the fuel corrosion rate. Excessive corrosion can cloud the water, and if through-clad penetration occurs, the concentration of radioisotopes (fission products) on the water can reach unacceptable values.”
Fukushima WATER is more Radioactive
TEPCO can’t even find the leaks.
http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201212120033
TEPCO unable to locate source of leak in Fukushima reactor
THE ASAHI SHIMBUN
The operator of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant is grappling to locate the source of a leak of highly radioactive water in the crippled No. 2 reactor, and will continue trying to pinpoint the cause next week. A remote-controlled robot is now scouring the basement of the reactor building that houses the pressure suppression chamber to pinpoint the cause of the leak.
Tokyo Electric Power Co. said it was unable to identify the source of the leak when the robot inspected one of the eight vent pipes that connect the chamber with the containment vessel on Dec. 11. A huge volume of highly radioactive water, used to cool down the fuel, has since been leaking from the reactor, TEPCO said.
An Explanation for the Varying Radioactivity of Potassium
There is plenty of evidence around that identifies that nuclear transformations are possible under a wide variety of conditions other than during ultra high temperature big bang/supernova type events. Examples are biological transmutations and LENR's.
One such transformation is:
K(39) + H(with reduced outer orbital size) <-> K(40)
According to this equation there is the potential for the radioactivity of potassium to vary depending on long terms storage conditions, i.e. what other other molecular species are stored in proximity to the potassium.
A simple test to verify this would be to source "old" samples, preferably geological samples, of a few different potassium compounds, extract the potassium and test radio activity. Newly manufactured compounds will be expected to have different radioactivity levels.
I strongly suspect that you are going to find some more interesting differences between radioactivity depending on the proximity of H, halides, transition metals,... etc.
A few simple experiments on this may start to change opinions on current models for planetary and star evolution, and a range of other phenomena, but that's another story for another day....
simon_brink@yahoo.com.au
Doesn't Balance...
The above poster claimed:
K(39) + H(with reduced outer orbital size) <-> K(40)
The K-39 has 19 protons and 20 neutrons.
If you add hydrogen H; you now have 20 protons and 20 neutrons.
However, Potassium-40 ( K-40 ) has 19 neutrons and 21 neutrons.
That doesn't balance.
If you could fuse K-39 and H-1; then you would have Calcium-40 ( Ca-40 ) and NOT K-40.
Correction.
However, Potassium-40 ( K-40 ) has 19 protons and 21 neutrons.
Non-standard physics
There is no accepted scientific evidence for either LENR ("cold fusion") or "biological transmutations".
In fact, the decay of K-40 has been studied in detail over the years because the constancy of its half-life is important for K-Ar geological dating.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Potassium has Potassium-40 ( K-40 ) in it
Just as Mark of BRAWM states, Potassium is radioactive because some of it is the radioactive species Potassium-40.
The only elements that were created as a result of the Big Bang are Hydrogen, Helium, and perhaps a little Lithium. But everything else had to be "cooked up" in the big thermonuclear reactors that we call stars. You want to see "nuclear waste?" Just look around you. Anything that isn't Hydrogen, Helium, or Lithium was once the nuclear waste from a big reactor called a star, that went supernova.
Many of the radioisotopes that were created by the stars and their supernova explosions have very long half-lives. Potassium-40 (K-40) is one of them, and the radioactivity hasn't had enough time to decay away.
This planet Earth, and in fact, this Universe were all created as radioactive.
Radioactivity is as natural to the Universe as anything else. Our only problem is that we didn't know about it until about a century ago, and since then many have been fear mongering by portraying radioactivity, not as a natural product of Mother Nature, but some evil perversion created solely by Man.
But the Universe is slowly
But the Universe is slowly cooling down in terms of radioactivity,
the trend is one way.
The natural state is for less radioactivity over time, not for the same or for more.
The actions of mankind on the Earth are therefore reversing a natural trend.
For example global Tritium levels are now significantly elevated above the natural level on the Earth purely by mankind's actions over the last 60 years.
WRONG!!!
But the Universe is slowly cooling down in terms of radioactivity,
the trend is one way.
================
WRONG!!! Where did you get the idea that the trend was one way?
Off some anti-nuke website, perhaps.
The truth is that Mother Nature is constantly making new radioactivity.
For example, the cosmic rays that enter our atmosphere devolve into showers of sub-atomic particles, including neutrons. Those neutrons can transmute the nuclei that capture them into new radioactive species.
The trend is NOT "one-way".
No, nature constantly produces radioactive isotopes
Radioactive elements are constantly being produced in stars, in supernova explosions, and in the atmosphere due to cosmic rays. Please read this:
Wikipedia: Nucleosynthesis: The major types of nucleosynthesis
Except for Big Bang nucleosynthesis, all other kinds of nucleosynthesis are continually happening in the universe and are continually producing both stable and radioactive nuclei.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Potassium is radioactive because of K-40
Anything containing potassium is naturally radioactive because of the primordial radioisotope K-40. I made similar measurements of KCl last June and posted them on this thread. That might answer some of your questions. (Apologies — they are restructuring the webpage and so the images are not currently available.)
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
Hi Mark, thanks for the
Hi Mark, thanks for the reply. So, looking at your measurements from last June, it seems I should conclude that my measurements of last June were seriously flawed. Comparing my finding that the radioactivity of my potassium chloride was "twice background levels" with yours showing more than ten times background levels, I concede that your test surely holds more weight than mine.
This at least soothes my worries that my 'salt substitute' had increased hugely in radioactivity.
Eating it and going by the 'homeostasis' theory is what I have been doing the past many months, but I do find that I am a little less happy eating it now, knowing that it is 10 times background levels.
And I do sort of hate to have this pile of radioactive stuff sitting around the house.
I thought this comment from the link you sent was intriguing. Too bad it is impossible to find out:
>>
Sure, but since we don't have any way to know what our health and longevity might be like without the effects of that constant K-40 (e.g., if the potassium we ate didn't contain any K-40, could cancer and heart disease be much lower, could our natural lifespan be 300 years? Well, unless we have a population just like us that have had only K-40-free potassium, it's pretty hard to know).
>>
No problem. I wouldn't
No problem. I wouldn't conclude from this that your measurements were flawed. Two different measurements done with a Geiger counter can produce very different results if not done in exactly the same geometry. For example, the measurements I made I performed with about 300 grams of KCl in a shallow glass dish and the Geiger counter directly above it. If you measure the KCl through the salt canister itself, the geometry would be different from mine. Also, small amounts of cardboard or metal can block a significant amount of the beta particles that the Geiger counter is detecting.
Your body regulates potassium, so as long as your kidneys are functioning properly you cannot change the amount of potassium in your body without your body getting rid of the excess. So you are right about homeostasis.
The human body contains about 140 grams of potassium, which is about how much potassium is in the 300 gram canister I tested. So a human body should also be considered a "pile of radioactive stuff sitting around the house" by that same measure.
I have not yet responded to that comment about health improvements if there were no potassium-40. The answer to that question is that health physicists can calculate how much damage K-40 does to our bodies, and the answer is essentially zero. Exposure from K-40 is about 0.17 millisieverts per year on average, or about 7% of the average person's total background dose of 2.4 mSv/year (Source: UNSCEAR 2008 Report, Annex B, paragraph 95). Given this total background dose rate (K-40 plus everything else), this means less than a 1% increase in the likelihood of cancer over someone's lifetime due to radiation exposure from natural sources — compare this to the actual cancer rate of about 40%. Another piece of evidence that the health effects from natural background radiation is essentially zero is that there are communities around the world where people live with ten times the average natural background dose but nobody has ever been able to find a significant increase in cancers among these people. Here's an example:
Nair, et al. Population study in the high natural background radiation area in Kerala, India.
The only contributor to radioactive background that is worth worrying about and mitigating is radon gas, which makes up about 50% of the average person's background exposure. I wouldn't worry about K-40.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
thanks again, Mark for the
thanks again, Mark for the detailed and interesting response.
someone I was discussing this with wondered if you had done a recent repeat of your test on potassium chloride. I said no, I don't think so, but yes, that would seem tp be the way to answer the question re whether potassium chloride has changed in radioactivity since last June -- at least for _your_ source of KCl. Are you confident that there would be no change?
Not being a chemist, I am still wondering: From what is KCl derived? Table salt can come from sea water, a concept I can grasp, but KCl?
OK, I just now did some googling, and am not exactly reassured:
>>
...Potassium chloride occurs in ocean water, and many minerals can be manufactured by extraction, crystallization and electrostatic separation of suitable minerals. Dried seaweeds are another source of KCl, which contain about 90 percent potassium chloride.
Read more: What Is Potassium Chloride? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/about_5431626_potassium-chloride.html#ixzz1pRFFdU00
>>
This just gives me more reason to wonder about the possibility of KCl being more radioactive now. But I suppose different sources of KCl could be very different?
Cannot be more radioactive
Potassium chloride is radioactive because of the isotope potassium-40, and there is only one K-40 nucleus for every 8,500 potassium nuclei on average. This ratio is constant on Earth, so it doesn't matter where the potassium comes from — KCl will not become more radioactive.
Mark [BRAWM Team Member]
It is not impossible at
It is not impossible at all.
It just needs some money spent on doing the research.
Start for example with mice.
Separate or reduce the K-40 in artificial soil,
this is tricky but not impossible, because isotopic separation is possible.
Then grow plants in such reduced K-40 conditions and feed the mice on the plant products,
and raise the mice in conditions shielded from background radiation.
Then see if the mice live any longer on average.
There may of course be vested interests at play here who really do not want the answer to this question to be widely known.
Flame test useful
You might try a simple flame test to show if the potassium salt might contain (Fukushima?) cesium. A better, more expensive option would be a lab test. Considering the implications, I'm not sure I want to know the results...
NoGlow
Flame test useful?
You might try a simple flame test (see http://chemistry.about.com/od/analyticalchemistry/a/flametest.htm)
to show if the potassium salt has somehow been contaminated with (Fukushima?) cesium. A more costly solution would be a lab test, of course. Considering the implications, I'm not sure I want to know your results, however...
NoGlow
NoGlow- That test seems very
NoGlow-
That test seems very irrelevant and inconclusive for measuring Fukushima fallout contamination; that was really a bad suggestion. Is is worth mentioning that table salt substitute that has been mined, processed, and commercially packaged in a sealed container which would likely be stored inside somebodies house in an area with other spices. That would not be a likely place that would contain Fukushima fallout, unless the potassium chloride was mined in Fukushima and packaged post disaster. It also is most helpful to use a non-destructive test when you are testing for radiation or suspected contamination. Perhaps a scintillation detector with mass spectroscopy would be idea for checking for contamination? I think so.
First Things First -
Is salt substitute becoming more radioactive? - The OP claims it has, apparently. Is it sound logic to say " Well, salt substitute is potassium chloride (KCl) and KCl cannot become more radioactive because the ratio of radioactive K40 to non-radioactive K39 is always constant in nature, therefore salt substitute cannot be getting more radioactive"? - NO, it is NOT sound logic. Sea Kelp is a common source of the KCl used as salt substitute, and sea kelp has been noted to be more radioactive post-Fukushima, as has been reported eleswhere on this forum. If this increased radioactivity is partially due to Cs137 accumulation, the relevant question is "Why WOULDN'Tt that make salt substitute made from sea kelp more radioactive?" Will you claim that the salt substitute maker goes to the trouble and expense of REMOVING the CS137 somehow?
NoGlow
salt substitute radiation level
I'm with you and find your logic regarding the sea kelp radiation source & find it theoretically sound. I was hoping someone at UCB would've addressed your question by now and by default and common-sense I've concluded you've won this round hands down!LOL! Just another example of those pesky little things concerned folks ask brilliant,young scientist minds that will remain unanswered & perhaps "taboo" since their work and funding is at stake to some degree if TPTB become agitated when unscripted replies are left in response to innocent questions posted by an individual concerned for his/her health that should've been posed to "neutral" venues elsewhere who might be better able to freely respond to it without fear of being "sanctioned" in some way or form. I hope they found out what,if any actions or changes in their lifestyle,dietary & activity they should implement sooner than later since even knowing conclusively that the salt substitute didn't contain cesium or has been safe all along would give one the piece of mind of knowing one way or the other whether they'd ingested loads of cesium on a daily basis thinking the product in question was safe! I wish the UCB staff WOULD address the part of the question related to "whether cesium in the sea kelp source would be isolated from the finished product as found on store shelves post-3/11/11 era"or not? I don't mean to have this post regarded as a "cheap shot" at these guys due to my own observations of "other" information venues who've been "muzzled" due to the weight of the industry & govt. imposed MSM blackout along with ANY other medical/educational/industrial entities who have access to "unedited",raw monitoring data and/or the ability or intentions of displaying actual radiation levels to the public.Luckily I'm already sick and older and have nothing to fear from those forces should I be on a __it list for speaking up at times against big nuke & don't much care who doesn't like what I say. In closing I'll admit that I hope there is an end in sight for jobs in new or active nuclear power stations as well as generation of electricity from them as well,but I think there will be as much work and needs for highly-educated,qualified personnel to de-commission existing facilities to absorb all of the graduating classes from your institution & all others for centuries beyond my lifetime and I wish you all the best as cheap natural gas already has made substantial impact on nuke's future thanks to a stagnant economy and high cost of NPP's long after they stop producing electricity and profits. I hope there's some truth to a rumor that certain prestigious universities have gotten funding for the expedited,ambitious goal of "coaxing the nuclear genie back into its bottle" and finally securing the driver's seat or engineer of the runaway nuclear train represented by,but so much more than just Fukushima,Chernobyl,TMI & the handful of others that we "know of"....so much more than ought to be the case :( oh well, I've climbed back off my soap box and will go back to digging around in the refrigerator for some Fuku-free fodder and call it a night since chemo starts @7:30am and I already spent too much time on this rant! lol! :) HAPPY HOLIDAYS TO ALL!! PEACE
My Thanks and Best Wishes to you, My Friend...
... and in case you missed it, you might find this exchange amusing:
http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/forum/218/here-let-me-google-you.2012-12-08#...
Professor Farnsworth
AKA NoGlow