From: Michael M. Butler (butler@comp-lib.org)
Date: Sat Jan 06 2001 - 07:16:19 MST
One historical quibble on your otherwise quite worthwhile post: The way
I heard it, the "going critical" of the radwaste was a _chemical_
criticality, not a nuclear one. You didn't specify, but I like to get
that information out.
For those who don't know:
At least as I heard it, there was something like a mineshaft full of
contaminated stuff that was largely ammonium nitrate. That substance is
one which in crystalline form can achieve a chemical "critical mass"
("critical configuration" is probably a better term)--if you pile up
enough, the physical pressure on the bottom crystals causes detonation.
I'm not sure how far the detonation wave spreads. I believe they
delivered the waste as liquid or sludge, and it didn't stay liquid.
Oopski.
And yes, the end result was a large nuclear waste contaminated area. So
it doesn't blunt John's point, necessarily.
John Marlow wrote:
> As to Mikle Lorrey's comment on "failing" to prove a
> catastrophe resulting from nuclear mishaps--anyone
> recall a certain Russian radwaste storage facility
> going critical and devastating the surrounding
> countryside?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:04:34 MST