![]() “As to what kind of reactor was being tested, there are two main possibilities: it was either a nuclear ramjet engine, which would be air-cooled, or a more conventional reactor using a coolant like hydrogen. “However, I’m still puzzled why there was no detection of iodine isotopes, some of which would be released in greater quantities,” he said. This account would seem to fit with reports of two separate explosions on 8 August reported over the weekend by a Norwegian monitoring group.ĭr Edwin Lyman of the Union of Concerned Scientists said the detection of the fission products announced on Monday was indicative of a reactor release. “Usually, an RTG uses just one radionuclide, and during its decay, and it cannot produce these kinds of isotopes.” “These specified radionuclides rule out, to some extent, the possibility of an RTG,” Zolotkov said. Zolotkov believes there are two possible explanations: either the failed test involved a highly unusual reactor, or the latest findings are a diversion. However, local media reports since 8 August have suggested doctors who treated victims of the explosion tested positive for caesium-137. And other radionuclides, such as caesium-137, should have also been detected. ![]() But even then, strontium-91 is exotic, he says. The identified radionuclides are of a type that could be produced in a uranium-235 reaction commonly used in nuclear reactors. ![]() A Rosatom statement on 10 August after the blast said only that the device was an “isotopic power source in a liquid-fuel engine”, suggesting the incident was some kind of failed missile test.Ī second Rosatom statement, issued by the head of the research institute where the five specialists worked, suggested the test involved either a small nuclear reactor or a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) – both of which have applications on spacecraft.īut the four radionuclides identified by Roshydromet on Monday are extremely unusual, according to Andrei Zolotkov, a chemist who spent 35 years working on Russia’s nuclear icebreaker fleet and knows the details of typical nuclear reactors. The Russian government and Rosatom have been vague about what happened. However, this disappeared after the Russian military denied there had been any emissions of radioactive material.Īn earlier Roshydromet statement said radiation levels had jumped by between four to 16 times their usual level. The findings appear to back up an official statement posted on the Severodvinsk city government website on 8 August. Roshydromet has been monitoring the situation but said no further radiation had been detected. They were responsible for the “sharp, short-lived change in the radiation situation over Severodvinsk”, the meteorological service said. These are fast-decaying radioactive substances that would emit inert radioactive gases if exposed to the open air. The substances were identified as “technogenic radionuclides” – strontium-91, barium-139, barium-140 and lanthanum-140.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |