5 ms·

Ask HN: Is depleted uranium being spread from the Khmelnitsky explosion?

• osipov 3y ago
  [dead]
• 2rsf 3y ago
  Probably not a lot to worry about: https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_layman/depleted-uranium/en/l-3/7.htm#0 https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_l... https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_layman/depleted-uranium/en/l-3/8.htm#0 https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/opinions_l...
• db48x 3y ago
  Depleted uranium is not stored in warehouses. It is stored as liquid UF₆ (uranium hexafluoride) in tanks.
  • lm28469 3y ago
    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/30mm_DU_slug.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/69/30mm_DU_... Doesn't look liquid to me https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depleted_uranium
    • memen 3y ago
      You are linking the wrong page. UF is also a solid, but it is soluble [0]. I do not have a source for his statement about deleted uranium being stored in this liquid form though, so still curious about that. [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_hexafluoride https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium_hexafluoride
      • lm28469 3y ago
        I'm linking the right page, depleted uranium ammunitions aren't made of UF at all
      • virmod 3y ago
        Nuclear engineer here. UF6 is solid at ambient temperature and pressure, though it is extremely voltatile and can be turned into a gas with ease. It is mainly used as an intermediary Uranium compound which has physical properties (first and foremost, being turned easily into a gas) that are very conducive to it enrichment. Once it is enriched though, it is turned through various other chemical processes into either various forms of ceramics (e.g. Uranium Oxides) or metal (e.g. pure Uranium metal). DU rounds are made of purely metallic Uranium and are, of course, stored that way too. There is no UF6 involved in the storage of DU rounds since... the rounds have already been fabricated out of metallic (depleted) Uranium.
• varjag 3y ago
  Buy a radiometer please rather than softcore spreading Russian propaganda here.
  • paganel 3y ago
    Not sure what "softcore" has to do with it, but the initial claim had been made by a former Azov member. It's a fair assumption to make that he is no Russia lover. From here [1]: > Igor Mosiychuk, ex-Ukrainian member of parliament, ex-deputy commander of Azov, recorded a 4 minute video talking about the latest strikes in Khmelnitsky & Ternopol, he claims the depleted uranium theory is correct, recommends evacuating children far from the explosion sites [1] https://twitter.com/RWApodcast/status/1657822892342607874 https://twitter.com/RWApodcast/status/1657822892342607874
    • varjag 3y ago
      RWA is a Russian propaganda account, that you quote it is telling. Either way a radiometer will give you an objective instrumental answer.
      • deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      • paganel 3y ago
        I know about the RWA, go by the screenshot, there's where the Azov guy is. They (the RWA guys) didn't photoshopped it. I don't have Telegram or whatever social media channel that Azov guy might have used to communicate his stuff. > Either way a radiometer will give you an objective instrumental answer. The moment the recorded radiations are too high is already too late, especially if you have kids, that's why we need to know about this type of things before the instrumental devices might show us that the radiation levels have crept up. So in that regard "get a geiger!" is of no practical use when it comes to protecting your closed ones.
        • shanebellone 3y ago
• shanebellone 3y ago
  [flagged]
• fauxpause_ 3y ago
  No. Depleted uranium rounds have been used in previous conflicts. They exploded in those conflicts. There was no material radioactive impact of this. It’s also unlikely that the Russian claims are accurate. Russia is falsely playing up these things as nuclear weapons. They’re not. If you’re concerned about radioactivity you can just look at your own link. The measurements of radiation are all that matters. Not some scary cause. As your link indicates, levels are fine.
  • lm28469 3y ago
    > No. Depleted uranium rounds have been used in previous conflicts. They exploded in those conflicts. There was no material radioactive impact of this. Oh yes ? Are you sure about that ? https://thebulletin.org/2020/07/war-and-the-environment/ https://thebulletin.org/2020/07/war-and-the-environment/ https://merip.org/1999/06/the-gulf-war-battlefield-still-hot-with-depleted-uranium/ https://merip.org/1999/06/the-gulf-war-battlefield-still-hot...
  • kavalg 3y ago
    Actually I am not that much concerned about (gamma) radioactive risks, but more about toxicity or DU. As far as I understand it, the latter comes from both uranium being a toxic metal and the alpha particles emitted from the dust in close proximity if inhaled or ingested.
    • fauxpause_ 3y ago
      You are very unlikely to see a material concentration of this stuff unless you’re very close to the site of the explosion. The risks, if any, come from people handling hunks of it like armor plating and bullets .
      • virmod 3y ago
        How about people on the receiving end? It is absolutely no secret that the use of DU ammo in Kosovo by NATO forces in 1999 led to an increase in the cancer rates of the civilian population, as well as some military units (most notably the Italian ones). It is no wonder either, DU is pyrophoric (i.e., burns on impact, spreading DU dust in the impact's environs) and should banned just as (even more than) cluster bombs and mines.
• vrut25 3y ago
  Yes. Depleted uranium rounds have been used by NATO in previous conflicts: Serbia, Iraq, etc. It is radioactive and causes enormous harm.
  • _kbh_ 3y ago
    Do you have a link that proves that any DU was even in that warehouse, far far behind the front line just before an offensive starts?.
• defrost 3y ago
  The bulk of the readings around the city are sub 100 nSv/hr with a few 113 & 139 - nothing is significantly spiking post the explosion date. Others have pointed out pragmatic reasons for not being concerned which appear sound, I'd point out that the point source "gross count" map doesn't raise alarms - and you'd really want decent gamma spectrum data in any case - not just total counts in some energy range, but a full channel by channel spectrum measurement showing peaks in uranium breakdown products [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_spectroscopy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_spectroscopy
• _kbh_ 3y ago
  > The evidence being presented, is an anomaly in the background radiation matching the event [1]. Im not seeing any evidence of an anomaly?, do you have a link to one.
  • kavalg 3y ago
    The EU radiation map site doesn't provide a link, but you can open the station with ID UA33429, which corresponds to Khmelnytskyi and see that the background radiation went from approx 100 nSv/h to 155 nSv/h. I can only look back to 10th of April and don't see a peak higher than approx 110 nSv/h, with the average hovering around 100.
    • utunga 3y ago
      Or check this video where he does just that https://youtu.be/sdrkvTPnuTw https://youtu.be/sdrkvTPnuTw I am not so worried about smallish spikes in gamma radiation but I think we should all be concerned about longer term impacts of small particles of DU scattered across large area, making it's way into food supply etc. It's sort of inevitable once you have a lot of it in-theater.
    • _kbh_ 3y ago
      The data I am seeing from people suggests that the spike in radiation happened two days before the strike which totally discounts this idea. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwLHn8XWYAMnNt4?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwLHn8XWYAMnNt4?format=jpg&name=... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwLJmZ8XoAknLBo?format=jpg&name=large https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FwLJmZ8XoAknLBo?format=jpg&name=...
      • kavalg 3y ago
        Right, thanks a lot for noticing this and for the links. Makes sense.