The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Are we returning to the 1960's again? New study focuses on surviving nuclear fallout...
Nuclear Accident SOG's: Do not flee. Get inside any stable building and don’t come out till officials say it’s safe...
Do not flee. Get inside any stable building and don’t come out till officials say it’s safe.
The advice is based on recent scientific analyses showing that a nuclear attack is much more survivable if you immediately shield yourself from the lethal radiation that follows a blast, a simple tactic seen as saving hundreds of thousands of lives. Even staying in a car, the studies show, would reduce casualties by more than 50 percent; hunkering down in a basement would be better by far.
But a problem for the Obama administration is how to spread the word without seeming alarmist about a subject that few politicians care to consider, let alone discuss. So officials are proceeding gingerly in a campaign to educate the public.
The new wave is citizen preparedness. For people who survive the initial blast, the main advice is to fight the impulse to run and instead seek shelter from lethal radioactivity. Even a few hours of protection, officials say, can greatly increase survival rates.
Administration officials argue that the cold war created an unrealistic sense of fatalism about a terrorist nuclear attack. “It’s more survivable than most people think,” said an official deeply involved in the planning, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “The key is avoiding nuclear fallout.” (Full Story)
What if you are not in a building? How can you protect yourself, your family or your crew from an event involving radiological materials and fallout?
Summary: Keep this below simple graphic in mind and remember time, distance and shielding are the key factors that determine your exposure to radiation.
"Failure to prepare is preparing for failure... Be prepared, your life may depend on it..."
TCSS,
CBz
mschlags@gmail.com
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by ashfire on
-
If terroist or our own nut cases keep coming up with ways to get bombs into a city or public area to kill citizens we might as well be prepare for anything.
I know of one building in our area that still has the 60s radiation shelter signs. If it still has supplies for citizens there I am unsure.
They have told us not just a few years ago to buy heavy roll plastic and duct tape so you could create safety place in your house in the event of some attack.
Just think of trying to get a million people out some of our cities.
South Korea just had a major test of their evac system just a few days ago. Ever heard of one being done all at once in the US? I bet this we would fail big time.
There might be homes in our area that still have backyard shelters put in back in the 50s or 60s that are now used for other things or have been forgotten.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Schlags (Captain Busy) Retd on
-
Not to give away too much, but... I would make it a point to preplan locations where there are basements. One thought that comes to mind are the older style fast food restaurants that have both a basement, food + water, and a means to stay safe for the 2-week 1/2-life that we always hear about. Just a thought. What's even more scary is that you are the only one to post a response to this breaking news as far as radiation safety and sheltering. Funny how one's priorities can focus on word games, helmet color, and other topics that have been beat to death and not salient data such as this.
CBz
-
Permalink Reply by Brian Dumser on
-
Does this mean we're back to learning, "Duck and Cover"?
I've actually been giving some serious thought to this. In light of terrorism and "dirty bombs".
Good point about the fast food restaurants with basements.
-
Permalink Reply by John Dobson on
-
Hey Cap, We were taught time, distance, shielding. But they never taught how much time, How much distance, How much shielding. Is there a way to learn that? My guess it would be on the size and type of spill/bomb.
We have trains running 75 feet in front of are bay doors and it's not real uncommon to see car with radioactive placards with medical waste wrote on them. Something to be concerned about? Below is the type of container.
-
-
This might help. (taken from the EPA website)
Time
The amount of radiation exposure increases and decreases with the time people spend near the source of radiation.
In general, we think of the exposure time as how long a person is near radioactive material. It's easy to understand how to minimize the time for external (direct) exposure. Gamma and x-rays are the primary concern for external exposure.
However, if radioactive material gets inside your body, you can't move away from it. You have to wait until it decays or until your body can eliminate it. When this happens, the biological half-life of the radionuclide controls the time of exposure. Biological half-life is the amount of time it takes the body to eliminate one half of the radionuclide initially present. Alpha and beta particles are the main concern for internal exposure.
How does EPA use the concept of time in radiation protection?
When we set a radiation standard that assumes an exposure over a certain period, we are applying the concept of time. For example, we often express exposures in terms of a committed dose. A committed dose is one that accounts for continuing exposures over long periods of time (such as 30, 50, or 70 years). It refers to the exposure received from radioactive material that enters and remains in the body for many years.
When we assess the potential for exposure in a situation, we consider the amount of time a person is likely to spend in the area of contamination. For example, in assessing the potential exposure from radon in a home, we estimate how much time people are likely to spend in the basement.
Top of page
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Distance
The farther away people are from a radiation source, the less their exposure.
How close to a source of radiation can you be without getting a high exposure? It depends on the energy of the radiation and the size (or activity) of the source. Distance is a prime concern when dealing with gamma rays, because they can travel long distances. Alpha and beta particles don't have enough energy to travel very far.
As a rule, if you double the distance, you reduce the exposure by a factor of four. Halving the distance, increases the exposure by a factor of four.
Why does exposure change more rapidly than the distance?
The area of the circle depends on the distance from the center to the edge of the circle (radius). It is proportional to the square of the radius. As a result, if the radius doubles, the area increases four times.
Think of the radiation source as a bare light bulb. The bulb gives off light equally in every direction, in a circle. The energy from the light is distributed evenly over the whole area of the circle. When the radius doubles, the radiation is spread out over four times as much area, so the dose is only one fourth as much. (In addition, as the distance from the source increases so does the likelihood that some gamma rays will lose their energy.
Exposure at 2 feet
Exposure at 4 feet
The exposure of an individual sitting 4 feet from a radiation source will be 1/4 the exposure of an individual sitting 2 feet from the same source
How does EPA use the concept of distance in radiation protection?
We also consider distance in analyzing potential exposures from a source. If a person is at a contaminated site, or working around radioactive material, we assess how the exposures vary if the person is closer to, or farther away from, the source of radiation.
Top of page
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shielding
The greater the shielding around a radiation source, the smaller the exposure.
Shielding simply means having something that will absorb radiation between you and the source of the radiation (but using another person to absorb the radiation doesn't count as shielding). The amount of shielding required to protect against different kinds of radiation depends on how much energy they have.
(Alpha)
A thin piece of light material, such as paper, or even the dead cells in the outer layer of human skin provides adequate shielding because alpha particles can't penetrate it. However, living tissue inside body, offers no protection against inhaled or ingested alpha emitters.
(Beta)
Additional covering, for example heavy clothing, is necessary to protect against beta-emitters. Some beta particles can penetrate and burn the skin.
(Gamma)
Thick, dense shielding, such as lead, is necessary to protect against gamma rays. The higher the energy of the gamma ray, the thicker the lead must be. X-rays pose a similar challenge, so x-ray technicians often give patients receiving medical or dental X-rays a lead apron to cover other parts of their body.
How does EPA use the concept of shielding in radiation protection?
We take into account the type of shielding that might be provided by soil when we assess sites that have been contaminated or used for disposal of radioactive material. We also account for the shielding provided by buildings for a person working or living at a site that has been cleaned up.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
