Russia denies nuclear accident after radioactive pollution

Russia denied its nuclear facilities experienced any incidents after reports of contamination by the ruthenium 106 radioactive i
Russia denied its nuclear facilities experienced any incidents after reports of contamination by the ruthenium 106 radioactive isotope in parts of the country

Russia on Tuesday denied its nuclear facilities experienced any incidents after reports of contamination by the ruthenium 106 radioactive isotope in parts of the country, and said the concentration detected posed little threat.

On Monday, Russia's meteorological service said a station close to the Mayak nuclear facility in Chelyabinsk region in south Urals detected "extremely high pollution" of Ru-106 which exceeded the usual background pollution by 986 times.

But a representative of Rosatom nuclear corporation told AFP "there have been no incidents at nuclear infrastructure facilities in Russia."

Mayak, which is under Rosatom's umbrella, also said Tuesday that the contamination "has nothing to do with Mayak's activities".

It said the dose "poses no danger to human health and lives" as it is 20,000 times smaller than the "allowed annual dose."

The facility, which reprocesses , added that it has not produced Ru-106 for many years.

The chief of Rosgidromet weather service Maksim Yakovenko on Tuesday also said the concentration detected "poses no danger to population's health", adding that it's not the service's job to detect the source.

On November 9, France's Institute for Radioprotection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN) issued a report saying ruthenium-106 had been detected in France between September 27 and October 13.

It said that the source of the pollution was probably an accident somewhere between the Volga River and the Ural Mountains, adding that the concentrations measured in Europe were not a danger to public health.

It added that the quantity of Ru-106 at the suspected release site was "between 100 and 300 teraBecquerels" which is "very high" and in France would have led to measures to protect the population in the area.

Ruthenium-106 is a product of splitting atoms in a reactor, and is also used in certain medical treatments. It does not occur naturally.


Explore further

Russia confirms 'extremely high' readings of radioactive pollution

© 2017 AFP

Citation: Russia denies nuclear accident after radioactive pollution (2017, November 21) retrieved 20 May 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2017-11-russia-denies-nuclear-accident-radioactive.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
4 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Nov 21, 2017
The radiation exposure from eating a banana would be higher, we should ban bananas.

Nov 21, 2017
They did this during Chernobyl, and they kept the Kyshtym disaster secret for 32 years. Oh, and the CIA knew about it for about as long but kept is secret to protect US nuclear power. Good god I wish this didn't sound like a conspiracy theory...

https://en.wikipe...disaster

Nov 21, 2017
I wonder if this might be a side effect of the recent disastrous earth shattering hydrogen bomb testing by North Korea. I think that is because of the catastrophic test results that no further nuclear testing has been undertaken by that state. The water table was probably contaminated; there was no doubt serious infrastructure damage to underground facilities. NK has been digging tunnels in there since the 1970's.

Nov 21, 2017
here isn't any doubt at all that there is lying --in the official sense-- going on, but it is unclear just who is to blame.

Contradictory statements like these two I 'm quoting from the article(and in which one immediately follows the other), attributed to France's ISRN, certainly do little to either reassure or even clarify:

"It said that the source of the pollution was probably an accident somewhere between the Volga River and the Ural Mountains, adding that the concentrations measured in Europe were not a danger to public health.

It added that the quantity of Ru-106 at the suspected release site was "between 100 and 300 teraBecquerels" which is "very high" and in France would have led to measures to protect the population in the area."

This may be an artifact of the writing of the article, but even at that, they are contradictory even if taken at face value.

contd

Nov 21, 2017
contd

Lastly --where is the statement from the EPA or whatever responsible agency regarding the intensity and distribution of these radiologicals over North America?

One assumes that any release in Europe or Northern Asia would result in a cloud drifting eastwards, with North America likely to suffer the highest intensity fallout.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more