I doubt heat would destroy the radioactivity, though if the substance emitting was destroyed, I suppose that would do it. I expect that coal waste becomes fill on which subdivisions are built.
However, we shouldn't worry - it's low level. And we already bathe in low level radioactivity.
Harry ------------------------------------
Lawrence wrote:
Interesting about the coal's radioactivity. Up in the air, I suppose? Incineration wouldn't destroy the radioactivity, would it?
Lawry
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Harry Pollard > Sent: Sat, May 31, 2003 12:01 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: RE: [Futurework] Lovely low level radiation? Proposal for new > Whitehouse dinnerware > > > Lawry, > > The casualty rate for uranium miners is about the same as coal miners. > However, far less uranium is required than coal than for same wattage. > > I'm not sure how much less, but I do know that the wattage that fills one > truck of uranium waste, fills 35,000 trucks with coal waste. > > Oh, yes. There's more radioactivity in the coal waste than in the uranium > waste, but who knows where it goes? > > Harry
**************************************************** Harry Pollard Henry George School of Social Science of Los Angeles Box 655 Tujunga CA 91042 Tel: (818) 352-4141 -- Fax: (818) 353-2242 http://home.attbi.com/~haledward ****************************************************
--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.486 / Virus Database: 284 - Release Date: 5/29/2003
