[net.space] Plutonium hysteria

KFL@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU ("Keith F. Lynch") (03/17/86)

  I have borrowed the March 15th copy of THE NATION.  This is a left
wing pulp magazine.  In a front page headline it says "PLUTONIUM
COVERUP"  The article under it is equally hysterical.
  "...no bigger than the baseball once thought to represent the size
of an A-bomb's core ... stumbled upon NASA's plans to launch the next
vehicle with a payload containing 46.7 pounds of plutonium-238, the
most toxic subsance in this universe. ... so far, the agencies
involved have been stalling, if not stonewalling.  ... Galileo
explosion could release about 57,000 curies of plutonium radiation -
theoretically enough to give 5 billion people lung or bone cancer ..."
  I can hardly believe they publish such stuff.  Of course they have
the right to publish whatever rubish comes into their heads.  But they
ought to feel some sort of responsibility to get their facts straight,
even if it means asking someone who took science in high school.
Galileo was not to have been on the next shuttle flight, as they
state.  Discovering the plutonium was hardly a milestone of
investigative journalism as they imply, it has been publically known
sisnce the first proposals for Galileo.  And most importantly, it
would not harm anyone if it was destroyed.  That amount of plutonium
cannot possibly cause 5 billion cancers, even if you were careful to
put all of it in people's lungs and none at all into the ocean.  I do
not know if it is really 57,000 curies, but if it is, that would come
to 11 microcuries per person.  The air in most houses is more
radioactive than that.
  I don't know what they hope to gain from this yellow journalism.
How do they say we should power Galileo?  Jupiter is too far for solar
cells, not to mention the fact that Galileo will often be in Jupiter's
shadow.  Batteries wouldn't last long enough.  All I can assume is
they don't want any sort of probe sent to Jupiter.  They would prefer
that people remain in ignorance about conditions there.  Ignorance is
at least consistent with their attitude about almost everything else.
  Several Soviet satellites containing far more plutonium have burned
up in the atmosphere or have crashed into the ground, spewing
plutonium into the environment.  They don't have anything to say about
that.  Which isn't surprising, since they never have anything negative
to say about the Soviets.  Not that these reentries have caused any
harm to anyone as far as I know.
  Despite many TONS of plutonium having been spread through the
atmosphere during the nuclear tests of the 1950s and 1960s, most of it
over land, the major source of radiation exposure to the average
citizen is tobacco smoke, with natural radon a close second, and
cosmic rays a distant third.  Manmade plutonium isn't even in the
running.
								...Keith