[HN Gopher] Goiania Accident ___________________________________________________________________ Goiania Accident Author : joering2 Score : 192 points Date : 2023-02-01 12:50 UTC (1 days ago) (HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org) (TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org) | olliej wrote: | One of the more stupid accidents. Here a judge decided that | security of a radioactive source that belong to company A was | secondary to a lease agreement with company B, and so contributed | to multiple people dying. | | The people who stole and opened the source obviously shouldn't | have, but given the period I think it's more reasonable that they | didn't understand what was going on. The judge doesn't have that | excuse. | xkcd1963 wrote: | Total failure by the people in charge. | intrasight wrote: | Sad tragedy that is the judge's fault for sure. Hope he or she | rots in hell - from radioactive poisoning. | Trufa wrote: | For those who can speak Spanish here's a Uruguayan folk song | about the incident | | https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=3YIalaC0M_A&feature=share | | I mean you might like it anyway but the lyrics are central. | augusto-moura wrote: | That was a good surprise, I'm from Goiania and I would never | guess that a Uruguayan song would be made about it. | MichaelBurge wrote: | > One of IGR's owners and the clinic's physicist were ordered to | pay R$100,000 for the derelict condition of the building. | | Why were the owners liable? They notified the court and were | prevented by the court from removing the machine, so my first | thought is they should be blameless: The court assumed control | and therefore responsibility. | bloomingeek wrote: | We humans can screw up anything. Whether it's not protecting | others or just not being cautious enough. Why would you ever | bring an item that glows and you have absolutely no idea what it | is around your family? | | Shame on the authorities for allowing this to happen in the first | place. Their job is to protect society from things they | don't/can't understand. And let's not forget money probably | accounted for why the source wasn't removed in the first place. | [deleted] | Maursault wrote: | Obligatory.[1] Fox Harris (1936-1988) was a wonderful yet | underappreciated actor. | | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VKzqAefBVY&t=0m38s | warent wrote: | Previous discussion: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29127586 | dang wrote: | Thanks! Macroexpanded: | | _The Goiania Accident (1987)_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29127586 - Nov 2021 (121 | comments) | | _Goiania Accident_ - | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23664402 - June 2020 (2 | comments) | [deleted] | aarchi wrote: | > Other contamination was also found in or on: three buses, 42 | houses, fourteen cars, five pigs, and 50,000 rolls of toilet | paper | | Why such a large figure for toilet paper? Is it somehow more | easily contaminated by radiation? | jll29 wrote: | The roughly 150 combined military and civilian incidents that the | two respective Wikipedia lists contain demonstrate that | | 1. military and civilian use of technology both go wrong roughly | similarly often (approx. 55% and 45%, respectively) | | 2. in just about 100 years of "nuclear technology", there have | been more than a mean of 1 1/2 incidents per year. | | I'd be surprised if the Wikipedia list is complete, there are | probably substantial numbers of unreported/suppressed incidents, | although I expect them to be small (large incidents would have | been detected by others measuring radiation). | koch wrote: | I found this one[0] the other day where a radiation source ended | up in the concrete wall of an apartment building. A whole family | got leukemia, took 9 years to eventually have it removed. | | [0]: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramatorsk_radiological_accide... | oskob wrote: | An excellent video on the topic: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k3NJXGSIIA | TremendousJudge wrote: | Well There's Your Problem has an episode on the incident as | well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34rdxDgpaaA | jasmer wrote: | This is the issue with nuclear in general. In short, we are not | responsible enough. If we were fully responsible as people, we | could do it. Once rich countries did it, poor countries would | demand it, and they are especially unprepared. A bit of economic | and political risk and voila, regions devastated. | | There should be a simple rule: if you can't manage sewage and | garbage, you can't handle nuclear technologies. | roywiggins wrote: | Nuclear medicine in middle-income countries has almost | certainly saved orders of magnitude more people than it's | killed. | | Even the specific source in the Goiania accident could easily | have been responsible for saving more lives than it ended up | taking. | | Of course these things have risks. But these radiotherapy | sources aren't being used for fun; the benefits are | substantial. That an accident that killed 4 people is | significant enough to get its own name and Wikipedia article | suggests to me that the risk isn't actually that high. | Karawebnetwork wrote: | You could say the same about almost all types of industrial, | chemical and medical waste. | jasmer wrote: | Nuclear has a fundamentally different risk profile. Nuclear | failures mean possibly a hugely disproportionate number of | deaths, entire regions unusable, and very risky | externalizations such as someone using waste to make most of | Manhattan unlivable, which is absolutely a possibility that | exist, and does not for almost all other technologies. | | People here are talking about 'irrational fear' (?) it's | 'irrational' not to account for those things. There are | possibly ways to mitigate it but there are externalizations | with Nuclear that cannot be avoided. | sofixa wrote: | > entire regions unusable | | True. | | > hugely disproportionate number of deaths | | Not really true. As a reference, the Bhopal industrial | disaster killed an estimated 20-25k people, with official | numbers at 7.5k, with more than 500k with non-fatal | poisoning. Chernobyl, where everything that could go wrong | went wrong, coupled with massive design and human flaws, | resulted in around 4000 deaths as of today according to the | WHO. Of course the density isn't really comparable, but it | kind of is because nuclear power plants don't need a lot of | employees and are usually far away from big population | centers. | | The evacuation of the zone around Fukushima, and an oil | tank fire caused more dead than the nuclear accident in the | power plant, all caused by the same earthquake+tsunami. | murat124 wrote: | The issue with the nuclear power is the nuclear warhead. | Mankind would be perfectly fine with nuclear power but will | always be at risk as long as it is weaponized. Some folks being | fatally radiated does not impose risk to our kind. | kergonath wrote: | But then people don't know a thing about isotopes, fertile | and fissile nuclei, or what actually goes into a bomb. The | reactors that produced the plutonium used in warheads largely | came from specialised reactors designed for this purpose | only. You cannot get the same stuff out of civilian reactors. | zirgs wrote: | I'd argue that nuclear warheads have saved millions of lives | by preventing another world war. MAD prevents nuclear weapons | states from waging war against each other directly. | rpastuszak wrote: | I see where you're coming from, but the way the western | countries managed their garbage problem was to send it to those | especially unprepared countries (think: sending container ships | with trash from the US to China). | | I think you're mixing a perceived sense of responsibility and | power dynamics. | | A better solution would involve putting more effort in helping | those poorer countries have the means to handle these problems | better. It's the 21st century, we're much more intertwined than | we've ever been. | ars wrote: | > think: sending container ships with trash from the US to | China | | That's not a real thing. It's a persistent myth, but it's not | actually real. | kergonath wrote: | This is the issue with people in general. Any industry is going | to cause a certain number of deaths. And nuclear is _far_ from | being the worst. Particularly nuclear medicine, which has saved | untold number of people. | duped wrote: | > This is the issue with nuclear in general | | nuclear what? chemistry? | ElectricalUnion wrote: | This is the issue with fossil fuel technology in general. In | short, we are not responsible enough. If we were fully | responsible as people, we could do it. Once rich countries did | it, poor countries would demand it, and they are especially | unprepared. A bit of economic and political risk and voila, | regions devastated. | | There should be a simple rule: if you can't manage sewage and | garbage, you can't handle fossil fuel technologies. | Kon5ole wrote: | The kind of damage a few malicious or negligent individuals | can cause in an afternoon from nuclear operations can't be | matched by fossil fuels. Fossil fuels have caused damage | through the effort of billions of people over centuries. | | The history of fossil fuels also shows us that humans are | negligent over time, which seems to me a good argument | against building a large infrastructure of nuclear | operations. | scarmig wrote: | The difference: | | When nuclear energy goes wrong, thousands of people die. | | When fossil fuels go right, millions of people die. | [deleted] | jrockway wrote: | Fossil fuel technology is easy. You dispose of the waste | products into the atmosphere which is like infinitely vast! | Most of the really damaging stuff will be washed out by rain, | and stored in all of these previously-useless lakes and | rivers. Let's be honest, what has a lake or river done for | YOU lately? | | If those dinosaurs didn't want us to burn their decayed | corpses so we could have McMansions in the suburbs and still | commute to the office every day, they shouldn't have been hit | by that big meteor! | YeGoblynQueenne wrote: | >> There should be a simple rule: if you can't manage sewage | and garbage, you can't handle fossil fuel technologies. | | I know this is sarcastic but the UK is in the middle of an | absolutely massive scandal with raw sewage being continuously | discharged in rivers and the sea for many years now: | | https://theriverstrust.org/key-issues/sewage-in-rivers | | https://www.bbc.com/news/explainers-62631320 | | _Why is raw sewage pumped into the sea?_ | | >> Pollution warnings for dozens of beaches in England and | Wales were issued after water companies discharged untreated | sewage and wastewater into the sea. | | >> Raw sewage was pumped into rivers and seas about 375,000 | times in 2021, the Environment Agency says. | | >> In 2022, Ofwat, the water regulator for England and Wales, | launched cases against six water companies over discharging | sewage at times when this should not have happened. | | And of course there's the little-known matter of | anthropogenic climate changed caused by CO2 emissions from | burning fossil fuels. I know it's hard to believe, but it is | starting to become a bit of a problem. | jasmer wrote: | ? There is no analogy here. | | There are no existential risks from Oil. Danger is small and | proportional to an installation. You have a big refinery fire | and five people die? That could happen with any tech. | | Fukishima is unusable for generations. Chernonbyl same. | | Spent fuel from a nuclear reactor could feasibly make most of | Manhattan unlivable in just a few hours. | | Oil and Nuclear don't share the same risk profile. | hexplate wrote: | > There are no existential risks from Oil. | | You uh, sure about that one? | spoils19 wrote: | This is the issue with sewage technology in general. In | short, we are not responsible enough. If we were fully | responsible as people, we could do it. Once rich countries | did it, poor countries would demand it, and they are | especially unprepared. A bit of economic and political risk | and voila, regions devastated. | | There should be a simple rule: if you can't manage garbage, | you can't handle sewage technologies. | JasonFruit wrote: | This sounds like "Great White Father" stuff to me. Are wealthy | countries really so suited to telling poorer ones what they may | and may not do to join the wealthy? | jasmer wrote: | Yes. It's imperfect but that's the way it is, it's already in | place with 'Nuclear Non Proliferation' [1] and many other | things. It's a 'free world' until interests are threatened, | then you see where the balance of power is, moreover, there | are legitimate issues of responsibility here. Canada, Japan, | Ukraine, Brazil, Cameroon - all different places in so many | ways, it is what it is. That's diversity. | | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non- | Proliferatio... | | EDIT: FYI I'm being a bit tounge-in-cheek with the garbage | thing, I realize 'Rich Countries' don't do sewage and garbage | perfectly well either, which is partly the point. The other | point is that other places are objectively much worse. | poyu wrote: | Boy, I have an article for you | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_ge... | icambron wrote: | We seem to manage nuclear very well, and one piece of evidence | is how horrifying it is that four people died in this story, | and the degree of concern it generated. Nuclear stuff is like | airline safety; there's a good cultural and governmental stance | around taking its risks seriously. | | But more importantly, not responsible enough compared to which | alternatives? In this case, it was a device for radiation | therapy. The solution here can't be that lots of people die of | cancer because nuclear is too dangerous. That just doesn't add | up. For nuclear tech more generally, I posit that we are far | less responsible with fossil fuels, and that they have done, | and will continue to do, vast amounts of damage. Using nuclear | would save a lot of lives. You can't just weigh the risk of | some course of action against the absence of that risk; you | have to weigh it against the risks of the alternatives or the | risk of not solving the problem at all. No one is using this | tech just for fun. | | I think some of this is a psychological effect: awful things | that are (or seem like) the status quo get priced into our | sense of risk, while exotic-seeming tech with very-differently- | shaped risks seem irresponsible. We're also bad at weighing | widespread, generalized damage against the low risk of | disasters, even if some simple thought experiments make it | clear which is better. | abyssin wrote: | You could also compare nuclear power to hydroelectric power. | Hydroelectric power causes orders of magnitude more deaths. | Kon5ole wrote: | Such comparisons will also indicate that tigers are safer | than dogs and guns are safer than cars. | jasmer wrote: | Different risk profiles. | | Oil accidents are limited and proportional. | | Nuclear accidents have massive externalizations. | | Fukishima and Chernobyl are unlivable. Waste from Nuclear can | do such damage in other places. | | Other forms of energy do not have this kind of risk, Nuclear | is completely different. | mixmastamyk wrote: | Sadly not even enough. Formerly well-managed countries have | revolutions and get into wars. | caned wrote: | Rich countries only manage sewage and garbage to the extent | that it's out of sight and out of mind. Arguably nobody is | "responsible enough." | alerighi wrote: | Well so nobody can handle nuclear technologies, since nobody | handles garbage correctly. Just look at how many stuff that can | be recycled get tossed into general waste, or how much | electronic waste we send to poor countries since we can't deal | with it. | | In reality fortunately the management of nuclear waste is | completely different than everything else, it's highly | regulated and controlled by international inspectors. In fact | this incident doesn't prove that nuclear power is unsafe, since | it didn't interest a nuclear power plant but rather a medical | device with radioactive substances in them (and radiation | sources are used commonly in the conventional industry, in | every country, even the one that doesn't have any nuclear at | all). | jasmer wrote: | Where are the regulations around combat teams hiding in | Nuclear Power plants? Artillery shells landing 500ft from | reactors? Small quasi-accidents happening because one regime | wants to 'blame it' on another? Nuclear staff being locked | into the facility? | | Regulations exist until someone decides they don't because | they don't want to pay for something, they are lazy, | incompetent. | | Google 'Jamie Metzl' who is a very respected researcher who | lays out the history of the establishment of Biolabs in | China, and points at the very strong likelihood that COVID | was created in a lab and is the result of a long series of | regulatory, oversight, political and scientific failures. | | Biolabs are 'safe' until the host country decides to screw | the regulators because they want to save money on | construction, or some person installs substandard materials | because somewhere down the long globalized value chain, | someone replaced one thing with another, on purpose or by | accident, and it compromises the entire system. | | Those are the kinds of systemic risks that exist with things | like viruses and Nuclear tech that normal thinking doesn't | account for. | | Likely we need an approach that works even if humans fail | completely, or, that can be maintained in more stable | systems. | barelyauser wrote: | Demand it? From who? Countries are sovereign. This post reads | very badly. | jasmer wrote: | 'Sovereignty' is a social construct. | | Most social groups do not allow children or crazy people to | have guns, and they enforce a whole range of other rules as | well. | | This notion that 'that group is sovereign' but 'that other | group' is not - is a decision we make, not some kind of | innate thing. | | More specifically - the rules are already in place for | Nuclear Weapons. 'Rich countries' will not allow messed up | nations to get them, or rather, it will be very difficult. | [1] | | It's the same with Nuclear technology of the same risk. | | Colombia can go ahead and try to make Nuclear Weapons and see | what happens. | | [1] https://www.un.org/disarmament/wmd/nuclear/npt/ | anthk wrote: | Spaniard here. You are deluded. | | There are weapons far more dangerous today than nuclear. | erredois wrote: | I think statistics do not support this fear. This is in Brazil | that probably has been running thousands of this equipments | over decades, with this one significant incident. Also runs two | nuclear power plants and enriches uranium locally without any | relevant incident. I think this irrational fear of atomic poses | more danger because it's something we need , oil kill much more | people and renewables alone won't cut it. Even Brazil that runs | a lot of hidro eventually needs to run fossil fuel | thermoelectric because of low volume of rains. | misterS wrote: | Plainly Difficult has a nice video about this accident: | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhL0xQzPSy8 | riffic wrote: | this happens so ridiculously frequently. look at wikipedia | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_orphan_source_incident... | garyfirestorm wrote: | from that list | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lia_radiological_accident | dom96 wrote: | > He soon developed a burn on his hand in the same size and shape | as the aperture - he eventually underwent partial amputation of | several fingers. | | > On September 15, Pereira visited a local clinic, where his | symptoms were diagnosed as the result of something he had eaten; | he was told to return home and rest. | | Hopefully the partial amputation occurred after the visit, | otherwise I would really love to know what the clinic thought he | ate that could cause partial amputation! | BizarroLand wrote: | "You ate something so we need to cut off your fingers" is a | sentence I hope is never spoken aloud to anyone ever. | EdwardDiego wrote: | Don't read about the people who are paralysed or die from | eating slugs as a dare... | r2_pilot wrote: | I'm posting a yahoo page about it because of a text | preference for HN, but the Chubbyemu YouTube video is mildly | terrifying. It's my understanding that this sort of thing is | vanishingly rare, but serves as a reminder that it's better | to have modern medicine than not. | https://news.yahoo.com/teenager-legs-fingers-amputated- | eatin... | Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote: | https://archive.is/KKrYN | | >> both of his legs and and all ten fingers amputated | | > better to have modern medicine than not | | Fuck no! Never let modern medicine butcher me like that. | LudwigNagasena wrote: | > They learned that JC only received the first dose of | the meningococcal vaccine just before he entered middle | school. And once he reached the age of 16, JC did not | receive the recommended booster for the vaccine. | dom96 wrote: | wow, so it totally is possible to lose your fingers after | eating something. This also show the importance of | vaccination and makes me wonder: how do I know if I missed | some vaccines as a kid? how do I know whether I need a | booster of something since school? | LudwigNagasena wrote: | Get your medical records and visit a doctor? | mrexroad wrote: | Well, they clearly didn't think much of the doctors advice... | the next day: | | > "September 16, Alves succeeded in puncturing the capsule's | aperture window with a screwdriver, allowing him to see a deep | blue light coming from the tiny opening he had created.[1] He | inserted the screwdriver and successfully scooped out some of | the glowing substance. Thinking it was perhaps a type of | gunpowder, he tried to light it, but the powder would not | ignite." | EdwardDiego wrote: | When I first read about this, I wondered how you wouldn't be | afraid of something glowing with a deep blue light. | | I feel like that would get the ol spidey sense tingling for | most. | jeoqn wrote: | [flagged] | marcosdumay wrote: | So... You just lost your empathy for ~200 people? | voakbasda wrote: | It was not forgotten. It was neglected by the government, which | then then tried to blame the owners that had been begging for | months for someone to address the issue. The government | actively prohibited them from removing it. | rbanffy wrote: | The owners also neglected to properly secure the device. In | their place I'd have at the very least seal the room with a | brick wall. | peteradio wrote: | How are you going to get permission to erect a brick wall | when you are barred from entering the grounds to retrieve | the device? | rbanffy wrote: | The person who forgot to remove it from the device was not | among the people who died. | jeoqn wrote: | Good, it wasn't his fault. | amelius wrote: | Anyone having a good reference to a cheap radiation measurement | instrument that would catch this? | Waterluvian wrote: | If you're curious, there's some reasonably priced ones on | Amazon that might satisfy your curiosity (but are not safety | rated or scientifically accurate). | | If you're actually feeling anxious about this, there's a | laundry list of things far more likely to harm you that you can | act on right now, such as making sure you have sufficient smoke | and CO alarms, a CO2 measurement tool to see if your popular | rooms are getting enough fresh air, and a radon detector | (though depending on region this may not apply). | roywiggins wrote: | To catch this specific thing, all you'd need is a pair of | eyeballs, since it actively glowed... | kazinator wrote: | From the Wikpiedia description, it looks like the IGR owners and | doctors were treated badly by the system in their country. They | made steps to warn about the radioactive material left behind, | but were prevented by a court order and guards from retrieving | it. Then in the aftermath, they became defendants in civil | litigation and criminal prosecution. | sneak wrote: | This, along with the Gimli Glider, are my favorite wikipedia | pages. | | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider | cactusplant7374 wrote: | Why this? | verytrivial wrote: | Warning: People not prepared to read about harm coming to | children should probably scroll past this one. | | I'm still haunted from the first time I read about this. | jonas21 wrote: | [flagged] | deely3 wrote: | Whats wrong with warning? Its not like all people on HN | should be forced to read all wiki articles about all horrible | thing that happens with people. | pflenker wrote: | What's wrong with that? I once read the plot of a horror | movie on that page and it haunted me for months. And that was | even though I fully expected the article to be unpleasant. | tiagod wrote: | Same here... probably the same movie..... | blueflow wrote: | You made me curious. Whats the title? | unwind wrote: | Seconded, I stopped reading at that point. Thanks anyway, good | idea to issue a warning. | dylan604 wrote: | In light of the little bitty thing lost/found in Australia, this | is a good example of why they spent such an effort to find it. | Forget making dirty bombs, just have a "committed to the cause" | person just carry something like this around as they tour the | city. At least a dirty bomb would be obvious something happened, | and people could know how/why they were getting sick in the | aftermath. | | This kind of thing would be the worst example of Silent But | Deadly. Once the committed to the cause person was too affected | from doing the work themselves, just have the next member pick up | and carry on the mission. Ammo that never needs reloading. You | just have to reload the delivery mechanisms. | RC_ITR wrote: | >Just have a "committed to the cause" person just carry | something like this around as they tour the city. | | Please don't fear-monger; the impact of radiation on the human | body is _cumulative_ and the inverse square law makes it hard | for any point source to have a ton of impact (particularly with | how much attenuating concrete and metal exists in cities). | | A person walking around a city with a Cs-137 capsule would emit | a _very_ dangerous field around themselves, but the impact | would be very localized _and_ require long exposure times for | there to be a meaningful impact. Your scenario would primarily | be a confusing suicide mission, where _maybe_ a random | assortment of people would have elevated cancer levels in | future years. | | Hell, even the guy _next to Slotin_ at the Demon core | criticality survived 20+ years (before dying of a _heart | attack_ )[0] | | The most deadly disasters are the ones where a radioactivity | source _is in one place for a long time_ and people interact | closely with it, frequently (usually because they don 't know | it is there). | | Take the Goiania accident [1] as an example. Only the scrapyard | employees who spent a few days with the capsule ended up dying. | Other people with shorter interaction times were fine. | | Or take the Kramatorsk Accident [2], only _the families in the | apartment_ died of leukemia, despite it being a full building. | | [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_C._Graves | [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident [2] | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramatorsk_radiological_accide... | dylan604 wrote: | If you took this seriously after Silent But Deadly to come | away with I'm trying to practice fear mongering, "well, boy, | I don't know." | | We have so many movie/book plots, that this is exactly how | they start. Someone reads something, and then just plays with | the idea. I'm not a writer, so it's not like I'm ever going | to use the idea. But who knows, maybe somebody else reads and | turns it into a good idea. | | We can still have fun in this world even with deputy downers | like you ruining for everyone "because it's not accurate". | [deleted] | KennyBlanken wrote: | Aside from both incidents happening in countries not | particularly well known for long-term follow-up on the | consequences of failures by the state...law of inverse | squares is what saved a lot of people in these incidents. The | source wasn't actually that close to them. In a dense city, a | hypothetical terrorist probably wouldn't have to work too | hard to get around this. | | Some radiotherapy sources are stamped "DROP AND RUN." If | you're able to read that, by the time you've read it, you're | already in deep dogshit. The levels of radiation involved | cause near instant cell death and odd sensations due to, | well, the frying of the nervous system. You might live - but | | The impact wouldn't be that high in terms of people | injured/killed. The real impact would be on the public | psyche, as well disruption of the health system when people | showed up in ERs and doctors offices thinking they were | exposed, clogging those systems for care of other patients. | In that sense, as a terror attack, it would be highly | successful. | | It's really bizarre seeing a bunch of HNers downplaying how | serious these sorts of incidents are. We're very lucky that | the lost sources have never ended up in the hands of anyone | but non-malicious actors. Now 'bad' people are far more aware | of them... | 0cVlTeIATBs wrote: | This kind of attack might be detectable with any digital | camera. I'd hope the level it takes to produce visible noise is | less than the level to be harmful. | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2GNvHRjcz8 | Gordonjcp wrote: | > just have a "committed to the cause" person just carry | something like this around as they tour the city. | | They'd be dead in a day or two, with no ill-effects for anyone | else. | gus_massa wrote: | I asked in a previous thread about the relative strength of the | device in Goiania and the recent device in Australia. cosama | replied: | | > _The wikipedia article you linked mentioned that the Goiania | source was 50.9 TBq (1,380 Ci) when lost, the source in | question here [in Australia] is probably 1-10 mCi, so about a | million times weaker. See this other thread about the | incidence:https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34549126 ._ | mrexroad wrote: | Thanks, appreciate you posting it here. Was skimming for that | comparison but didn't see it. | rimunroe wrote: | The source in Australia was about 19 GBq (514 mCi) according | to https://www.aap.com.au/news/search-for-radioactive- | capsule-i... | gus_massa wrote: | 50.9 TBq / 19 GBq = 50,000 GBq / 20 GBq = 2,500. | | Can I round it to 1000? | | Thanks for the data. So it's 1000 weaker, not 1000000 | weaker. | KennyBlanken wrote: | ...which is still a very, very serious danger to public | health? Particularly since symptoms might not be as | acute? | | Downplaying the seriousness of the Australian incident is | a really weird flex. The lost source was still easily | lethal. | twelve40 wrote: | its terrible, but given that after smearing this stuff all over | the place only 4 people died, it seems to take a bit more | effort than just walking around the city. Those shooters like | Las Vegas etc we get here cause way more destruction without | having to use such extravagant methods. | dylan604 wrote: | i don't know if it's just because we've become numb to these | events, but they just don't get the reaction from something | esoteric like someone irradiating the local stores causing | people to get sick invisibly. then again, maybe i'm giving | the new "scary" too much credit. overall, we didn't take | covid seriously. i could see people having radiation parties | of groups of people convinced it's not real. | marcosdumay wrote: | > "committed to the cause" | | Ignorance is enough already, you don't need any malice. A child | that didn't have had the chance to learn about radioactivity is | enough to kill plenty of people. | | That's why you control radioactive elements. Not exactly | because of some antagonistic group. Any such group could | probably kill way more people, way more easily by messing with | something else. | dylan604 wrote: | An ignorant child doesn't make for nearly as compelling of a | plot though. | liendolucas wrote: | They have done a movie about it, and I remember it wasn't bad at | all: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0259956/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0 | | Other terrible accidents (not related to the nature of Goiana): | | * Hisashi Ouchi: Fatal dose beyond imagination. Accident during | manually mixing a bucket of radioactive material (yes, you read | that right) in a room. They did this in order to bypass the | regular procedure to finish the job earlier as they were already | delayed. Doctors (if I recall correctly) kept him alive for 2 | months while the poor guy was begging to let him go. | | * Anatoli Bugorski: Literally put his head in a particle | accelerator. Happened because a light indication was off when it | should have been on. He described seeing the light of a billion | suns (or something like that). Survived but with serious | consequences. | fnordpiglet wrote: | Not only did he survive, but he's still alive. | [deleted] | Koshkin wrote: | Discussed previously: | | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29127586 | DoreenMichele wrote: | _The Goiania accident was a radioactive contamination accident | that occurred on September 13, 1987, in Goiania, Goias, Brazil, | after a forgotten radiotherapy source was stolen from an | abandoned hospital site in the city._ | | I wish we would put more emphasis on supporting the body as a | means to improve health instead of assaulting the body in the | name of assaulting the illness. | msie wrote: | I saw a video depiction of the incident that wasn't listed in the | wikipedia. Does anyone recall? | [deleted] | iamgopal wrote: | Pardon my ignorance but How could any radioactive material whose | half life is 30 year could survive billions of years on earth and | still be radioactive? | Sharlin wrote: | It took us a few hundred years, but we did finally realize the | alchemists' dream of transmuting elements into other elements. | It's just a little expensive. | jerf wrote: | You are correct. It can't. It is made: | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium-137#Uses | | "As an almost purely human-made isotope, caesium-137 has been | used to date wine and detect counterfeits and as a relative- | dating material for assessing the age of sedimentation | occurring after 1945." | EdwardDiego wrote: | This reminds me of a cottage industry that developed to | recover iron/steel from shipwrecks that sunk before | atmospheric nuclear tests began. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-background_steel | jl6 wrote: | It hadn't survived for billions of years, it was made of | caesium-137 which was manufactured in a nuclear reactor. | vandahm wrote: | Cesium-137 is made in nuclear reactors, but some radioactive | isotopes with shorter half lives (well, short compared to the | age of the Earth) exist in nature because they are a product of | the natural radioactive decay of other, long-lived materials | like Uranium. | haunter wrote: | Here is the IAEA report from 1988 https://www- | pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub815_web.pd... (mind you | with some injury photos too) | corpMaverick wrote: | Similar accident in Chihuahua Mexico | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciudad_Ju%C3%A1rez_cobalt-60_c... | | It talks about 4000 people. My father built our house in | Chihuahua around 1985-86. Our family lived in that house for 30 | years. We don't if we were affected, but it hit me when my sister | died of brain cancer two years ago. | i_am_jl wrote: | Similar to both incidents is Kramatorsk, where a Ce-137 capsule | was found in an apartment block, embedded inside a concrete | wall, after it fell out of a piece of quarry equipment. | | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kramatorsk_radiological_accide... | verytrivial wrote: | I'm very sorry to hear about your sister. | huevosabio wrote: | I'm from Juarez, Centro Medico de Especialidades was the | hospital we all went to back in the day. | | I only know about this story because my father told me how one | of the biggest radioactive accidents happened in Juarez when | discussing radioactive events after watching the show | Chernobyl. | sgt101 wrote: | If civilization collapses there will be lots of terrible stories | like this over the next 500 years or so as enterprising folks | raid old sites and find amazing "treasure". | nocoiner wrote: | There was an instance maybe in the '90s where a few hunters | found an abandoned Soviet radioisotope thermal generator in the | woods and used it to keep warm overnight. I think one or two of | them may have ultimately survived, but at least one died and | they all suffered terribly. | karlzt wrote: | Previous discussion: | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29127586 | major505 wrote: | I remember this when I was a kid. Most amazing was that the | federal goverment didn't had a protocol to deal with things like | that, even at the time we where building our second nuclear power | plant. | | But the military was aable to perform a fast response for the | incident. And shows that even if nuclear energy is the future, we | could never understimate it. | garyfirestorm wrote: | can you clarify 'even at the time we where building our second | nuclear power plant' | igortg wrote: | Brazil has only 3 nuclear power plants. The accident occurred | when the second one was being built. | yellow_lead wrote: | > That night, Devair Alves Ferreira, the owner of the scrapyard, | noticed the blue glow from the punctured capsule. Thinking the | capsule's contents were valuable or even supernatural, he | immediately brought it into his house. Over the next three days, | he invited friends and family to view the strange glowing | substance. | | The blue glow of death. | TremendousJudge wrote: | It really reads like a horror story about stealing a cursed | artifact from an ancient tomb. | labrador wrote: | > On September 16, Alves succeeded in puncturing the capsule's | aperture window with a screwdriver, allowing him to see a deep | blue light coming from the tiny opening he had created. He | inserted the screwdriver and successfully scooped out some of | the glowing substance. Thinking it was perhaps a type of | gunpowder, he tried to light it, but the powder would not | ignite. | | Kiss Me Deadly (1955) Last scene | | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOtApnSjX1Y | realworldperson wrote: | [dead] ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2023-02-02 23:00 UTC)