The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > General Questions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-28-2001, 09:46 PM
bernse bernse is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
I was just watching a show about Apollo 13. One of the concerns at the time was that the LEM was going to burn up in the Earths atmosphere. It had some plutonium decay power source and there was a concern about it "leaking." The plan was to try to dump the LEM into some deep part of the pacific and hope for the best.

Did the LEM hit its "target" - a deep trench in the Pacific? Has there ever been a check for excess radioactivity in the area? I've never heard either way but curious to know.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 10-28-2001, 09:55 PM
Genseric Genseric is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
The drama surrounding the ill fated Apollo 13 mission was an ideal subject for a series of books and movies. But the most disturbing aspect of the near disaster has mostly been neglected. Apollo 13 was a nuclear catastrophe waiting to happen, as aboard the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) was a plutonium power cell.

Called 'Systems for Nuclear Auxiliary Power' (SNAP-27) it contained 3.8 kilograms of plutonium, which is so toxic that less than a millionth of a gram can cause cancer. Designed to be left behind on the moon, the crippled Apollo 13 was forced to carry it back to Earth. Not only were the three astronauts in danger but millions on the ground unwittingly lived under threat from the toxic space junk.

When the paralyzed Apollo 13 re-entered Earth's orbit, the astronauts transferred back to the command module, and the LEM with its nuclear payload was jettisoned. It re-entered the atmosphere somewhere over New Zealand and although the LEM burned up, SNAP-27 survived re-entry and plunged intact into the Pacific Ocean off Tonga, where according to NASA it is "isolated from man's environment." SNAP-27's radioactivity will last 2000+ years and its watery grave comprises some of the world's prime fishing grounds.

NASA successfully concealed the crisis from the world at the time, and continues to power some spacecraft with plutonium, recently launching the Cassini probe with a 33 kilo plutonium cell.

http://www.historyplace.com/specials...nt/strange.htm
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-28-2001, 09:56 PM
Genseric Genseric is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
D'oh! Put a big QUOTE tag all the way around that sucker.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-28-2001, 10:22 PM
Genseric Genseric is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Upon rereading that bilp I posted, I feel I have to point out that there is something of a slant to it, that I don't necessarily support. I feel that the scientific benefits of using RTGs in deep space probes, far outweighs the slight risk of plutonium dispersal during launch or gravity assist in near earth space. Viva Cassini!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-28-2001, 11:16 PM
friedo friedo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 19,269
Pu-238 has a half-life of about 90 years, IIRC, so the radiation threat from the Apollo 13 LEM shouldn't last more than a few hundred years.

Also, the main danger from Plutonium isn't the radiation, but inhalation of Plutonium dust, which is extremely toxic.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-29-2001, 12:02 AM
douglips douglips is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Quote:
Originally posted by friedo
Pu-238 has a half-life of about 90 years, IIRC, so the radiation threat from the Apollo 13 LEM shouldn't last more than a few hundred years.
I'm not averse to radiation, but I must correct this.

The half life of 238Pu is indeed about 90 years. However, it decays by [sym]a[/sym] into 234U, or else it likely undergoes fission.

234U itself decays by [sym]a[/sym] to 230Th, or it also may fission. But, the half life here is about 25000 years. 230Th decays to Radon, etc. etc.

So, the radioactive products of this power pack will last a very long time. Now, as to whether there is any danger, that's a different issue.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-29-2001, 12:14 AM
friedo friedo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 19,269
Good point, Mr. Lips, thanks for the correction.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-29-2001, 12:57 AM
Chronos Chronos is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 47,968
Three things: First of all, bomb-grade plutonium has approximately the same LD-50 as caffeine (LD-50 is the dosage of a poison you'd need to have a 50% chance of dying from it). It's nasty stuff, to be sure, but not as nasty as most folks think. Second of all, the plutonium used in a radiothermal generator is not the same isotope used in bombs, and is even less deadly. Thirdly, plutonium is primarily an alpha emitter, which means that it's deadly if it gets inside of you, but you could carry it around in a paper bag and not get any dosage from it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:26 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.