Kodak Had a Secret Nuclear Reactor

[devi]

So exactly what was in that Kodak chrome anyway?

[Dave]

So exactly what was in that Kodak chrome anyway?

There are certain chemical analyses for purity of metals that require neutrons and such things.

Back in the 1980's when BUNKER HUNT and his Brother were trying to corner the silver commodities market, Kodak and Berkey (I think it was Berkey) were the only American companies that made photography film. And, as you should know, Black and White photograph film requires silver metal. The process is silver-based.

So as this effort to corner the commodities market started to show its ugly head, Kodak revealed that it had huge supplies of silver metal either at hand or under contract from the mines at a stable price. It made sense but was not obvious that a company dependent on a precious metal would have thought of a way to stabilize the price of that metal and thus keep their product competitive.

Kodak and Berkey did go to (wait for it because this is spectacular) TIFFANY and CARTIER companies and between the four companies foiled the Hunt Brother's attempts to corner silver. From what I remember (And I had a source on the board at Tiffany's) when the four companies called in the silver futures, the Hunt Brothers had to cough up about one and a half times more than the current supply of silver that existed in the world at the time. And I can't remember if it was a British Bank or a Wall Street Bank that refused to write a loan to the Hunt Brothers to pay that debt. Tiffany and Cartier watched priceless silver art from the American Revolutionary War being melted down for its silver content. That's greed.

And the Hunt Brothers are just one story in a long line of rich investors who try to corner markets and get caught at it.
There is a real story out there about a 50,000 cubic foot storage tank of seawater being sold as Olive Oil that's just the gasping adventure of a lifetime of greed if you look it up.

[moi621]

The University of California, Irvine had a iddy biddy nuclear reactor
when the original Physics Building was built in the early sixties.
No secret. A point of pride then. And forgotten.
Time to decommission: "What was that reactor doing in my back yard". That was a few years ago.
Having lived through it all locally, I found it amusing.

Moi
Nuclear, it only takes one oopsy.
Y'all come back in 500,000 years - y'hear. It'll be safer then.
Less thyroid cancer, leukemia, lymphoma, solid organ tumors.
http://gcaggiano.wordpress.com/2010/...yne-literally/
"The movie was notorious for being shot in the deserts of Utah, almost ten years after the United States Army conducted nuclear bomb testing there. Of the 220 people involved in the film, 91 would die of cancer, including Wayne, director Dick Powell, and every leading supporting cast member: Agnes Moorehead, Susan Hayward, and John Hoyt. Another star, Pedro Armendáriz would also be diagnosed of cancer, but commit suicide after hearing the news. The number does not even include the extras and other people involved in filming. Numerous American Indians who served as Mongolian warriors contracted cancer in later years, and even John Wayne’s son Michael died in 2003 of cancer, after visiting his father on the set at age 22.
What is also even more mind-boggling is the fact that after principle shooting was finished in Utah, the production company had 60 tons of radioactive dirt shipped to Hollywood so filming could be finished on sound stages. Whatever became of this dirt is unknown; it’s probably been used as filler in a back-lot by now.

A dress that Susan Hayward wore onset was recently analyzed and found to have radioactive dust particles.

Be Afraid. Be very, very afraid.

[Dave]

There are placed in the southwestern deserts that are marked as "government" and "Off Limits" because of the fallout still there from the nuclear tests.

That's for real if you ever go jeep hiking and see signs marking the place as forbidden.

[gareth19]

Just about a week ago, I have seen two guys here, turning a RID-1 smoke sensor in their hands. That, and a screwdriver (my first thought was - if they disassemble that, I do not want to be near it). The sensor contains two Pu²³⁹ sources. This thing is relatively safe, while assembled (just do not sleep, hugging it ), but it is enough to cover few square meters in a material that would "glow in the dark", as Moi speaks.

There are other things, that usually are thought to be safe like radioactive switches (they had radium activated luminophore), but those are not produced since early 1970s. Can be still found though.

Plutonium is highly toxic. I doubt that anyone would use it as an ionization source for a smoke detector. In the US all models that I am familiar with use americium. Your metal detector uses californium as a source.

[gareth19]

I am 95 percent sure that I saw a documentary that said that the Thresher was lost because a valve used to put air into the ballast tank had frozen up with condensation from the air. The ice prevented air from entering the ballast tank and the submarine could not surface.

Parts of the Thresher were photographed. It is definitely in pieces, and we do have vessels that can go deep enough to survey the wreckage.

[Dave]

Parts of the Thresher were photographed. It is definitely in pieces, and we do have vessels that can go deep enough to survey the wreckage.

Yes, there are deep sea submersibles that can go down there. Go find the National Geographic issue in the Titanic that came ot in April for lots of underwater pictures from that depth.

As for the ruins of the Thresher -- at that depth, water pressure will crush steel. Also, as a sinking ship falls through the water, it hits the ocean floor with amazingly destructive force. Again, go to the National Geographic for pictures of the "crush" damage to Titanic bow half that hit the ocean floor so hard, it nearly pancaked the decks. Specifically look for the forward cargo hatch cover that was blown from the deck.

[fhunter]

Plutonium is highly toxic. I doubt that anyone would use it as an ionization source for a smoke detector. In the US all models that I am familiar with use americium. Your metal detector uses californium as a source.

I found the documentation for the RID-1. It uses plutonium based source.
Had to do some research to check it. Found on the net: photos from disassembly, measurements from the source itself, the type of the source, and some definitely crazy videos.

The catalog from the company, that makes the sources, which claims "plutonium":
http://www.po-mayak.ru/content/katal...ukzii_2010.pdf - page 5, source nr.1 on that page.

[Dave]

I found the documentation for the RID-1. It uses plutonium based source.
Had to do some research to check it. Found on the net: photos from disassembly, measurements from the source itself, the type of the source, and some definitely crazy videos.

The catalog from the company, that makes the sources, which claims "plutonium":
http://www.po-mayak.ru/content/katal...ukzii_2010.pdf - page 5, source nr.1 on that page.

Yes, plutonium...

I said in another post that the laboratory where I worked had to create an inventory of chemicals for each cabinet in a laboratory.
One of the reasons was that we had to catalog all such devices containing radium (old exit signs), metal tank level detectors, and as we discovered much to our chagrin, smoke detectors with plutonium. All of the radioactive stuff went onto a master inventory at the nuclear regulatory commission with changes requiring immediate updates... This was so that terrorists could not assemble sufficient americium, plutonium, radium, cesium and other isotopes (x-ray machines in hospitals and dentist's offices are other sources) to create a dirty bomb.

Handled properly. plutonium is safe.
Just please don't blithely assume you know what safe is. There are professionals in hazardous waste that can handle these things. Either employ them or take the time to get certified by an independent agent.

[Paolo]

Wow, and I've been playing with Kodak products for over 20 years...ouch...

[Riverwind]

Not any more.

River

[gareth19]

Yes, plutonium...

I said in another post that the laboratory where I worked had to create an inventory of chemicals for each cabinet in a laboratory.
One of the reasons was that we had to catalog all such devices containing radium (old exit signs), metal tank level detectors, and as we discovered much to our chagrin, smoke detectors with plutonium. All of the radioactive stuff went onto a master inventory at the nuclear regulatory commission with changes requiring immediate updates... This was so that terrorists could not assemble sufficient americium, plutonium, radium, cesium and other isotopes (x-ray machines in hospitals and dentist's offices are other sources) to create a dirty bomb.

Handled properly. plutonium is safe.
Just please don't blithely assume you know what safe is. There are professionals in hazardous waste that can handle these things. Either employ them or take the time to get certified by an independent agent.

In solution, plutonium ions are a very attractive sky-blue, but you have to work wiith it in a glove box.