Our previous calculations of 7°*u, *3*7h and *°xK

exposure rates based on the

infinite medium buildup factors

are also given in Table 3.
These calculations for an
infinite medium assumed that the energy absorbed at the

earth-air interface per
gram of air would be % the energy
emitted per gram of soil 1)
Since for low energies the
absorption in soil is greater than in air this tended to
overestimate the exposure rate.
By comparing the “°K
results (Table 3), we see that this overestimate was only
about 4% for 1.46 MeV.
It would have been greater for a
lower energy source.
The much larger differences in the
old and new calculated 7*°u exposure rates, however, are due
not

as much to the more accurate method

(which accounts

for

only about 5~8% of the difference) as to the different
source relative intensities used in the present work.
In

any case, the small changes in the values of 23°y, 232 ah
and *°K exposure rates per unit concentration of these
elements do not significantly alter any of the results

given in any of our previous reports on environmental
radiation’?°®?.,

The present report, of course, is much more detailed
than our previous work, since it provides data on energy
and angle distributions and detector height dependence
rather than just exposure rates at one meter above the

interface.

B.

.

Differential Energy Spectra

The relative contributions of various energy photons
to the total scattered energy spectrum is determined by
examining the differential energy spectra.
The differential
energy spectra of the scattered energy flux (flux x energy)

for three source energies, .364 MeV, 1.0 MeV, and 2.5 MeV

are shown in Figure 2 for h = 1.0 meter and h = 100 meters.
The effect of the increased scattering in air relative to
soil at the lower energies is illustrated in the figure by
the shift to lower energy and buildup of the Compton peak

- 10-

Select target paragraph3