@-l1-
In theory, it is possible to predict the removal of the
radioactive debris from the stratosphere given these non-weather
datas
the particle size, shape and specific gravities to
determine the extent of gravitation3l settling and the distribution
of radioactivity Im space. In practices, not only are the none
weather data unavailable, but the meteorological ingredients
described aboveare not sufficiently well now,
Tr. W. F. Libby has published information which permits one
to bypass all of the”whocntatzites,— He does not specify anything
but the total amount of radioactivity available for delayed fallout
and the acount which has been deposited during these first few.
years of the thermonuclear age.
Libby computes the fraction of
the stratospheric burden deposited each year, finds it toe bs
roughly 10% per year and assucss that this fraction can be
extrapolated into the futura,” Thisassumption yieldsanexponential
decrease in the amount removed each year.
Libby's approach is very appealing in that it ts now possible
to obtain an answer to ths first qusstions
debris remain in the stratosphere.
how long will the
At the moment, there is no
alternative to Libby's analysis except to argua for changes in
details.
5
heaeeD
two incvedfents enter into the calculation of 10% renoval
per year.
These ares
the quantity in the stratosphere at the
beginning of a given tins interval and the arount removed from the
atzosphere during the interval.
It is not possible to qu2rrel with
libby's estinate of the initial stratospheric burden for reasons
of possible infrinserent on classified data.
The question of tha removal of radioactive debris from the
ataosphere, and in particular, Strontiuz-90, is important to
restive not only for the problem of stratospheric storage tins but
|
also for the wmderstanding of thse present GevelStrontius-70%n earth.
«
nt
Hepartme’
ok
HistParia*§
Energy
sting
pss
RECHEES