🚀 go-pugleaf

lachlan@dmp.csiro.au (Lachlan Cranswick) writes:

>Just a small query :-
>What handling procedures make handling berylium "extremely harmless"?          
>(In theory CFCs can be contained in such a way that they don't
>affect the OZONE layer, but why is there the rush for alternatives?)

Certainly not from any scientific reasons.

>(Mercury spills are cleaned
>up by adding elemental Sulphur over the area, what imobilizes
>beryllium?)

I once had the Hazmat team called out after I dropped a mercury thermometer.
Again, no basis in science.

>Given the above attitude on beryllium, you will
>probably find it typically paranoid that our radiation lab
>considers anything above background to be a
>leak that has to be fixed.  

In a radiation lab, that is considered as much radiation hygene in order
to keep backgrounds low as it is a health precaution.

>It can be 
>argued that compared to the health risks of pollution,
>passive smoking, junk food, coca-cola etc,
>these potential hazards are not much of a
>health risk.  This could be correct, but it is much
>nicer to work in an lab environment where the emphasis
>is on more safety rather than less safety.

Actually no.  I find the lawyer-induced "precautions" now practiced
by most businesses and institutions opressive.  I seemed to have done
quite well back when all that was needed for most procedures was a pair
of glasses and a lab apron.

>The original question was why Beryllium isn't used more
>widely (in mainstream uses).  My opinion (still)
>is that Beryllium is so toxic people would
>prefer to use alternatives rather than risk its harmful effects.

But it has nothing to do with the ACTUAL risks.  Here in the US, we
have a little problem with lawyers and with people looking for a free
mealticket for the rest of their lives.  That means that managers must
take extreme steps, far beyond anything scientifically reasonable,
so that he will appear "reasonable" to 6 or 12 blithering idiots (the
jury screening process screens anyone with a clue) if he gets sued.

You asked about disposing of your X-ray tubes.  Your supplier is not
doing you much of a favor "disposing" of those tubes.  At least in 
medical and XRF application tubes, they are rebuilt and resold.
Much too expensive to simply throw away.  I'd have to commend your supplier,
however.  He's put a great marketing spin on it. :-)

John

-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC               |Interested in high performance mobility?  
Performance Engineering Magazine (TM) |
Marietta, Ga                         |Interested in high tech and computers? 
jgd@dixie.com                        |Write me about PE Magazine
Need Usenet public Access in Atlanta?  Write Me for info on Dixie.com.