PROOF OF PLUTONIUM in Takeda's Ganges Tributary Silt Sample
Apr 1, 04:16 PM | An Eye At The Top Of The World
As reported in the March 26, 2007 edition of The Seattle Post Intelligencer, Boston Chemical Data Corp., a private environmental engineering firm in Massachusetts, analyzed the sample and detected plutonium 239 with 95 percent certainty…
“Proof of plutonium in climber’s sample”
By CAROL SMITH
Seattle P-I REPORTER
The potential leak of radioactive material from the lost equipment on Nanda Devi is the source of much regret and consternation among the surviving climbers who put it there.
– Spy Robert Schaller’s life of secrecy, betrayal and regrets
At least four of the original team of eight American climbers are now dead, but of those who survive, M.S. Kohli, Jim McCarthy and Robert Schaller all have expressed concern about having abandoned plutonium on one of the world’s highest, most sacred sites.
The U.S. government has never officially acknowledged the mission.
Pete Takeda, a Boulder, Colo.-based climber and author, tried to scale Nanda Devi in 2005 to reconstruct the CIA’s expedition and search for wreckage of the instrument.
Takeda and his team, like nearly every other group in recent decades, however, were denied permission by the Indian government to climb Nanda Devi, so the team picked a route on Nanda Kot from which they could view the likely “fall line” of the instrument on the adjacent peak.
During the course of that expedition, Takeda took a sample of coarse sediment 200 yards upstream from the confluence of the Rishi Ganga and Dhauli Ganga, due south of the town of Lata just outside the Sanctuary, a site so remote there are no potential industrial or human sources of pollution.
The Rishi Ganga is a stream flowing from the Nanda Devi Glacier out from the Sanctuary. The Dhauli Ganga is the river into which the Rishi flows, ultimately becoming the Ganges, Takeda said.
Boston Chemical Data Corp., a private environmental engineering firm in Massachusetts, analyzed the sample and detected plutonium 239 with 95 percent certainty.
“Just to have that level in a coarse sediment sample was a real surprise,” said Marco Kaltofen, a civil engineer and president of Boston Chemical. “It definitely warrants more investigation.”
Plutonium, one of the world’s most toxic substances, tends to concentrate more efficiently in organic-rich material, such as black mud or fine clay. The coarse sample, which was the consistency of aquarium gravel, was the “worst possible condition for retaining plutonium,” he said.
Plutonium 238 has a half-life of about 90 years and takes a millennium to clear out of the environment, and plutonium 239, which has a half-life of more than 24,000 years, can hang around for 250 millennia, said Tom Carpenter, director of the Government Accountability Project Nuclear Oversight Program in Seattle.
The results suggest the possibility that a concentrated source of plutonium exists somewhere in the Sanctuary, Kaltofen said. “This indicates somebody should definitely go up and look for plutonium.”
SEE ALSO FROM THE SEATTLE P-I: Spy Robert Schaller’s life of secrecy, betrayal and regrets
Steve — Apr 12, 12:54 PM #
I’m a radiochemist and I analyze soil and water samples for Pu every day. Frankly, I’m extremely skeptical of these results, and without seeing the actual analytical data, everyone else should be too. First of all, there is a background level of Pu-239 throughout the world, the result of years of atmospheric nuclear testing. The soil in your garden contains Pu-239, as well as other nuclear fission products. Not to mention orders of magnitude more NATURAL uranium and thorium, alpha-particle emitters like Pu. Second, where is the Pu-238? Though there may be Pu-239 in the SNAP as well, the vast majority is Pu-238 which produces the heat required to act as a generator as it decays at a much faster rate than Pu-239. Without Pu-238 in the sample, the Pu-239 could not have come from the SNAP source as there is no natural process to separate Pu isotopes from one another. Third, the analytical work and quality control of the laboratory must be closely scrutinized. Are these results real or are they false positives resulting from cross-contamination, misinterpretation of the data, etc? Fourth, even if there is Pu from the SNAP in the water, Pu metal rapidly hydrolyzes and adsorbs nearly irreversibly to sediments. Even if you drank water containing Pu-contaminated sediment, essentially all of it would pass right through you and not be absorbed by the body.
Pete, I’d like to rebut some of your comments on Pu. Although it certainly is toxic, it is nowhere near the most toxic substance in the world as has been repeatedly claimed. I’ll take my chances any day with Pu over natural substances like botulism, aflatoxin, cyanide, etc., not to mention man-made substances like nerve agents. There have been many people over the years who have been contaminated by Pu, and many of them have lived long lives with no effects. Your claim that the people of India are in mortal danger from this Pu makes me laugh. I’ve seen pictures and video of India and I hardly think that a potentially infinitesimal speck of Pu would cause more harm than the raw sewage and industrial waste that they bathe, cook, and clean with daily.
I could go on, but this is probably enough. I read the excerpt in R&I and think it’s a really interesting story. It could have used some scientific scrutiny.