Learning Center What is a mineral?The most common minerals on earth Information for Educators Mindat Articles The Elements The Rock H. Currier Digital Library Geologic Time

Minerals by Properties Minerals by Chemistry Advanced Locality Search Random Mineral Random Locality Search by minID Localities Near Me Search Articles Search Glossary More Search Options

The Mindat Manual Add a New Photo Rate Photos Locality Edit Report Coordinate Completion Report Add Glossary Item

Mining Companies Statistics Users Mineral Museums Clubs & Organizations Mineral Shows & Events The Mindat Directory Device Settings The Mineral Quiz

Photo Search Photo Galleries Search by Color New Photos Today New Photos Yesterday Members' Photo Galleries Past Photo of the Day Gallery Photography

Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

╳Discussions

💬 Home 🔎 Search 📅 Latest

Groups

Recent Images in Discussions

EducationShipping radioactive minerals

29th Mar 2017 20:37 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Thought I would let everyone know that the gates are closing. UPS and Purolator for all practical purposes will no long ship any radioactive minerals.

29th Mar 2017 20:54 UTCWayne Corwin

Reiner

How little is too much now? ? ?

29th Mar 2017 21:49 UTCMatt Neuzil Expert

Crazy....omg it's radioactive! Nimby, but you can find it in somebody else's

29th Mar 2017 22:19 UTCRudy Bolona Expert

Collectors of radioactive minerals get no love. I remember telling my former landlord that my hobby was finding radioactive pegmatite minerals and she freaked out and asked "You're not bringing that stuff here?!" I said no, but of course I had at least 100 pounds of it on her property. :)p How w ill UPS check packages? What if the sample is small and shielded? How will they know?

29th Mar 2017 23:48 UTCMatt Neuzil Expert

Hard to say, Maybe they are going on the honor system. The USPS asks you if you are shipping hazardous or perishable items. They list a bunch of items not to send. Batteries is one of them. I bet they get sent sometimes anyways. The sender just has to say no.

30th Mar 2017 00:22 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

They now monitor their shipments with radiation detectors. I was told by their expert that the critical factor is no longer the level of radiation at the surface of the parcel but the isotopic makeup of the mineral. I had suggested that if the radiation level at the surface of the parcel was too high to simply put it in a bigger box. He said that is now irrelevant. I would need to get a complete isotopic analysis of the samples to determine the concentration of all the isotopes in ppm and then us a mathematical formula to determine if it was acceptable for shipment. I didn't ask what that formula was as I had no intention of doing such testing. He said this applied to any quantity even if it was a gm. The other danger is that if you do not declare what you have sent and they detect radioactive isotopes they will not return the parcel to you. Luckily this time ( he said he was doing me a favour) they were kind enough to agree to return the samples to me.

30th Mar 2017 01:38 UTCDoug Daniels

I hope the tire treads on their trucks don't get any pebbles of potassium feldspar or granite lodged in them - then they'd be transporting a radioactive mineral/rock.

30th Mar 2017 03:13 UTCRudy Bolona Expert

What are they afraid of? Radiation poisoning from a mineral sample in a box? Are the employees of UPS educated on what is a real radiation hazard? The level of exposure to the employees from shipping the very infrequent radioactive rock is inconsequential. I wonder what the real reason is.

30th Mar 2017 03:33 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager

The reason, Rudy, is simply fear. Some people just enjoy making others afraid, or get some benefit from making others feel afraid. Nowadays there is a constant background drumbeat of fearmongering, whether it's fear of radiation, poisonous minerals, terrorism, ebola, pot smokers, immigrants... etc., someone wants you to be afraid. And most of the population has a poor grasp of statistics and science, and so easily fall victim to manipulation.

30th Mar 2017 05:08 UTCDoug Daniels

And another point - in order to get an isotopic analysis (and who can afford that), you would need to send a sample to a lab capable of doing such analyses. So, how do you do that, if you can't ship a sample?

30th Mar 2017 05:30 UTCDana Slaughter 🌟 Expert

There are restrictions on lithium batteries with the USPS...not simply batteries. One can still ship radioactives domestically with the USPS. I no longer ship radioactives outside the US. I don't use lead foil, etc. and have yet to have a problem within the US. Shipping with the USPS is generally much cheaper anyway. Just checked a 10 lb package from San Tan Valley, AZ to Grand Rapids, MI and cheapest UPS is $21.34 for UPS Ground. 2nd Day Air is $81.81! I can ship Flat Rate Priority Mail Medium Box (usually 2 days to Michigan) for $13.60 and even cheaper if done online. Never a hassle.

30th Mar 2017 10:04 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Yes you can still ship within a country as far as I know because radiation detectors are currently not used on internal mail, but not legally.

Hello Doug,

Yes that is the irony of it all and in effect means you cannot ship anything that is radioactive across a border where radiation detectors are used. However I suppose you could ship it to a lab in your own country because it is safe to do that. However shipping the same thing across a border makes it unsafe. It is all just irrational fear and it makes everyone feel safer to have these restrictions. Politically it also good because most voters are fearful of anything radioactive unless it is safely in the hands of power companies where nothing ever goes wrong. Of course it is perfectly safe for people to have guns since they are not dangerous like deadly radioactive minerals. LOL

30th Mar 2017 11:02 UTCJohan Kjellman Expert

Oh Rudy what are we gonna do? :)

Reiner Mielke Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> the critical factor is no longer the level of

> radiation at the surface of the parcel but the

> isotopic makeup of the mineral.

Does this mean that they let minerals with the right isotopic makeup continue to the adressee?

I vaguely recall a story from Alfredo that he was waved through a Canada/US check-up with the car full of radioactive Bancroft (?) material, since it didn't register as a threath from an isotopic point of view.

cheers

30th Mar 2017 11:27 UTCPaul De Bondt Manager

Radioactive specimens can still be posted but you have to mention it on the parcell .......... and pay for the special postage.

The price of fear.

30th Mar 2017 12:29 UTCJolyon Ralph Founder

Well, what if you were posting an unknown mineral for analysis?

I guess things are just going to end up being "lost" more frequently.

30th Mar 2017 13:49 UTCPeter Trebilcock Expert

I personally know of two case's where Cornish radiaoactive parcels destined for overseas have been intercepted in the Uk in the last two years. The senders were given the choice of collecting the parcels in person and paying a handling fee or having the parcels disposed of at the horrendous cost in excess of £1000:

One of the packages was intercepted at Swindon distribution centre, the other in London, which is quite a long return trip from Cornwall to collect a small package.

Withholding your senders name on the parcel will not work and you will still be caught or have the package destroyed especially if bought through an auction site.

The senders names are witheld to save embarrassment.

30th Mar 2017 13:58 UTCHarold Moritz 🌟 Expert

Within the USA one can relatively easily ship natural samples of radioactive material (eg, specimens of U ore) by following the relatively simple rules of US Postal Service publication 52, once you figure out what they are from this long document that covers many other types of restricted materials. Mostly, for natural rad material, it involves double boxing and centering the inner box within a larger box so that the exterior radiation level is below a certain value that you must measure. For a typical collector sample, it's not that big a box, especially if you use some shielding in the inner box. And, of course, declaring what it is so that the postal workers are protected (if you dont and they notice, you could get into some deep doo-doo). It can only go ground transport, first class parcel, and within USA (I dont know how they get it to Hawai'i or Alaska, etc.). Consult the document for details.

For artificial isotopic mixes you have to go through the detailed analysis and complex formula alluded to by Reiner, which is not necessary for natural stuff. Really only labs, hospitals, the gubmint or folks working in nuclear power would be involved in using that stuff.

I cant say what the rules are for other countries, but they likely have a similar document.

30th Mar 2017 14:36 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Hello Harold,

In Feb.2015 I investigated this in detail. The USPS website says that for U and Th bearing minerals anything more than 1000 Bq is considered radioactive. For uraninite that means more than 0.007gms and thorianite more than 0.26 grams. Lets assume you have some uraninite in a 10cm diameter box, so as such the distance to the centre ( assuming a point source) would be 5cm. Using this calculator http://www.radprocalculator.com/Gamma.aspx and assuming a 1000Bq source should give you a reading at the surface of the box of 0.005 mR/hr. In otherwords if you have a reading greater than 0.005 mR/hr the box would be considered radioactive and could not be mailed. That is fine except that an empty box measures 0.015 mR/hr! which is background here. So in effect I have no way of measuring if a parcel would be rejected or not since I cannot distinguish U and Th from K or C. My conclusion was that one cannot mail anything by air that is radioactive period, unless you can accurately determine that the mass of the U and Th in the sample generates less than a total of 1000 Bq. ( good luck with that one LOL)

Surface mail is another matter and much easier to figure out, you just need the proper labelling and packing, and the surface of the parcel cannot exceed 0.5 mR/Hr. The only catch is you have to send it by first class registered mail which is more expensive than normal.

30th Mar 2017 14:41 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

the critical factor is no longer the level of

> radiation at the surface of the parcel but the

> isotopic makeup of the mineral.

As far as I know that currently only applies to parcels sent by UPS and Purolator. I was told this by their radiation consultant after they seized my parcel destined for Germany at the Canadian border.

30th Mar 2017 14:47 UTCAndrew Debnam 🌟

I have had items shipped to me in lead foil was that inappropriate? eg a thumb nail of Uranophane

30th Mar 2017 14:50 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Gamma rays are not much affected by lead foil, for example to bring the level down from 0.5mR/hr to 0.005 mR/hr would require lead 5.9cm thick! You can calculate how much shielding you would need here: http://www.radprocalculator.com/Gamma.aspx I have had no trouble receiving radioactives through Canada Post. They are not yet as paranoid as other postal services. The big problem is sending parcels out of Canada not in receiving them.

30th Mar 2017 14:57 UTCAndrew Debnam 🌟

Thanks Reiner, that would be a lot of foil....foiled again

30th Mar 2017 15:08 UTCHarold Moritz 🌟 Expert

Hi Reiner,

Getting the exterior of a parcel with a hand sample or smaller of U ore in the middle to below the USPS domestic 0.5 mR/Hr threshold is not that difficult, just get a big enough outer box (distance is better than shielding). There are no USPS restrictions on the size or mass of a natural sample and you dont have to characterize the isotopes. What mainly matters for natural samples is the reading outside the outer box.

Private shippers have their own rules and I suspect because of all the various international border rules and paperwork they have to deal with they just no longer want to take on the costs of dealing with transporting rad material. It is likely very time consuming and a very, very small portion of their revenue.

30th Mar 2017 16:35 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager

Here is citation from https://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,59,108437,110837#msg-110837 :

"The problem was discussed on mindat many times but only qualitatively, on fingers. It seems to me, that experimental quantitative data would be interesting for evrybody.

This is naturexperiment:

specimen - 4x2.5x1.7 cm 52 g natural pseudomorphose of gummite after uraninite xl from Karelia

natural radioactivity on the table 25 µR/h

A - experiments on air - specimen is covered by newspaper and polyethilen (2-3 layer of both):

tightly to detector 2283 µR/h (butt 2.5x1.7=4.2 cm2) - 4253 µR/h (side 4x2.5=10 cm2)

3 cm from detector 1225 µR/h butt - 1814 µR/h side

30 cm from detector 60 µR/h butt - 83 µR/h side

B - specimen deposited in the lead tube container with 16 mm walls - 536 µR/h butt - 858 µR/h side (tightly to detector)

the same but container in outer foam plastic cover with 16 mm walls - 277 µR/h butt - 494 µR/h side.

Weight of the lead container itself is 2700 g, with foam plastic cover - 2750 g. Size of the ready-mounted container is : l -16 cm, d- 9.5 cm.

Compare sizes and weights of the specimen and the container with radioactivity data..

Who will send 2800 g instead of 52 g? If it will stoped on any custom because of massive piece of lead for begining..."

30th Mar 2017 17:56 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Hello Pavel,

Thank you for the detailed analysis. I like your specimen and your table cover with the pretty flowers. The table cover is just like the one my late grandmother used to have. Sure brings back good memories.

30th Mar 2017 18:19 UTCRudy Bolona Expert

When I was selling self collected Colorado radioactive specimens on Ebay between 2006-2012, I sent hundreds of rad minerals all over the US and around the world and every package made it to its destination. The ladies that work at my post office all know me as the guy who sends and receives rocks. They laugh about it. They ask what kind of rock I am sending and I will throw out names like, samarskite, monazite, aeschynite, etc... I never tell them they are radioactive, but then again they are never curious enough to Google those names and find out about these weird things I send. They ask that obligatory question about hazardous content and everyone says no. I wonder if anyone has ever said yes? I can see how lithium batteries can be a problem as they can explode and ignite spontaneously, but a samarskite will never detonate into a nuclear explosion. I'm no longer selling on Ebay as the market became flooded with radioactive specimens, especially from Colorado and interest in these things waned.

30th Mar 2017 19:30 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager

Once I was unable to send couple mg samples of native aluminium through DHL - they begun to explain to me that aluminium is dangerous metal and they unable to take it for shipping.

30th Mar 2017 21:26 UTCFred E. Davis

Say what? Did you ask them what the airplane's outer surface is made of?

30th Mar 2017 21:56 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager

I asked this question. ;-) Being in US I would received 50000$ by the court as compensation for moral damage from listening of their debiloid explanations.

31st Mar 2017 07:10 UTCJoel Dyer

Ah well, such a contorted and sad wolrd we live in.

It seems that so much concentration, effort and resources are spent on meaningless matters, and the big, important questions for humanity remain unsolved. Not sure to cry or laugh at all the nonsense in regulations, politics etc....tragicomedy??

Cheers,

Joel

31st Mar 2017 08:49 UTCPaul De Bondt Manager

Belgians are specialists in such matter.

We created rules to rule rules. ( gnarfing smiley )

31st Mar 2017 19:03 UTCŁukasz Kruszewski Expert

Shall I say, boric acid is about to be under new regulations, too.....

31st Mar 2017 23:24 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

A really strange thing is I have had UPS deliver 4 litres of hydrofluoric acid to my front door, but apparently I cannot get a a radioactive rock delivered!? One of the concerns the radiation consultant had is that the box might break open and spill the radioactive contents. That was so stupid I didn't bother to tell him the 3cm diameter piece of uraninite was triple boxed, that is in a 10 cm box that was in a 20 cm box that was in a 30cm box. Besides if it broke open then just pick the damn thing up and put it in a new box, how difficult can that be?

31st Mar 2017 23:39 UTCAlfredo Petrov Manager

Just to put this discussion in perspective, there was a dispute back in the 1930s about whether one could legally mail limburger cheese in the U.S,, with one postmaster considering it "hazardous" and another merely "offensive".

1st Apr 2017 01:40 UTCMatt Neuzil Expert

LOL. I'm gunna have to build a canadian radioactive collection. I collected some platy, black, 2 inch long, crystals at beryl pit 4 years ago. Guess they stay where they have been for 4 years, in canada.

1st Apr 2017 05:37 UTCFrank de Wit Manager

Alfredo Petrov Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just to put this discussion in perspective, there was a dispute back in the 1930s about whether one could legally mail limburger cheese in the U.S,,

> with one postmaster considering it "hazardous" and another merely "offensive".

Limburger cheese (Rommedoe) is offensive.

But French Époisses is hazarous...

When you open a package of Époisses, small birds drop dead from the roof!

1st Apr 2017 12:29 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Do any of our French members know what the current state of affairs is with regards to radioactive minerals and the postal service?

Frank, how is it in the Netherland?

1st Apr 2017 14:19 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

Well, I'm shaking my head in amazement.

Any radioactive material?

That's anything containing potassium (including bananas), vanadium (including your spanners), REEs (including the cold cathode tubes in your laptop - and thet have mercury, too!), tritium & promethium (anything luminised), lumps of Cornish granite (U, Th and all of the daughter products) and so on. Oh, and anything living or recently dead contains Carbon-14.

Don't let's get into the contamination that began with the first atomic test, either.

Seriously, though - the only stuff that we (as collectors) should ever want to send that is detectably radioactive are uranium and thorium minerals.

The isotopic makeup is easy to list - but you have to assume up to 10% thorium in a uranium mineral and up to 10% uranium in a thorium mineral, and you can list the isotopic make up from the book.

I suppose that I'm going to have to produce a table of isotopic make-up for all known radioactive minerals as another supplement to Here be Dragons. Feh!

Here be Dragons : The Care and Feeding of Radioactive Mineral Species

The new edition (Feb 2017) is right here:- Alysson Rowan's Published Papers and Stuff

Oh, and for all legal purposes, anything containing less than 35kBq radioisotopes is considered non-radioactive here in the UK. (That's about 28kg bananas, if I remember right).

1st Apr 2017 17:51 UTCŁukasz Kruszewski Expert

Dunno how it is in other countries, but in Poland there was a statement made, that collecting of radioactive minerals is not dangerous (this, of course, doesn't apply if you consume them, or inhale their dust during scratching/grinding (-;)

1st Apr 2017 19:57 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

Sounds like the folks in Poland have their heads on the right way.

2nd Apr 2017 01:55 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

USPS has very high limits for potassium isotopes so there is no problem shipping Sylvite or other K minerals. I would assume UPS and Purolator use the same criteria for potassium.

2nd Apr 2017 03:22 UTCDoug Daniels

But potassium gives off gamma rays......what exactly are they measuring? Uranium and thorium (and daughters) give alpha, beta, and gamma (and what of positron?).

2nd Apr 2017 11:42 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Hello Doug,

I suppose it is the decay products that they are worried about. K decays to Ar and Ca. Uranium and Thorium to Pb,Th,Ra,Rn,Po etc. It couldn't be the radioactivity itself since the same level of radioactivity from K is just as dangerous as U and Th. Besides if K radioactivity where treated the same it would be too unpopular since people are naturally radioactive due to K.

2nd Apr 2017 12:09 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

They will look at total beta-gamma dose (just for safety) and gamma using a scintillation probe which will be 'electronically windowed' to detect certain gamma energies - or, rather, to reject certain energies.

Anything that falls outside of the acceptable total dose (too radioactive to ship) or acceptable nuclides (that 35kg of bananas or a shipment of luminous watches) will be quarantined. They are actually looking for fissionable materials (Pu239 and Uranium), but are unable to tell the difference (because they don't understand that there is a difference) between weapons grade concentrate and a lump of uraninite. They are also looking for radiographic sources (which they shouldn't be shipping in any case).

To be fair - they have put together a set of rules that any of their least bright employees can follow without having to refer to a big book of what can be shipped (and which requires an understanding of health physics and use of expensive instruments to interpret and apply).

Of course, radiation leaks from a perfectly well sealed package in a way that toxic chemicals don't - and so folks get really, really worried by it - for the simple reason that they don't understand it.

2nd Apr 2017 12:37 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

When my package was stopped by UPS, the person who called me , their radiation consultant, a Dr.- - - - - - would have no excuse that he did not understand it. The people who made up the rules obviously did not understand it and they should have. So it seems the rules have been literally made up by ignorant people. Either that or the consulting industry and radiation equipment manufacturers saw this as a golden opportunity to make lots of money and lobbied the ignorant law makers to implement these stupid rules. I prefer the latter theory. In other words the whole thing is motivated by profit and fear which feed on each other.

2nd Apr 2017 12:57 UTCJohan Kjellman Expert

Don't they go hand in hand, doesn't it take ignorant people to make up a world run by fear- and profit?

2nd Apr 2017 13:01 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

I was just thinking, we radioactive mineral collectors should be getting a kickback from the radiation equipment manufacturers. If it wasn't for the stuff we were trying to ship around there would be nothing for them to detect and the government might decide they didn't need all that expensive equipment. LOL

2nd Apr 2017 13:11 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Hello Johan,

Interesting philosophical question. I think maybe it would be better is to say it takes indifferent and selfish people to make up a world run by fear- and profit enabled by ignorant people.

2nd Apr 2017 14:28 UTCPavel Kartashov Manager

Terrorists should be getting a kickback from the radiation equipment manufacturers.:-)

They should to measure not simply gamma-rays total dose, but specific energies of gamma-ray connected with individual isotopes.

2nd Apr 2017 14:49 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

" Terrorists should be getting a kickback from the radiation equipment manufacturers."

Do terrorists actually ship radioactives through the mail? I have never heard of such a case and I am sure we would if that happened. Such news would be welcomed by politicians since it would increase fear and people in fear are easier to control. It would be a win win for the politicans and manufactures if this was reported so I think this has never happened.

"They should to measure not simply gamma-rays total dose, but specific energies of gamma-ray connected with individual isotopes."

Some check points do this including UPS and Purolator. Many do not because it requires more expensive equipment and more knowledge. The problem apparently is that such measurements are not quantitative and so according to the UPS consultant they cannot assess whether or not the material can be shipped, thus the requirement to have quantitative isotopic analysis provided by the shipper.

2nd Apr 2017 16:03 UTCHarold Moritz 🌟 Expert

Alysson:

Correct me if I am off, but isnt the best way to detect high grade material by looking for neutron flux? This flux is immaterial for natural samples, but it is what makes the high grade stuff actually useful. And it is very penetrative so it's easy to read through cars, trucks, containers and ship hulls as they pass by, no? (I'm falling back on my admittedly dated rad worker training from my nuke plant decommissioning days).

"If it wasn't for the stuff we were trying to ship around there would be nothing for them to detect..." I know you are having fun with this Reiner, but there are probably a lot more medical radioisotope shipments than minerals. These have very short half-lives and must be constantly replenished and shipped right away to hospitals all over the continent. I believe they are made in a Canadian reactor (the US had one too, but it became a victim of budget cuts I believe), so somehow that stuff makes it across the border. There are also the sources in portable x-ray fluorescence detectors, which are commonly rented and thus shipped all over.

2nd Apr 2017 16:41 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Hello Harold,

Natural radioactive decay does not produce neutrons only alpha, beta and gamma rays.

Medical and other isotopes as such have been going across the border long before they started installing radiation detectors everywhere. So that cannot be the reason why they have. My point is that this is a waist of time and money as no one has ever died frorm radioactive mineral specimens and no one has ever shipped radioactive material through the mail for use in terrorist activity that anyone knows of. The risks of this happening are miniscule and the presumed danger associated with the shipping of radioactives are unproven and unsubstantiated. I know of no other thing that has received so much attention where no clear danger exists. Boggles the mind. They would be far better off investing that money in finding a defense against asteroids which are a proven danger.

2nd Apr 2017 17:02 UTCMatt Neuzil Expert

I'd assume a terrorist would be shipping yellowcake or something processed.

2nd Apr 2017 17:07 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Yellowcake is not very radioactive or dangerous as all the highly radioactive isotopes have been removed. It is much like depleted uranium. Not to say it isn't dangerous at all but no more than depleted uranium (unless the uranium is in the form of bullets and projectiles).

2nd Apr 2017 17:11 UTCHarold Moritz 🌟 Expert

Reiner, all very true.

Perhaps, as I just posted on the toxic minerals discussion, because nearly all adverse exposure is occupational, the main reason for all this is an increase in the protection of the employees who are potentially handling these packages daily, and because of "right to know" laws in occupational settings (hence the creation of things like MSDS sheets for chemicals in the workplace, etc.), and placarding on vehicles, air transport packaging rules, etc., etc. Then you have litigation if an employee claims illness due to exposure that the employer may have caused. While very difficult to prove either way (for one particular person), the cost of the litigation and potential settlements is enough to warrant safeguards, which due to advice from attorneys, is typically extremely conservative. When it comes to the legal arena, much like the political or security ones, there is no such thing as "no clear danger". Somehow the perceived risk (perhaps on top of increased security mandates) has offset the potential for profit in these matters. And it is much easier (and less risky) to train employees to simply say "no" than to give them the complex rad worker training to make informed decisions or mitigate unrealistic fears. In the end they are private companies that can choose to not ship whatever they want for whatever reason, it's their business...

2nd Apr 2017 17:16 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

Harold,

You require quite a significant lump to produce a detectably elevated neutron flux - a couple of sheets of enriched uranium foil will produce detectable beta-gamma, but neutrons will be too few to find easily from outside a vehicle. A paperback-sized slab of enriched uranium will probably be detectable with a good BF₃ detector - if you are close enough. The problem with N⁰ detection is a combination of inverse-square law and neutron scattering.

These companies are looking for a quick, inexpensive detection method - and neutron detectors don't come cheap - plus, they won't detect anything else.

I think I'd like to know if someone were shipping a few Curies of polonium using my parcel service - and that is an extremely handy material for those terrorists. More than 14kg of enriched uranium, in fact (unless they are planning on building a sundog - a quick and dirty reactor designed to irradiate rather than detonate).

Reiner,

What's wrong with an umberella as a defence against asteroids? *silly grin*

Matt,

More likely the metal, if they can get it.

2nd Apr 2017 17:23 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

Harold - regarding shipping:

Getting a shipping company licenced to carry radioactive materials is expensive. For some materials, licencing is more expensive than for others.

Securicor, here in the UK, was the only courier licenced to ship radioactive sources by road. I used them once. Only once. The source was on a 24hrs shipment, never arrived and was returned to us 3 months later in a severely damaged condition. They billed us £1500 for the service. (I wish to heck that I'd just driven the source to Aberdeen myself).

I don't know if we have ANY licenced carriers, now.

2nd Apr 2017 17:24 UTCReiner Mielke Expert

Chlorine bleach is far more dangerous than radiaoctive minerals and has been recently used by terrorists, yet it is on the shelves of Walmart ( apparently no concern for the employees or customers) and UPS will ship it no problem. You can argue this anyway you want but there is no valid reason for being so concerned about radioactive minerals. There are far more dangerous things that these same people who make these regulations are not nearly as concerned about simply because politically such concern would be unpopular.

2nd Apr 2017 17:49 UTCHarold Moritz 🌟 Expert

Clearly my memory on neutron flux detection was nuclear plant-based, where they have a known fixed source, so apparently much more difficult to do out in the world.

2nd Apr 2017 17:56 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

It is, Harold. Around reactors, the darned things get everywhere - but there again, you're running a super-critical geometry with lots of fuel. Once you look at sub-critical assemblies, you find it difficult to see the neutron flux from any distance.

If you take an enriched uranium foil onto an operating reactor site, it will start to produce a few more neutrons, purely because of the ambient thermal neutron flux around that reactor - and this was once the basis of a criticality detector system.

16th Apr 2017 00:44 UTCBrian Eisemann

This may be a bit off topic, so apologies. I love Metatorbernite and other uranium minerals. Let's say I'm at the Sainte-Marie-Aux-Mines show and see a wonderful specimen, which I decide to buy. I carry this back with me to Texas on the airplane. I'd assume that airports have radiation detectors, but considering this is a mineral specimen, would this be an issue? All this is hypothetical, just trying to anticipate a potential issue in the future. Sad that we have to worry about this. Thanks for any input!

16th Apr 2017 09:58 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

Brian,

It shouldn't be an issue but you'd best avoid United Airlines - they don't even need an excuse to drag you off the plane. ;)

Seriously: If you can point to a properly contained mineral specimen that is in a spaced packaging (with the bill of sale and such like), then security have no cause top complain.

On the other hand, you could do the other thing and hire a car - stopping off at all of those other mineral sites on the umpteen-thousand mile drive home.

16th Apr 2017 12:42 UTCAlan Barnes (2)

I agree with what everybody else has said here and I find the refusal of postal services to ship natural, unprocessed materials (despite being radioactive) unjustified. In the UK I've heard that they won't ship radioactive materials in case terrorists get hold of them and for health and safety reasons. I guess post office staff would refuse to have an x-ray if they needed one. Surely any self-respecting terrorist wouldn't go to the trouble and expense of buying expensive specimens weighing up to a couple of hundred grams and shipping them when they could quite easily go to any uranium mine and fill the boot of their car with the stuff. Its another example of bureaucracy gone mad (we have plenty of those in the UK) and yet the risks of shipping radioactive materials are the same now as they have ever been. So what exactly has changed in the risks associated with shipping radioactive specimens? Nothing. Its totally crazy, in my opinion, and I agree with what others have said in that it is lack of understanding that leads to this sort of decision. Unfortunately, decisions are made and implemented by people who don't really understand either the science or the genuine risks associated with what they are making decisions about. As Alysson said, I could easily ship 28Kgs of bananas to somebody and the post office wouldn't bat an eyelid - but if I tried to ship a 25gram specimen of a radioactive mineral, all hell would break loose. Education is the key but I am confident that if a group of people who collect radioactive minerals set up a meeting with the postal services to review the shipping of radioactive specimens, the post office wouldn't change their mind. The whole issue of postal services refusing to ship small specimens of radioactive minerals is, in my opinion, totally bonkers. I noticed a sign in my local Post Office on Saturday listing the products that they will not ship.......radioactive materials was not one of them but I bet they'd say something if I tried. But here's a question. Has anybody ever tried shipping a radioactive specimen in a parcel containing barium sulphate? Barium sulphate is a good x-ray absorber (barium meals in hospitals).

To respond to Brian's question, although I haven't done it myself, I have heard of several groups of people travelling back from St Marie (albeit a few years ago now) being stopped by Customs at Dover and questioned about the radioactivity emanating from their vehicle. After answering the questions to Custom's satisfaction the groups were allowed on their way (with specimens). Unless the rules have changed now, in the UK you are legally allowed to own 5Kg of unprocessed uranium minerals..........but who's gonna know?

Alan

16th Apr 2017 13:28 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

In fact, here in the UK, there is no actual control of possession of naturally occurring radioactive materials - if there were, a number of properties in Cornwall would need their walls removing as a certain amount of dump material has been used in building repairs over the last couple of hundred years, at least.

If each specimen is less than 35kBq, (micros and many thumbnails), then they are not individually (legally) radioactive.

As soon, however, as you trim, cut, polish or otherwise modify the chunk of rock they are on, then technically (assuming they are over the 35kBq de minimus), they are no longer natural material and are processed radioactive materials, and are immediately in a completely different category.

Strangely and uncharacteristically for UK law, there are clauses that suggest that reasonable and practicable application be made of the regulations, so long as the rule of taking all precautions that are reasonably practicable is followed.

The rules and regulations concerning shipping of specimens is up to the carrier - and the Post Office have always held that shipping radioactive material by post is a no-no. British Rail had their own rules for parcels and packages (and it was a damned good service at one time) that amounted to It shall be clearly marked as radioactive and not to be near photographic materials. I don't think the parcel service exists on today's rail network, though.

16th Apr 2017 14:15 UTCFred E. Davis

> As soon ... as you trim, cut, polish or otherwise modify the chunk of rock they are on, then ... they are

> no longer natural material and are processed radioactive materials [...]

You lost me there. If you chip off a fragment of a boulder to obtain a specimen, then that's ok - it's not yet "processed." But if you trim that chip, it suddenly becomes "processed"? What does altering the non-radioactive matrix (quartz, feldspar etc.) have to do with "processing" the radioactive mineral? I thought separating and concentrating isotopes would qualify as "processed radioactive materials," but when the matrix is NOT radioactive how does trimming the matrix change the category?

16th Apr 2017 17:08 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

In actual fact, it doesn't - but the way the law is worded, as soon as you modify the specimen in your lab/workshop, the specimen becomes "processed".

No one will fault you for trimming the matrix, or even picking off a fragment of the specimen for analysis, but the law (as it is in most of Europe) is written with ore separation in mind - and no consideration was ever made as to the numbers of hobby collectors who would like to keep hot rocks. Of course, this clause will be used against you should you spread uraninite dust through a previously uncontaminated neighborhood.

16th Apr 2017 17:14 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

For anyone in the UK who wishes to know .... the HSE guide is here:

HSE Information Sheet: Ionising Radiation Protection Series No 8

It references the current legislation here in the UK. It is also aimed at businesses who use ionising radiation or radioactive sources (which is all that you will ever find on most governments' websites).

16th Apr 2017 17:33 UTCAlysson Rowan Expert

I'm going to have to take a detailed look at the current legislation - it seems that the wording of the law has been messed around with (again!), so the old definitions may have changed since I last re-read the various acts.

Some relevant excerpts from DEFRA's own guidance notes:

Meaning of radioactive material

2.05

Materials which contain naturally occurring radionuclides and which are not used in a

work activity, and which are not used for their radioactive, fertile, or fissile properties,

are not captured by the legislation and are therefore not radioactive material.

NORM industrial activities

2.15

Outside the legislation there are many activities involving radioactivity. An example is

the collection, preparation and display of geological specimens. However, for the

purposes of this legislation, any such activities, unless listed in Table 2.1a or 2.1b (see

page 19), do not involve radioactive material or radioactive waste as defined in this

legislation. This is because in the UK, following Euratom guidance, we believe that the

radiological consequences (in terms of radiation dose) of such activities are trivial. Only

those ‘industrial activities’ which could conceivably lead to the need for controls are

covered by the legislation.

Of course, the legislation is not really that simple - but for the purposes of current legislation, small amounts of radioactive rock in collections are effectively exempt (unless you are a dealer in radioactive rocks, when the law becomes more complex). This does not mean that you shouldn't take care when handling the stuff.

16th Apr 2017 18:06 UTCFred E. Davis

Thank you for the clarification. -Fred

16th Apr 2017 20:42 UTCMatt Neuzil Expert

I love the off topic reference to UA. But, if you're unruly at a movie, concert, or sporting event and fail to behave, listen, obey, etc you'll get dragged off as well. Purchase doesn't guarantee anything when behaving poorly.

Regarding these laws, it's getting silly. I guess if I want a Grenville radioactive collection, I will have to keep it I canada

16th Apr 2017 21:24 UTCBrian Eisemann

Thanks everybody for your input. I appreciate it! The most trouble I've ever had at an airport was in Frankfurt. They wanted to look at everything, and also in Nashville. They wanted to look at everything. Most other places, including leaving the Denver show, the X-Ray guy just said "you got a bunch of rocks in there" and smiled. My experience is that if you are friendly and cooperative, there's no problem. Of course, none of that especially radioactive. Now.... I may not be so friendly if United decides to bump me on my way to Sainte-Marie hahahahha. :) I never understood why airlines wouldn't just keep raising the amount they offer to people until they voluntarily take the next flight. thanks again!

Mindat.org is an outreach project of the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization.
Copyright © mindat.org and the Hudson Institute of Mineralogy 1993-2024, except where stated. Most political location boundaries are © OpenStreetMap contributors. Mindat.org relies on the contributions of thousands of members and supporters. Founded in 2000 by Jolyon Ralph.
Privacy Policy - Terms & Conditions - Contact Us / DMCA issues - Report a bug/vulnerability Current server date and time: May 9, 2024 01:21:42

Go to top of page