Subject: Radon levels in paper
A repost from Library Date: 23 Apr 92 From: Glee Willis <willis [at] UNSSUN__SCS__UNR__EDU> Subject: Measuring shelf afterlife Sender: Libraries & Librarians <LIBRARY [at] INDYCMS__BITNET> I am posting this to THIS LIST ONLY (due to the general nature of this list, and due to the (perhaps) generic appeal of this topic to all librarians. Readers of this list may feel free to cross-post it to other lists, as they see fit. -- GW =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+= [A bit of background explanation:] I have been participating in a year-long pilot project to test the radon levels of dwellings in my state. The house from which I recently moved (not because of its alarmingly-high radon levels, but because home ownership beckoned) was a local "hot spot". My new house has tested at a comfortingly low radon level (even though it is only 6 1/2 blocks from my old house), so the coordinator of the test, who is a geologist, recently sent me this (summarized) note: ... So, that's the good news! Now for the not-so-good! It looks as if your job could be hazardous to your health (see attached clipping from _Nature_).... Never thought that a library could be hazardous to one's health! Guess I'm going to have to stop spending so much time in them in the future! Perhaps what the letter to the editor of Nature, entitled "Measuring shelf afterlife", (p. 293) in the March 26, 1992 issue, notes is "old news"? However, I had not previously heard of it, and would like to bring this information to the attention of those of you who might have to deal with patrons who might be prone to hysteria upon learning of it? My apologies, in advance, if it has already been discussed on the EXLIBRIS or CONSERVATION lists (neither of which seem to have easily-searchable archives?). I checked the ARCHIVES archives, and it had, apparently, not yet been mentioned there. -==--==--==-<>-==--==--==- To excerpt from what the authors B. Singh, of McMaster University, and H.W. Taylor, of the University of Toronto, wrote: "SIR -- The radioactivity of substances in daily use has been well documented. But it is not common knowledge even to nuclear and health physicists that the fine papers used in high-quality printing, photocopying and writing are indeed radioactive. Using standard gamma-ray spectroscopic methods with a shielded large-volume HpGe detector, we have measured the gamma-rays emitted by various paper samples, mostly in the form of unbound scientific journals, magazines and newsprint.... These data establish the presence of easily detected radionuclides in fine papers. Although we have chosen mainly scientific journals, the activities are expected to be comparable for any publications that use this type of paper. We believe that large differences in absolute activities and in thorium/radium ratios are caused by varying amounts and qualities of the fine clays that are added (a practice started about 50 years ago) to basic paper pulp to produce durable and high-gloss surfaces used for many colour-illustrated magazines and professional journals.... Our data can provide an estimate of radiation exposure to a person using a library. A seven-shelf bookcase of a typical journal, for example, _Nuclear_Physics_.... The dose at the centre of the body of the person standing about 0.4m in front of the bookcase is about 0.4 m-rad h-1. This dose, although small, is comparable to that received by a person living or working in a brick or masonry building (in addition to the normal average background). It is interesting to note that the dose from paper can be reduced by the use of fine papers of low radioactivity, as is the case for the journals _Arcit_ and the _Journal_of_Environmental_ Radiation_. Whether such adjustments to our lifestyles are justified by the dose rates involved is open to question. [end of excerpt] Glee Willis Engineering Librarian Internet: willis [at] unssun__scs__unr__edu Bitnet: willis@equinox FAX: (702) 784-1751 Telephone: (702) 784-6827 USnail: Engineering Library (262) University of Nevada Reno, NV 89557-0044 *** Conservation DistList Instance 5:53 Distributed: Saturday, April 25, 1992 Message Id: cdl-5-53-006 ***Received on Friday, 24 April, 1992