Categories

Login

Lynas Issue by Dr. HW Looi >>>

Repost :: Prominent Kuantan Doctor Rubbishes Concerns Over Lynas' Radioactivity

Disclaimers:

No replies in Malaysiakini’s comment column because I had terminated my MKini subscription some time ago.

The ring is here, not elsewhere. Of course anti-Lynas Malaysians are free to spread lies in other places and hope no reply from Dr. Looi for them to make claim that Dr. Looi is too afraid to answer their questions raised in every news portal, blog and forum in the internet. 🙂

This is a serious subject, I may delete those nonsense and absurd comments from anonymous, but promise NEVER delete a single comment from anyone with his/her identity verified like dare to show his name card or disclose his real name and working place to public.

Also promise NEVER share your IP, email address and any electronic trait with Lynas, police and any parties.

Actually I’m too sick to defend Lynas and BN government for free, but feel more sicken whenever I see anti-Lynas NGOs are spreading lies and myths with all sorts of twist and turn to bring down Lynas.

“If you cannot attack his or her viewpoints, then attack the person”. This saying was online since 1998 in soc.cul.malaysia forum. Anti-Lynas supporters have been resorting to this dirty tactic to discredit Dr. Looi.

I only give an honest, not the blind support to Dr. Looi, and no hesitate to point out his mistake in his arguments.

KUANTAN, Nov 5 (Bernama) — A prominent Pahang doctor has rubbished concerted “lies” spread by the Opposition among local residents on radioactive concerns from the recently completed RM2.5 billion Lynas rare earth plant here, saying that the anti-Lynas campaign was purely politically motivated to win votes in the coming general election.

Datuk Dr Looi Hoong Wah, a consultant physician with 40 years interest in nuclear medicine and particle physics, said the anti-Lynas activists had been brainwashing the people here for the last two years despite the fact that there would be “absolutely no radiation waste or any toxic waste whatever” from the plant.

Lynas’ safety was verified by six independent bodies, including the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the world’s highest authority for atomic energy.

“The substance they bring in is just nothing but rare earth oil containing a tiny bit of weak radioactive thorium 232. That is an extremely weak sort of radioactive substance and it has a very long life of tens of billions of years.

“And all this anti-Lynas people say…oh our great-great grandchildren are going to suffer for 14 billion years. This is absolutely rubbish,” he said.

Dr Looi said if one were to look at the half life of radioactive material (the time required for a quantity to fall to half its value), the longer the half life, the less dangerous it would be.

“For instance, if half of a house is burned down in 14 billion years, will it cause any problem? No, it won’t cause any problem because there is only a tiny fire, whereas if it is burned down in 40 minutes, then a lot of people will get killed or injured.

“The same thing with lead, the one we use in our car batteries. It has a long half life as well of 19 billion years. Because it has such a long half life, it is practically non-radioactive when you use it in your cars. So thorium is very weak radioactively,” he told Bernama in an interview.

Asked how he got interested in nuclear science and particle physics, Dr Looi said he developed an interest when he was a medical student in Manchester about 40 years ago as one of his tutors was a nuclear physicist.

He said he had put thorium in his hand without any side-effects till today because thorium, when released outside connected with electrons to produce helium gas, just like the one used to fill balloons, which was completely harmless.

Dr Looi reckoned that it was purely for political reasons that the Opposition was trying to work everybody up about the Lynas plant in Gebeng.

“The thorium 232 or decay products produce only a tiny bit of electron, which is electricity. It doesn’t cause any problem. You find that Lynas’ radiation, once you are outside of the boundaries of the plant, the radiation is zero. There is no instrument on this earth which is sensitive enough to pick it up,” he said.

Dr Looi said the disinformation on the Lynas bordered on ridiculous assertions because even in a human body there was radioactivity as well due to potassium, which doctors gave to patients to control the intake of salt in hypertension and other cases.

“Even in our body, we have about 4,400 becquerel (Bq) whereas the Lynas waste and ore contain less than 6 Bq per gram. This is already 124 times more than the Lynas worst case scenario. So why complain about a Lynas plant in Gebeng here where there are 124 Lynas plants in your body producing radioactivity?”

Asked on the effects on workers, he said what they could possibly get was only less than 20 per cent of the permitted dosage.

Dr Looi also quoted Dr Nick Tsurikov, the international radiation specialist, as saying that there was no radiation risk whatsoever as far as the Lynas plant was concerned.

He also said that opposition to the plant should take into account that more than 1,000 quality jobs were at stake and these are people with families for them to put food on the table.

“Once you have a rare earth plant around, (other) companies will come, like Siemens (which) is planning to come in and make use of the rare earth. They will produce thousands more jobs because of the spill-over effects,” he said.

Dr Looi appealed to non-governmental organisations and the Opposition to “wake up” and realise that the Lynas plant would be of great benefit to the country.

“You can brainwash people for some time but you can’t brainwash them forever,” he said.

— BERNAMA

[send-link-to-friend]

The nkkhoo.com comment board with Facebook account.
ariel says:

If it can be recycled so easily and safe, why didn’t Australia carries out the process? Australia has abundance of land to build this type of plant. The plant officials must have thought that Malaysians still live on trees, wear leaves and hunt animals for daily food. Lynas will argue that they can recycle the waste but to do so will likely emits even more radioactive waste. We have brought this upon ourselves by voting bn as the federal government. In 50 years, all of our children will suffer some form of cancer.

nkkhoo says:

This stupid reason is recycled and recycled. America is also bigger than Malaysia, why Intel, Seagate, First Solar, etc. come to Malaysia?

Solar Panel manufacturing is never a safe and green production. A new plant in the Penang Island is under construction, and Green Perkasa keeps quiet about the plant because Green Perkasa is a pro-PR political movement from day one.

looihw88l says:

DEAR NK,

THE PREVIOUS VERSION HAS SOME ERRORS.
KINDLY DELETE IT.
HERE IS THE CORRECTED VERSION OF THE ANSWER TO THE POSTING BY JOHN RICHMAN IN LYNAS FACEBOOK.

WARMEST REGARDS,

MAY GOD BLESS YOU ALWAYS.

LOOI.

**********

*
*
Quote John Richman the EXECUTIVE MANAGER OF A QUANTITY SURVEYOR FIRM 15.12.12: “Lynas expects to produce 22,000 metric tons (22,000,000kg) of rare-earth materials a year after reaching full capacity. if “Earth” from Australia come out 50% of End Product and another 50% is considered as “Normal Earth” as mentioned by two expert above. That means 220,000 m3 of “Normal Soil” what the expert mentioned will be fill in malaysia yearly. If the “Normal Soil” fully occupied by Malaysia Industry every year, then all the HIGHWAY, ROAD AND HOUSE will the build by this “Normal New Stone” start from next year. Otherwise, another Famous “Mountain” in Pahang will in front of Malaysian’s Eye soon.” Unquote.

COMMENT:

It looks like the arithmetic does not add up!

AS THE EXECUTIVE MANAGER OF A QUANTITY SURVEYOR FIRM, HE SHOULD CHECK HIS CALCULATIONS BEFORE POSTING IT IN THE WORLD WIDE WEB !

The operation of the plant will result in the generation of three major residue streams, namely the

1. WLP .. Water Leach Purification Residue (WLP) from the cracking and separation process, and is the only component which is more radioactive than Malaysian soil.

2. FGD .. the Flue Gas Desulphurisation Residue (FGD) from the waste gas treatment system (scrubber) ~ 12 ppm of Thorium (less than Malaysian soil).

3. NUF .. Neutralisation Underflow Solids from the wastewater treatment process (NUF) ~ 7 ppm of Thorium (less than Malaysian soil).

ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT ~ 1,600 ppm (parts per million)

2 MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS “WASTE” ~ 12 ppm

3rd RESIDUE STREAM (WLP) = 1,500 ppm of Thorium

AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 21 ppm OF THORIUM

The NUF and FGD is has only 1/2 the radioactivity of Malaysian soil mainly because the vast majority of it’s content is actually derived from Malaysian materials like limestone, sulphuric acid, water etc.

WE DO NOT NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THE FGD AND NUF because they are only 1/2 as radioactive as Malaysian soil and will be made into normal useful gypsum board and fertilizer and profitably marketed without any problem.

So this part of the residue which is the largest by volume consist of mainly MALAYSIAN ELEMENTS WHICH ARE NATIVE TO MALAYSIA AND HAS BEEN IN MALAYSIA FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS AND HAVE MORE RIGHT TO STAY IN MALAYSIA THAN ALL THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS !

WLP

Lynas is expected to produce about 824,400 cubic meters of WLP in the 1st 10 years of operation or 82,440 cubic meters of WLP per year (in terms of weight only 32,000 tonnes per year).

This 32,000 tonnes (82,440 cubic meters) of WLP will be diluted with NATIVE MALAYSIAN MATERIALS according to International Standards and made into clinker and other useful products.

SO ONLY 82,440 CUBIC METERS PER YEAR in the clinker (and not 220,000 cubic meters) are actually foreign Australian material !

THE MAIN COMPONENT OF WHATEVER FINAL PRODUCT OF CLINKER FOR ROAD AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION USE, WILL CONSIST OF MALAYSIAN ELEMENTS WHICH ARE NATIVE TO MALAYSIA AND HAS BEEN IN MALAYSIA FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS AND HAVE MORE RIGHT TO STAY IN MALAYSIA THAN ALL THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS !

IF WE ARE FORCED TO EXPORT ALL THE GYPSUM PRODUCTS AND THE CLINKER, WE WILL BE EXPORTING A HUGE VOLUME OF MALAYSIAN ELEMENTS WHICH ARE NATIVE TO MALAYSIA AT A CHEAP, CHEAP PRICE TO OUR NEIGHBOURS LIKE SINGAPORE.

IT IS RATHER IRONIC THAT WE REFUSED TO SELL TO SINGAPORE SAND WHICH IS A CARCINOGEN AND HAS TWICE THE RADIOACTIVITY OF THE GYPSUM PRODUCTS and yet we want to send the gypsum products and clinker to them at a dirt cheap price because of the forced sale!

DON’T YOU THINK THAT WE LOOK LIKE IDIOTS IN THE EYES OF THE WORLD COMMUNITY ?

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)
*
http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

nkkhoo says:

I cannot find the comment. Please put the link together.

looihw88l says:

*
*
HOW TO TRANSFORM 6.2 Bq/g OF THORIUM-232 INTO 62.0 Bq/g OF THORIUM-232 !

If you want to play a trick on your colleague and make him believe that a material containing Thorium-232 is 10 times or 1,000 % more radioactive than what it really is, USE THIS LITTLE TRICK AS IS WELL DEMONSTRATED BY THE Lynas Assessment Report BY THE AUSTRALIAN BASED COMPANY CALLED “NTN”

They are NOT telling a lie, but only not telling the whole truth.

Quote:” In addition to the WLP waste the LAMP it is claimed the LAMP will generate;

* flue gas desulphurisation residue (FGD) with a RADIOACTIVITY CONCENTRATION OF 0.47 Bq/g (12ppm thorium-232 and 0.3 ppm uranium-238)”
Unquote.

12 ppm of Thorium-232 should give rise to 0.047 Bq/g and not 0.47 Bq/g!

HOW IS THE RADIOACTIVITY BEING INFLATED BY 1,000 % AND THEY ARE STILL TELLING THE TRUTH ?

Please read on so that you would not be FOOLED again.

CONFUSION ON THE SPECIFIC ACTIVITY OF THORIUM-232 IN ONE OF THE LYNAS “WASTE” STREAM…..6.2 Bq/g or 62 Bq/g ?

It looks like a lot of people do not have even the basic knowledge of radioactivity concentrations and the various methods of calculating the specific activity of the radionuclides, especially of the series radionuclide.

There are essentially two ways of doing this, one is old fashioned way which use the total activity and the other is the modern currently in use and internationally accepted one and this uses only the concentration of the “mother” radionuclide.

Old method: “Since each atom of Thorium-232 decays into 11 other atoms of other radionuclides (12 atoms involved), each Bq of Thorium-232 had been assumed to be multiplied by a factor of 10 (10 because the end result Lead-208 is considered non-radioactive though this may not be true as it still has a half life of 19 million billion years, and Bismuth-212 decays either into Polonium-212 or to Thallium-208 both of which then decay into Lead-208..so Po-212 and Tl-208 can be considered as 1 Bq only).”

Quote: International Radiation Safety Expert Nick Tsurikov:

” On this basis, if a material contains 400 parts per million of thorium – its specific activity is calculated as follows:

a) Outdated method – 400 x 4.09 (specific activity of Th-232) x 10 (number of radio nuclides in the thorium decay chain) = 16,360 Bq/kg, or 16.4 Bq/g

b) International standard (IAEA, AELB and Australia) – 400 x 4.09 = 1,630 Bq/kg, or 1.64 Bq/g.”
Unquote.

The Anti-Lynas folk is now using this old fashion way of looking at specific activity to confuse the people.

Because of all this, they claim that the Lynas “waste” is not 6.2 Bq/g but 62 Bq/g and Lynas has been misleading the people about the radioactivity.

The truth is that nobody, except some of the Chinese in China still use this non-standard way of looking at specific activity of a series radionuclide.

The old method has been discontinued internationally since about 1997.

Actually, when we use the standard description “Lynas waste has only 6.2 Bq/g”, we have already factored in the radiation from all the daughter radionuclides.

For instance, all the dose coefficients given by IAEA of 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/g for radiation at 1 metre from a pile of Thorium, and by UNSCEAR of 0.604 microSv/hr/Bq/gm for radiation dose from an infinite field of Thorium DEMANDS THAT WE USE THE STANDARD WAY OF DESCRIBING SPECIFIC ACTIVITY i.e. 1 Bq of activity in both a series or single non-series decay means 1 atom of the “mother” radionuclide decaying.

So as far as the dosage in terms of biological effects is concerned, whether we use the standard 6.2 Bq/g or the old Chinese way of 62 Bq/g to describe the radioactivity of the Lynas “waste”, there is NO DIFFERENCE, as, if we were to use the old Chinese 62 Bq/g, we will have to divide the IAEA and UNSCEAR coefficients by a factor of 10.

Dato’ Dr Looi
*

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

looihw88l says:

Quote Kah Yau 14.12.12: “http://www.freemalaysiakini2.com/?p=28400.” Unquote.

Quote: ” Article in freemalaysiakini

China expert: Lynas’ waste recycle proposal outdated

Chun-Hua Yan, who is Cheung Kong professor of the College of Chemistry and Molecular Engineering, part of Peking University, said that recycling radioactive waste from a rare earth plant into gypsum, fertiliser and material for road construction, was the method adopted by China rare-earth plants in the early days and commented that it is an outdated method abandoned by China.

I’M NOT AN EXPERT IN THIS FIELD but I believe that was the road travelled by China before but not now,” he told the media after attending an international symposium on rare earth today in Kuala Lumpur

Yan claimed that radioactive leakage is not the hazardous risk of a rare earth plant because if the operator is willing to inject huge funds to bury the waste far from habitation and seismic areas, as well as isolated from groundwater and sealed, it would not be a problem.” Unquote

Generally the most pressing problem for a rare earth plant, said Yan, is to deal with the fluorine gas produced during the fusion process.

Comment:

As is so clearly stated, the good Professor admitted that HE NOT AN EXPERT IN THIS FIELD.

He also said that radioactive leakage is not the hazardous risk of a rare earth plant!

SO IF RADIOACTIVITY IS NOT A HAZARDOUS RISK, WHY ARE THE ANTI-LYNAS NINCOMPOOPS KEEP ON HARPING ABOUT RADIATION AND FUKUSHIMA FROM DAY 1 OF THE ANTI-LYNAS DEBACLE?

Quote Nick Tsurikov: “RADIATION FROM THE PLANT WILL BE UNDETECTABLE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES and

THORIUM IN OTHER WASTE IS INSOLUBLE AND CANNOT “POISON” ANY PLANTS, ANIMALS OR THE ENVIRONMENT – EVEN IN THEORY “.Unquote.

According to Prof. Chun-Hua Yan, THE MAIN HAZARD IS THE fluorine gas produced during the fusion process.

Getting rare-earth metals requires a multiple-step process.

First rare-earth oxides, like cerium, praseodymium and neodymium oxide powders are exposed to hydrogen fluoride gas.

This turns the oxide powder into a crystalline fluoride, such as the green praesodymium fluoride crystal.

A reduction reaction and further processing turns the rare-earth fluorides into their final, pure metal forms.

I AM NOT SURE WHETHER LYNAS SELLS THE REE IN THE OXIDE FORM OR FURTHER REFINE THEM INTO THE PURE REE METALS.

IF LYNAS SELLS ONLY RARE EARTH OXIDE, NO FLUORIDE WILL BE USED.

BUT WHATEVER LYNAS DOES, THE CHEMICAL PROCESS HAS BEEN REFINED AND PERFECTED BY THE REE PLANT IN LA ROCHELLE, FRANCE.

THIS SAME PROCESS IS NOW BEING USED IN THE ULTRA-MODERN, STATE OF ART, SUPER SOPHISTICATED LYNAS REE PLANT (unlike the primitive refineries in China).

AND THE LA ROCHELLE PLANT HAS BEEN PRODUCING RARE EARTHS SAFELY AND WITHOUT CAUSING ANY PROBLEM TO THE SEASIDE TOURIST CITY OF LA ROCHELLE FOR OVER 40 YEARS !

Dato’ Dr Looi

Note: Irrelevant links deleted by nkkhoo.

nkkhoo says:

Lynas is being attack left and right by both BN and PR.

Malaysia can say sayonara to Western foreign investors.

China investors will bring in more harmful industries to help LGE in Penang when American investors pull out en-mass.

nkkhoo says:

The IP is from Singapore and not many local “Malays” are working and staying in kiasuland.

Let watch up for instigators from the down south to destabilize Malaysian with their BN detest campaign.

qtrina says:

dr looi has spoken a lot but people still detest bn for lynas.
that is the main reason.

looihw88l says:

*
*
To QTRINA,

IF THOSE PEOPLE DETEST BN, I COULD’NT CARE TWO HOOTS IF THEY GO AHEAD AND ATTACK BN, FOR IT’S NONE OF MY BUSINESS.

BUT DO NOT BASH AN INNOCENT BYSTANDER LIKE LYNAS AND DESTROY THE RICEBOWLS OF 1,750 POOR WORKERS AND THEIR FAMILIES ! ! !

Warmest regards,

Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

*
*
LYNAS MUST REMOVE ALL WASTE FROM MALAYSIA, SAY 4 CABINET MINISTERS.

Comment:

It does not make any sense to say that the waste must be exported… BECAUSE THERE IS NO WASTE !

HOW DO YOU EXPECT LYNAS TO EXPORT “NOTHING” FROM THE COUNTRY?

IT SOUNDS SILLY TO DEMAND THAT A RESPECTABLE INTERNATIONAL COMPANY (JUST TO MASSAGE THE INFLATED EGO OF THE ANTI-LYNAS IGNORAMUS), SHOULD EXPORT “NOTHING”.

AND I WONDER WHO IN THIS WORLD WOULD LIKE TO IMPORT OUR “NOTHING”.

A “waste” is by definition something that is unwanted and needs to be removed as a rubbish.

The residue from the Lynas operation is not unwanted for it can be easily converted into the 3 types of useful, profitable gypsum products.

The operation of the plant will result in the generation of three major residue streams, namely the

1. WLP .. Water Leach Purification Residue (WLP) from the cracking and separation process,

2. FGD .. the Flue Gas Desulphurisation Residue (FGD) from the waste gas treatment system (scrubber) and the

3. NUF .. Neutralisation Underflow Solids from the wastewater treatment process (NUF).

ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT ~ 1,600 ppm (parts per million)

TWO MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS “WASTE” = 12 ppm

3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium

AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

The first two are classified as non-radioactive as its radioactivity is only half that of Malaysian soil and is much much less radioactive than the SAND THAT YOUR CHILDREN PLAY WITH in our beaches.

Lynas will recycle them as synthetic gypsum for plaster board, magnesium rich synthetic gypsum as fertilizer and synthetic aggregate as clinker for road and other construction projects.

Gypsum is nothing more than just hydrated Calcium Sulphate (CaSO4.2(H2O) and comes probably from the neutralization of SO2 and Sulphuric acid vapour by our own Limestone (CaCO3) or Calcium Oxide in the scrubber.

The 3 types of Gypsum products are:

1. Iron Phospho Gypsum from the WLP with a very low NORM and radioactivity and after dilution according to international standard, can be used as clinker for road and in the construction industry.

2. Synthetic Gypsum with a radioactivity only 1/2 of Malaysian Soil.

3. Magnesium Rich Gypsum also with a radioactivity only 1/2 of Malaysian Soil and is a valuable fertilizer.

SO THE MAJOR PART OF THE RECYCLED RESIDUE PRODUCT ACTUALLY CONSISTS OF THE CALCIUM, SULPHATE AND WATER WHICH WERE BORN AND BRED IN MALAYSIA FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS.

THE MAJOR PART OF THE SO-CALLED RECYCLED “WASTE” IS ACTUALLY NATIVE TO MALAYSIA AND IN FACT HAS MORE RIGHT TO REMAIN IN MALAYSIA THAN THE ANTI-LYNAS NINCOMPOOPS !

The global market for synthetic gypsum is approximately 150 million tonnes per annum.

At the current rates of production, supplies of synthetic gypsum co-products are beginning to outstrip natural gypsum, thus providing valuable new alternative materials and preserving the planet’s natural resources.

If we insist that these valuable by-products are not allowed to be used locally and must be exported even though they are much less radioactive than our soil, then our sanity and intelligence will be questionable AND MAKE OURSELVES THE LAUGHING STOCK OF THE WORLD.

THE BIGGEST POTENTIAL BUYER OF THESE PRODUCTS WILL BE COUNTRIES LIKE SINGAPORE WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE “kiasu” BUT HAS AN INTACT BRAIN, WHILE PEOPLE IN MALAYSIA ARE NOT “KIASU” BUT HAS NO GUTS AND “KIASI”.

IT IS RATHER IRONIC THAT WE REFUSED TO SELL TO SINGAPORE SAND WHICH IS A CARCINOGEN AND HAS TWICE THE RADIOACTIVITY OF THE GYPSUM PRODUCTS and yet we want to send the gypsum products to them cheap!

DON’T YOU THINK THAT WE LOOK STUPID !

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)
*

looihw88l says:

*
DAP secretary general Lim Guan Eng said that the Lynas rare-earth refinery should be shut down because the company had reneged on its commitment to export its so-called “harmful waste” out of Malaysia as promised in the letter to the AELB.

DAP secretary general Lim Guan Eng said Lynas claimed that managing director Mashal Ahmad had admitted that the Australian mining company will not be exporting waste out of Malaysia.

He said that with the statement by Mashal, which was published in a Chinese daily, the government can cancel the Lynas plant for breach of compliance without having to pay compensation

THIS IS NOT TRUE!

The letter sent by the CEO and MG of Lynas, Malaysia Nicholas Curtis and Mashal Ahmad clearly states that “IF NECESSARY”…….

SINCE ALL THE WASTES WILL BE RECYCLED, IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO SHIP THE “WASTE” OUT OF MALAYSIA.

AS SUCH IT IS RATHER OFFENSIVE TO ACCUSE THE LYNAS CEO OF LYING !

IF THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLK CANNOT UNDERSTAND EVEN SIMPLE ENGLISH, HOW CAN THEY UNDERSTAND RADIOACTIVITY?

Letter dated: 23.02.12 by the CEO and MA of Lynas Malaysia to AELB.

Quote: “Lynas Corporation Australia hereby give a full undertaking to, IF NECESSARY, remove from Malaysia all the waste generated Lynas Advanced Material in Gebeng, Kuantan during the Temporary Operating License period.” Unquote.

Lynas will recycle them as synthetic gypsum for plaster board, magnesium rich synthetic gypsum and synthetic aggregate and cement manufacturing, or as fertiliser.

The global market for synthetic gypsum is approximately 150 million tonnes per annum.

At current rates of production, supplies of synthetic gypsum co-products are beginning to outstrip natural gypsum, thus providing valuable new alternative materials and preserving the planet’s natural resources.

The WLP can be diluted according to international standards and made into valuable clinker for road construction and other construction projects.

I repeat, AND SO IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO REMOVE THE RECYCLED PROFITABLE “WASTE” FROM MALAYSIA and the recycling of the so called waste will create even more jobs … but hopefully not for the Anti-Lynas folk.

IF MALAYSIA WERE TO CLOSE DOWN LYNAS, LYNAS IS ENTITLED TO SUE FOR BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF COMPENSATION.

THEY WILL MOST LIKELY SUE MALAYSIA IN AUSTRALIA, ENGLAND OR EVEN IN THE USA!

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

Links deleted.

nkkhoo says:

Lynas must remove all residue from Malaysia, say 4 cabinet ministers

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/12/10/nation/20121210205105&sec=nation#135516137469736&if_height=643

Usop says:

This is an obvious corrupted hanky-panky deal during the initial planning to set up LAMPs. In the haste to sign on the dotted-line and to receive the sinful dues, many conditions were not written in the agreement, that’s why so much of haggling in recent times.
At the end of the day, the tax-paying rakyat are the ones to suffer. Wait and see.

looihw88l says:

*
*
There is actually no waste products in Lynas and the so-called waste is not wasted but is recycled and made into useful, highly profitable products.

The operation of the plant will result in the generation of three major residue streams, namely the

1. WLP .. Water Leach Purification Residue (WLP) from the cracking and separation process,

2. FGD .. the Flue Gas Desulphurisation Residue (FGD) from the waste gas treatment system (scrubber) and the

3. NUF .. Neutralisation Underflow Solids from the wastewater treatment process (NUF).

ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT ~ 1,600 ppm (parts per million)
2 MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS “WASTE” = 12 ppm
3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium
AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

The first two are classified as non-radioactive as its radioactivity is only half that of Malaysian soil and is much much less radioactive than the SAND THAT YOUR CHILDREN PLAY WITH in our beaches.

Lynas will recycle them as synthetic gypsum for plaster board, magnesium rich synthetic gypsum and synthetic aggregate and cement manufacturing, or as fertiliser.

The global market for synthetic gypsum is approximately 150 million tonnes per annum.

At current rates of production, supplies of synthetic gypsum co-products are beginning to outstrip natural gypsum, thus providing valuable new alternative materials and preserving the planet’s natural resources.

The WLP can be diluted according to international standards and made into valuable clinker for road construction and other construction projects.

Dr Looi

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/12/8/nation/12432981&sec=nation

*
http://aliran.com/archives/monthly/2002/6e.html

黑面 says:

莱纳斯马来西亚私人有限公司董事经理马沙,今天在关丹莱纳稀土厂示范稀土原料辐射测试时强调,根据国际公约阐明,稀土废料是不允许运出国的,所以他们会遵守这项条例,不会把稀土废料运出国外。

廖中莱不是说过稀土废料一定会运出国的吗?
现在,莱纳马来西亚私人有限公司董事经理马沙证实,稀土废料不会运出大马!

当初的运出国的承诺呢?
janji tak ditepati?

nkkhoo says:

Liew Tiong LIAR!

xiao xin sen says:

卖华只是自己讲自己爽,在里面已没势力了!

身为一个卫生部長,连讲过的話都没有内阁成言支持你,还说代表全马华人出来争取和發言,再信他的真是仆街囉。身在内阁,居然不知道内幕!还整天以一个谎言盖另一个谎言!

不要潜水了啦,出来解释一下。

nkkhoo says:

Dr. Looi, we may a very few dare to speak up against Green Perkasa, but more neutral and educated Malaysians will listen to science.

Aidil Yunus says:

Too longwinded argument is not science, but confusion.

nkkhoo says:

Sometimes I wonder why people have to write a long article to present a simple view. 🙂

looihw88l says:

*
Quote Mahesvaran Mahadevan 06.12.12 : ” u brought lynas to parliment, the won, then to court lynas won the case. what some more. this already prove lynas is safe. I AM CONFUSED WHY ONLY CHINESE ANTI-LYNAS WHEN OTHERS SO QUIET, WEIRD.” Unquote.

Comment:

Yes, why only the Malaysian Chinese and no other racial groups are involved in this comical anti-lynas debacle.

At present, about 95% of these rare earths are mined and refined in China.

If you look at all the foreign blogs and press, you will see that most of the commentators are saying that CHINA IS THE HIDDEN CULPRIT BEHIND ALL THIS NONSENSE !

You cannot blame the foreigners for doing so as:

PRACTICALLY ALL ANTI-LYNAS NINCOMPOOPS ARE CHINESE

PRACTICALLY ALL NON-CHINESE ARE PRO-LYNAS,

SO THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION ?

CHINA IS THE ULTIMATE CULPRIT ! ! !

And this has triggered a lot of ill will, animosity, hatred and disgust for what was perceived as “CHINA’S DIRTY TRICKS AND MANIPULATIONS.’

However, this is not the real truth.

Quote notorious Anti-Lynas Jade Lee: “It may enlighten some readers here, if you are open minded enough to listen and to learn the truth,

IT WAS A FEW CHURCH LEADERS IN KUANTAN

who have first started to discuss the Lynas issue and to raise awareness of their congregation to oppose this project.” Unquote.

So what really happens is that a few of the innocent church leaders in Kuantan who are always concerned about the sufferings of others, suddenly realised that a huge REE plant is being built nearby.

Unfortunately at about the same time, the Fukushima disaster occurred.

And to their horror, they found that the raw material to be used in the Lynas plant was “radioactive” and with only a primitive knowledge of radiation, these concerned church leaders were flabbergasted and as Jade Lee said instigated their congregation to oppose this project.”

Presumably, these leaders have only a rudimentary knowledge of economics and must have been very suspicious of why Australia would want to send the ore all the way to Malaysia for processing and falsely believing that Australia must be truly terrified about the refining process with all its “dangerous, radioactive waste.”

Once the madness started, a few of the local Chinese Newspapers, picked up the story and amplified the fear by persistently reporting on every word that the anti-lynas say, even though they are something that is obviously absurd.. like the Lynas plant is a nuclear plant and is going to explode and spread radioactivity all over the country.

These Chinese Newspapers which are traditionally anti-establishment, may also be partly irritated by Lynas brag that Lynas is going to end the monopoly of China on the Rare Earth market by producing almost a third of the present world production.

Then, as usual, the local politicians saw the fantastic opportunity to accuse the establishment of allowing such a dangerous plant to be established in Kuantan.

Because the general election is coming soon, they could not let this golden opportunity to pass by, and so jump right into the fray.

With their massive financial backing, the opposition, together with some naive unthinking minds started the anti-lynas campaign

Since the local politician is a psychologist, this politician must be well versed in the techniques of convincing the population into believing something that is absolutely ridiculous.

It looks like they are using the same brainwashing techniques used by that devious demonic master brainwasher before and during the 2nd World War i.e. Hitler.

Brainwashing techniques are based on the consistently persistent repetition of propaganda focused on just a few issues and continuously repeated in a slightly different way.

According to Adolf Hitler in- “War Propaganda”, in volume 1, chapter 6 of Mein Kampf (1925)

“But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success.” Unquote.

One Chinese Newspaper in particular, has been reporting on a daily basis of everything that these anti-lynas folks were saying or doing, no matter stupid it is, like making fake coffins and doing silly walks.

This propaganda in the Chinese media is, like what is mentioned in Hitler’s Mein Kampf, is focused, constant, continuous and persistent.

There are 4 stages in this Hitler type of brainwashing procedure:

1. DISSEMINATION OF PROPAGANDA (usually well camouflaged lies)

2. HARASSMENT OF NON-BELIEVERS

3. INTIMIDATION OF DISSIDENTS and

4. ELIMINATION OF THE OBSTINATE DISSIDENTS

THE ANTI LYNAS RED GUARDS HAVE DEPLOYED AN ARMY OF CYBER HARASSERS AND CYBER THUGS IN ALL THE MALAYSIAN BLOGS AND OTHER NEWS MEDIA TO INTIMIDATE ANYONE WHO OPPOSE THEM AND THEY ARE VERY SUCCESSFUL SO FAR.

VERY FEW PEOPLE DARE TO SPEAK UP, AND ALL THOSE WHO DARE TO DO SO ARE BEING INTIMIDATED, HARASSED AND BOYCOTTED BY THE BRAINWASHED ZOMBIES.

THE MAIN AIM OF THESE CYBER THUGS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GETTING RID OF LYNAS, OR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HELPING CHINA MAINTAIN THEIR GRIP ON THE REE MARKET, BUT THEY ARE USING THIS GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO BRAINWASH AND INSTILL HATRED FOR THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT, THUS ENABLING THEM TO WIN THE COMING GENERAL ELECTION.

At present they have been hindered by a tiny group of dissidents in Kuantan and they are now blocked at stage 3.

As a result of the Chinese media, most of the Chinese were well brainwashed into believing the absolute crap that these anti-lynas people were propagating and disseminating.

Fortunately, all the other racial groups do not read Chinese and the propaganda do not affect them and as a result, the Malays and Indians are unaffected.

QUOTE Anti-Lynas Jade Lee: “When a few so claimed rare earth scientists came to Kuantan to speak about the safe rare earth processing, they were criticised and BOOED OUT OF TOWN IN SHAME” Unquote.

THE THREE RARE EARTH SPECIALISTS, RECOMMENDED BY THE CCP OF CHINA, WHO WERE INVITED BY A FEW OF THE LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS TO ENLIGHTEN THE PEOPLE OF KUANTAN WERE RUDELY AND CRUDELY HARASSED BY THE ANTILYNAS LEADER AND HIS RED GUARDS IN A SHAMELESS AND DESPICABLE WAY.

THESE INNOCENT FOREIGN GUESTS WERE BEING BOOED, SHOUTED AT, JEERED, MOCKED, CRITICIZED, TERRORIZED AND DEGRADED BY THESE
DESPICABLE, UNCOUTH COMMON HARASSERS WHO UNWITTINGLY DISPLAYED THEIR ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY FOR ALL TO SEE.

THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR BRINGS SHAME TO ALL MALAYSIANS AND SHOULD BE STRONGLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY CONDEMNED.

THESE THREE POOR OLD CHINESE SCIENTISTS, TWO OF WHOM WERE IN THEIR 70’S, WITH YEARS OF VALUABLE EXPERIENCE, WERE FLABBERGASTED BY SUCH STUPID, CHILDISH, DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR.

THE USE OF SUCH THUGGERY UNEQUIVOCALLY CATEGORIZES THE USERS INTO THE LOWEST RUNG OF SOCIETY AND REFLECTS BADLY ON THEIR CHARACTER, INTELLIGENCE AND UPBRINGING !

BECAUSE OF THEIR BULLYING TACTIC, VERY FEW PEOPLE DARE TO SPEAK UP, AND ALL THOSE WHO DARE TO DO SO ARE BEING INTIMIDATED, HARASSED AND BOYCOTTED BY THESE ZOMBIES

Dr Looi

http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

looihw88l says:

*
*
Quote Davin Tan: “……those radioactive waste, is a common sense it is harmful, even Australia are not willing to accept it.” Unquote.

Comment:

It is illogical to say that Australia refused to accept those so-called “waste” because it is harmful.

THE AUSTRALIANS REFUSED TO ACCEPT IT AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE.

FOR INSTANCE, MALAYSIA HAS A LOT OF OIL PALM FACTORIES AND PLANTATIONS IN INDONESIA.

IF INDONESIA WERE TO INSIST THAT THE WASTES FROM ALL MALAYSIAN OIL PALM FACTORIES AS WELL AS ALL THE WASTES FROM THE PLANTANTIONS MUST BE SENT BACK TO MALAYSIA,

WOULD MALAYSIA BE STUPID ENOUGH TO AGREE TO SUCH A DEMAND ?

MOREOVER, WE HAVE A LOT OF STUDENTS AND TOURISTS IN AUSTRALIA.

IF AUSTRALIA WERE STUPID ENOUGH TO INSIST THAT THE POO AND URINE OF ALL THESE STUDENTS AND TOURISTS (please note: poo and urine are radioactive because of the high potassium content) MUST BE SENT BACK TO MALAYSIA BEFORE WE ARE ALLOWED TO SEND OUR STUDENTS AND TOURISTS THERE,

WOULD THE MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT AGREE ?

SO DO NOT BE SO UNREASONABLE AND EXPECT AUSTRALIA TO TAKE BACK THE “WASTES” FROM PLANTS THAT HAS EXPORTED THEIR JOBS TO OTHER COUNTRIES …. THEY ARE ALREADY FEELING VERY SORE ABOUT THESE “UNPATRIOTIC” COMPANIES.

Dato’ Dr Looi,

looihw88l says:

*
*
BE ON YOUR GUARD AGAINST THE SLIMY, SNEAKY, SLEAZY ANTI-LYNAS RED GUARDS!

SEE HOW THE ANTI-LYNAS RED GUARDS TRY TO MISLEAD THE NAIVE PEOPLE OF MALAYSIA BY SAYING THAT THE LEAD-21O AND POLONIUM-210 IN TOBACCO FROM Thorium-232 causes cancer.

LEAD-210 AND POLONIUM-210 are from the URANIUM-238 DECAY SERIES AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THORIUM-232 OR THORIUM-228 ! ! !

I repeat:

Lead-210, Polonium-210, Thorium-230, Radium-226 and Radon-222 are from the URANIUM-238 DECAY SERIES AND HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THORIUM-232 OR THORIUM-228.

THORIUM-232 PRODUCES ONLY POLONIUM-216 WITH A HALF LIFE OF ONLY 0.14 SECONDS AND POLONIUM 212 WITH A HALF LIFE OF ONLY 30 MICROSECONDS.

The Thorium-232 decay series also include Lead-212 (half-life of 10.6 hrs) and the stable, “non-radioactive” Lead-208 with a half life of 19 million billion years.

SO THE WELL WRITTEN ARTICLE BY THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY HAS ABSOLUTELY NO RELEVANCE AND DOES NOT APPLY TO THORIUM-232 WHICH IS FOUND IN SMALL QUANTITIES IN THE LYNAS ORE AND SO-CALLED “WASTE”.

And yet the Anti-Lynas Red Guards try to make use of an irrelevant scientific article to try to mislead the naive people.

HOW SNEAKY AND SLEAZY CAN THEY BE ?

Quote Chon Yan:
“看看这是美国人经过吸烟,吸收了辐射剂量而患癌的年度报告,而这辐射粒子就是稀土废料里的“钍232”所释放出来的辐射元素。

2012, American Cancer Society, Inc., Surveillance Research

How does radioactive material get into a cigarette?

The tobacco leaves used in making cigarettes contain radioactive material, particularly lead-210 and polonium-210. The radionuclide content of tobacco leaves depends heavily on soil conditions and fertilizer use.

Soils that contain elevated radium lead to high radon gas emanations rising into the growing tobacco crop. Radon rapidly decays into a series of solid, highly radioactive metals (radon decay products). These metals cling to dust particles which in turn are collected by the sticky tobacco leaves.

The sticky compound that seeps from the trichomes is not water soluble, so the particles do not wash off in the rain. There they stay, through curing process, cutting, and manufacture into cigarettes

Lead-210 and Polonium-210 can be absorbed into tobacco leaves directly from the soil. But more importantly, fine, sticky hairs (called trichomes) on both sides of tobacco leaves grab airborne radioactive particles.” Unquote.

Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

*
Quote Kokchong Tan: ” How about the water treatment? what method they going to use to “remove” the polluted water before release into the river?” Unquote.

Comment:

WATER MANAGEMENT AT LYNAS PLANT

1) All process wastewater from the LAMP will undergo physico-chemical and biological treatment onsite prior to discharge.

The concentration of any residual chemical from the process (organic and inorganic) which is still remaining in the treated effluent will be monitored and assessed using the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) parameter.

COD is defined as a measure of the oxygen-consuming capacity of inorganic and organic matter present in wastewater.

The use of COD as an indicator for both organic and inorganic pollutants arising from industrial wastewater is an internationally accepted practice.

(2) Under the Fifth Schedule of the Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009, permissible limits for mercury, lead, arsenic and, other hazardous metals such as cadmium and chromium (trivalent and hexavalent) have been specified and enforced by the DOE.

Water quality data collected from the river (at 7 locations during the high and low tides) in 2008 indicate that mercury, lead and arsenic were not detected in the river water samples despite the fact that the river has been receiving discharges from the chemical and petrochemical industries operating within the Gebeng industrial area since the 1990s.

Sediment samples collected as part of the Lynas EIA baseline study indicate the absence of mercury and arsenic in all samples; and very low concentrations of lead.

The treated effluent from the LAMP will NOT contain cadmium, chromium (trivalent and hexavalent), mercury or arsenic.

Only lead will be present at 0.07 mg/l which is well below the Std. B limit of 0.5 mg/l.

(3) The water quality modeling approach employed in the Lynas EIA is consistent with the requirements of the DOE in Malaysia.

The modeling exercise considered the likely contribution of the Lynas discharge to the Balok River and, predicted the concentrations of key water quality parameters in the river under six scenarios representing both untreated and treated discharge.

(4) The water quality modeling carried out for the plant, which simulates the water quality of the Balok River upon receipt of the Lynas discharge, indicates that the impact of treated effluent alone on the river water quality is very low, and is likely to be diluted by a factor of 150 by the river water.

Although the COD within the river body at the point of the Lynas discharge is close to the Class III limits, the river BOD concentration is approximately only one-third of its standard value.

This suggests that the oxygen consumption due to the biological decay of organic material over the short term (5 days) will be relatively small.

COD is a measure of the total oxygen demand, but it does not give an indication of the rate at which the oxygen is consumed; BOD is comparatively a better indicator of this rate.

The bulk dilution analysis indicated that the treated Lynas effluent would only increase both COD and BOD concentrations in the river by relatively small amounts.

Dato’ Dr Looi

*
Link deleted.

Note: There are threads about Hudud, please post Hudud matter in the right thread. Thanks

looihw88l says:

*
Dear NK,

Quote Amus:” Dr Looi talks too much … often pseudo-rational and long-winded show-off of high school chemistry.. The often abusive put-downs is a reflection more of his insecurity than his ability.

Here is a paper that present a cogent case for shutting down lynas

http://www.ntn.org.au………..” Unquote.

Comment:

The NTN was commissioned to do the report on Lynas probably by some interested parties and as such is found to be full of holes and inaccuracies !

Most of the claims have long been debunked b Nick Tsurikov, the International Safety Expert and also by a very detailed rebuttal by the Lynas Scientists from Australia.

Below are some of the links to download a copy of Nick Tsurikov’s PDF file.

1. http://calytrix.biz/random/lynas-old.htm

2. http://calytrix.biz/random/1.2011-12-01.reply-to-NTN-from-nick-t.pdf

3. http://calytrix.biz/random/3.2011-12-15.reply-2-to-NTN-from-nick.pdf

4. http://calytrix.biz/random/5.2012-04-17.Reply-to-NTN.pdf

If anyone wants a copy of the comprehensive rebuttal by the Lynas’s scientists, please ask Lynas.

With regards to this character “Amus” this is the only thing I have to say:

THERE ARE 3 TYPES OF IDIOTIC PEOPLE WHOSE INTELLIGENCE AND ULTERIOR MOTIVES ARE QUESTIONABLE,

1. THOSE WHO ARE STUPID AND KNOWS THAT THEY ARE STUPID.

I do not mind this group of people. In fact I like them and admire their courage.

2. THOSE WHO ARE STUPID AND DO NOT KNOW THAT THEY ARE STUPID.

I can tolerate this group and I even have a fair amount of sympathy for them.

3. THOSE WHO ARE STUPID BUT THINK THEY ARE SMART !

THIS IS THE ONLY GROUP OF PEOPLE I REALLY DESPISE !

And you know which group this creature, hiding behind the pseudonym “Amus” belongs to !

Warmest regards,

Dr Looi

nkkhoo says:

The amus is not worth for you to entertain anymore.

I will put him/her in the spam kill list for two reasons. Personal attack and using anonymous to post.

looihw88l says:

Dear NK,

Thanks and Warmest Regards,

Dr Looi

稀稀 says:

‘感谢’政府在凌晨2点钟偷偷摸摸地派遣警方护送100辆货柜车稀土去Lynas厂。
大选时我们会非常‘感恩’您的!Janji ditepati…Lynas didahulukan!

nkkhoo says:

If Lynas transported rare earth during the day time, you Green Piss will condemn the government put many innocent people in the risk of radioactive contamination.

Aren’t you people always contradicting yourself in every argument?

Amus says:

Dr. Looi talks too much and explain too little. The often pseudo-rational and long-winded show-off of high-school chemistry doesn’t make for any meaningful debate or discussion. The often abusive put-downs is a reflection more of his insecurity than his ability.

Here is a paper that present a cogent case for shutting down lynas.

http://www.ntn.org.au/wp/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Lynas-EIA-Assessment-Report-NTN-April-13-final.pdf

nkkhoo says:

Everyone should learn the “lembu” way of irrational action like Green Piss.

Please tell me how many Australians vote Green party, your good buddy in Australia? Only 13% total vote in Australia.

Why only 13% in a nation with matured green movement? Because green people have NEVER do what they preach.

> 90% Malaysia green activists are pro-PR, not the neutral one with rational thinking on environment protection.

If you are truly concerned on environment, first thing is to boycott electricity and plastic products. For Lynas case, you should boycott products like handphone, Lithium battery, etc. for using rare earth.

nkkhoo says:

As a quality auditor certified by American Quality Society, I think I can say a few things about the report.

1. The author is not a radioactive expect, his expertise is in ESD (electrostatic discharge).

2. Did the consultant allow to conduct side audit? Or the findings are based on imagination?

3. No false data on radioactive materials as given by Malaysia green piss NGOs.

At least the report never say WLP is 76 times more radioactive than thorium.

At least the report never say thorium with billion years half-life span is more harmful than uranium.

4. For recommendation 1: Please show us the proof that Australian government had rejected Lynas’s permit based on radiation risk, otherwise it’s just another story telling and lie.

Only recommendation 3 is a professional input, others are junks from a consultant perspective.

5. The consultant’s main concern is chemical contamination from the chemical materials used in the plant.

6. The author agreed that China government allowed rare earth mining and processing pollution to happen for the priority given on economy.

7. Thorium is insoluble in the water is a common knowledge except Green Piss refuses to admit the fact.

Do you drink insoluble stone when you drink pipe water?

I can list down 100 points to rebut the report if I get paid by Lynas. I stop here for not giving free service to Lynas.

looihw88l says:

*
*
Quote Fuad dated 3.10.12: “Thorium from Lynas is TENORM and a radioactive waste which has serious health risks. Lynas and AELB have made the TENORM sound like low level waste by merely diluting the waste until it conforms with IAEA regulations. Diluting does not make the radiation ‘go away’.” Unquote.

Answer:

The use of the term “TENORM” has gone out of fashion for quite a number of years but it looks like the Anti-Lynas folks have reintroduced it just recently.

TENORM has been defined as ” Technically ENHANCED Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material.”

Now:
ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT = 1,600 ppm of Thorium

TWO MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS “WASTE” = 12 ppm of Thorium

3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium

AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

Since the concentration of Thorium-232 is not ENHANCED or concentrated and the concentration of the ‘waste” is less than the original ore, IT IS RATHER SILLY TO CALL THE LYNAS “WASTE” A TENORM.

DILUTING A SUBSTANCE WILL NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY, BUT YOU MUST REMEMBER THAT IT IS AN INTERNATIONALLY LEGITIMATE AND ACCEPTED WAY FOR REDUCING ANY RADIONUCLIDE’S IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.

For instance, STRYCHNINE IS AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS POISON AND YET WHEN PROPERLY DILUTED IT HAS BEEN USED FOR DECADES AS A TONIC !

CHORINE WHICH IS ALSO AN EXTREMELY DANGEROUS POISON, WHEN WELL DILUTED IN WATER IS PERFECTLY SAFE AND IS DRUNK BY ALL THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLK IN THE FORM OF TAP WATER!

Perhaps this clarification by Nick Tsurikov will help.

QUOTE: “The funny bit about NORM/TENORM – as I’ve said many times before: the term ‘TENORM’ is meaningless and it’s use is discouraged internationally.

The example that I gave before, I think:

(a) I buy a truckload of sand mixed with gravel, but need to separate the two.

(b) Sand has 3 parts per million thorium, gravel – 30 parts per million; overall average = 10 ppm

(c) So I grab a shovel and throw the stuff through the metal mesh – sand goes through, gravel stays on my side.

So…

BY THE DEFINITION OF TENORM – I am ‘technical enhancing NORM’ and therefore, I am ‘generating’ horribly deadly TENORM – as the concentration of radioactivity in the final product (gravel) is THREE TIMES HIGHER than the background.

So – I need to be strictly controlled and cannot even buy the sand/gravel mix, until I’ll get licensed by the AELB and a dozen of other departments…

The point that I am trying to make is: it is completely irrelevant what we call the substance, we need to look what level of hazard is associated with it and how this level of ‘whatever it may be’ compares with national and international standards.

Basically, the definition of NORM, as I have in my course slides is mostly from the IAEA Safety Glossary:

Radioactive material containing no significant amounts of radionuclides other than naturally occurring radionuclides and designated in national law or by a regulatory body as being subject to regulatory control because of its radioactivity.

So it is actually up to the national regulators to decide what to regulate – IAEA suggests 1 Bq/gram of thorium and/or uranium, some countries have 0.5 Bq/g, others – for different materials – up to 10 Bq/g.

A point on the ‘waste’. If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports

– you will clearly see that two most ‘voluminous’ residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium

– and the average Malaysian soil – 20 parts per million of thorium.

That is the point.

Of course, the third ‘residue stream’ will have about 1500 ppm of thorium and will need to be managed appropriately.
UNQUOTE.

Dato’ Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

*
HAVE A LOOK AT THIS ARTICLE BY BERNAMA IN THE SUN

LYNAS PLANT OF INT’L STANDARD, OPERATIONS TO BENEFIT ECONOMY

KUANTAN (Nov 4, 2012): Workers of the Lynas Advanced Materials Plant (LAMP) here are steadfast that the first rare earth plant in the country is compliant with international safety standards and that its operations will benefit the economy and local population.

According to Lynas Malaysia Sdn Bhd engineer Chin Yin Yee, her health will not be at risk, noting that the plant was built according to international safety standards and given the green light by the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

I don’t have any doubts on the safety of the plant. It is very frustrating when we are trying to explain to people that the plant is fine but people do not want to listen. They prefer to go with their misconception,” she said.

Chin said despite the negative publicity and concerns raised with regards to the safety of the plant, her family members had given her full support from the time she decided to join LAMP four years ago.

She noted that the rare earth industry was expanding worldwide as many components such as hybrid cars, batteries, bulbs and magnets needed the material in their manufacturing processes.

Downstream industries will boom with the operations of the Lynas plant. It will be a loss to the country without it. A lot of people will also lose their jobs. It is going to be very sad,” Chin added.

The LAMP operation is expected to bring substantial economic benefits as it will create 400 skilled jobs plus a multiplier effect of five times in secondary jobs through the economic ecosystem. It will also have 200 permanent contract workers and 1,000 indirect workers providing services to its facility.

Chin said the chain reaction to LAMP’s operations would be an increase in job opportunities via supporting industries, noting that more food outlets, contractors and businesses located near the Gebeng industrial area would also benefit.

The senior manager of engineering services at LAMPS, Abdul Rahman Mohamad Ali, said he was happy to be employed by the company and it came as a shock to him that the matter of safety was politicised to an extent that it could jeopardise their livelihoods.

The fear of Lynas came about because it was not based on facts. The fact is Lynas is safe,” he said.

My family is supportive of my decision to work at Lynas. There is a lot of fear out there but I am convinced we know what we are doing here and international safety measures are in place.

I really hope Lynas can start operations so that my family can have peace of mind and my three children can continue their studies here. If Lynas cannot begin operations, many people will be out of jobs and investors will be afraid to come to Malaysia. Our industries will not grow,” he added.

Echoing him, Abdul Rahman’s wife, Rozita Md Yassin, said she was initially worried about her husband’s safety but having gained a clearer understanding about the rare earth industry, she understood that all the fears were unfounded.

I hope all those who created the rumours that the plant is unsafe, will stop spreading untruths. They affect the lives of many people,” she said.
Meanwhile, Azlin Zawawi, a technician, said the danger of radiation has been blown out of proportion.

Just like any other factory, there are safety measures in place. Safety is of the utmost priority. I hope all those parties out to smear Lynas will stop. As a wage earner who has to support a wife and child, why would I want to endanger myself if the plant was hazardous?” he asked.

Lynas is the first rare earth plant in Malaysia. It is bringing in new technology and should be given a chance before condemning it. If it succeeds, there will be other industries linked to rare earth which will grow. Perhaps Malaysia can be among the largest producers of rare earth,” Azlin said.
Superintendent Zaini Sabidin said what the Kuantan community fears is far from reality.

I have been to rare earth plants in China and Lynas is modern and safer with better safety and engineering policies. The issue of safety has been played up in the interests of specific parties which will jeopardise the rice bowls of at least 1,000 families.

Lynas has been transparent about its safety. It has also installed a 24-hour monitoring service open to public viewing to check on any potential pollutants,” he said.

Datuk Dr Looi Hoong Wah, a resident of Kuantan and a medical specialist who took up an interest in nuclear medicine and particle physics some 40 years ago when he was a medical student in Manchester, said what was dangerous is the political play by some people on Lynas.

Stressing that LAMPS radioactive rays are close to zero, he added: “They have to wake up and realise that this plant is of great benefit to the whole country.

People’s jobs are at stake. Don’t destroy their jobs. You may have a nice, comfortable job at home, don’t go around destroying other people’s jobs. That’s not a way to win an election.

All these are good quality jobs, for people especially from the kampung area. They need the jobs to feed their children. It is very unfair to break their rice bowls.

Some people are telling us to get rid of Lynas. Who is going to feed the children of these 1,750 people? They have families, they need work. In
Malaysia we don’t have any special social security. Good jobs are very difficult to come by,” said Dr Looi.

Explaining about radiation, he said there was not risk of radiation exposure. In a worse case scenario, he said “the radiation you get from a wooden house you live in is almost 100 times more radioactive than living next to Lynas.”

Living in a brick house exposes you to 200 times more radioactivity than living next to Lynas in a tent,” Dr Looi said of the safety features of the plant and of the radioactive elements of wood and bricks. – Bernama

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/532299

looihw88l says:

*
Quote Kokchong Tan: ” how about so2 and so3? about radiation doses receive by workers, the workers might receive 2msv per year, and very small amount will have about 10msv per year. so, please tell us the safe level is at how many msv per year? 3? or 4? is it consider safe for this range 2~10msv/yr?” Unquote.

Answer:

The SO2, SO3 and H2SO4 as well as all other acidic gases and chemicals will be easily neutralised by substances like limestone (CaCO3) or calcium oxides in the scrubber and converted to CaSO4 or gypsum which can fetch a neat profit in the international market.

What is the “safe” level of radiation?

Public dose limits for exposure from uranium mining or nuclear plants are usually set at 1 mSv per year above background.

According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and its international counterpart, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Both of these organizations offer recommendations for the maximum permissible dose (MPD) of radiation.

General Public annual MPD by both NCRP and ICRP is 1 mSv.

For Radiation Workers, the annual MPD is 50 mSv (NCRP) and 20 mSv (ICRP), with a cumulative MPD of 10 mSv x Age.

MPD during pregnancy is 5 mSv (NCRP) and 2 mSv (ICRP).

HOWEVER, EXPERTS INCLUDING Professor WADE ALLISON OF OXFORD UNIVERSITY ARGUE THAT THE DOSE LIMIT CAN SAFELY BE RAISED TO 100 mSv, based on current health statistics.

Compare this with the dose of 0.002 millisieverts/year of exposure for people living within 1 km of the Lynas plant in the worst case scenario (estimated by Lynas).

This level of 0.002 mSv/yr is actually grossly overestimated because the low energy gamma rays from the Thorium-232 decay chain is able to travel less than 300 metres in air.

Note, the average energy of most abundant emission is only 0.059 MeV, though the gamma ray from Thallium-208 decay to stable Lead-208 has a higher energy of 2.62 MeV.

The radon-220 has a very short half life of only 55 seconds and as such cannot travel far and do not accumulate in confined spaces like the radon-222 from the Uranium decay series.

So the actual radiation dose at a distance greater than 300 metres from the plant is approaching 0 mSv/year !

Comparative Dosages in Biological Effect in mSv.

Dose from natural radiation in the human body: 0.40 mSv per year

Sleeping next to someone for 8 hours daily = 0.02 mSv/yr (10x Lynas worst case)

Sleeping in wooden house = 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Smoking a pack of cigarettes daily 0.20 mSv/yr (100x Lynas worst case)

Slag brick and granite house = up to 2.0 mSv/yr (1,000x Lynas worst case)

Chest X-ray = 0.10 mSv

Medical or dental X-ray 0.39 mSv

CT Scan (Chest) = 10 mSv

CT Fluoroscopy of abdomen and pelvis 6 to 90 mSv (median=31 mSv)

Average individual background radiation dose: 2 mSv per year (1.5 mSv per

year for Australians and 3.0 mSv per year for Americans)

Dose from atmospheric sources (mostly radon): 2 mSv per year

Total average radiation dose for Americans: 6.2 mSv per year

Current average dose limit for nuclear workers: 20 mSv per year

Dose from background radiation in parts of Iran, India and Europe: 50 mSv per year

(Source: UNSCEAR and EPA and IAEA)

All the potassium that we eat everyday in our food contains potassium-40 and the normal dietary potassium would give a total of about 80 Bq per day.
Compare this with the Lynas waste which produces only 6 Bq/gm

Even your wife or husband is radioactive, with a radioactivity of 4,000 Bq from Potassium-40 and another 3,000 Bq from Carbon-14 giving a total of about 7,000 Bq!

Sleeping next to someone (i.e. your wife or husband) for 8 hours a day will lead to an exposure of 0.02 mSv/year (Source: UNSCEAR and EPA).

Since all living cells contain potassium, all types of meat, flesh, fruits, nuts and vegetables are radioactive because of the potassium-40 content.

The so-called sodium free salt recommended by health experts to combat high blood pressure is nothing more than just highly radioactive potassium salt! Even a lot of doctors, specialists and professors do not know this!

The message here is that more radioactive substances are freely sold in the shops and used as a fertilizer or eaten by us than you would otherwise thought.

Dr. Gary H. Kramer, who is the Head of the National Internal Radiation Assessment Section at Health Canada:

“Potassium chloride can be found in large quantities in stores selling materials for water treatment. The potassium content is about 500 g kg-
Typically, the material is sold in 20 kg bags so each bag contains ~600 kBq of 40K giving a concentration of 30 Bq g-1. This is well above the exclusion level yet the material is handled as non-radioactive. The external dose rate in close proximity to a typical display in these types of shops would be about 150 microSv hr-1.
A worker would only need to be near the pile for about 7 hours to exceed the public dose limit of 1 mSv.”

Quote: Nick Tsurikov, radiation safety expert:

” In most countries, the current maximum permissible dose to radiation workers is 20 mSv per year averaged over five years, with a maximum of 50 mSv in any one year.

This is over and above background exposure, and excludes medical exposure. The value originates from the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), and is coupled with the requirement to keep exposure as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) — taking into account social and economic factors.” Unquote.

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RPOGzrqu1Vg

looihw88l says:

*
*
Have a look at this article in the Sun Newspaper

BEST TO USE COMMON SENSE

Posted on 20 November 2012 – 03:11am

Azman Ujang

THE picture on the front page of Utusan Malaysia on Nov 9 says it all. It shows hundreds of workers from the Lynas Advanced Material Plant in Kuantan kneeling and giving thanks because the plant can now begin its long-delayed operations.

They shed tears of joy outside the High Court building after Justice Datuk Mariana Yahya rejected an application filed by three Kuantan residents for an interim injunction on the plant’s temporary operating licence (TOL).

Clad in their yellow factory uniforms, the workers displayed banners like “Don’t disturb our rice pot”, “Who will feed our children?”, “Stop slandering Lynas”, “I really love Lynas”, and “Kuantan Lynas will be the national green technology centre”.

The words on the banners are loaded with strong messages that tell people campaigning against Lynas to stop as claims that the rare earth plant will cause health and safety risks have been declared baseless.

Lynas’s safety was verified by the Atomic Energy Licensing Board that granted the TOL and even by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) which sent an inspection team to the plant as well as by other independent bodies. The IAEA is the highest authority for atomic energy.

And the Academy of Sciences Malaysia (ASM), an independent science think-tank whose 226 fellows are accomplished scientists, in welcoming the High Court verdict, said that “rare earths have been vindicated”.

ASM Fellow Ahmad Ibrahim, in his column in the New Straits Times, said the interesting part about the anti-Lynas campaign is that most of those against the project are not even residents of Gebeng near Kuantan where the plant is located.

“Their baseless campaign on the plant’s health and safety risks is now exposed,” he declared, adding that interviews of residents in the neighbourhood have further confirmed public acceptance of the project.

He rubbished the anti-Lynas campaign by saying that from the technology scanning that ASM regularly undertakes, rare earths have emerged as offering tremendous potential in the new expanding green economy.

Scientists have uncovered the unique role of rare earths in many applications to improve the efficient use of energy, which is a crucial agenda in the global effort to fight climate change. In China, which accounts of some 97% of the world’s rare earth production, the strategic nature of rare earths had long been recognised by their leaders which explains why the country has invested so much into rare earths.

Ahmad said the demand for rare earths is projected to explode in the coming years in line with the growing demand for more efficient communication systems, while mobility and miniaturisation, which feature prominently in telecommunication equipment, also rely on rare earths.

From Day One, prominent Kuantan physician Datuk Dr Looi Hoong Wah, who has some 40 years of expertise in nuclear medicine and particle physics, has been saying that there would be “absolutely no radiation waste or any toxic waste whatsoever from the Lynas plant”.

With Lynas now given the go ahead by the court to start production, we are going to see the multiple economic spin-offs, including attracting more investments from buyers of rare earth and joint-venture partners including Siemens from Germany which has pledged more than RM1.5 billion to operate a plant that will hire 1,200 workers.

Meanwhile, two acid companies investing RM300 million and employing 100 staff began operations recently to supply acid to Lynas.

Dr Looi is so incensed with the anti-Lynas campaign that he asked: “Who is going to feed the children of these 1,750 Lynas workers? They have families. In Malaysia, we don’t have any special social security and good jobs are hard to come by.”

On the larger picture, Lynas, Australia’s biggest investment in Malaysia, can produce up to RM8 billion worth of exports annually, adding much needed value to the gross national product (GNP).

What it means is that when GNP goes up by RM8 billion, the government can print RM8 billion worth of money to further stimulate the economy.

So in the face of all this, why are some people, including opposition politicians, still wasting so much time and resources, including the court’s precious time, pursuing their anti-Lynas campaign when their claims have been proven to have no scientific, economic and environmental basis?

To people like Dr Looi, the campaign was purely political especially with the general election looming.

He might have some basis for saying so because on the political front, the most outspoken Lynas critic is first-term Kuantan MP Fuziah Salleh from Parti Keadilan Rakyat. The opposition MP is of course eyeing to be re-elected.

Just consider this – why would Australian investors spend as much as RM2.5 billion to set up the plant if it is hazardous to health as claimed by the “Save Malaysia Stop Lynas” activists?

If these activists use their common sense, they should be able to understand that it doesn’t make sense for investors to build a plant only to see their workers falling sick one by one until the factory has to close.

These activists are doing a great disservice to the people of Kuantan, the country at large and of course to Lynas because for every day of delay in production, the company makes huge losses.

We can draw some parallel to this campaign with many Malaysians who over the years have lost millions, squandering their life savings and pawning their future after falling victim to sweet-talking fraudsters.

We are all too familiar with such stories published by newspapers after the victims have met people like the indefatigable Datuk Seri Michael Chong, who heads the MCA Public Service and Complaints Department.

When they get to people like Chong, they would normally have already lost virtually every thing.

And of late, despite the best efforts of the media to educate the people, more and more are falling into the same traps, no thanks to the abuse of social networking media. When will they ever learn?

While Lynas deals with rare earths, it’s most appropriate for Malaysians to stock up their common sense, which is still a rare commodity among so many.

Azman Ujang is a former editor-in-chief of Bernama.

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/544826

nkkhoo says:

The blind is leading blind is also true for anti-RAPID green piss people.

How many of them are Johoreans?

looihw88l says:

*
*
:-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-):-)

WRONG TRACK STARTED HIS SILLY WALK ON 13th NOV. WITH THE HOPE THAT MONTY PYTHON FLYING CIRCUS WOULD EMPLOY HIM AS THE CONSULTANT TO THE MINISTRY OF SILLY WALKS !

FAT HOPE ! HIS WALK IS FAR TOO SILLY AND EVEN JOHN CLEESE MAY FEEL EMBARRASSED ! ):-):-):-):-):-):-)

nkkhoo says:

That is his democratic right as long as he is not obstructing traffic like UMNO gangsters on the Penang Bridge.

looihw88l says:

*
Quote GFrenz: “…Thorium-232 produces Radon-220 and Polonium-210….and blah, blah…dying from cancer” Unquote.

Answer:

Half Life of Radon-220 = 55 seconds.

Half Life of Polonium-210 = 0.14 seconds

Both will ultimately become the non-radioactive Lead-208 and since Lead is a very heavy element, if it comes from a lucky aerial Radon-220, will fall out of the sky like a piece of lead and will not go any further.

Only about 0.71 cubic meter/hr of Radon-220 gas will be produced by a year’s pile of Lynas “waste”.

And out of this 0.71 cubic meter/hr of Radon-220 gas only a tiny fraction of Radon-220 (a.k.a. Thoron) within a few centimetres of the surface of a huge pile of waste will be able to live long enough to escape from the pile and see the light of day!

OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LYNAS SETUP THERE IS NOT ENOUGH RADON-220 GAS TO TICKLE EVEN THE BACKSIDE OF A NEWBORN MICRO CATERPILLAR !

Although the level in the worst case scenario at Lynas is given as 0.002 mSv/yr mainly from Radon-220, the actual amount of radiation from alpha, beta and gamma rays from Th-232 and it’s daughter radionuclides (including Radon-220) is actually so small that no equipment available anywhere in the world is sensitive enough to detect it, once outside Lynas boundaries.

A lot of people have mistaken Radon-220 from Thorium-232 decay series with the more notorious Radon-222 which has a much longer half life of 3.8 days. Radon-222 comes from Uranium-238 decay series.

Because of its much longer half life, Radon-222 can and do accumulate in the cellars and poorly ventilated areas of domestic dwellings. Radon-222 is the gas that has been linked to lung cancers in especially non-smokers.

So please do not blame poor Thorium-232. It does not produce any Radon-222 and as such is not guilty of radon induced lung cancers.

The radiation of 6 Bq/gm from the weakly radioactive Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low that even IAEA do not consider it significant and as such can be transported without any special permission.

AS FOR POLONIUM-210 IT’S HALF LIFE IS ONLY 0.14 SECONDS, VAST MAJORITY OF THE POLONIUM WILL STAY IN THE PILE AND NEVER GET THE CHANCE TO MOVE MORE THAN JUST A FEW FEET FROM THE PILE OF LYNAS “WASTE”.

RISK OF DYING

Dying from heart disease — 1 in 6 (lifetime risk)
Dying in an auto accident — 1 in 75 (lifetime risk)
Committing suicide — 1 in 71 (lifetime risk)
Being Murdered — 1 in 140 (lifetime)
DYING FROM CANCER – 1 in 5 (lifetime risk)
Being struck by lightning — 1 in 10,456 (lifetime)
Seriously injuring yourself while shaving — 1 in 5,844 (annual risk)
Going to prison this year — 1 in 139
Dying from falling out of your bed or chair — 1 in 513,142
Being stuck and killed by a falling aircraft — 1 in 25 million
Getting food poisoning — 1 in 8 (annual risk)
Freezing to death (in non-tropical countries) — 1 in 780,938 (annual risk)

Cancer risk from 1mSv/y = 1 in 20,000

So the risk from 0.002 mSv/y from Thoron = 1 in 10,000,000

SO THE RISK OF DYING FROM RADIATION FROM THE WORST CASE

SCENARIO IS LIKE DYING FROM:

BEING KILLED BY LIGHTNING 1,000 TIMES IN A LIFETIME,

BEING KILLED IN A MOTOR ACCIDENT 133,333 TIMES IN A LIFETIME

AND DYING FROM CANCER 5,000,000 TIMES IN A LIFETIME BEFORE YOU CAN HAVE THE CHANCE OF DYING FROM THE RADON-220 FROM LYNAS !

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

*
Quote: “Sandrinah Soo –

SMSL is caught telling lies again…. (see evidence below)….”

http://sphotos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/430735_221206784679946_1924075553_n.jpg

looihw88l says:

Sorry TYP0:

Sentence should read as “AND DYING FROM CANCER 2,000,000 TIMES IN A LIFETIME BEFORE YOU CAN HAVE THE CHANCE OF DYING FROM THE RADON-220 FROM LYNAS !”

GFrenz says:

常言道,不怕一万,只怕万一!!!如果这个万一代表了一万次里就有一次不幸的话,那么稀土厂的辐射效应就会是每一万人就有一人会是不幸的受害者!!!那么大马有两千八百万人口不就是说每天或每月或每年会有两千八百个人会患癌症或是怪胎的受害者了吗???

所谓“虎毒不食子”一个爱民的政府是不会用,石化,山埃和稀土厂来毒害子民的!!!马华这个“丧心病狂”的政党!!!不被天谴灭亡!!!老天都没眼!!!

科学家们证实了长期吸入氡气的人,(“氡220”和“钋210”就是稀土中的“钍232”所释放出来的辐射粒子)那么每年每250人中就有一人患癌症!!!如果根据科学家所认为的在辐射污染的环境下生活,在一年内的每250人会有一人患癌症!!!如果稀⋯⋯土厂的废气扩散到一百万人住的范围,那么每年就会有4,000人因为吸入(气体辐射物)而患癌症!!!在乘以12年稀土厂的免税年里就有48,000人因为稀土厂而患癌症!!!这还不包括经过水和食物感染的人数!!!至于怪胎和弱智儿童呢???

也许有人会想只要不去工厂附近就不怕了!!!真的是那么简单吗???当稀土厂员工上班时他们会穿防护衣和戴面罩!!!那下班后呢???防护衣和面罩要如何处理???大家要搞清楚辐射不是病毒要如何消灭辐射???用一天就丢掉???丢去那???用水清洗???水流去那???用火烧掉???辐射不怕火!!!

nkkhoo says:

A typical lie from Green Piss. Which scientist? His name? Where is technical paper to support this bullshit?

Obviously, Dr Looi’s English explanation never reach Chinese educated uncles and aunties.

looihw88l says:

*
Quote Amus: “The amount of ore processed there is very little and the waste are transferred to specialized containment area……at ANDRA’s La Manche centre..” Unquote.

ANSWER:

The La Rochelle plant uses Monazite-(Ce)…(Ce, La, Nd, Th, Y)PO4 and this is by far the most common and most radioactive of the 3 types of monazite ore.

The other 2 types which are Monazite-(La) and Monazite-(Nd).

The monazite from Malaysian Tin tailings has 6 to 7% Thorium-232 and has an activity of 284 Bq/g.

WASTES
Until the end of 1974, THE PLANT RELEASED ALL RADIOACTIVE LIQUIDS AND SOLIDS DIRECTLY INTO THE SEA (WHERE LOCALS AS WELL AS TOURISTS ARE SWIMMING)!

Since, and until the end of 1990, it sent at least a part of the solid residues to the CSM. These wastes are composed, among other substances, of thorium 232, uranium 238, and their descendants (including radium 226 and 228).

SOLID WASTES
–A solid residue resulting from the processing prior to July 1994 and described by Andra as “Résidu solide banalisé” (RSB), solid residue made commonplace.

As of June 1999, 8025 tons (50% moisture) with an activity of 217 GBq were on the PLANT site. The thorium 232 in the DRY PRODUCT REPRESENTED 48 Bq/g AND THE URANIUM 238, 6 Bq/g MAKING A TOTAL OF 54 Bq/g.

Rhône-Poulenc placed 61,000 t of what Andra describes as RSB into a waste site located near its factory and belonging to the city of La Rochelle (Port de Pallice).

The residues contain in particular thorium 232 (48 Bq/g dry product) and uranium 238 (6 Bq/g dry product), for a total of 1.65 TBq [Andra 00].
–Radioactive minerals that have not been attacked. According to Andra, they have been used to fill in a part of the plant site;

–Substances in suspension, the only residue produced by the minerals used today. 10,048 t (50% moisture) containing thorium 232 (2.6 Bq/g ) and uranium 238 (4.7Bq/g) for a total of 37 GBq are stored at the plant;

–Tailings, containing thorium 232, uranium 238, and their descendents including radium.
They are more radioactive than the RSB (see above). They are located at Cadarache and presumably in the bay of La Rochelle. They were stored for a time at the CSM.

–Thorium nitrate and crude thorium hydroxide.
The 2000 inventory of Andra states in a footnote that it does not take into consideration some 11,000 t of thorium nitrate (mass activity 1650 Bq/g) and about 20,000 t of crude thorium hydroxide (mass activity 720 Bq/g), the “historic” residue of the processing prior to mid-1994, because these substances are “commercialized at present “by Rhodia Terres Rares.

The thorium nitrate is used in the manufacture of lamp sleeves; the hydroxide “is a potential raw material.”
Apparently these substances are stored at the site [Andra 99]. The 1997 inventory of Andra listed the hydroxide as a waste.

The waste thorium nitrate (mass activity 1650 Bq/g) has an activity which is 27,500% higher than the waste from Lynas which is only 6 Bq/g! Apparently these substances are stored at the site [Andra 99].

8,025 TONS OF WASTE WITH AN ACTIVITY OF 217 GBq were still stored in the compounds of the plant.

THIS “LOW RADIOACTICITY WASTE” has 48 Bq/g from Thorium 232 and 6 Bq/g from Uranium-238 giving a total of 54 Bq/g.

You have to realise that 54 Bq/g is 900% higher than that of the Lynas waste of 6 Bq/g.

And these wastes are still being stored in the compound of the plant.

IF THE FRENCH ARE NOT WORRIED ABOUT 54 Bq/g OF RADIOACTIVITY, WHY ARE SOME MALAYSIANS SO FRIGHTENED OF ONLY 6 Bq/g?

As for the collaboration between La Rochelle and Lynas, the information was given to me by a staff member of Lynas.

If you want to know more, you can ask Lynas.

Dato’ Dr Looi

Amus says:

[QUOTE]THE LYNAS REE PLANT WAS ACTUALLY DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED WITH COLLABORATION WITH SCIENTISTS FROM THE LA ROCHELLE REE PLANT IN FRANCE.
THIS REE PLANT IN FRANCE HAS OPERATED FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS OR SO WITHOUT ANY RADIATION OR TOXIC WASTE PROBLEM AND WITHOUT ANY “ANTI-LYNAS NINCOMPOOP” PROBLEM.
Cheers,
Dr Looi
[/QUOTE]

Do you have any link to the fact that rhodia cooperated with lynas ? I tried searching but I could not find any. What I found was that the amount of ore processed there is very little and the waste are transferred to speciallised containment area (initially stored at ANDRA’s La Manche center until 1991, then in the French atomic energy commission’s Cadarache facility )

The total slightly radioactive waste produced till 1997 was 8000 mt and until 2007 total uranium extracted (they don’t call it waste) was 2000 mt and 2.6 mt of lead. Compare this amount with what lynas will be producing. And compare the disposal plan imposed by the authorities of france guess who is the nincompop here ?

Sharon says:

“百里苦行反公害” is getting lots of public support.

nkkhoo says:

50 people ++ participated in the walking is called a lot of support?

Green Piss will say all Malaysians support them if they manage to get 500 people. 🙂

GFrenz says:

這個運動,在實際的運作來說,其實不是「直接」給國會看的,因為國會不會被「直接」感動的。這個運動的目標,是給千萬個會參與投票給國會的選民看的。300公里苦行,要感動的,要喚醒的,不是國會議員,而是賦權予國會議員的你。

nkkhoo says:

It’s just make informed voters stay sway from PR and green piss.

looihw88l says:

*
SINCE ANTI-LYNAS, SPURIOUS GREEN ENVIRONMENTALISTS, POPULISM AND POLITICS ARE TIGHTLY INTERTWINED IN MALAYSIA, HAVE A LOOK AT THIS ARTICLE IN THE NEW STRAITS TIMES PRESS, dated 15.11.12

KOTA BARU:

PAS’ DEWAN ULAMA YESTERDAY MADE A STAND THAT HUDUD AND SYARIAH ELEMENTS WOULD BE INTRODUCED IF THE OPPOSITION PACT HOLDS MAJORITY SEATS IN PARLIAMENT IN THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION.

Its chief, Datuk Harun Taib, claimed that Pas’ partners in Pakatan Rakyat had agreed in general that syariah elements would be implemented when the pact led the country.

“In Pakatan, we have generally agreed to implement not only hudud but also other syariah elements once we succeed in earning the people’s confidence to lead the country.

“But the syariah system will be tailored along the principles of democracy. If we hold the parliamentary majority, we will get support from Parliament for the relevant laws to be passed,” he said after opening the 51st Dewan Ulama Muktamar at a resort here.

NATURALLY, HARUN SAID, THE LEGISLATION WOULD BECOME FEDERAL LAW WHICH THE PEOPLE MUST FOLLOW.

“Many people often oppose traffic rules but the government proceeds with their enforcement.”

However, Harun’s claim that other Pakatan parties had agreed to the plan was immediately lambasted by Karpal Singh.

The DAP chairman, who was taken by surprise by Harun’s statement, told the New Straits Times that at no point in time had any agreement been made by DAP on the hudud issue.

“This is far from the truth if he’s saying that DAP leaders agreed through dialogue on the application of hudud in the country.”

Karpal said the party’s stand against hudud remained and he did not see the need to repeat the reasons every time.

He also said that DAP’s opposition to hudud was fundamental to the party’s existence.

“Hudud cannot be a part of the system of this country.”
Harun, however, claimed that other DAP leaders had no problems with Pas’ objective to introduce hudud as they had regularly held dialogues to iron out differences.

He said even before Pakatan was formed, Pas had clarified its views on hudud with DAP on many occasions when both parties sat together to exchange their views.

“As for Karpal, he only sounds to be disagreeable (on the hudud issue), but that does not mean he disagrees.”

In his opening remarks at the muktamar, HARUN SAID THE IMPLEMENTATION OF HUDUD WOULD CREATE MORE EMPLOYMENT AS THERE WAS A NEED TO RECRUIT EXECUTIONERS OF PUNISHMENTS..

Harun’s policy speech was later read out by dewan ulama vice-chairman Datuk Dr Mahfodz Mohamed as the former was unwell.

Additional reporting by Carisma Kapoor

http://aliran.com/archives/monthly/2002/6e.html

looihw88l says:

*
THE MOTHER OF ALL LIES AND GRANDMOTHER OF ALL EXAGGERATION !!!
*
QUOTE: “Ng Ngah Lynn: ” It will produce 99,000 normal m cube of gas per hour, released in to the air
(The gas is named Radon. Highly toxic and dangerous!) Unquote.

Since:

1. Lynas is expected to produce about 130 tonnes of Th-232 per year

2. Specific activity of Th-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

3. Atomic weight of Radon-220 = 220

4. Avogadro number = 6.023×10 to the power of 23

5. The gm molecular weight of a gas occupies 22.4 litres at STP

It can easily be calculated that if we start with a pile of 130 tons of

Thorium-232, at equilibrium the volume of Radon-220 produced per hour is

only = about 710 litres or 0.710 CUBIC METRES

PER HOUR AND NOT 99,000 CUBIC METRES PER HOUR !

THIS ANTI-LYNAS ZEALOT HAS OVERESTIMATED THE VOLUME OF RADON-220 GAS BY ALMOST 14,000,000 % !

THIS IS TRUELY THE MOTHER OF ALL LIES AND GRANDMOTHER OF ALL EXAGGERATION !!!

AND MOREOVER, THE HALF LIFE OF RADON-220 IS ONLY 55 SECONDS.

As such only a tiny amount of Radon-220 (a.k.a. Thoron) within a few centimetres of the surface of a huge pile of waste will be able to live long enough to escape from the pile and see the light of day!

OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF THE LYNAS SETUP THERE IS NOT ENOUGH RADON-220 GAS TO TICKLE EVEN THE BACKSIDE OF A NEWBORN CATERPILLAR !

A lot of people have mistaken Radon-220 from Thorium-232 decay series with the more notorious Radon-222 which has a much longer half life of 3.8 days. Radon-222 comes from Uranium-238 decay series.

Because of its much longer half life, Radon-222 can and do accumulate in the cellars and poorly ventilated areas of domestic dwellings. Radon-222 is the gas that has been linked to lung cancers in especially non-smokers.

So please do not blame poor Thorium-232. It does not produce any Radon-222 and as such is not guilty of radon induced lung cancers.

The radiation of 6 Bq/gm from the weakly radioactive Thorium-232 in the Lynas waste is so low that even IAEA do not consider it significant and as such can be transported without any special permission.

Dato’ Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

*
To everybody, INSTEAD OF QUARELLING ABOUT EVERYTHING,

HAVE A LOOK AT THIS VIDEO ON THE PROBLEM

WITH THE NUMBER 0 !

Problems with 0.

http://richerramblings.wordpress.com/2012/10/26/problems-with-zero-numberphile/

Dr Looi

nkkhoo says:

A friend of mine did in-depth study on the meaning of zero. I saw he borrowed at least 5 technical books on zero subject from NUS library. 🙂

The guy is another genius with a doctorate degree in fluid dynamics from the Imperial College.

He did follow me to visit your brother, Uncle Looi at several years ago. His IQ is also awesome, but not up to Uncle Looi’s level.

looihw88l says:

*
IS THORIUM-232 THE REAL CAUSE OF CANCER IN PATIENTS INJECTED WITH THOROTRAST?

Dosage in “Thorotrast” Fluoroscopy = ~1,000 mSv (100 Roentgens)

Risk in developing Cancer = 1 in 20,000 per mSv

Therefore risk with 1 Thorotrast Fluoroscopy = 1 in 20

~ 4 million patients, number developing Cancer = 200,000 from X-ray induced Cancers!

SO IS IT FAIR TO CONCLUDE THAT THORIUM-232 IS A CARCINOGEN, based mainly on the results of studies on Thorotrast study alone?

(In an attempt to prevent some injuries, A LIMIT OF 100 ROENTGENS (approximately 1,000 mSv) per fluoroscopic examination was set in New York City hospitals (Braestrup 1969)

Please read on:

*
CANCER, RADIATION AND THOROTRAST

I have known about the controversy of Thorotrast (a 25 cc vial of a 25% colloidal suspension of Thorium dioxide) since I was a medical student in Manchester about 45 years ago and in fact I have been collecting a fair amount of data with regards to this contrast media.

Thorotrast was given as a contrast media via the vein or artery and the dose of Thorium used was huge, though this depends on the type of radiological procedure done.

It had been estimated that as many as 4 million people were given this contrast in the 1930 to late 1950s.

It has been claimed that there was an increase in the incidence of cancers especially of the liver.

However, we need to consider a number of factors before we can be sure that this is the real culprit.

1) The radiation dose from those old X-ray machines in the 1930 to 1950s are hundreds of times that of the present machines.

For instance an 1896 X-ray machine was tested and found to have exposed the body to 1,500 times more radiation than modern technology does, largely because each image took 90 minutes to develop, dramatically increasing the patient’s cumulative exposure to the rays. By 1930 to 1950s, the radiation dose have improved a lot but still much higher than the present X-ray machines.

Modern day X-rays require only about 21 milliseconds, and technicians place lead coverings over the body to protect vital organs from even this slight exposure.

Even in the 50s and 60s, the dose of X-rays from Tuberculosis screening is about 100 times higher than that of today’s Chest X-Ray.

The fluoroscope leaves the X-ray beam “on” while the physician does his examination and as such, the fluoroscope has the potential to deliver very high X-ray doses.

In the 1920s, fluoroscopy became very popular procedure not only among radiologists, but also among many kinds of physicians.

Radiological methods of diagnosis became so important that no investigation of a patient is considered complete without the X-rays, which generally include fluoroscopy. These studies are often carried out by a general practitioner or surgeon in his office.

In 1942, Dr. Franz Buschke and Herbert M. Parker wrote (Buschke 1942):
“Recently we became aware of the fact that apparently a number of pediatricians include fluoroscopy in the monthly routine examinations of infants in their care during the first and second years of life.” This pediatric practice is confirmed in Pifer 1963 and in Blatz 1970.

After studying the radiation output of seven fluoroscopes in the offices of “reputable pediatricians selected at random,” Buschke and Parker estimated (Buschke 1942, p.527): “If the average rapid fluoroscopy by an experienced and well-adapted examiner takes twenty seconds, about 8.3 roentgens [entrance dose] will be delivered at this rate or 100 roentgens during the first year of life.” The roentgen is a dose-unit which is approximately equivalent to a rad (actually it is less as the ICRU defined the roentgen to be 2.58e -4 C/Kg in 1971)
Fluoroscopy was popular also in hospitals.

(Braestrup 1942, p.213):
“During the past years, we have measured the roentgen output of large numbers of fluoroscopes, using the settings at which they are normally operated … and have found a very wide variation … Attention is called particularly to test B-116, where the R [roentgen] per minute at the panel was 127, that is, an erythema dose would be reached in about three minutes. Such a unit could be classified as a lethal diagnostic weapon and yet there are many of these still in use.”

Of the various types of radiologic equipment, the mobile unit probably has been responsible for more radiation damage than any other piece of apparatus. These accidents have in most cases occurred while the mobile unit was used for fluoroscopy by surgeons, who apparently did not realize the high output obtained at short distances.”

In an attempt to prevent some injuries, A LIMIT OF 100 ROENTGENS (approximately 1,000 mSv) per fluoroscopic examination was set in New York City hospitals (Braestrup 1969).

The patients who received the Thorotrast were subjected to a huge dose of X-rays from these antique X-ray machines.

This huge dose of X-rays may be the cause of most of the cancers, we just do not know as most of the studies are unable to assess the X-ray’s dose. All these studies are done 20 to 30 years later.
So we cannot use other patients who have X-rays done in the 1930s to 1950s as a control group since most X-rays which do not need a contrast media consist of only 1 or 2 X-ray pictures.
A few of the studies do have controls but these controls were cases from later years especially after 1947 when the advancement in radiological techniques and hence dosage reduction is greatest.

It is generally accepted that the risk of radiation induced cancer is 1 in 20,000 per mSv.
As such, a dose of about 1,000 mSv would mean a risk of 1 in 20. For 4 million patients injected with Thorotrast, THIS RADIATION WOULD GIVE RISE TO AN EXCESS OF 200,000 CASES OF RADIATION INDUCED CANCERS IN THE 4 MILLION CASES OF “THOROTRAST” PATIENTS!

In 1953, Dade W. Moeller (then of the Public Health Service; later, president of the Health Physics Society) published an estimate that the average entrance dose per fluoroscopic examination was about 65 roentgens (about 650 mSv) at mid-century (Moeller 1953, pp.58-59).

The use of Thorotrast was discontinued by 1953.

2) The contrast studies are usually done for patients who are rather ill and may have multiple other disorders.
The cancers usually appear (as most cancers do) about 20 to 30 years later when the patients reach the “cancer” age. Because of this long lapse of cause and effect, all the studies are retrospective in nature.
And as you know, all retrospective studies are full of problems and inaccuracies.

3) A lot of these patients, have other disorders which may also lead to cancer like alcoholic cirrhosis, hepatitis B and hepatitis C. In fact the first case of liver cancer I saw in Manchester was an old alcoholic with severe liver cirrhosis. But he also had Thorotrast contrast study more than 20 years earlier. Because of this history, the surgeon had to report him as a Thorotrast induced cancer.

4) With about 4 million by now old people, we are bound to come across a lot of cancer cases. Since the life time risk of cancer in the advanced countries is 1 in 5, there should be about 800,000 cases of cancer due to other causes.

So how many if any of these (taking into account all the above problems) are really caused by the radiation from the massive dose of intravenous Thorium-232… nobody can be really sure. If anybody says he can tell, then either he is lying or he does not know what he is saying.

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

Don says:

Lynas share price go up thanks to the prominent analysis.

looihw88l says:

Quote Amus: “I asked why wasn’t safety data collected from an actual pilot plant?” Unquote.

THE LYNAS REE PLANT WAS ACTUALLY DESIGNED AND CONSTRUCTED WITH COLLABORATION WITH SCIENTISTS FROM THE LA ROCHELLE REE PLANT IN FRANCE.

THIS REE PLANT IN FRANCE HAS OPERATED FOR THE LAST 40 YEARS OR SO WITHOUT ANY RADIATION OR TOXIC WASTE PROBLEM AND WITHOUT ANY “ANTI-LYNAS NINCOMPOOP” PROBLEM.

Cheers,

Dr Looi

nkkhoo says:

I also saw tsunami hitting the Lynas plant, the factory will explode like Japanese nuclear plant, the building collapsed, etc. arguments from anti-Lynas NGOs.

The anti-Lynas NGOs have elevated themselves to non-bumi Perkasa status with the spinning on all sorts of lies. The irony is their machais in Malaysiakini Chinese blame other side is liar.

Amus says:

Nkkhoo why did you traipse around what I had said ? I asked why wasn’t safety data collected from an actual pilot plant ?

The mechanism of how radioactive waste – gaseous, liquid and solid – in bukit merah got into the environment had not been properly studied.

Do you have a habit of calling people names and insulting others ? I don’t know you and you don’t know me why be so aggressive and abusive ?

nkkhoo says:

Lynas has collected the data from another similar plant to estimate radioactive levels in its future plant in Kuantan, but you call it a guesswork.

What radioactive materials in the residue at Bukit Merah? It’s the thorium? What concentration of the radioactive there?

What the name calling you are talking about? If I do not mention Soo Jin Ho’s name to refer to his threshold theory, then you may think I am talking to a thin air or a liar who pluck the fact from a thin air.

Amus says:

If thorium is not soluble and has strong affinity with clay and therefore in the good doctor’s mind has no way of getting into the ecosystem or into our body. If that be the case could the good doctor explain the tragic incident in bukit merah ?

At what point of the concentration of the concentrated waste or even the desulphurisation flue gas or water discharge be a matter of concern ? What if the scrubber failed or the purification of the water failed ? What would be the worst case scenario ?

If thorium particulates adhered to clay well would clay suspension help move the thorium particulates into the environment when flooding took place in the plant ? Btw. shell fish can accumulate thorium.

Btw. nkkhoo how come you don’t adhere to the very standard of comments you demand of others ?

nkkhoo says:

Are you people are nice citizens before you ask others to respect yourself?

The Lynas case was mentioned in the court, but the losers in the court are still going to street protests.

Anti-Lynas NGOs are spreading fake science and lies as listed below.

1) A very long half-life for thorium is harmful to human life which is a ridiculous lie.

2) Lynas WLP is 69 time more dangerous in radioactive than thorium-238.

3) Internal emitters in thorium is 20 times more dangerous than K-40.

looihw88l says:

QUOTE AMUS on 11.11.12: “IF THORIUM IS NOT SOLUBLE AND HAS STRONG AFFINITY WITH CLAY … AND HAS NO WAY OF GETTING INTO OUR BODY.. COULD THE GOOD DOCTOR EXPLAIN THE TRAGIC INCIDENT IN BUKIT MERAH ?” Unquote.

ANSWER:

Quote Nick Tsurikov, International Radiation Safety Expert and Co-author of IAEA Radiation Safety Report:

“THORIUM IN ‘WASTE’ IS INSOLUBLE AND CANNOT POISON ANY PLANTS, ANIMALS OR THE ENVIRONMENT – EVEN IN THEORY.” Unquote.

In Bukit Merah, the radiation comes from Thorium and Uranium which are our own and has been in Malaysia for billions of years.

Although the radiation level is well over 37 times that of the Lynas waste, there is no definite well controlled scientific proof that the cases of leukaemia and birth defects are caused by radiation from the waste.

COMPARISON OF RADIOACTIVITY IN Bq (Specific activity.. number of atoms decaying in 1second)

Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gm

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gm

Naturally Occurring Potassium (3 different isotopes) in our body and food = 31.825 Bq/gm

Artificially created Plutonium-238 = 634,000,000,000 Bq/gm (1/2 life=87.7 years)

Monazite ore from Amang or Tin Tailings in Malaysia = 284 Bq/gm

Lynas Rare Earth Waste = 6 Bq/gm

Public dose limits for exposure from uranium mining or nuclear plants are usually set at 1 mSv per year above background.

According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and its international counterpart, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). Both of these organizations offer recommendations for the maximum permissible dose (MPD) of radiation.

General Public annual MPD by both NCRP and ICRP is 1 mSv.

For Radiation Workers, the annual MPD is 50 mSv (NCRP) and 20 mSv (ICRP), with a cumulative MPD of 10 mSv x Age.

MPD during pregnancy is 5 mSv (NCRP) and 2 mSv (ICRP).

However, experts including Professor Wade Allison of Oxford University argue that the dose limit can safely be raised to 100 millisieverts, based on current health statistics.

Compare this with the dose of 0.002 millisieverts/year of exposure for people living within 1 km of the Lynas plant in the worst case scenario (estimated by Lynas).

I have seen lots of cases of leukaemia and other types of cancer as well as birth defects over the last 40 years or so and unfortunately we do not have Lynas around at that time to use as a scapegoat.

Unscrupulous people have been using videos and pictures of patients with congenital abnormalities and other illnesses to instil fear into the population. There is absolutely no scientific proof that these cases are caused by radiation.

Only people with ulterior motives would use pictures and videos of these unfortunate patients whose disorders have nothing to do with radiation to score political points!

In the south of the state of Kerala in India the soil contains as much as 4,000 ppm (parts of Thorium per million). Studies have shown that there is little or no accumulation of Thorium-232 in the inhabitants.

The Lynas waste contains only 1,650 ppm.

It has been estimated that in the worst case scenario, the radiation risk within a 1 km radius from the Lynas plant is only 0.002 mSv/yr.

In Ramsar, Iran, the naturally occurring radiation
is extremely high at 260 mSv/yr.
This is 13,000,000% higher than the expected worse case scenario in Kuantan.

And the people in Ramsar, Iran has been found to be healthier and live longer than the rest of the Iranians! There is also no increase in the number of cancer cases.

Remember the Tin slag from the Eastern Smelting and Straits Trading in Penang ? These, which contain the tantalum and monazite ore, and the monazite ore can be more than 3,700 % more radioactive than the Lynas waste.

And these radioactive tin slag were used to fill up the old Penang Stadium and the roads in Penang. A lot of these has already been stolen and sold off at a huge profit, but a lot still remains in the roads in Butterworth and Penang island.

The people in Penang have not developed Cancer so far as a result of these slag!

The anti-Lynas people who are so paranoid about imported radiation from Australia should have a look at this paper published in the Malaysian Journal of Analytical Sciences which showed that the level of radiation in areas where tin was mined. The waste or amang contains high levels of Monazite and other minerals which are highly radioactive.

All these old tin mine areas are well populated. Note even Kuala Lumpur is also an ex-tin mining area.

The study which was done University Technology MARA in Kg Gajah in Perak showed:

Quote: “The level of surface dose varies from one location to another, but there is a critical area which has a significantly high surface dose approaching 30 microSv/hr” Unquote

30 microSv/hr is about 260 mSv/year or about the same level as the highest recorded area in Ramsar!.

Even ordinary Sand (crystalline silica, SiO2) is classified as a group 1 Carcinogen (a confirmed cancer causing agent), but as you know, we do not expect a huge number of people in living in the deserts or along the seashores to die from silica induced lung cancer.

The lung cancer risk occurs only when fine sand (silica) is inhaled by miners for a prolonged period in the quarries and mines i.e. silica is not a carcinogen when ingested and of course not when injected for nobody would allow you to inject sand into their veins.

Thorium-232 is a very weakly radioactive substance and produces only alpha particles which cannot even penetrate a thin piece of paper.
All you have to do is to wrap it up in a piece of newspaper and it is for all intents and purposes, non-radioactive !

” Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE.”

It is not considered to be a cancer causing substance if taken orally or inhaled according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC, just like silica (sand) which is not carcinogenic if ingested.

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

*
http://kickdefella.net/2012/04/17/lynas-negligible-radiation-but-only-toxic-chemical-waste/#more-5242

Amus says:

Nkkhoo,

Your bluster against sooJH is rather uncharacteristic of a man of science. The reference you asked for was actually in sooJH’s article ([9] “Atomic Energy Licensing (Exemption) (Low Activity Radioactive Material) Order 2002”, Atomic Energy Licensing Act 1984, P.U. (A) 182, AELB, from http://www.aelb.gov.my/aelb/engv/document/legislation/pu182.pdf)

I find it rather interesting that after all the calculation that Dr.Looi did in answering sooJH he came to the same conclusion that the thorium-232 is actually more dangerous – radioactive-wise than the table salt. But he dismissed it as impossible as the thorium-232 would not be ingested or breathed in. That is actually an ASSUMPTION – NOT an established fact.

A pilot plant would have settled that question. You must remember that the processed concentrated ore from Mt.weld was actually ball-milled. This meant that a substantial amount of ore would be of colloidal size. While the ore is shipped moist the radioactive particles still find its way into the environment. This is admitted on Page 35 of a report from the IAEA commissioned for a rare earth processing plant in Malaysia. The PREDICTED exposure is 0.002 mSv/year. While this is a small number it is equally misleading. The numbers cited is a guesstimate and not an actual safety data. The issue that had been said and said repeatedly is that the real concern is these radioactive particles finding its way into the eco-system and into our body. As the half-life of thorium is so long it has a lot of time to do its harm.

nkkhoo says:

My bluster on Soo is very mild compared to what you people did against Dr. Looi in Malaysiakini and elsewhere.

Dr. Looi was emphasized on biological hazardous doses, a parameter used to assess the hazardous effect on human body by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Dr. Looi, this fella puts Soo’s words into your mouth to make it you also agreed thorium a hundred time is more dangerous than pottassium. 🙂

A clue for Dr Looi, don’t simply buy in Soo’s thorium is a hundred time more dangerous than potassium. He picked the exemption level from an AELB technical sheet and apply his nonsense interpolation to come out to such weired conclusion.

You will be forever be framed into “thorium is several hundred time more dangerous than potassium” trap and anti-Lynas people will use this false finding to spin you like a dog is chasing its own tail.

Anti-Lynas people want you to slap your own face by saying you agree with Soo’s thorium is a hundred time more dangerous than potassium, but disapprove it with inhalation of thorium is impossible risk.

If you’re falling into their trap, your technical explanation will be rubbished by them even you answer 1000 times.

Let me repeat, “thorium is a hundred time more dangerous than potassium” is not a finding from any scientific study, it’s just a manipulation on a data sheet not related to radioactive safety threshold limit.

Rubbish the weired conclusion from Soo Sin Ho which I have offered to cut off my dick if Soo can prove and publish his finding in any renowned international journals.

I let Dr Looi. to handle this futile argument with you.

Banana with natural potassium level of radiation is about 31 Bq/g, is more radioactive than WLP. So do you want our government to ban the banana also?

I am not sure how expert like Soo JH to conclude exemption level = radioactive safety threshold. Although I am not a radioactive subject expert, but I cast doubt on exemption level = radioactive safety threshold.

Exemption level is more for labeling purpose for radioactive material control purpose, it does not spell the exact hazardous effect on the human tissue.

Here is another typical selective reading from anti-Lynas experts like Soo Jin Ho.

AELB defined low radioactivity material based on characteristic B and C. Soo Jin Ho only pick up B and ignore C, and manipulating his wrong interpolation to conclude that WLP is 69 times more dangerous than lite salt.

That is truly absurd and invalid conclusion as I have explained earlier.

The PREDICTED exposure is 0.002 mSv/year is the BEST data available. This is best estimate data by Lynas from its sister plant and agreed by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) experts for a pre-production plant.

Even Dr. Looi repeats 1000 times to say that Thorium-238 is insoluble in water and impossible to inhale critical amount to make residents outside the plant sick, you will not believe it.

As usual, you cannot provide any data and proof to claim your point except crying like a baby.

I fully support anti-Lynas NGO to take legal action to shut down Lynas plant if actual data collected later after production is beyond the AELB safety limit.

For the time being, let’s accept Lynas report from IAEA as the best scientific document available until you can provide another more reliable study.

Jeff says:

Prominent can be for a wrong reason if the argument is very complicated and confusing.

nkkhoo says:

Any technical explanation is not easy for non-Engineer and non-scientist to comprehend.

But I do agree Dr. Looi is not good in summarizing his conclusion for normal people to understand.

kaylie says:

Honestly, I’m not a scientific person hence I can’t understand what’s the differences and what does it do. But let me assume it’s safe then following questions really puzzle me.

1. If this is really making so much money, doesn’t it make sense to have it in their home country?
2. This plant creates job and boost economy so I don’t see why Australia govt reject them.
3. Last but not least, although both of you may sick (as you claimed) of seeing anti-lynas spreading lies but it’s still don’t make sense for a normal individual to support this project so much.

nkkhoo says:

Please answer these first two questions before I answer you, why First Solar, Intel, Seagate and WD set up plants in Malaysia?

1. If this is really making so much money, doesn’t it make sense to have it in their home country?

2. This plant creates job and boost economy so I don’t see why American govt reject them.

To answer your question 3, I and Dr. Looi have brains to think independently with our consciousness above anything unlike the normal people who follow blindly whatever their leader has asked or said or lied.

nkkhoo says:

Dr. Looi, I have openly invited anti-Lynas “experts” to rebut you, me or anyone disagrees with them in my blog instead of spreading lies in Malaysiakini and elsewhere.

Seem they have NO courage to come here to debate with intelligence and also unable to present their views in professional way.

You should rest and stop playing zither with the mad cows. Just refer them to your answers here to save your time from chasing mad cows in all over the places.

I also want to get pay by UMNO, Lynas and Bernama for my free service to rebut anti-Lynas lies, please refer me if you have such “lobang”. 🙂

looihw88l says:

Dear NK,

Thank God that there are still people like you who have a conscience and the moral courage to stand up to those people who spread blatant lies for obvious reasons.

The Master Controllers of these zombie loonies are actually well versed with the techniques used by the greatest and most demonic of all the brainwashers and manipulators i.e. Hitler himself!

Brainwashing techniques are based on the consistently persistent repetition of propaganda focused on just a few issues and continuously repeated in a slightly different way.

According to Adolf Hitler in- “War Propaganda”, in volume 1, chapter 6 of Mein Kampf (1925)

“BUT THE MOST BRILLIANT PROPAGANIST TECHNIQUE WILL YIELD NO SUCCESS UNLESS ONE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE IS BORNE IN MIND CONSTANTLY AND WITH UNFLAGGING ATTENTION. IT MUST CONFINE ITSELF TO A FEW POINTS AND REPEAT THEM OVER AND OVER. HERE, AS SO OFTEN IN THIS WORLD, PERSISTENCE IS THE FIRST AND MOST IMPORTANT REQUIREMENT FOR SUCCESS.” Unquote.

Since brainwashing techniques are based on the consistently persistent repetition of propaganda, the only consistently effective way to de-brainwash a brainwashed brain is to repeatedly, consistently AND PERSISTENTLY shower the brainwashed folks with the same FACTS and TRUTH, displayed in slightly different ways.

Warmest regards,

Dato’ Dr Looi

nkkhoo says:

Malaysia needs more brave people like you to keep “truth” from being buried by those dirty BN and PR politicians.

A man without conscience is like a soulless dead man.

Another Hitler’s propaganda on show is TV3 is continuously showing a police car was overturned by Bersih mob like me.

kkk says:

Dr Looi kindly rebuts this :

The unpublished letter to The Sun.
Dr Looi Hoong Wah, in dismissing the Kuantan community’s apprehensions over Lynas rare earths refinery in Gebeng (The Sun, March 7, 2012), has glossed over a number of points:
1. Potassium-40, when absorbed, is distributed more uniformly throughout the human body, mostly in muscle tissue which is among the least radio-sensitive of the body’s tissues (the most radio-sensitive tissues are the lymphoid organs, bone marrow, blood, testes, ovaries, intestines)
2. Thorium-232 is very poorly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, but much more readily via an inhalation route. Seventy per cent of thorium entering the bloodstream localises to the bones where it is retained with a biological half-life of 22 years, all that while irradiating the blood-forming tissues with alpha-particles which are 20 times more damaging than gamma or beta radiation.
3. In contrast, potassium-40 is excreted from the body much more rapidly, with a biological half-life of 30 days.
4. The net result of all this: the lifetime cancer mortality risk per Curie of inhaled thorium-232 is 200 times that of inhaled potassium-40, and 2,000 times that of ingested potassium-40 (1 Curie = 37 GBq).
5. The “safe thresholds” of 1 mSv/yr (public) and 20 mSv/yr (occupational) that Dr Looi, Dr Che Rosli Che Mat (MP, Hulu Langat), Lynas, AELB, and IAEA repeatedly invoke are derived from ICRP risk models which are currently under critical scrutiny and challenge, in the wake of excess childhood leukaemia near nuclear power plants that can’t be explained by radiation exposures which are much below the “safe thresholds”. A UK expert panel for instance (2004, http://www.cerrie.org) could not arrive at a consensus regarding the health risks of low-level exposure to internal emitters (inhaled or ingested radioactive particles). Opinions among the UK panel members ranged from negligible adverse effects to an underestimation of risk by at least a 100-fold.
6. In short, nobody really knows at this point how hazardous the Lynas refinery may turn out to be, given that much of the radioactive solid wastes will be in powdery form, i.e. respirable as suspended particulates, or ingestable from contaminated surfaces.
7. In asserting that the LAMP refinery is unquestionably safe, Dr Looi, Dr Che Rosli, Lynas and AELB have recklessly abandoned the precautionary principle. The Kuantan-Kemaman community may end up as lab rats in a natural experiment.
* Chan Chee Khoon, ScD (Epidemiology) is from the Centre for Population Health, Department Social & Preventive Medicine Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya.

nkkhoo says:

Lynas rare earth processing plant is not the first one in the world.

I only agreed that BN government is arrogant, ignorant, corrupt and insensitive in handling Lynas project. There was no consultation whatever with the stakeholders in Gebeng before the project was approved.

May be anti-Lynas NGOs can ask BN government to arrange plant visits to see themselves how China, Europe and Australia manage their rare earth “radioactive” plants.

The rumor says ten millions Chinese within 10Km radius from the rare earth plants died due to cancers. 🙂

By the way, they should bring their camp sets because the cement wall in the hotel is more radioactive than WLP. 🙂

looihw88l says:

*
QUOTE kkk: “Dr Looi kindly rebut this….the unpublished letter to the Sun ” Unquote ….by Chan Chee Khoon, challenging the views of Dr Looi Hoong Wah.

ANSWER:

The Learned Hon Prof. Chan :

QUOTE No. 01 :
Quote from the Hon. Professor “…childhood leukaemias observed among the children of Bukit Merah? (Recall also the inverse square law — the intensity of radiation from a radioactive particle a metre away from a human body increases a trillion-fold when that same particle sits at micron-level distances on the body’s cells and tissues.)

ANSWER by Ng Ai Soo

“The inverse square law applies to trillions and trillions of particles, not just the one particle. That one particle IS the radiation only “dilutes” in a quantum sense… it otherwise remains one particle no matter how far it is from the source… so the cellular damage by that one particle is the same, no matter how far it travelled to get into the cell. But it must survive that journey into the cell and for different particles the survival rates are different.

The Hon. Prof. Chan

A quick response to Ng Ai Soo (?): I’m referring to macroscopic radioactive particles (e.g. thorium-containing dusts), not to a radioactive atomic nucleus nor sub-atomic particles.

Comment by Me.

1. In addition to the clarification by Ng Ai Soo of the inappropriateness in invoking the inverse square law to just one particle, if we assume that the intensity is increased by a trillion fold, an alpha particle from Thorium-232 with an energy of 4 MeV is magnified by a factor of 1 trillion, the energy would be 0.64 Joules and this is so “intense” that all the cells that are hit, will be vaporized. We know that DEAD CELLS do not and cannot turn into cancer cells!

2. Even if we are referring to thorium-containing dusts in Bukit Merah and “not to a radioactive atomic nucleus nor sub-atomic particles,”
it would not work either because at 1 metre away, alpha particles from the Thorium-232 can travel about a couple of centimetres, and since the cells are subjected to an intensity of radiation at 1 metre = 0 units.
Therefore at micron level, 0 multiplied by 1 Trillion is still = 0 units

This shows that if we use retrograde calculations in these situations, we can end up with some rather embarrassing results.

QUOTE No. 02 :
: “Dr Looi’s cites the Argonne National Lab’s fact sheet on thorium to argue that only a miniscule portion of thorium-232 which is ingested via food or water is absorbed into the bloodstream, of which only 4 per cent gets deposited in the liver where it is retained with a biological half-life of 700 days.”

ANSWER:

I have never quoted the Argonne National-Lab’s fact sheet in any of my postings. This is just a figment of the fertile but confused imagination of a person infected by the highly dangerous anti-lynas virus.

QUOTE No. 03 :
” Allow me also to bring to Dr Looi’s attention a 1993-1994 study of male miners at the Bayun Obo rare earths and iron mine in Inner Mongolia which was reported in the Journal of Radiological Protection in 2005.
In that study, highly dust-exposed miners had 5.15 times the age-adjusted lung cancer rate compared to the rate among Chinese males in the general population. ”

ANSWER:

It was claimed that a 20 year study in one of the largest rare earth mine, the Bayun Obo mine has shown that inhalation Thorium has proven to cause lung cancer. The number of miners in 2001 were 6,983 of which 3016 were exposed to dense dust in the mine.

After correcting for the heavy smoking, there was an excess of 10 cases of lung cancer in workers who had worked for about 30 years or so in the mine.

But this study cannot exclude crystalline silica (SiO2) in the dust as being the cause of the lung cancers. Silica is a confirmed carcinogen while Thorium by inhalation or ingestion is not.

SILICA IS A CONFIRMED GROUP 1 CARCINOGEN by inhalation whereas Thorium-232 is considered to be a carcinogen only IF ADMINISTERED INTRAVENOUSLY AS A COLLOIDAL DISPERSION OF THORIUM-232 DIOXIDE.” (IARC).

QUOTE 04:
“The “safe thresholds” of 1 mSv/yr (public) and 20 mSv/yr (occupational) that Dr Looi, Dr Che Rosli Che Mat (MP, Hulu Langat), Lynas, AELB, and IAEA repeatedly invoke are derived from ICRP risk models which are currently under critical scrutiny and challenge, IN THE WAKE OF EXCESS CHILDHOOD LEUKAEMIA NEAR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS that can’t be explained by radiation exposures which are much below the “safe thresholds”.

ANSWER:

The British study (COMARE) published in 2010 clearly showed that there is NO INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF LEUKAEMIA CASES in young children living near nuclear power plants.

This study which covers a period of over 35 years is far more comprehensive than the French study which covers only a period of 5 years.
The research, conducted by scientists on the Committee of the Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment (COMARE), found only 20 cases of childhood leukaemia within 5 km (3.1 miles) of nuclear power stations between 1969 and 2004.
The rate was virtually the same as in areas where there were no nuclear plants.
A study on Germany, published in 2007, did find a significantly increased risk, but the COMARE team said these findings were probably influenced by an unexplained leukaemia cluster near a nuclear plant in Krummel, north Germany, that lasted from 1990 to 2005.
Excluding Krummel, evidence for an increased leukaemia risk among young children living close to German nuclear power plants was “extremely weak”, it said.
The French study found that between 2002 and 2007 (only 5 years), 14 children under the age of 15 living in a 5-kilometre radius of France’s 19 nuclear power plants had been diagnosed with leukaemia.

This number of cases (14 in 5 years) is so small that even a small unaccounted unknown factor would lead to a false statistical result.

cont.

QUOTE No. 05 :

“The US Public Health Service (1990) reports that the natural background level in North American soil is typically ~ 6 ppm of thorium.”

ANSWER:
The average Malaysian soil ~ 20 parts per million of thorium.
Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert: ” THE MAJORITY OF THIS LYNAS “WASTE” WILL HAVE ONLY HALF THE THORIUM THAN IN NORMAL MALAYSIAN SOIL.
So, in fact most of Lynas residues are only half as radioactive as the sand the kids all over Malaysia play in the kindergartens”
(Note: Sand or crystalline SiO2 is also classified as a group 1 Carcinogen by IARC).
If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports – you will clearly see that two most ‘voluminous’ residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium – and the average Malaysian soil – 20 parts per million of thorium.
Of course, the third ‘residue stream’ will have about 1500 ppm of thorium and will need to be managed appropriately
cont.

QUOTE No. 06 :

“A UK expert panel for instance (2004, http://www.cerrie.org : ttp://www.cerrie.org/) could not arrive at a consensus regarding the health risks of low-level exposure to internal emitters (inhaled or ingested radioactive particles). Opinions among the UK panel members ranged from negligible adverse effects to an underestimation of risk by at least a 100-fold.”

ANSWER:
Quote: Nick Tsurikov, Radiation Safety Expert “The point that I would like to make is to illustrate clearly that ECRR “100-200 times” factors cannot possibly be correct – have a look:

The ‘official’ risk of getting cancer from radiation exposure is 1 in 20,000 per 1 milliSievert of dose. So, if the hazard is ‘understated’ by, say, 200 times – it becomes 1 in 100, per 1 mSv of dose.

Thousands of people in Malaysian amang industry and in heavy mineral sands industry world-wide have been exposed to about 5 mSv every year for (let’s say, on average) 6 years of working life, so their cumulative dose was 30 mSv.

WHICH MEANS THAT IF ECRR IS CORRECT, EVERY THIRD WORKER IN THE AMANG INDUSTRY WOULD BE DEAD FROM CANCER BY NOW !

And what about those who were exposed to about 20 mSv for five years or more (in any industry, uranium included) – in accordance with the ECRR coefficients – the chance is 1 in 1, so they are all dead from cancer by now…

I do not see any cancer epidemic happening… What about all the tin miners in Malaysia in 1950’s-1970’s: they all should’ve died within several years after starting their work (as their coefficient would be close to 5 to 1…) Just some points for general consideration…” Unquote.

Quote No. 07: Hon. Prof Chan:

“Potassium-40, when absorbed, is distributed more uniformly throughout the human body, mostly in muscle tissue which is among the least radio-sensitive of the body’s tissues, Thorium entering the bloodstream localises to the bones where it is retained with a biological half-life of 22 years.
The risk of cancer mortality per pCurie is higher in inhaled thorium-232 when compared with that of INHALED potassium.” Unquote

ANSWER:
When Potassium is taken into the body it is not just concentrated in the muscles but concentrated in the INTRACELLULAR spaces of ALL CELLS where the cancer sensitive chromosomes are located!

So to say that Potassium concentration is less in the radiosensitive cells of the blood, lymphoid tissues, testis, ovaries and intestine is definitely not in line with basic human physiology.

It is concentrated and equally distributed in ALL INTRACELLULAR SPACES . In terms of per cell mass, it may be slightly less only in fat cells.

Intracellular Potassium = 139 to 140 mEq
Extracellular Potassium = 4 mEq which is tiny compared with the Intracellular Potassium.

Thorium-232 stays mainly in the extracellular space where it is not so harmful.
Practically all the data on the acute and long term toxicology of Thorium-232 comes from the study of Thorotrast.

Most of the human data for thorium exposure comes from diagnostic studies. A massive dose of 1 to 2 vials of 25 ml of 25% Colloidal thorium-232 dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into patients as a radiographic contrast medium between 1928 and 1955.

Thorium dioxide in Thorotrast is insoluble and in a colloidal form i.e. in the form of particles. ALL INSOLUBLE PARTICLES ARE TAKEN UP BY THE MACROPHAGES AND OTHER CELLS OF THE RETICULO-ENDOTHELIAL (RE) SYSTEM and deposited into the tissues of the RE system i.e. the liver, spleen, lymph nodes, bone marrow and parts of the small intestines and not just the bones.

In humans, WHERE WILL the SOLUBLE AND NON-PARTICULATE FORM OF THORIUM SALTS BE DEPOSITED and what is the renal clearance and hence their biological half life ? Nobody really knows because, for obvious reasons, all studies done on Thorium are conducted on animals. The results are only applicable to rats, rabbits, cats and dogs !

cont.

To mention that the lifetime risk of cancer mortality per pCurie is higher in inhaled thorium-232 when compared with that of INHALED potassium is not always valid.

And it is not easy to find the heavier than lead Thorium-232 particles in the air for someone to inhale, even when near to a chemical plant like the Lynas Rare Earth Plant.

You would only be able to find the correct sized particles of about 1 to 5 microns in the Uranium or Thorium mines or Thorium refining plants or where there is combustion.

It sounds very impressive indeed to say that the lifetime cancer mortality risk for inhaled Thorium-232 is 200 times that of inhaled Potassium-40.
But we must know how these mortality coefficients are being calculated. For example in the case of Potassium-40:

(EPA USA) To estimate a lifetime cancer
mortality risk, if it is assumed that 100,000 people
were continuously exposed to a thick layer of soil
with an initial average concentration of 1 pCi/g
potassium-40, then 4 of these 100,000 people
would be predicted to incur a fatal cancer over
their lifetime.

Why not 40, or 80, or 800 or 8,000 or 80,000 of these 100,000 people would be predicted to incur a fatal cancer over their lifetime!

Any good mathematician would tell you that when an assumption is put into a mathematical equation, the result would be just RUBBISH!

AND WE MUST ALSO REMEMBER THAT THERE IS ALWAYS 4,400 Bq OF K-40 in the body and there is NEVER any chance of a significant quantity of Thorium-232 ever entering into the body of ordinary non-miners or Thorium workers, whether by ingestion or inhalation.

The 4,400 Bq of K-40 contribute to a dosage of ~ 0.29 mSv/yr of the ~ 0.41 mSv/yr of radiation from internal radionuclides. The other ~ 0.12 mSv/yr comes from Carbon-14. (0.29 mSv/yr is 145 x Lynas worst case scenario).

In places like Kerala, a coastal belt in India, the concentration of Thorium-232 in the soil average about 4,000 ppm.
The radiation at Karunagapally, Kerala has been assessed at 5 to 8 milisievert/year. In certain location on the coast, it is as high as 70 milisievert/year.

Thorium-232 is strongly adsorbed to clay and there is no natural way it can get into the body. Even the plants and fruits do not contain any Thorium in these high Thorium areas.

The amount of Thorium in the human body is so tiny (estimated to be only 30 micrograms per body) that only extremely sophisticated equipments are able to measure the true level.

The epidemiological data from these studies show that the primary health effects of high doses of injected Thorotrast are blood disorders and liver tumours.

However, these tumours and blood disorders could have been caused by the massive doses of X-rays from the rather antique X-ray machines used at that time.

Because these are contrast studies, more than 20 to 50 X-rays need to be taken and the dose is really massive. None of the studies have factored in this massive dose of X-rays as all the studies are done retrospectively.

Some evidence of increased incidence of lung, pancreatic, and haematopoietic cancers was found in workers occupationally exposed to thorium via inhalation.

However, these workers were also exposed to several other toxic agents especially Silica (SiO2) which is a group 1 carcinogen and in some cases to other radionuclides like Uranium, K-40 and Radium, so direct causation cannot be inferred.

Inhalation of Thorium-232 by the general population like those living in the cities is practically impossible for the particles that can get into the lungs need to be between 1 to 5 microns.

These tiny particles can only be found in the thorium or uranium mines or unsophisticated refineries.

Few data are available regarding the health effects associated with low (e.g., environmental) levels of exposure from either inhalation or ingestion.

Dr Looi
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RPOGzrqu1Vg

looihw88l says:

Quoted: Jonathan Fun Response to Hon. Prof Chan in Insider

“I read with great interest the debate and evidences shown by both sides.

While acknowledging Prof. Chan’s arguments, doubts, concerns, and counter-evidences on the effects of Thorium, I must agree with Datuk Dr. Looi and Ng Ai Soo’s points in what I’d like to call “Selective Rejection”.

We all know the effects of Thorium to our health through the inhalation route; microscopic thorium dusts entering our bloodstream, majority of those amounts will be deposited in our bone marrows and stays there for the next 22 years, emitting alpha radiation, increasing risks to cancer, etc.

But again, consider Ng Ai Soo’s comment from Chan’s previous article :

” And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts. For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.)

And, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air… and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula.

Where do we store this waste? Does this waste go into making our roads or construction material? What is Lynas waste in comparison?! How did we manage to put up with that yearly radioactive and toxic waste, and plan to build more of the same, with no objection from you?

Be fair… if you want to protect us from industrial radiation pollution, then tackle the whole lot of them in proportion to their pollution, not just Lynas. Dr. Looi’s presentation of the facts is clear and persuasive compared with the unnecessary fear, uncertainty and doubt that taints your article in reply to him. ”

The keyword here IMHO is “Uncertainty”, which brings us back to the discussion of the “Precautionary Principle”.

There is nothing wrong being doubtful of the effects of Thorium, hence rejecting it, and there is nothing wrong being confident that Thorium wastes that will be produced by Lynas if they are given the green light to operate, are going to be safe, given the scientific facts that proves it.

But what I’d like to implore those hardcore Anti-Lynas/Anti-Rare Earth/Anti-Whatever friends out there to understand, is that when we make a stand, it must be based on a principle, and for the stand to be credible and fair, it must be applied across the board.

So we know iron/copper mines also produces not just Thorium, but Radium and Uranium wastes too.

And we know rock phosphate fertilizer production facilities also produces not just Thorium, but Radium and Uranium wastes too.

Hence, if the reason we are all so head over heals about throwing Lynas out of our shores is because of the potential hazards of Thorium, or the uncertainty that Thorium will be safe, then let our will be done. Reject Lynas. Get them out of the country. Shoo.

But we can’t let existing industries which are also producing Thorium wastes, like iron/copper mines and fertilizer plants, to continue operating as well. Reject any industry that produces Thorium wastes. Get them out of the country. Shoo.

Can we all agree on this stand? Else going all out to reject Lynas while allowing existing industries that also produces Thorium wastes to continue operation is just plain hypocritical.”

Dato’ Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

Quoted from Ng Ai Soo response to the Hon. Prof. Chan ‘s article in the Malaysian Political Podium and Insider:

Quoted from Ng Ai Soo’s response to the Hon. Prof. Chan’s Article.

“The inverse square law applies to trillions and trillions of particles, not just the one particle. That one particle IS the radiation only “dilutes” in a quantum sense… it otherwise remains one particle no matter how far it is from the source… so the cellular damage by that one particle is the same, no matter how far it travelled to get into the cell.

But it must survive that journey into the cell and for different particles the survival rates are different.

The “precautionary principle” has to be used judiciously… overuse can lead to awkward situations.

For example, the other day a football player collapsed and very nearly died mid-game, therefore nobody should play football… never mind rugby! More than a million people die on the roads worldwide each year, therefore nobody should use roads… to say nothing about air travel.

The use of coal results in fatalities not only in mining, but also due to emissions… therefore we should not use coal. So where do you draw the line.

The methods used to get such high damage estimates from radiation, if applied to other sources, can also lead to silly results.

For example, if applied to air travel (high altitude leads to higher radiation) such methods will give hundreds, if not, thousands of casualties.

As pointed out by Dr. Looi, people have lived very healthy lives for many, many generations in Ramsar despite (or because of?!) a background of more that 100mSv/yr… likewise in Kerala where the background exceeds 50mSv/yr… apply the extreme methods to these people and you will find thousands of expected radiation casualties over the millennia, not to say mutations and such… but the people have been and are all healthy if not better than average.

Nuclear power stations cannot be constructed in Cornwall because the natural background radiation is about 8mSv/yr.

Why are there no cancer clusters there? You put it best when you say “excess childhood leukaemia near nuclear power plants that can’t be explained by radiation exposures which are much below the “safe thresholds””… that is, they are not caused by radiation exposure from the nuclear power stations.

In fact such clusters occur in other places as well, nowhere near nuclear power stations, and in one case, a cluster was found at a site at which a nuclear power station was planned but not yet built!

Of course what happened at Cerrie is well known (see http://iopscience.iop.org/0952-4746/24/4/E02/pdf/jr44e1.pdf , http://www.cerrie.org/ and http://www.comare.org.uk which advises the UK government) and is due to two members, one of whom is Christopher Busby who, it seems, sells radiation protection kits to Fukushima survivors (see http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/21/christopher-busby-radiation-pills-fukushima and

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/nov/22/christopher-busby-nuclear-green-party ).

Busby is very political and even ran for office. Please advise all that protection has to be sought for exposure to Busby emissions, if nothing else, from his reported profanity.

And what about other pollution and/or radiation sources in the environment before Lynas even starts.

For example, a 1,000MW coal plant after just 1 year of operation produces 6,000,000 tons of CO2, 44,000 tons of SO2, 22,000 tons of NO2, 320,000 tons of ash containing 400 tons of heavy metals (arsenic, mercury, cadmium, lead etc.) and, here’s the kicker, including 5 tons of Uranium and 12 tons of Thorium from which the radon gas of both decay chains are out the chimney and into our air… and we are building TWO of these now to add to those we already have on the peninsula. Where do we store this waste?

Does this waste go into making our roads or construction material? What is Lynas waste in comparison?!

How did we manage to put up with that yearly radioactive and toxic waste, and plan to build more of the same, with no objection from you?

Be fair… if you want to protect us from industrial radiation pollution, then tackle the whole lot of them in proportion to their pollution, not just Lynas.

Dr. Looi’s presentation of the facts is clear and persuasive compared with the unnecessary fear, uncertainty and doubt that taints your article.”

Dato’ Dr Looi

nkkhoo says:

Dr. Looi, I doubt average anti-Lynas people can understand your long technical explanations on Thorium-232.

Anti-Lynas appointed experts only dare to use anonymous to insult you and have no gut to debate the issue openly.

A half-cooked expert like So Jin Hou intended to talk like a subject expert with his nonsense and invalid threshold theory.

Anti-Lynas NGOs and with the full backing from PR opposition are not going to believe any scientific arguments.

An ancient Chinese saying, “Like playing zither to a herd of cows.” < <对牛弹琴>>

looihw88l says:

Dear NK,

Thanks your valuable advice.

I will stop playing zither to these Anti-Lynas Cows with Mad Cow Disease!

Warmest regards,

Dr Looi.

looihw88l says:

Quote Anti-Lynas: “The alpha and beta radiation from Thorium-232 may not be dangerous externally but what about the gamma rays..” Unquote.

Freshly isolated PURE Thorium-232 do not produce any gamma rays and as such has practically no external biological effect (the 0.09 MeV of gamma rays in freshly isolated Thorium-232 actually comes from Radium-228 decay which comes from Thorium-228.)

Note: Thorium-228 cannot be chemically separated from Thorium-232.

The most biologically damaging forms of gamma radiation occur in the gamma ray window of between 3 and 10 MeV.

Those below 3.0 MeV are NOT significantly harmful because they have poor penetrating power in living tissues and do not deposit much energy into these tissues.

Those higher energy gamma rays of greater than 10 MeV are
NOT very harmful because the body is relatively transparent to them i.e. they pass straight through without depositing a significant amount of energy.

THE AVERAGE ENERGY OF THE MOST ABUNDANT EMISSION OF THORIUM-232 IS ONLY 0.059 MeV, though the gamma ray from Thallium-208 decay to stable Lead-208 (in the Th-232 decay series) has a higher energy of 2.62 MeV.

AS SUCH THE TINY AMOUNT OF LOW ENERGY GAMMA RAYS PRODUCED BY THORIUM-232 DECAY CHAIN IS NOT BIOLOGICALLY VERY SIGNIFICANT AS AN EXTERNAL OR EVEN AS AN INTERNAL THREAT.

The alpha ray and beta radiation from Thorium-232 is not an external threat because alpha particles cannot penetrate even a piece of paper and beta rays are nothing more than just electrons..note the flow of electrons is electricity.

SO WHAT’S THE BIG RADIATION FUSS FROM THORIUM-232 DECAY?

Dato’ Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

RADIOACTIVITY IN MEDICALLY PRESCRIBED POTASSIUM.

The potassium chloride salt that is prescribed by dieticians as an adjunct for high blood pressure therapy as well as the potassium chloride used by the medical profession, is radioactive with a radioactivity of 32 Bq/gm.
(1 Becquerel or Bq is 1 nuclear decay per second.)

It is a real surprise that the vast majority of doctors, including senior consultants, professors and university lecturers do not know this.

The radioactivity comes from Potassium-40 (K-40) which is a naturally-occurring radioactive material or NORM.

Wherever there is potassium, there is potassium-40. It constitutes 0.0117% of natural potassium.

Potassium-40 is a beta (87.3%), gamma (10.67%) and
positron (~2.0%) emitter and contributes to both internal and external doses.

The other 2 isotopes of potassium are K-39 and K-41 and both of these are considered to be non-radioactive.

The total internal dose to a typical member of the population from internal radionuclides is about 0.42mSv/yr and approximately 0.29 mSv/yr is due to the K-40 in the body. The rest of the dosage is from C-14 and other trace radionuclides.

According to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) and its international counterpart, the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), the recommendations for the maximum permissible dose (MPD) of radiation =

General Public annual MPD by both NCRP and ICRP is 1 mSv.

For Radiation Workers, the annual MPD is 50 mSv (NCRP) and 20 mSv (ICRP), with a cumulative MPD of 10 mSv x Age.

MPD during pregnancy is 5 mSv (NCRP) and 2 mSv (ICRP).

However, experts including Professor Wade Allison of Oxford University argue that the dose limit can safely be raised to 100 millisieverts, based on current health statistics.

Data

K-40 Half-life: 1.28 x 10^9 years

K-40 Decay Mode:

Potassium-40 in our diet produces the highly dangerous gamma and beta rays from all the 3 types of beta decay, i.e. electron emission, electron capture and positron emission.

Gamma Rays: 1.461 MeV (10.7%)

Beta maximum energy is 1.31 MeV

Potassium-40 is a beta and gamma emitter and contributes to both internal and external doses.

About 89.28% of the time, it decays to calcium-40 with emission of a beta particle (β−, an electron) with a maximum energy of 1.33 MeV and an antineutrino.

About 10.72% of the time it decays to argon-40 by electron capture, with the emission of a 1.460 MeV gamma ray and a neutrino.

Very rarely (0.001% of the time) it will decay to 40Ar by emitting a positron (β+) and a neutrino.

Daily intake of potassium element: 3.3 grams

Amount of potassium element in body: 140 g to 200 g (about 4,400 Bq)

There is a very tight homeostatic control over potassium levels in the human body. This means that the consumption of foods containing large amounts of potassium will not increase the body’s potassium content

Which is more radioactive, Potassium-40 prescribed by your doctor or Thorium-232 in the environment ?

In fact, a professor claimed that potassium-40 is far LESS radioactive than Thorium-232 and he cited the EPA (environment protection agency of American) and the WHO UNSCEAR as proof of his statement!

One of my friends who stated that K-40 is about 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232 was severely criticized.

Well, that depends on what we are talking about.

1. I think what my friend was thinking about is radioactivity in terms of Bq i.e. activity rather than biological effect (Sv) when he said potassium-40 is 62 times more radioactive than Thorium-232.

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram
Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Therefore potassium-40 has about 62X more Bq than Thorium-232

*** Even in terms of biological effect, 1 gram of pure potassium-40 will still have a greater biological effect when compared with 1 gram of pure Thorium-232.

Pure Potassium-40 = 254,000 Bq/gram

Quote: 1 Becquerel per gram of K-40 in the soil (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) results in an increase in gamma-levels by ~0.042 microSieverts per hour (WHO UNSCEAR). Unquote

Therefore 254,000 Bq = 10,668 microSieverts/hour
(from 1 gram of pure potassium-40 i.e. not mixed with K-39 and K-41)

*** Pure Thorium-232 = 4,080 Bq/gram

Quote “Each becquerel per gram of Th-232 (should actually be 1 Bq of K-40 per gram of soil) increases this level by ~0.604 microSv/hour.”

Therefore 4,080 Bq = 2,464 microSieverts/hour

10,668 microSv/hr divided by 2,464 microSv/hr = 4.33

or the biological effect of radiation from pure Potassium-40 is actually 4.33 times more than that of pure Thorium-232.

2. If we are talking about 1 gram of naturally occurring Potassium which contains only 0.0118% of K-40, then it is perfectly correct to say that Thorium-232 is more radioactive biologically than Potassium as the naturally occurring potassium has only 32 Bq per gram as compared to K-40 which has 254,000 Bq per gram.

So 32 Bq of K = 1.344 microSieverts/hr while 4080 Bq of Thorium-232 = 2,464 microSieverts/hr which is far more biologically radioactive than Potassium.

(But kindly refer to Dr Gary Kramer argument below because if you take his figure of 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40 and the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is only 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA), then K-40 is actually 12.8 times more radioactive as an external threat than Th-232, rather than Th-232 being 14 times more radioactive than K-40.)

3. If we compare radioactivity in terms of becquerel (number of atoms decaying per second), 1 Bq of course is equal to 1 Bq in terms of activity.

But in terms of PER Bq (radioactivity from only one nuclear decay) the biological effect, according to IAEA, Potassium-40 and natural potassium is less radioactive biologically than Thorium-232 (but remember that 1 gm potassium-40 has 254,000 atomic decay per sec while 1 gm of Thorium-232 has only 4.080 atomic decay per second ).

SO, BEFORE YOU CRITICIZE ANYONE FOR SAYING THAT POTASSIUM-4O IS MORE RADIOACTIVE THAN THORIUM-232 OR VICE VERSA, MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

It all depends on whether you are comparing activity (Bq) or biological effect (Sv), whether you are talking about pure potassium-40 or natural potassium which is composed of only 0.0118% highly radioactive K-40 and whether you are comparing Bq per gram of potassium-40 or Bq per gram of soil.

Moreover, we have to state that the Thorium-232 is NOT that of pure Thorium-232 as freshly isolated pure Thorium-232 do not produce any gamma rays and as such has practically no external biological effect (the 0.09 MeV of gamma rays in freshly isolated Thorium-232 actually comes from Radium-228 that comes from Thorium-228 which is cannot be chemically isolated from Thorium-232).

The same arguments apply to the comparison of the cancer coefficients of potassium-40 and Thorium-232.

In fact, the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is actually 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA). The figure given by UNSCEAR of 0.69 microSv/hr/Bq/ per gram of soil is for an infinite plain.

We must also remember that

1. Potassium is always in the body and is strictly homeostatically controlled at 140 g to 200 g (about 4,400 Bq). Whereas, Thorium-232 is never in the body in significant amounts. In fact the average level of Thorium-232 in an average body has been estimated to be less than 30 micrograms per person.

2. Thorium-232 in clay soil cannot enter the body by ingestion as it is strongly adsorbed by clay. In the crystalline or soluble form in the absence of clay, it is estimated only 0.02 to 0.05% is absorbed.

3. Inhalation of Thorium-232 only occurs if there are particles of less than 5 microns in the air, most effective are particles that are about 1 to 2 microns.
These particles are found only in the Uranium or Thorium mines or where there is combustion. The ore used by Lynas are moist and the whole process do not involve any dry powder at any stage. So inhalation is not a problem in the ultra-modern, state of the art Lynas plant.

Dr. Gary H. Kramer is the Head of the National Internal Radiation Assessment Section at Health Canada and is a world authority in radioactivity in Potassium salts. The coefficient of 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40 is probably obtained by actual field measurement of the pile of Potassium chloride:

Quote: “Potassium chloride can be found in large quantities in stores selling materials for water treatment. The potassium content is about 500 g kg-

Typically, the material is sold in 20 kg bags so each bag contains ~600 kBq of 40K giving a concentration of 30 Bq g-1. This is well above the exclusion level yet the material is handled as non-radioactive.

The external dose rate in close proximity to a typical display in these types of shops would be about 150 microSv hr-1.

A worker would only need to be near the pile for about 7 hours to exceed the public dose limit of 1 mSv.” Unquote.

From the above statement from Dr Gary Kramer, who is a world authority in radioactivity in the Potash mines of Canada, and who also has a bone to pick with the IAEA report, the biological dose from a large pile of KCl is 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40.

Since, the biological dose 1 metre from a large pile of Thorium-232 is only 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/ (IAEA).

As an external threat, the biological dose from a large pile of KCl is 5 microSv/hr/Bq for K-40, so in terms of per Bq, K-40 is still far more biologically active than Th-232..

However, as an internal threat to the Lynas workers or people of Kuantan if Thorium-232 managed to get into the tissues (which is not possible for the reasons stated above) it may be a completely different picture.

Dr Looi

Ben Hur says:

We all know it is a ‘collaboration’ between that Doctor and Bernama as planned by BN. So no need to waste so much time reading into it.

nkkhoo says:

I know Dr. Looi is an honest man than a bunch of anti-Lynas idiots.

A famous saying I learned since 1998, “If you cannot attack his or her viewpoints, then attack the person”.

This is anti-Lynas dirty tactic to discredit Dr. Looi.

Anyway I’m still waiting BN to pay me for my stand on Lynas. RM 50,000 is ok, I can live like a king in Thailand for a month with RM50,000 cash. 🙂

nkkhoo says:

I pull in JinHou commnet from other blog for further discussion,

So let’s assume that AELB is correct, i.e. K-40 is 100 times more harmless than Th-232. The lite salt at 8.7 Bq/g is only at 0.087 of the safety threshold (100 Bq/g) and therefore the WLP waste is 69 times more hazardous than the lite salt (6/0.087)!!

Please prove my calculations wrong.

===================================================


1. No AELB link is quoted to substantiate so-called safety threshold numbers.

2. Jin Hou’s data interpretation is wrong (or try to deceit a bunch of brainless Malaysians)

Q1: Which professor teaches you that a threshold limit is proportional to hazardous doses.

Q2: Which genius tells you that you can compare two threshold limits from two materials side by side?

Q3: Which Nobel award winner tells you that you can draw a threshold limit for WLP with interpolation from your K-40 threshold limit?

Don’t be a simpleton to come to such silly conclusion. There is no international journals like Nature Science will buy in such Bodohland “syiok sendiri” approach.

Jin Hou, please come back to chop my dick off if this simpleton method is accepted by any international journal panels.

The right approach is to run a radioactive exposure tests on rats or monkeys with same amount of salt and WLP. You should press BN or UKM for a joint experiment with you if you have no confidence on them.

nkkhoo

===================================================

Another commenter rebutted JinHou’s threshold theory.

The reason why the thresholds are different is because thorium, once it gets into our body, is considered a heavy metal poison. You will die from heavy metal toxicity due to thorium exposure before you die from its radiation effects, but for that to happen, you’ll have to be inhaling plenty of thorium dust all day long.

Potassium-40 on the other hand is easily absorbed and utilized by our body, because it is chemically similar to regular potassium. Same goes for iodine radioisotopes – our thyroid glands will absorb them just as they would regular iodine.

Therein lies the difference between the different effects of potassium-40 and thorium-232 in the human body. It’s because of their chemical properties, and not because of their radiation output.

looihw88l says:

*
No, it does not mean that the calculation is right or wrong.

What it means is that whether the calculation is right or wrong, it is totally irrelevant to the present situation as we cannot get Thorium-232 in significant amounts into the body.

Thorium-232 does not pose a significant external radiation threat.

POTASSIUM-40 IS ALWAYS IN THE BODY AT 4,400 Bq AND THORIUM-232 IN NEVER IN THE BODY AT ANY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT.

Even in places like the south of the state of Kerala in India where the soil contains as much as 4,000 parts per million of Thorium, it has been estimated that the average amount of Th-232 in the human body is only about 30 micrograms.

As an analogy we can do all the calculations to show that a 10 ton bomb is far more dangerous than a 1 ton bomb.

However, if we have no means of delivering the 10 ton bomb to the enemy at the other end of the world, but we do have the means to deliver the 1 ton bomb to the enemy, as far as the enemy is concerned the 1 ton bomb is far more dangerous than the 10 ton bomb.

Warmest regards,

Dr Looi

nkkhoo says:

Anti-Lynas people always avoid to answer and rebut these seven questions from Lynas scientist. These info are hiding from aunties and uncles who cannot read and understand English and radioactivity.

====

The following has been confirmed way too many times and has NEVER EVER been proven to be false by anyone:

1. Radiation from the plant will be undetectable outside the boundaries;

2. None of the materials have to be signposted as ‘radioactive’ for transport – as per international regulations, since 1996;

3. In accordance with international guidelines, the plant can be allowed to operate pretty much anywhere in the world with minimal regulation;

4. Vast majority of tailings will have only half of thorium that is in normal Malaysian soil;

5. Thorium in other waste is insoluble and cannot ‘poison’ any plants, animals or the environment – even in theory;

6. Blending of tailings follows the basic safety principle of World Health Organisation, International Labour Organisation and seven more UN and other reputable international organisation – with guidelines on this existing in many countries;

7. Maximum dose to workers is not expected to be more that ~25% of the limit, therefore – in accordance with international guidelines – personal monitoring is not even necessary: the doses are so low that they can be assessed for a ‘work group’, no need for ‘individual’ assessments.

cheers, nick

Amus says:

This doctor’s benign radioactivity argument had been constantly challenged and yet he continued to use the same stale argument that the banana – or other benign objects – radioactivity is more than that of the lynas waste. This was one of the reply from soo jin hou that the good doctor has yet to answer to :

Soo Jin Hou:
According to Atomic Energy Licensing Board’s standard, the radioactive threshold for potassium-40 is 100 Bq/g whereas it is 1 Bq/g for thorium-232. This implies that potassium-40 is 100 times less hazardous than thorium-232.

That’s why bananas and potassium chloride salt are classified as non-radioactive as opposed to Lynas’ waste, despite the former having equivalent radioactivity.

nkkhoo says:

There are tons of replies from Dr. Looi to Jin Hou for this question. He never avoided such question.

http://wangsamajuformalaysia.blogspot.com/2012/05/lynas-waste-as-harmless-as-table-salt.html?showComment=1352234501165#c2615320759149440149

nkkhoo says:

I have challenged JinHou sending his technical paper to renowned International Journals for publication.

I have yet received any news from him.

nkkhoo says:

Amus, I do not think you understand how a threshold limit is set for different materials or subjects.

This below analogy is quite simple for you to understand the concept.

A bicycle safety threshold limit is 10 km/h (let say) and a F1 racing car threshold limit is 200 km/h (let say).

JinHou is trying to misled you that driving a F1 racing car is 20 times less dangerous than peddling a bicycle purely based on the threshold limit comparison.

There is no simple way to compare the safety feature of a bicycle and a racing car, they are built with different material and structure, different mass, different usage, etc.

This kind of threshold limit comparison is not scientific, invalid and wrong conceptually.

Do you still believe threshold limit is an ultimate standard to compare two different materials now?

What the JinHou’s say insofar is a rubbish.

nkkhoo says:

Can you ask So Jin Hou to show me the link for his AELB’s threshold data?

I googled it up and down, see nothing about K-40 radioactive threshold of 100 Bg/g. I admit that I am very stupid unlike Jin Hou who find the source of AELB reference and keep it himself.

AELB radioactive safety threshold in Lynas study is in energy level, mSv/yr, not Bq/g.

He quoted AELB but without giving any reference to its document. And some people believe his bullshit like a drunken fly.

He must pluck it from the thin air!

looihw88l says:

Dear NK Khoo,

Quote Amus: ” According to AELB (Atomic Energy Licensing Board’s standard), the radioactive threshold for K-40 is 100 Bq/g whereas it is 1 Bq/g for thorium-232. This implies that K-40 is 100 times less hazardous than Th-232.” Unquote.

Answer:

Even Dr. Gary H. Kramer, who is the Head of the National Internal Radiation Assessment Section at Health Canada and a world authority in radioactivity in Potassium salts, has a bone to pick with IAEA and ICRP with the above statement and is perplexed by the reason for downgrading the biological effect of K-40.

Since the average absorbed Beta energy of K-40 decay is 499 keV and the average absorbed Gamma energy is 156 keV, it can be easily calculated that the constant INTERNAL DOSAGE FROM K-40 IS IN THE RANGE OF 0.17 to 0.24 mSv/yr WHICH IS HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT AND IS ABOUT 120 TIMES THAT OF LYNAS WORST CASE SCENARIO OF 0.002 mSv/yr.

Note: The total internal dose from the NORMs in the body is about 0.42 mSv/yr with K-40 (4,400 Bq) contributing about 0.17 to 0.24 mSv/yr and the rest by C-14 (3,000 Bq) and other trace radionuclides.

If anybody wants to know more about this, they could read Dr Kramer’s letter to the IAEA with regards to this problem.

Quote Dr Kramer: “40K: Potassium is the 7th most abundant element on the earth’s surface and plays an integral part in life.

Reference Man (ICRP 1975) contains 140 g of potassium of which 0.0117% is the radioactive 40K, which means there is about 17 mg of 40K.

The activity of 17 mg 40K is approximately 4.4 kBq (or 0.06 Bq g-1) WHICH GIVES AN ANNUAL DOSE OF ~ 0.2 mSv.

Comparing these values with Table S2 one sees that the 40K in humans is well below the proposed exclusion level of 10 Bq g-1 but is 20 times larger than the IAEA’s 10 microSv exclusion dose.

If one assumes that the exclusion dose is harmless, then is a dose that is 20 times larger still harmless? It appears so as we live with this normally.

Potassium chloride can be found in large quantities in stores selling materials for water treatment. The potassium content is about 500 g kg-1.

Typically, the material is sold in 20 kg bags so each bag contains ~600 kBq of 40K giving a concentration of 30 Bq g-1.

This is well above the exclusion level yet the material is handled as non-radioactive. The external dose rate in close proximity to a typical display in these types of shops would be about 150 microSv hr-1.

A worker would only need to be near the pile for about 7 hours to exceed the public dose limit of 1 mSv.

Contrast 40K with the other exclusion level for ƒÀ/ƒÁ emitters (i.e., 0.1 Bq g-1).

When one considers that foods like bananas and potatoes exceed this level (~0.16 Bq g-1) it becomes clearer why the ICRP had to make a special case for 40K (the IAEA exempted 40K within the human body from consideration).

The question remains why the emissions of 40K (ƒÀ: 1.31 MeV max and 0.51 MeV ave; ƒÁ: 1.46 MeV) can be considered to be less harmful than other beta emitters by a factor of a 100?”

Unquote.

Dr Looi

looihw88l says:

*
*
Amus quoting Soo Jin Hou:

“According to AELB’s (Atomic Energy Licensing Board)standard, the radioactive threshold for K-40 is 100 Bq/g,

whereas it is 1 Bq/g for Thorium-232.

This implies that K-40 is 100 times less hazardous than Thorium-232.” Unquote.

ANSWER:

1 gram of Pure Natural Metallic Potassium (mixture of K-39, K-40 and K-41) = 32 Bq/g

Therefore to get 100 Bq/gm Metallic Potassium we need to enrich the Natural Metallic Potassium by 312%.

IN ORDER TO ENRICH A RADIONUCLIDE IN A MIXTURE OF ISOTOPES, JUST LIKE ENRICHMENT OF URANIUM, WE NEED HIGHLY SOPHISTICATED MACHINERY WHICH CAN ONLY BE FOUND IN THE MOST ADVANCED COUNTRY WITH REALLY SMART SCIENTISTS.

I have not heard of any country that is enriching Potassium. So to say that the radioactive threshold for K-40 is 100 Bq/g is rather ODD and INCOMPREHENSIBLE !

Dr Looi
*
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yf4ZFngQQhg

nkkhoo says:

He is also very smart to interpolate his K-40 radioactive threshold to get WLP threshold.

I have to say only Bodohland can produce such engineer buruk found nowhere else.

looihw88l says:

Dear NK,

It looks like you can buy enriched Potassium nowadays, but it costs US $20,000 per gram or US $20 million per Kg for enriched Potassium with 4.5% of K-40!

So we still do not need to worry about the exclusion threshold of K-40 as the trade for this element is miniscule.

Warmest regards,

Dr Looi.

nkkhoo says:

“Even in our body, we have about 4,400 becquerel (Bq) whereas the Lynas waste and ore contain less than 6 Bq per gram. This is already 124 times more than the Lynas worst case scenario. So why complain about a Lynas plant in Gebeng here where there are 124 Lynas plants in your body producing radioactivity?”

=========================================================

Dr Looi, can you explain this? A total of 4,400 Bq in our body or 4,400 per gram in the body?

I believe 124 Lynas plants given by Dr. Looi is over exaggerated analogy and wrong.

My quick calculation says otherwise. Let use a worst case number, 8,000 Bq for a human body. Source: http://www.hicare.jp/en/09/hi08.html

The adult average weight is 75 kg or 75,000 grams.

Therefore, radioactivity in human body is 0.11 Bq per gram.

I hope Dr. Looi corrects this error with Bernama.

looihw88l says:

Dear NK Khoo,

Quote “Even in our body, we have about 4,400 becquerel (Bq) whereas the Lynas waste and ore contain less than 6 Bq per gram.
This is already 124 times more than the Lynas worst case scenario.” Unquote.

I am sorry that there is some confusion over the statements above. This is because the Bernama reporter is not technically orientated and forgot to mention the biological (Sv) dose of K-40 and jumps from activity (Bq) to the biological dose of the Lynas worse case scenario.

*
We have to realise that Potassium is ALWAYS in the human body and is strictly homeostatically controlled at 140 g to 200 g (average about 4,400 Bq) per human body, whereas Th-232 IS NEVER IN THE HUMAN BODY IN SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS.

Note: Bq is the activity and the 4,400 Bq from K-40 has to be converted to the biological dosage before it can be used to compare with exposure from other sources.

Since the average absorbed Beta energy of K-40 decay is 499 keV and the average absorbed Gamma energy is 156 keV, it can be easily calculated that the INTERNAL DOSAGE from K-40 ~ 0.24 mSv/yr or rather a range of 0.17 to 0.24 mSv/yr.

Since the worst case scenario for Lynas is 0.002 mSv/y, the biological radiation dose is about 120 times the Lynas worst case scenario.

To put in another way,

ALTHOUGH THE DIET INTAKE OF POTASSIUM DOES NOT, OVER THE LONG TERM, INFLUENCE THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF POTASSIUM IN THE BODY, THE BODY IS EXPOSED TO A BIOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT DOSE OF RADIATION FROM THIS RADIONUCLIDE.

The INTERNAL TOTAL DOSE TO A TYPICAL MEMBER OF THE POPULATION FROM INTERNAL RADIONUCLIDES IS ABOUT 0.42 mSv/y AND APPROXIMATELY 0.17 TO 0.29 mSv/yr IS DUE TO THE K-40 IN THE BODY. The rest of the dosage is from C-14 and other trace radionuclides.

The internal dose from the NORMS in the body is equivalent to 210 x the dosage from Lynas worst case scenario.

Thorium-232 is never in the body in significant amounts. In fact the average level of Thorium-232 in an average body has been estimated to be less than 30 micrograms per person.

IN OTHER WORDS, TO GET 30 GRAMS OR 1 OUNCE OF TH-232, WE NEED TO EXTRACT IT FROM 1,000,000 HUMAN BODIES. Even in places with high Th-232 in the soil like in Kerala, the load of Th-232 is not significantly raised.

Most of the human data for thorium exposure comes from diagnostic studies. A massive dose of 1 to 2 vials of 25 ml of 25% Colloidal thorium-232 dioxide (Thorotrast) was injected into patients as a radiographic contrast medium between 1928 and 1955.

Thorium dioxide in Thorotrast is insoluble and in a colloidal form i.e. in the form of particles. All insoluble particles are taken up by the macrophages and other cells of the reticulo-endothelial (RE) system and deposited into the tissues of the RE system i.e. the liver, spleen, lymph nodes, bone marrow and parts of the small intestines and not just the bones.

In humans, where will the SOLUBLE AND NON-PARTICULATE FORM OF THORIUM SALTS BE DEPOSITED and what is the renal clearance and hence their biological half life?

Nobody really knows because, for obvious reasons, all studies done on Thorium are conducted on animals. The results are only applicable to rats, rabbits, cats and dogs !

Thorium-232 in clay soil cannot enter the body by ingestion as it is strongly adsorbed by clay. In the crystalline or soluble form in the absence of clay, it is estimated only 0.02 to 0.05% is absorbed. When mixed with clay only a minuscule amount is absorbed.

Inhalation of Thorium-232 only occurs if there are particles of less than 5 microns in the air, most effective are particles that are about 1 to 2 microns.
These particles are found only in the Uranium or Thorium mines or where there is combustion.

The ore used by Lynas are moist and the whole process do not involve any dry powder at any stage. So inhalation is not a problem in the ultra-modern, state of the art Lynas plant.

As such to compare the renal clearance of Potassium with that of Thorium-232 clearance and conclude that Th-232 is a few hundred times more dangerous radiologically, do not make any sense because Th-232 is NEVER in the body in any significant quantity and Potassium is ALWAYS in the body in biologically significant amounts.

Dr Looi.

nkkhoo says:

Dr Looi, it’s better to ask Bernama to correct the error, otherwise anti-Lynas supporters will use it to attack you as a spinning old doctor as usual.