Abstract
Analytical and statistical uncertainties associated with low-level measurements may lead to spurious conclusions regarding the behavior of some plutonium isotopes. The general aspect of the methodology used in sample collection, preparation, radiochemical separation and alpha spectroscopy analysis of plutonium is considered. Biases and experimental artifacts that may produce inaccurate results and improper conclusions are discussed with examples from our research and from the open literature.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
L. R. Anspaugh, L. R. Bauer, E. H. Essington, R. O. Gilbert, W. C. Hanson, S. A. Ibrahim, J. R. Kercher, C. A. Little, R. G. Schreckise, Report of a Workshop, US Department of Energy, Las Vegas, NV, 1990. UCRL-1D-110051, 1993.
F. W. Whicker, S. A. Ibrahim, Final report to EG&G Rocky Flats. Department of Radiological Health Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 1993.
C. A. Little, F. W. Whicker, T. F. Winsor, J. Environ. Qual. 9 (1980) 350.
S. A. Ibrahim, S. B. Webb, F. W. Whicker, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem. 177 (1994) 127.
NCRP, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 45, 1975.
UNSCEAR, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effect of Atomic Radiation, New York, NY, 1977.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ibrahim, S.A., Webb, S.B. & Kattel, A. Sources of misinterpretation for environmental plutonium measurements. Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, Articles 194, 213–219 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02037630
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02037630