CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Radiation Warning (or not) symbols on Evan's bikes

(15 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. Beano
    Member

    Interesting spot at lunchtime whilst at Evans Cycles. I've a good mind to take this up with Evans as I think it is bad practice, completely unnecessary and has the potential to cause alarm.

    Hopefully these images come through as first time trying to upload an image.

    My job, as a Radiation Protection Adviser, is to advise people on how to work with ionising radiations safely. The misuse of the radiation symbol is a personal irritation of mine and has the potential to cause an incident/confusion later on down the line.

    A hazard warning symbol is there to warn persons of the hazard not to NOT warn them that there is no hazard.

    Would anyone who's bike 'glowed' in the dark ACTUALLY believe that their bike may be radioactive!? is that what the world is coming to?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  2. Morningsider
    Member

    I knew it - cyclists simply aren't content with making everyone drive at 20mph. They now intend to subject otherwise law abiding motorists to nuclear armageddon.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  3. stiltskin
    Member

    I take it that you also don't own a Nukeproof mtb? If anyone deserves being done under the Trades Description Act it's them. I have grave reservations about how effective the brand would be in the event of a nuclear disaster.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  4. Beano
    Member

    null

    NAIR invoked (National Arrangements for Incidents Involving Radiation)
    Eight fire engines
    specialist emergency support vehicle
    28 fire service personnel
    street closed - 100 yard cordon
    decontamination shower erected
    etc etc

    all for some tiny school sources that many in their 50s/60s might have played with at school. absolutely no risk to the public but probably cost the tax payer tens of thousands...

    Posted 9 years ago #

  5. Min
    Member

    Yes, the Fire Brigade really don't like the radiation symbol.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  6. Beano
    Member

    @stiltskin - grumble grumble at the NukeProof website...

    Posted 9 years ago #

  7. DaveC
    Member

    Beano, could you do somethig about Dalgety Bay? We have a radioactive beach but no radioactive symbols on the signs. I feel me are loosing out.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  8. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Both naturally occurring isotopes of lithium are stable so the stickers are quite unnecessary. Mind you, the oddest things can wind up glowing in the dark;

    http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1908&dat=19840203&id=-JcfAAAAIBAJ&sjid=VdQEAAAAIBAJ&pg=3893,2708437

    Posted 9 years ago #

  9. Beano
    Member

    @DaveC - Dalgety Bay seems to have got caught in a long drawn out battle between SEPA and the MoD to get it cleaned up. Don't think both parties are blameless but I believe things are progressing but I haven't checked up in a while.

    The omission of a symbol is probably deliberate so as not to instigate panic.

    As long as you are not eating the sand in large volumes then you should be fine. Chances of ingesting a radioactive particle are tiny; even if you did ingest one the radiation dose to you might be no different than that of a CT body scan and people seem to have no problem with that concept (granted a CT scan is for your benefit; eating a radioactive particle inadvertently is not).

    Posted 9 years ago #

  10. Stickman
    Member

    Beano, perhaps you can confirm/deny a story I was told:

    You can take bananas or Brazil nuts into a nuclear power plant for lunch, but you have to eat them there and not take them home. The naturally occurring radioactivity from the potassium in them would mean they would be classed as low-level nuclear waste and have to go through proper disposal methods.

    Urban myth?

    Posted 9 years ago #

  11. Beano
    Member

    @stickman - I've worked on a few nuclear plants (only the ones they are decommissioning) and haven't come across that before so it sounds like an urban myth.

    However, pre-2011 some sites insisted on a very low clearance level of 0.4 Bq/g which you could exceed with Brazil nuts so there might have been some weight to the myth.

    I did work on a site where the reactor bases got filled with groundwater and the site had trouble getting agreement from the SEPA to get rid of it even though it was more radioactive when it passed INTO the nuclear site (as most water is mildly radioactive).

    Posted 9 years ago #

  12. Uberuce
    Member

    https://what-if.xkcd.com/29/

    Posted 9 years ago #

  13. Stickman
    Member

    @Beano: Cheers for that.

    @Uberuce: I remember reading that previously. I like xkcd :-)

    Posted 9 years ago #

  14. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    And I was getting on so well with my tax return, Uberuce.

    Posted 9 years ago #

  15. acsimpson
    Member

    A little off topic but a quick reminder to anyone who took Evans up on their pre Christmas Voucher offer and haven't yet spent the "free" voucher. I remembered last night that they expire on Saturday so now have a new pair of shorts in the post.

    Posted 9 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin