Skip to main content
Answer was given using millisieverts instead of microsieverts. Correct scale but use same unit for comparison.
Source Link

I don't think 0.96 $\mu$Sv/h or 365.25  $\times$24 24 $\times$0 0.96 = 8.5,415 microsieverts/year is a problem. To put this in perspective,

  • Every year, we receive natural radiation : 2,000 microsieverts
  • CT scan : 7,000 microsieverts
  • Additional radiation in a life time for those living around Fukusima : 10,000 microsieverts
  • US radiation worker in a year : 50,000 microsieverts
  • Astronaut in the International Space Station for 6 months : 80,000 microsieverts
  • In a smoker's lung in a year : 160,000 microsieverts

Therefore, don't worry about the amount of radiation leaking from your lab. It is very very small.

P.S. I get this number from a Veritasium's video called "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth".

I don't think 0.96 $\mu$Sv/h or 365.25$\times$24$\times$0.96 = 8.5 microsieverts/year is a problem. To put this in perspective,

  • Every year, we receive natural radiation : 2,000 microsieverts
  • CT scan : 7,000 microsieverts
  • Additional radiation in a life time for those living around Fukusima : 10,000 microsieverts
  • US radiation worker in a year : 50,000 microsieverts
  • Astronaut in the International Space Station for 6 months : 80,000 microsieverts
  • In a smoker's lung in a year : 160,000 microsieverts

Therefore, don't worry about the amount of radiation leaking from your lab. It is very very small.

P.S. I get this number from a Veritasium's video called "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth".

I don't think 0.96 $\mu$Sv/h or 365.25  $\times$ 24 $\times$ 0.96 = 8,415 microsieverts/year is a problem. To put this in perspective,

  • Every year, we receive natural radiation : 2,000 microsieverts
  • CT scan : 7,000 microsieverts
  • Additional radiation in a life time for those living around Fukusima : 10,000 microsieverts
  • US radiation worker in a year : 50,000 microsieverts
  • Astronaut in the International Space Station for 6 months : 80,000 microsieverts
  • In a smoker's lung in a year : 160,000 microsieverts

Therefore, don't worry about the amount of radiation leaking from your lab. It is very very small.

P.S. I get this number from a Veritasium's video called "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth".

added 57 characters in body
Source Link
TBBT
  • 2.8k
  • 6
  • 24
  • 42

I don't think 0.96 0.96 $\mu$Sv/h or 365.25$\times$24$\times$0.96 = 8.5 microsieverts/year is a problem. To put this in perspective,

  • Every year, we receive natural radiation : 2,000 microsieverts
  • CT scan : 7,000 microsieverts
  • Additional radiation in a life time for those living around Fukusima : 10,000 microsieverts
  • US radiation worker in a year : 50,000 microsieverts
  • Astronaut in the International Space Station for 6 months : 80,000 microsieverts
  • In a smoker's lung in a year : 160,000 microsieverts

Therefore, don't worry about the amount of radiation leaking from your lab. It is very very small.

P.S. I get this number from a Veritasium's video called "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth".

I don't think 0.96 $\mu$Sv/h is a problem. To put this in perspective,

  • Every year, we receive natural radiation : 2,000 microsieverts
  • CT scan : 7,000 microsieverts
  • Additional radiation in a life time for those living around Fukusima : 10,000 microsieverts
  • US radiation worker in a year : 50,000 microsieverts
  • Astronaut in the International Space Station for 6 months : 80,000 microsieverts
  • In a smoker's lung in a year : 160,000 microsieverts

Therefore, don't worry about the amount of radiation leaking from your lab. It is very very small.

P.S. I get this number from a Veritasium's video called "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth".

I don't think 0.96 $\mu$Sv/h or 365.25$\times$24$\times$0.96 = 8.5 microsieverts/year is a problem. To put this in perspective,

  • Every year, we receive natural radiation : 2,000 microsieverts
  • CT scan : 7,000 microsieverts
  • Additional radiation in a life time for those living around Fukusima : 10,000 microsieverts
  • US radiation worker in a year : 50,000 microsieverts
  • Astronaut in the International Space Station for 6 months : 80,000 microsieverts
  • In a smoker's lung in a year : 160,000 microsieverts

Therefore, don't worry about the amount of radiation leaking from your lab. It is very very small.

P.S. I get this number from a Veritasium's video called "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth".

Source Link
TBBT
  • 2.8k
  • 6
  • 24
  • 42

I don't think 0.96 $\mu$Sv/h is a problem. To put this in perspective,

  • Every year, we receive natural radiation : 2,000 microsieverts
  • CT scan : 7,000 microsieverts
  • Additional radiation in a life time for those living around Fukusima : 10,000 microsieverts
  • US radiation worker in a year : 50,000 microsieverts
  • Astronaut in the International Space Station for 6 months : 80,000 microsieverts
  • In a smoker's lung in a year : 160,000 microsieverts

Therefore, don't worry about the amount of radiation leaking from your lab. It is very very small.

P.S. I get this number from a Veritasium's video called "The Most Radioactive Places on Earth".