Ambient office = 99 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 137 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 139 nanosieverts per hour

Blueberry from Central Market = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 116 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 103 nanosieverts per hour

     A collaboration between researchers at the University of Sheffield in the UK and the University of Hawaii in the US has resulted in the development of a design for an antimatter detector that can measure antineutrinos and create a profile for the nuclear reaction emitting it. This system could help determine if the reactor is being used to generate power or create weapons even from hundreds of miles away, a press release said.
     With nuclear fission technology poised for a major comeback as a means to power the globe with low-carbon energy, there are also concerns about nuclear power reactors being used as cover for developing nuclear weapons.
     Both weapons and nuclear fuel are made with uranium, with the difference being the level enrichment, which measures fissile material in the fuel. While nuclear fuel is not enriched beyond five percent U-235, enrichment in a nuclear bomb exceeds ninety percent U-235.
     By measuring the antineutrino count in an area, researchers can determine the existence of a nuclear reactor, its distance from the detector, and its operational cycle.
     Much like neutrinos in matter, antineutrinos are chargeless particles that have almost zero mass but exist in an antimatter form. Most antineutrinos are created during nuclear reactions.
     Steve Wilson is a research associate at the University of Sheffield. He explained that “Around 10^20 (100 billion billion) antineutrinos are produced by a typical 3 GW thermal power station. As they very rarely interact, they can, in principle, travel infinitely far and cross the entire Universe.” By capturing the antineutrinos, researchers are able determine the exact isotope of nuclear fuel and the operational cycle of the reactor.
     To capture the passage of antineutrinos, the researchers utilized the well-known phenomenon of Chernekov radiation. Wilson explained that “When a charged particle, such as an electron, travels faster than the speed of light in a medium like water, light slows down, but the antineutrino does not. The antineutrino causes a positron, the electron’s antiparticle, to briefly travel faster than the speed of light. This produces the light equivalent of a sonic boom, a cone of blue light that can be observed. Observing this effect indicates that a neutrino may have interacted.”
     Wilson and his team have designed an antineutrino detector that is seventy-two feet in diameter and would contain several thousand tons of water and an organic liquid scintillator. Wilson added that “The components used to detect light in this kind of detector require in the region of 1000 to 2000 V, and there would be over 4000 of them.” His team proposes that it construct a detector in northern England, and use it to detect antineutrinos from all of the UK’s reactors and even those in France.
     There is a serious problem with Wilson’s plan, however. Cosmic rays can also impact the observation of neutrinos. When cosmic rays impact the Earth’s upper atmosphere, they produce particles called muons.
     Wilson elaborated that “When muons reach the detector, they streak through and leave a large trail of light from Cherenkov radiation. They can also smash apart the molecules in the detector, leaving fragments of the broken particle that are unstable and decay radioactively. This decay can look very similar to that produced by an antineutrino.”
     Wilson said that a detector of this size could cost one hundred million dollars or more, but for now, the researcher is happy to stimulate discussions on how such a detector could be utilized.

Ambient office = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 118 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 121 nanosieverts per hour

Avocado from Central Market = 93 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 100 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 89 nanosieverts per hour

Part 3 of 3 Parts (Please read Parts 1 and 2 first)
     Before it was commissioned, the Arighaat was drawing attention in China. State-run newspaper Global Times quoting unnamed Chinese experts as saying India should not “use it to flex muscles. Nuclear weapons should be used in safeguarding peace and stability, not muscle flexing or nuclear blackmailing.”
     Other analysts have said India is just responding to increased pressure from Beijing, which now has the largest navy in the world in terms of the number of vessels.
     Kandlikar Venkatesh is an analyst at the GlobalData analytics company. He said, “China’s extensive naval buildup and the regular deployment of fully armed nuclear deterrence patrols by Type 094 submarines (the Jin class) are perceived as a threat by other countries in the region, including India. The deployment of Arihant-class submarines will provide India some degree of parity with its Chinese counterparts.” He also said that adding that more submarine investment is coming, thirty-one billion six hundred billion over the next decade.
     Venkatesh said that bigger subs and longer-range missiles are reportedly under development. This could eventually see India field nuclear-tipped weapons with a range of seven thousand five hundred miles.  
    Abhijit Singh is a senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation in Mumbai. He said that it’s not just China that India is looking at with its sub development. Singh wrote in an op-ed that “The real impetus for India’s expansion of its second-strike capability is, in fact, the significant growth of the Pakistani and Chinese navies in the Indian Ocean.” He added that Pakistan is in the process of acquiring eight Chinese-designed Type 039B attack submarines as it modernizes its fleet. “Pakistan continues to narrow the sea-power differential with India.”
     India and Pakistan have long been fighting in the disputed and heavily militarized region of Kashmir. Both countries claim in its entirety. A de facto border called the Line of Control divides it between India and Pakistan. This dispute has led to three wars between the two nations. China is one of Pakistan’s most important international backers and a major investor in the country.
     Korda, the Federation of American Scientists expert, said that it’s not the subs themselves that give him cause for worry, but the multiple-warhead missiles they carry.
     That technology is known as Multiple Independently targetable Reentry Vehicles (MIRV). It also applies to land-based missiles and can be destabilizing, Korda argues. He added that “India, Pakistan, and China are all developing missiles that can carry multiple warheads.”
     India announced in April that it had joined the MIRV club, which includes the US, UK, France, Russia and China, with a successful test of the domestically developed Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missile. Pakistan has also claimed to have MIRV technology, but experts say the claim is unverified.
     Adversaries need to assume such claims are true if they don’t want to be caught unprepared in the event of actual conflict. Korda said, “These systems are ideal first-strike weapons, but they are also the first weapons that would likely be targeted in an opposing first strike. As a result, their deployment across the region will likely kick the collective arms race into a higher gear, as countries seek to build missile defenses and conventional strike options that can counter them.”

Ambient office = 81 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 87 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 87 nanosieverts per hour

White onion from Central Market = 115 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 69 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 58 nanosieverts per hour

Part 2 of 3 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
     The Indian government has been very tight-lipped about the capabilities of the Arighaat. They said that only “technological advancements undertaken indigenously on this submarine make it significantly more advanced than its predecessor,” which was commissioned eight years ago. India has not released pictures of Arighaat since its August 29th commissioning.
     Naval analysts say India is clearly on track to develop a subsea nuclear deterrent that packs enough second-strike capability to deter Beijing from taking hostile action against it.
     India has newer, bigger subs with longer-range missiles in the works. Those missiles could have ranges up to three thousand seven hundred and twenty-eight miles, according to analysts, enabling strikes anywhere in China.
     Matt Korda is an associate director for the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. He said, “Although India’s sea-based nuclear deterrent remains in relative infancy, the country clearly has an ambition to field a sophisticated naval nuclear force with ballistic missile submarines at its core.”
     Korda continued that “These submarines are a critical piece of India’s broader efforts to establish a secure second-strike nuclear force thus allowing India to hold both Pakistani and Chinese targets at risk, particularly with its eventual third and fourth submarines (which will have more missile tubes and longer-range missiles).”
     India’s next ballistic missile subs could be years away if history is any predictor of the future. Arighaat was launched almost seven years ago. If that timeline from launch to commissioning applies to the next Indian ballistic missile sub, it won’t join the service until sometime in 2030.
     Tom Shugart is an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security and a former US Navy submarine commander. He said that a second ballistic missile sub does do something for India’s naval and military psyche.
     Shugart said that “It is a marker of being a great power.” He pointed out that the five members of the United Nations Security Council including the United States, Russia, China, the United Kingdom and France all have nuclear-capable ballistic missile submarines, or SSBNs.
     The smallest of those SSBN fleets are those of Britain and France. They have four boats each, a number Shugart sees as the minimum for keeping one at sea at all times.
     Nuclear-powered submarines are very complex machines. When regular maintenance is needed or when things break and need repairing, the work can take a month or more.
     The U.S. Navy’s Ohio-class SSBNs spend on average of seventy-seven days at sea followed by thirty five days in port for maintenance, according to the US Navy’s Pacific Fleet. Refits and overhauls can take up to twenty-seven months for a nuclear reactor refueling, according to US Navy documents.
     Shugart continued, “By having more than one, there’s a better chance India will be able to have one of them at sea in a survivable status. But to keep one at sea at all times is probably going to take more than two boats.”
Please read Part 3 next