this post was submitted on 23 Nov 2024
109 points (99.1% liked)

Asklemmy

44160 readers
1485 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I came up with this question right after I wanted to take apart a microwave to see why it wasn't heating anything before I remembered that that's a very, VERY bad idea

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] culpritus@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago (5 children)

I heard once that old amoke detectors have some radioactive isotopes in them. Not sure how true or dangerous but sounds bad.

[โ€“] DefinitelyNotAPhone@hexbear.net 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Ionization chamber smoke detectors have a tiny grain of Americium in them, which is radioactive. However, the radiation is almost entirely alpha particles which are relatively low risk as they don't penetrate skin particularly well.

They are also still sold, though you should buy the other kind (which use light beams instead) because they're significantly better at their jobs.

[โ€“] barrbaric@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They're low risk unless you ingest them, because then they're hitting internal organs directly.

[โ€“] TheDrink@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago

Also if you pool the Americium from 100 detectors together they become pretty dangerous.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)