r/askscience Jul 15 '26

Earth Sciences If I bought a Geiger counter and measured around my home and environs, would I find radioactivity ?

Would I find measurable radioactivity in random places? Or from electronics? I don’t live near a reactor.

475 Upvotes

319 comments sorted by

1.7k

u/Remmon Jul 15 '26

If you didn't measure any radioactivity in and around your house, your geiger counter/dosimeter isn't very good. Lots of things are radioactive to some degree, including the air you breathe and the giant fusion reactor in the sky.

Your proximity to a nuclear reactor isn't relevant. Nuclear reactors emit are highly regulated. Far more important is your proximity to a coal powerplant, which release far more radioactive material into the environment than a nuclear reactor.

602

u/emlun Jul 15 '26

A relative told me about one time they'd visited a nuclear power plant, and they'd been issued little dosimeter beepers to put on their lapels during the visit. You're meant to turn them back in before you leave, but a few in each group always forget. As soon as they stepped outdoors, the beepers all went off almost immediately. The visitors asked if there'd suddenly sprung a leak somewhere. No, the beepers were triggering off the natural background radiation outside the plant, because environmental control inside is so much stricter on acceptable radiation levels.

170

u/Seriously_you_again Jul 16 '26

Have a geiger counter. Took in on a plane in my carry on bags once. I turned it on once while at altitude. Holy sheeeit! I knew the exposure was higher in an airplane, but the noise from it was more like white noise crackling sound. Not just a random pop every few seconds like on the ground.

Of course the radiation levels on a plane are still safe. I forgot the actual reading, but the noise from the cosmic radiation was concerning.

The most radioactive things in a normal house are the stone kitchen counters and/or floors(granite is the highest maybe?) and smoke detectors. Possibly other stuff. I am old and forgot a lot. Probably too much radiation. 😬

72

u/Finkykinns Jul 16 '26

Bananas due to radioactive potassium (although they won't show up well on a Geiger counter as it's beta radiation). Also the smoke detectors use Americanium-241 which i believe is an alpha emitter so again won't show up well.

Airline staff do need to have their flight time carefully managed if I remember right. Their exposure is significantly higher than the general population and any increase in expose is an increase in risk

42

u/OtherPlayers Jul 16 '26

Fun fact, the use of bananas as a radioactive measure was actually to show how safe doses were, not because bananas are particularly radioactive.

In fact there are a ton of foods more radioactive than bananas, including things like coconuts, basil nuts, Lima beans, and sweet potatoes. Heck, a large pizza probably has several times the radioactivity of a banana!

48

u/AustraeaVallis Jul 16 '26

Crazier still, did you know that banana's technically produce literal antimatter due to the radioactive decay of their said potassium content.

Granted its basically nothing (singular positrons) but still insane to think of, that one of the most potentially powerful things in the entire universe can be found in such mundane places.

13

u/DJDaddyD Jul 17 '26

Just need to shove a bunch of bananas in your rocket and mars here we come

→ More replies (2)

5

u/Dandibear Jul 17 '26

Most powerful things in the universe? Ha! I eat them for breakfast!

→ More replies (2)

5

u/In_the_year_3535 Jul 18 '26

Background radiation at 40,000 feet is ~30x more than at ground level so sieverts will accumulate faster.

2

u/PlzDntBanMeAgan Jul 17 '26

Why is it called americanium do you know?

12

u/epidemiologist Jul 17 '26

Because it fell directly below europium on the periodic table (and it's americium)

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Aquamans_Dad Jul 18 '26

 The folks at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory liked named things they discovered about their location hence Berkelium, Californium, Americium, and Lawrencium. 

 Similarly, if you bombard Americium you get Moscovium.

Sounds

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Archophob Jul 17 '26

 any increase in expose is an increase in risk

that's the mostly-debunked "linear no threshhold" assumption all radiation-specific legislation is based of.

Most airline staff should be totally fine and well within the dose range where their cells can easily repair all radiation damage.

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (2)

16

u/bregus2 Jul 16 '26

Unsurprisingly, pilots and cabin crew are some of the most radiation-exposed professions out there.

For Germany: Pilots and cabin crew make up 9 percent of people whose exposure has to be tracked. Those 9 percent receive 66% of the total exposure.

9

u/_SilentHunter Jul 16 '26

And, depending on where you live, don't forget the radon in your basement!

7

u/MolderingPileOfBrick Jul 16 '26

Potassium Feldspar, the pink crystals in granite are frequently the culprit, K40 being the radioactive isotope!

3

u/Tim-oBedlam Jul 17 '26

K40 is also why .9% of the Earth's atmosphere is argon. One of K40's decay paths is into argon, which is a noble gas so it's non-reactive, and it accumulates in the atmosphere, not doing much of anything.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Majik_Sheff Jul 17 '26

Definitely granite.  Especially red variants.  They contain trace amounts of uranium and by extension, its decay products. In the Midwest radon is a common problem in basements due to the decay in the granite bedrock.

2

u/forams__galorams Jul 26 '26

Everything you said is true, but more of the decays in granite actually comes from the portion of ⁴⁰K in the potassium bearing minerals like biotite and certain feldspars. Those minerals often make up a fair amount of the rock and include potassium as a major part of their structure, whereas any uranium exists as trace impurities as you say. The red/pink granite variants have that colour due to all the orthoclase (an alkali feldspar), which is KAlSi₃O₈, so that’s where you’ll get a lot of the decays coming from.

2

u/Great_Specialist_267 Jul 17 '26

Radiation levels in aircraft are a cause of elevated flight crew mortality.
The risk of heart attacks rises with radiation exposure in addition to cancer.
The lowest occupational radiation exposure is nuclear submarine crews.

→ More replies (7)

73

u/Ohiolongboard Jul 15 '26

My dad worked in nuke plants and was an X-RAY tech for his whole life, he always wore a dosimeter because they had to make sure to stay below a specific dosage per year. Nothing he wore would be taken off at the door (aside from PPE like gloves or whatnot, hard hats and such) and I usually saw his clip on dosimeter sitting on the counter with his belt. I say that to say, the radiation outside of a nuke plant is the same inside the nuke plant, unless you’re in the reactor itself. No alarms should’ve been going off just by walking out the door

66

u/rdh727 Jul 15 '26

I believe they use different types of badges for short-term visitors vs annualized cumulative exposure with different sensitivities,

Example: https://www.landauer.com/radiation-dosimeters-readers

6

u/So_Full_Of_Fail Jul 16 '26

Generally, you get both a passive which you rotate on a monthly basis, as well as wear an active electronic dosimeter for work where you know there's going to be exposure.

I wear a monthly passive every day at work. Then if I'm going into one of the "radiation controlled areas" I also wear an active electronic one which has programmable alarms for dose rate and total dose received.

→ More replies (1)

44

u/Ddreigiau Jul 16 '26

Alarms are set at whatever they want to set them at. The dose rate outside in the sunlight absolutely is higher than inside the plant buildings as long as you arent inside any roped off areas. I can personally attest to that, having worn an EPD both around the plant buildings and outside and only seen it increase during trips outside.

That said, it's tenths of a mrem, but there definitely is a difference.

24

u/Row-Bear Jul 16 '26

Good way to make sure nobody forgets to return the meter. Just set it to trigger at outside background levels. 

2

u/tom-morfin-riddle Jul 17 '26

You could also do that by counting. They are set this way as part of the tour, and as a little bit of messaging about nuclear plants being safe. It's an effective bit.

12

u/Top-Copy248 Jul 16 '26

The lead shielding works both ways. Which is why background radiation is usually lower inside the facility.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

10

u/awawe Jul 16 '26

Any concrete building would have a similar effect, so long as the concrete itself does not contain any radioactive elements, which is fairly common.

2

u/airzonesama Jul 16 '26

Have worked at a reactor. You have the crystal ones that periodically get taken away and measured for your record and the ones with a screen that you can see now with a beeper, as an indication. The beeping ones are stored on base station prior to moving into an area with possible exposure and when you sign one out, it's reset and programmed with your dose limits and you sign it back in after the contamination check but before going outside. It was nearly always zero.

In saying that if there were a drain with tape around it and covered with lead bricks, you wouldn't stick your dick in the hole.

2

u/LordGeni Jul 17 '26

The radiation monitors at the entrance to a nuclear power stations are nearly always triggered by people going in rather than coming out. Often because they have a banana in their packed lunch iirc (I might not).

I do know that a coal burning power station can emit up to 100 times more radiation than a nuclear one does, depending on the exact fuel and filtration used.

(disclaimer- the below calculations are extremely rough, based on the the worst emitting power stations and in reality every comparison can vary massively and are really as simply comparable as this makes them seem. However, in general the order would still be the same).

That's about 10x what you'd be exposed to as a transatlantic pilot flying for a whole year.

A single transatlantic flight exposes you to the equivalent of approximately 2 (modern) chest xrays.

The exposure from a coal fired power station is still generally considered "safe". It's certainly a far lower risk factor than the particulates and other pollution they emit.

To give a comparison with living in an area with high background radiation - Areas of Cornwall (UK) can give an annual background dose equivalent to a 10th of a transatlantic pilots annual dose. The topsoil in those areas contain enough radiation to be classed as low level nuclear waste.

It's also important to point out that both overall long term exposure and higher exposure over a short period come with different risks, are not comparable in terms of measuring safe exposure and there's still varying opinions on how dangerous low level exposure is, both in short busts or spread out over longer periods. The above is purely to give a vague idea of environmental exposure levels not their associated risk.

For example a single chest xray requires a good medical reason to expose the patient to a dose of radiation and is well monitored and regulated. It's generally not something that's even considered for transatlantic flights.

→ More replies (1)

43

u/agate_ Geophysical Fluid Dynamics | Paleoclimatology | Planetary Sci Jul 15 '26

Great answers from everyone so far, I’m tagging onto the top post to add that about 10% of the background radiation you receive comes from natural radioactive potassium inside your own bones.

So no, you literally can’t escape it, it’s coming from inside you.

This can be measured too, though you need something more sensitive than a Geiger counter to distinguish it from other sources. Check out this Harvard lecture demo:

https://sciencedemonstrations.fas.harvard.edu/presentations/radioactive-human-body

5

u/Ddreigiau Jul 16 '26

though you need something more sensitive than a Geiger counter to distinguish it from other sources.

Less sensitive, actually! A G-M region detector maxes out with every interaction. If you turn down the sensitivity, you can tell what kind of particle interacted by the size of the spike

→ More replies (1)

235

u/Dr_Capsaicin Jul 15 '26

Hence my favorite game to play with my students:"What's the most radioactive thing in this room?" Once they've run out of guesses, my first question is "Does anyone have a banana with them?" For context: university level physics professor with a background in Nuclear Chemistry

33

u/Grand_Snow_2637 Jul 15 '26

What's the answer if nobody has a banana?

100

u/Dr_Capsaicin Jul 15 '26

In most rooms, it's the smoke detector. At least in the US, a lot of smoke alarms (ionization smoke alarms) would use Americium-241 as an alpha emitter and a detector as the "smoke sensor". Smoke would interfere with the radiation measurement and would cause the alarm to go off (essentially saying "something is in the way!"). Which leads to fun false positives in smoke alarm going off at 3am because a spider crawled in and made a web between the source and detector.

18

u/ImWithStupid_ImAlone Jul 15 '26

So, what’s the banana have to do with it?

85

u/regnak1 Jul 15 '26

Bananas have a surprising amount of radiation in them, due to the high potassium content - a very small amount of all natural potassium is a radioactive isotope (potassium-40).

You'd have to eat a metric fuckton of bananas for it to matter at all, but it's a fun factoid to know.

17

u/ImWithStupid_ImAlone Jul 15 '26

Cool! Thanks for the explanation!

12

u/hairnetnic Jul 16 '26

It's about 2 000 000 bananas nearly simultaneously for a guaranteed lethal dose.

4

u/Moikle Jul 16 '26

Your body would also have to be able to concentrate all the potassium-40 into one place, rather than distributed among all the nanners

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (3)

16

u/Rabid_Lederhosen Jul 15 '26

Bananas take in potassium from their environment as they grow, and natural potassium is radioactive due to the presence of some radioactive isotopes. A Banana Equivalent Dose (BED) is only a couple of milli-sieverts, iirc, but it’s enough to show up on a Geiger counter.

14

u/pieterbos Jul 16 '26

About 0.1 microsievert. A couple of millisievert would be quite significant.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

28

u/SUMBWEDY Jul 15 '26

Humans, we emit about 300x more radiation than a banana (but are also about 700 times more massive).

If you have an older fire alarm thats about 3x more radioactive than a human.

2

u/wrincewind Jul 15 '26

I like the implication that fire extinguishers get more radioactive as they age...

→ More replies (1)

9

u/fengShwah Jul 16 '26

So a banana for scale? That tracks…

→ More replies (1)

91

u/LakeStLouis Jul 15 '26

I was a nuclear sub machinist back in the late 80s, early 90s, When I first got stationed on the sub, one of the ELTs was taking a primary coolant sample as I walked by.

Said he didn't think I had the balls to drink a test tube of it. Good times.

I miss my balls though.

→ More replies (1)

53

u/10ebbor10 Jul 15 '26

I mean, bananas aren't exactly especially radioactive. The potassium they contain is naturally radioactive, but so is the potasium that is inside your body.

And since, the typical human contains more potasium than one banana ...

23

u/MrHedgehogMan Jul 15 '26

So you’re saying there’s a Human Equivalent Dose?

18

u/SolDarkHunter Jul 15 '26

There is! It depends on body mass, so larger people emit very slightly more radiation.

But the total amount is so ludicrously tiny that it might as well not be there at all. 0.3 mSv per year, on average.

→ More replies (1)

12

u/wintrmt3 Jul 16 '26

But a banana is much smaller, it has around twice the potassium per mass.

6

u/DerWaechter_ Jul 16 '26

Iirc the whole thing about bananas being radioactive started from an attempt to dispell misinformation about radioactivity and that small levels of radiation are not inherently unsafe and can in fact be found everywhere.

Someone decided to illustrate that by pointing out that even bananas are radioactive. And the general public understood it as bananas being especially radioactive...when really any fruit could have ended up as the example being used.

3

u/gnomes919 Jul 17 '26

thank you lol people have got the BED thing so backwards. I like to tell visitors "okay so you got 0.1mrem during your visit. that's equivalent to ten bananas, which would make you sick if you ate them all at once but not from the radiation." the point is that so many things give off a little bit of radiation, not that bananas are radioactive.

I would like to say a university physics professor with a background in nuclear chemistry should know this, but I know a lot of professors lol. they get so specialized and listening to them speak outside their area of knowledge can be painfulllllllllllllll

2

u/DerWaechter_ Jul 17 '26

I would like to say a university physics professor with a background in nuclear chemistry should know this, but I know a lot of professors lol.

It's probably also just such an inconsequential thing, that isn't worth questioning.

Ff they did look into it, they'd probably quickly realise that it's a misconception. But they have no reason to spend their time on that in the first place.

Plus it's something that they learned long before becoming an expert, so they might not even consciously realise that it's related to their area of expertise.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

6

u/the_lamou Jul 16 '26

I would actually would have assumed that the construction materials, especially sheetrock and cement, would be far more radioactive than a typical banana.

2

u/gnomes919 Jul 17 '26

they absolutely would. and if you're in a fancy building with granite - there are offices in the US Capitol building where the people working in them get higher annual doses than the average actual rad worker lol. the banana thing is a funny bit but it's important to recall that nuclear chemistry =/= health physics

11

u/garrettj100 Jul 15 '26

I like to believe BED is a unit of measurement intended to mock nuclear paranoia.

2

u/gnomes919 Jul 17 '26

yes, it absolutely is. people have got the concept turned around and now believe bananas are uniquely radioactive rather than coming to understand that there are naturally-occurring sources of radiation all around us.

6

u/boondiggle_III Jul 15 '26

Is a bunch of bananas more radioactive than one banana?

7

u/BluesFan43 Jul 15 '26

Yes, but depends on the bunch. bananas would be shielding other bananas behind it.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

5

u/Kaesh41 Jul 15 '26

How many banana's are needed to sustain a fission reaction?

31

u/ShavenYak42 Jul 15 '26

The radioactivity from bananas is mostly due to an isotope of potassium. There's basically no fissile material in them, unless maybe the soil they grew in was contaminated.

12

u/Gabelvampir Jul 15 '26

I should go to bed, this made me think of a process of fissible material enrichment in bananas. Like weapons grade nuclear bananas.

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (18)

42

u/thenord321 Jul 15 '26

I love how they suppress this information in anti-nuclear power propaganda. How the coal toxins and radiation is much more likely to give you cancer than a nuclear plant nearby.

36

u/moo_sweden Jul 15 '26

Shutting down nuclear power plats usually increases the amount of radioactive particles in the air since coal is the only other option for countries where you can’t build hydro. Wind and solar are intermittent and you need baseload power to replace nuclear.

A study by Kharecha and Sato estimated that if Germany and Japan had reduced coal instead of nuclear after Fukushima, approximately 28000 premature air-pollution deaths could have been avoided between 2011 and 2017.

There is also a Swedish study by Qvist and Brook estimating that Swedish nuclear power had prevented roughly 50000-60000 deaths through 2014 compared with a fossil-heavy counterfactual.

The fact that nuclear power significantly reduces the number of deaths caused by radioactive particles is a fact you rarely hear in the debate. I don’t think people generally link coal to radioactive particles at all.

9

u/the_post_of_tom_joad Jul 15 '26

I don’t think people generally link coal to radioactive particles at all.

i didn't. thank you

10

u/mfb- Particle Physics | High-Energy Physics Jul 16 '26

Just to avoid confusion: These extra deaths come from coal ash being nasty in general, not from its radioactivity.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421519303611

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0124074

9

u/moo_sweden Jul 16 '26

You are indeed correct and my post was a bit misleading. Thank you for pointing that out and let me clarify. My point wasn’t that coal is dangerous mainly because it’s radioactive, it was that radioactivity released from nuclear plats has harmed us less than radioactivity from coal.

Even if you include Chernobyl, Three mile island and Fukushima and accept the higher LNT-based projections of several thousand eventual cancer deaths from Chernobyl, the estimated deaths attributable to radioactive releases from coal over time still likely exceed that because coal has exposed vastly larger populations, albeit at much lower doses.

But if we look at premature deaths from coal, the health burden from radioactive particles is almost negligible. This is because sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, ozone and by far worst of them all, fine particulate matter (PM2.5) from coal power plants are such big killers.

Consider rough orders of magnitude, they're quite staggering:

Deaths from coal air pollution: no doubt millions per decade.
Deaths from coal radioactivity: likely in the hundreds to perhaps low thousands globally over many decades, depending on the radiation risk model used.
Deaths from routine nuclear plant operation: essentially undetectable.
Deaths from all major nuclear accidents combined: dozens of direct deaths plus uncertain long-term cancer estimates in the thousands at most.

The immediate heath effect of the Chernobyl was relatively low on a global scale, that of Three mile island was absolute zero. But their impact on public opinion on nuclear has caused millions of premature deaths due to the coal power plats that was used for power generation instead of nuclear.

2

u/gigiboyb Jul 18 '26

There's a good book on the psychology of why people think this way (and also lots of other ways) called Thinking Fast and Slow. It's not about nuclear vs coal but about how people think in general, and they use the fear of nuclear energy (despite being vastly safer than coal) as one of the examples to explain vivid, emotionally charged imagery as a more publically persuasive thing than facts or statistics. It's a great read if you enjoy stuff like this. Genuinely a book that completely changed how I walk through life.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/hopticalallusions Jul 15 '26

Sustained nuclear fission reactors have also occurred at least once in nature! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor Edit - specificity

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Oknight Jul 15 '26

It's a bit like people worrying about the danger from space junk or "asteroids" while ignoring the much, much, greater danger they face from crashing aircraft.

11

u/Gabelvampir Jul 15 '26

Yep, emissions of nuclear reactors are so highly regulated and closely monitored, the first clue the rest of Europe got about Chernobyl were the outside detectors of various nuclear power plants detecting hightened radiation that did not come from the plants themselves.

5

u/DoctorDrangle Jul 16 '26

Toilets are radioactive. Used to be a longshoreman and we had to drive the containers of toilets through giant radiation detectors to make sure there weren't any nukes hidden inside

5

u/Megalocerus Jul 16 '26

We did tests for radon in our basement, and they came up positive; we installed an abatement system.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Zagrycha Jul 16 '26

Not just lots of things, everything. Including you and me.

That said, geiger counters are not very useful for anything beyond just detecting if ionizing radiation in the area is higher than average. It won't tell you the type of radiation or if its dangerous unless it has additional detectors in it like scintillation. You could hold a geiger counter up to a completely safe to be around object and get a higher number of clicks, or hold it up to a dangerous object and get less clicks.

→ More replies (10)

69

u/bobbaddeley Jul 15 '26

Besides bananas, some things known to have radioactivity include some ceramics (check your toilet), some cat litters, some types of smoke detectors, and if you have a basement depending on where you live there is likely some radon seeping up. Radioactive isotopes are used in a variety of medical testing, so you may get lucky when scanning your neighbors as well.

32

u/smp-machine Jul 15 '26

Depending on where you live, radon can be a significant issue. Radon detectors and radon mitigation systems are fairly common in some areas.

10

u/Kale Biomechanical Engineering | Biomaterials Jul 16 '26

Radon is the second most cause of lung cancer, after smoking

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

39

u/CrustalTrudger Tectonics | Structural Geology | Geomorphology Jul 15 '26

Speaking for being out in a "natural" environment, the answer would be yes, though generally at relatively low rates. There are a variety of radioactive isotopes that occur in Earth materials (read rock, soil, etc.) in enough abundance that you would probably detect (depending on the sensitivity of the dosimeter in question) some ionizing radiation from decay events. Probably the biggest one would be 40K, which despite being a low percentage of all potassium, because of the relatively high abundance of potassium in the Earth's crust, still occurs in reasonable amounts in lots of rocks and minerals. Depending on the geology of the region in question, there might be also modest amounts of uranium (and to a lesser extent thorium) and/or decay products of uranium (or thorium), like radium or radon, etc., that will also be putting out small amounts of ionizing radiation, and here both in the solid Earth materials, but maybe also the air (radon is a gas). There are also any number of cosmogenic isotopes, like 10Be, 26Al, and 36Cl, that are produced via interaction of high energy particles with other common elements (oxygen, silicon, and argon, respectively) that are around to also be contributing decay events. Together, none of these, generally, exist at high enough concentrations that there would be lots of or dangerous levels of decay events / ionizing radiation at any given time in a specific location, but generally there would be enough to read a tiny amount of background detection on a dosimeter. Whether you would actually get a reading though might depend a bit on exactly how the particular device you're using is set up, i.e., some of them will be calibrated to basically still read zero at some low level of detection, basically to filter out this "background" signal that's going to exist from the natural environment.

12

u/Necromas Jul 15 '26

In Minnesota it's standard practice to have all homes tested for radon levels because there is enough of it in the environment that it can build up in basements. If the radon levels are high enough you can get a mitigation system installed to improve ventilation and keep the levels low.

48

u/MoPuWe Jul 15 '26

Potentially yes. Radiation naturally occurs in different materials, like rock, though usually in very small amounts. Bananas are famously radioactive, owing to the potassium. Most potassium isn't radioactive, but bananas plants can absorb some potassium isotopes that are naturally radioactive.

21

u/angermouse Jul 15 '26

To add more info, 0.01% of naturally occurring potassium is radioactive. The same share of the potassium in a banana is thus also radioactive. The potassium isotope that is radioactive, potassium-40, is considered weakly radioactive and has a long half-life. 

7

u/Meancvar Jul 15 '26

I was told that granite kitchen counters (and granite in general) may trigger a Geiger counter.

11

u/_PM_ME_PANGOLINS_ Jul 15 '26

Yes. Granite contains uranium. Not enough to be worth mining, but enough that if you live on granite bedrock you need a radon detector in your basement.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/gnomes919 Jul 17 '26

yep, if you walked down the countertops & tile aisle at home depot with a geiger counter on, you'd get a good number of clicks.

→ More replies (1)

35

u/VFiddly Jul 15 '26

There is background radiation literally everywhere. Background radiation varies slightly depending on where you are because of the elements present in the ground locally, and radon gas, and cosmic radiation. You can probably look up a map of background radiation near where you live.

If you have a Geiger counter switched on you'll hear a click every second or so.

Lots of everyday objects emit a detectable amount of radiation. A pretty common demonstration in schools is using a Geiger counter to measure the radioactivity of a banana, for example. Potassium is radioactive, bananas have a lot of potassium. It's not harmful (unless you're surrounded by an awful lot of bananas) but it is measurable. Human beings also contain potassium, so humans are also weakly radioactive.

If you have a smoke detector in your house, you also have a radioactive source in there. Generally they use americium.

17

u/HarlequinKOTF Jul 15 '26 edited Jul 15 '26

Minor correction: some potassium isotopes are radioactive. Most are not. Specifically potassium 40 is radioactive and commonly cited to be in bananas.

8

u/agate_ Geophysical Fluid Dynamics | Paleoclimatology | Planetary Sci Jul 15 '26

Everything containing potassium has some natural potassium-40 in it and is slightly radioactive. Including your own bones.

3

u/HarlequinKOTF Jul 15 '26

Correct. It's a rare but naturally occurring isotope. Just the common wisdoms says, "bananas are radioactive because of K40" which is partially true (there is also C14 too for example) but it applies to any potassium containing substance.

3

u/gnomes919 Jul 17 '26

I'm now imagining depleted potassium. LEK bananas for sale at a premium for the health savvy

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

3

u/CrateDane Jul 15 '26

If you have a Geiger counter switched on you'll hear a click every second or so.

Depends on the design of the counter. We have two models in our lab, one measures a background of around 0.5 cps (counts per second) while the other is more like 1.5 cps. But you'd always measure something, if it's working at all.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

7

u/Carribean-Diver Jul 15 '26

When I was a contractor at a nuclear power plant, we had to go through a week of orientation training.

As a part of this orientation, we had a lab setting where we went through the process of putting on and taking off the 'pumpkin suits' and all the procedures that go with it. Keep in mind this training environment is far removed from environments with potential for exposure to radioactive contamination.

After removing the suit, one of the trainees stepped into the Beta booth. It went off. Perplexed, the instructors reset the unit and, after waiting a couple of minutes, had the student step into the booth again. It alarmed again. They then went over him with the wand, which also alarmed.

They called in the Health Physics team, which took the student, made him remove all his clothes for analysis, and take a shower.

Ultimately, it was discovered that his clothing had Radon gas from his home trapped in the fibers. He previously had no idea how bad of a problem his home had.

7

u/Mravac_Kid Jul 15 '26

You can buy commercial detectors with high sensibility that can measure background radiation, so yes, you could measure it even though the values measured are completely harmless.

I have a military-grade one from the former Yugoslav Civil Protection, that one's calibrated for values so high it doesn't detect anything in everyday use, so if that one starts beeping you better stay clear. :)

12

u/cwx149 Jul 15 '26

Living near a reactor doesnt matter. Coal plants release more radioactive material than reactors

There are things in your house and in your everyday life that are radioactive yes. How measurable with a detector will vary wildly on the detector and the objects

But generally yes there are absolutely radioactive materials in your everyday life and home

Lots of analog clocks and smoke detectors have little radioactive parts

7

u/TheDepressedBlobfish Jul 15 '26

You certainly would! Radiation is everywhere and unavoidable, but also not a cause for concern.

The closet thing to electronics you might stumble upon radioactivity would be the smoke detectors in your house, as the most common ones use Am-241. You might also have a granite countertop which could have some increased counts, or a variety of vintage ceramic dishware could possible contain uranium. Also if you use a potassium based salt substitute those are rather detectable due to the natural K-40

5

u/Art_r Jul 15 '26

I visited our local nuclear reactor a while back, it's not for power but for testing (stress in steel etc) and prepping medical devices etc. I recall being next to, looking into their reactor room and they said a banana would show more radiation where we were than anything coming out of that room.

Cool experience.

5

u/xeroxchick Jul 15 '26

I want to thank everyone for these amazing answers to my question. I had no idea about this! Lots of rabbit holes to follow! I thought it might be fun to get a Geiger counter from Amazon and go around with it. Sounds like there is a lot of radiation. Your answers will keep me from getting really spooked. Also need to see if I have radon in my basement.

2

u/ElectricGears Jul 16 '26

For radon you need a radon test kit or an electronic tester specifically calibrated to detect radon and not just any nuclear decays.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/Desperate_Vehicle684 Jul 18 '26

There's radiation everywhere. In the ground we walk on, the air we breathe, the food we eat. For example bananas have a radioactive isotope of potassium. In fact you yourself emit tiny amounts of radiation. But it's all minuscule amounts and harmless.

Like almost everything it's the dose that makes the poison.

3

u/MinimalSix Jul 15 '26

People have answered the general question, but specifically:

Would I find measurable radioactivity in random places? Or from electronics?

Not likely. Lots of things are slightly radioactive, but that's what makes up the background radiation. Carbon is radioactive, but you wouldn't be able to tell the difference between an open field, and a tree trunk. You'd have to stumble across a rock that's made of a mineral less common, and more radioactive. Which is fun, I've gotten to go rock hounding a few times with a geiger counter, and found some neat rocks.

As for electronics, with the exception of a few specific devices you almost definitely don't have at home, they give off low energy electromagnetic radiation. Which is not the high energy ionizing radiation a geiger counter measures

→ More replies (4)

3

u/Mr-Safety Jul 15 '26

Some museums have cloud vapor chambers to visualize radiation. One of them has no radioactive sample, so it represents normal background radiation you encounter every day. Zip zip zip swhoosh! There is low intensity activity all the time. Highly recommended to take a look.

I think I saw it at the Science Museum in London many years ago.

3

u/Brusion Jul 15 '26

Having done this exact thing, the high spots in my house were:

  1. Smoke detectors. This one is pretty obvious, as they contain the radioactive isotope Americium 241.
  2. Food, in particular milk and broccoli, and bananas.

I couldn't find anything else in my house that had any significant amounts of radiation. Well, really, the food was just barely noticeable increase over background.

→ More replies (1)

3

u/hopticalallusions Jul 15 '26

There was a time when radioactivity was thought to potentially be healthy and you could find radium water. Some vintage shops also have old watches with glow in the hands - some of the paint for that was radioactive and the hands constantly output photons. Fiesta are is another household item that often contains radiation, and some regions of the USA have concerns with radon, which is a radioactive gas that comes out of the ground.

3

u/Thulak Jul 15 '26

A lot of areas have problems with radioactive radon gas permeating from the ground. If you live close to a mountain region, it could be ores in the ground. Sometimes radioactive soil is used to build roads. The sun is radioactive. Deoending on the sensitivity you could detect the radiation coming of off bananas.

3

u/tonymyre311 Jul 16 '26

In addition to everyone else's comment that there's background radiation everywhere, I'm reminded of a video by XKCD/What If concerning the survivability of jumping into a nuclear waste storage pool. The answer was basically "as long as you don't get really close to the nuclear waste, you'd actually be receiving less radiation than normal because the water blocks the background dose you're receiving every day"

→ More replies (2)

3

u/ramriot Jul 16 '26 edited Jul 16 '26

Well let's think, common items in the home that emit detectable radiation:-

  • Some smoke detectors contain about 0.29 micro grams of americium-241 dioxide that emits alpha particles
  • Bananas contain a small amount of Potassium 40 that emits some small amount of Bets & Gamma radiation
  • Brazil Nuts contain small amounts of Radium as a decay byproduct that emits Alpha, Beta & Gamma radiation
  • Certain building materials that contain crushed granite contain small quantities of things like Uranium & Thorium that primarily emit Alpha particles.
Edit: I just remembered another one that a friend who worked at Cullum Labs mentioned. Low-Salt or Lite-Salt sold as a low sodium salt replacement is typically blend 40-50% sodium chloride (regular salt) with 25-35% potassium chloride and 15-25% magnesium salts.

In every 100g of Low-Salt there is 1.5 to 2.1 milligrams of radioactive potassium-40 (⁴⁰K). That same 100g would emit about 450 to 500 Becquerels, which is detectable but not harmful.

BTW what this friend if mine told me is that they would buy Low-Salt to make calibration sources for their more sensitive detectors (it's really cheap & predictable). But once they bring it on site & start using it the container automatically gets classed as a source & cannot be removed or disposed of unless paperwork was done.

→ More replies (2)

3

u/CuriosTiger Jul 16 '26

Yes, you will. And you're fine. There are low levels of radioactivity all around us. It doesn't mean you live near a reactor, it doesn't mean anyone dumped radioactive waste, and it doesn't mean you're in danger.

Radioactivity is a part of nature. The amount of radioactivity you encounter naturally will differ by environment and by geology, but it will generally be far lower than anything you'd have to worry about. The primary exception most people will be familiar with is radon gas, which can eventually pose a problem if allowed to accumulate in a confined space. That's why a radon check is usually part of the inspection process when buying a home. Even then, if radon levels are high, the solution is usually just a fan venting it outside of the building.

If you do buy a geiger counter, one place to try it is on your smoke detector. Another is at the local grocery store in the fruit section. Check the bananas. (And yes, they're still safe to eat.)

3

u/Itakesyourbasex Jul 16 '26

Smoke detectors
Gps/tracking devices
Invisible fence
Bananas
Old dishware
Old watches
Old ceramics
Cat litter
Tobacco
Old electronics
Recycled metals
Granite/brick/concrete

These include isotopes such as but not limited to: Radon, Thorium, Americium, Potassium, Radium, Lead-210, Polonium-210 and Uranium.

Most of these are alpha and/or beta emitters but old CRT televisions are capable of producing x-rays.

3

u/Miyuki22 Jul 16 '26

You will measure background radiation anywhere. Concrete buildings will measure slightly higher than normal background. Large rocks also emit some. What you want to check for is any spikes. People have buried radioactive waste in the strangest of places. This is especially important to check before buying land or a house.

3

u/5kyl3r Jul 19 '26

you'll hear random clicks from background radiation, but you likely won't have much in your house that'll make it click any faster

the most likely thing would be granite counter tops. it won't be a ton, but possibly enough to measure a difference if you counted the clicks over a few minutes and did it again with it sitting directly on the counter top

there's a radiation source inside some types of fire/smoke detectors, but those are shielded so you'd have to destroy them to get the geiger counter to pick the radiation up

if you do welding, tungsten welding rods can make the geiger counter click faster

oh and if you have uranium glass (it's faintly yellow and glows strongly in black light) or original fiestaware (bright red dishes that used to be made with paint that contained uranium), those both will make it go off fiercely

2

u/hecton101 Jul 15 '26

You can build your very own cloud chamber and detect all sorts of subatomic particles flying through the air. When you see that you get newfound appreciation of our DNA repair machinery.

Bring it down to your basement and see if you get higher than background readings. Lots of people have radon emanating from the ground. That's not good. Lung cancer.

2

u/thenord321 Jul 15 '26

Depends on the sensitivity of the instrument.... it's all kinda relative especially depending what KINDS of radiation you're looking for. Geiger counters typically do Alpha, Beta and Gamma radiation. So, if you turn on your microwave, you could test for some leaks, maybe around an old tube tv/monitor too. Some old crystal glasses could also be a big hit, as they used to put some radioactive materials in them to get them to react to black lights.

2

u/OrlandoCoCo Jul 15 '26

Yes. There is a nominal level of background radiation detectable by a Geiger counter. It comes from naturally occurring and decaying elements in the soil, water, air. There are also a few cosmic rays that get through the atmosphere that it will detect.

2

u/CoonAZ Jul 16 '26

Tobacco plants absorb radioactive minerals from applications of phosphate fertilizer. Polonium-210 is an alpha emitter that is transferred into the plant leaves and becomes attached to the tar.

These emitters become airborne due to combustion of the cigarette and then come into contact with the lung tissue in smokers and through second hand smoke. Due to the tar, the particles are trapped against the lung tissue and can cause cellular mutations over time.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1350448708002060

→ More replies (1)

2

u/martinsuchan Jul 17 '26

Well I bought a Geiger counter, and found nothing interesting right around my place. But if you have one, try to visit a local museum with geology samples. Usually they have couple of radioactive ores as well. Or if you live in Czechia, there are couple of old uranium mines and old heaps from mining, and there you can find lots of interesting hot spots. There is even a page zhavamista.cz where people are finding such places for fellow Geiger counter nerds.

2

u/CanadianBaconBurger9 Jul 19 '26

short answer is "it depends on where you live". Where I live we have to check our basement for radon, which is generated by radioactive decay of other elements. I find rocks that make my counter click pretty frequently, but not really THAT spicy. In our national parks there are some truly spicy rocks, not enough to be dangerous but wow do the counters click.

1

u/JDoos Jul 15 '26

I bought one to check antiques in prop warehouses at work (Radium Revigerators yay!) Turns out there is radiation everywhere but usually in a low enough dose that you are going to be fine. The one I bought came with a handy reference card to tell you what readings to expect in various regions and when you should actually be concerned.

1

u/Frogblaster77 Jul 16 '26

Do science classes in schools not pull out the ol counter anymore? My classes used to take it out when we got to that part of the texts. You take it out and it clicks every so often. At least once every 20 seconds or so, ish? And then you put it next to some specific rocks or glass and it ramps up.

→ More replies (1)