| Revision as of 22:13, 21 March 2017 editVQuakr (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers39,484 edits clean up references← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 00:19, 5 December 2024 edit undoTypoBoy (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users7,290 edits →Density of depleted uranium: ReplyTag: Reply | ||
| (71 intermediate revisions by 22 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Skip to talk}} | {{Skip to talk}} | ||
| {{talkheader}} | |||
| {{Calm}} | {{Calm}} | ||
| {{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|1= | |||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject Military history|class=B | {{WikiProject Military history|class=B | ||
| <!-- B-Class checklist --> | <!-- B-Class checklist --> | ||
| Line 14: | Line 15: | ||
| <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> | <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> | ||
| |B-Class-5= yes | |B-Class-5= yes | ||
| |Weaponry=yes | |Weaponry=yes | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{WikiProject Chemistry |
{{WikiProject Chemistry|importance=Low}} | ||
| {{WikiProject Environment|importance=High|sustainability=y}} | |||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{Controversial-issues}} | {{Controversial-issues}} | ||
| {{Archive box| | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| ] | |||
| *] (Jan–May 2006) | |||
| *] (May–Jun 2006) | |||
| *] (Jun–Sep 2006) | |||
| *] (Sep–Apr 2007) | |||
| *] (Apr–Dec 2007) | |||
| *] (2008—) | |||
| }} | |||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{ |
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 100K | |maxarchivesize = 100K | ||
| |counter = 13 | |counter = 13 | ||
| Line 43: | Line 29: | ||
| |archive = Talk:Depleted uranium/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Talk:Depleted uranium/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{ |
{{Archives|bot=Lowercase sigmabot III |age=90}} | ||
| {{Broken anchors|links= | |||
| * <nowiki>]</nowiki> | |||
| == High cancer rates, and dust from abandoned open-pit uranium mines == | |||
| }} | |||
| Uranium in dust in desert areas in the Middle East, and on Native American lands. | |||
| *. 11 March 2016. By Josh Cunnings and Emerson Urry, EnviroNews. From the article: "To our understanding there are about 15,000 abandoned uranium mines that have been left in complete ruin with very little cleanup or remediation at all, just in the western United States. This has happened, by-and-large, because of an antiquated mining bill -- the 1872 Mining Bill -- still affecting these situations today -- that kind of allowed miners to just walk away from these situations -- but yet, they remain in the open leaching off tailings -- blowing around radioactive dust. I think there's about 4,500 of these exposed mining sites just in Navajo country -- another 2,500 or so in Wyoming. ... The Northern Great Plains' levels are higher than Fukushima -- and these are not from nuclear power plants or from an atomic weapon, or atomic bomb being exploded. These are from 2,885 abandoned open-pit uranium mines and prospects, and we are subject to that radioactive pollution constantly. We, the people of the Great Sioux Nation, we are the miner's canary. We are the miner's canary for the rest of the United States. We have the highest cancer rates now. We never gave permission for uranium mining to occur in our treaty territory. It's not just the nuclear power plants that people have to be afraid. All of these abandoned open-pit uranium mines in the Northern Great Plains are affecting everyone, but they are genocide for the Great Sioux Nation -- for my people. This is genocide." --] (]) 21:40, 5 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == Regulation of DU at 15 military sites in the USA == | |||
| *. 23 March 2016. ]. From the article: "The contrast with the strict US domestic regulatory framework for DU contaminated sites and the US military’s response to DU following its use in conflict could not be starker." --] (]) 21:40, 5 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == Paid health claims concerning depleted uranium at Wah Chang facility in Oregon == | |||
| *. By Bennett Hall. ''].'' June 22, 2016. Article quote ('''emphasis''' added): | |||
| {| style="border:1px solid;" | |||
| | | |||
| While Wah Chang workers were eligible to apply for EEOICPA benefits from the time the law went into effect in 2001, few seem to have been aware of it before the creation of the special exposure cohort and designation of a residual exposure period in 2011. | |||
| In general, eligible Wah Chang workers are covered under Part B of the program. Those who qualify receive a lump sum payment of $150,000, plus medical benefits covering the cost of treatment for '''22 different types of cancer.''' | |||
| So far, 451 current or former Wah Chang employees — or their survivors in cases where the employee has died — have filed 672 claims for benefits. To date, '''302 of those claims have been approved and the government has paid out $32.6 million in cash compensation and $2.3 million in medical bills.''' | |||
| But an unknown number of '''people who might qualify for benefits still have never been told about the program.''' | |||
| |} | |||
| --] (]) 22:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == External links modified == | |||
| Hello fellow Wikipedians, | |||
| I have just modified {{plural:12|one external link|12 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit ] for additional information. I made the following changes: | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050601054749/https://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/dumyths.pdf to http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/dumyths.pdf | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140522005411/https://www.cornnet.nl:80/~akmalten/unan5a.html to http://www.cornnet.nl/~akmalten/unan5a.html | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930093916/http://www.ir100.com/PROD01.html to http://www.ir100.com/PROD01.html | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070712222352/http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0929-11.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0929-11.htm | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070412122229/http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_ii/du_ii_refs/n52en017/mr1018_7_chap1.html to http://www.deploymentlink.osd.mil/du_library/du_ii/du_ii_refs/n52en017/mr1018_7_chap1.html | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110928073005/http://www.irak.be/ned/archief/Depleted%20Uranium_bestanden/DEPLETED%20URANIUM-2-%20INCIDENCE.htm to http://www.irak.be/ned/archief/Depleted%20Uranium_bestanden/DEPLETED%20URANIUM-2-%20INCIDENCE.htm | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130902013328/https://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0126-03.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0126-03.htm | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081120013734/http://www.seattlepi.com/national/95178_du12.shtml to http://www.seattlepi.com/national/95178_du12.shtml | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130527015017/http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0114-01.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/views01/0114-01.htm | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120204035816/http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2005/def-nonprolif-sec/snl-dusand.pdf to http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2005/def-nonprolif-sec/snl-dusand.pdf | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071220182915/http://www.iaea.org:80/NewsCenter/Features/DU/du_qaa.shtml to http://www.iaea.org/NewsCenter/Features/DU/du_qaa.shtml | |||
| *Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050417062505/http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/Depleted-Uranium.pdf to http://www.ead.anl.gov/pub/doc/Depleted-Uranium.pdf | |||
| When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' or '''failed''' to let others know (documentation at {{tlx|Sourcecheck}}). | |||
| {{sourcecheck|checked=false}} | |||
| Cheers.—] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">(])</span> 09:07, 11 December 2016 (UTC) | |||
| == US confirms DU use in Syria == | |||
| == Yacht keels == | |||
| Last month US CENTCOM confirmed that two incidents where it had previously been reported that DU was used in Syria in November 2015 were A10 strikes on Islamic State fuel convoys. Foreign Policy/Airwars investigation here: http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/02/14/the-united-states-used-depleted-uranium-in-syria/ News that the US had used DU in Syria first appeared on IRIN in October 2016, following an investigation by journalist Samuel Oakford and ICBUW, coverage here: https://www.irinnews.org/investigations/2016/10/06/exclusive-iraq-war-records-reignite-debate-over-us-use-depleted-uranium However at the time CENTCOM did not confirm the targets that it had been used against. The situation was of particular interest as fuel tankers are not armoured targets. In 2016 an analysis of A10 strikes in Iraq 2003 by PAX and ICBUW revealed that fewer than half of all targets struck were armoured vehicles, see: http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/targets-of-opportunity ] (]) 11:57, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| At least one of the French ]s that were built as ] challengers used a DU keel, possibly ]. I'm looking for references, any help appreciated. ] (]) 17:27, 25 September 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :{{reply|ICBUW}} the third source fails ] and doesn't mention Syria, but the other two seem adequate. ] coverage for Syria would be to add to the sentence in the history section: "The US and NATO militaries used DU penetrator rounds in the 1991 Gulf War, the Bosnia war, bombing of Serbia, the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and ] on ] in Syria." Sound good? ] (]) 17:02, 1 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| From memory it was one of the yachts financed by ], which means in 1970, 1974, 1977 or 1980, so it wasn't France 3 which was a 1983 effort. ] (]) 17:35, 25 September 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :I'm now less confident that it wasn't ]. There was involvement by a ] or ] involved in that one too. ] (]) 20:55, 29 July 2022 (UTC) | |||
| :There was a Sydney headline "A Baron of beef" at the time but I can't find it in Trove. ] (]) 21:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC) | |||
| == Radiological weapon? == | |||
| == Edit on the contamination of uranium with other isotopes == | |||
| Can be the DU ammo be categorized as a radiological weapon? Though not used as an area-denial material, the DU has the secondary effect of contaminating the targets it hit (tanks, armoured vehicles, bunkers, etc.). The US vehicles struck by friendly DU rounds in both the Gulf War and the Invasion of Iraq had to be "washed" as they represented some radiological hazard.----] (]) 00:58, 14 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| Here are the edits I want to integrate in the page re. contamination of uranium with other isotopes : | |||
| :That doesn't make it a radiological weapon, which are nuclear weapons or ] used for area denial, . ] (]) 17:39, 16 November 2020 (UTC) | |||
| :: Well, as DU creates vast contamination areas on battlefields, there is no way to deny that this aspect actually does exist. However, this is not an effect intended by the military. At least they claim not to intend such effects. Nevertheless it might be seen as a criminal act to cause such contamination as an unintended, but predictable and well known effect of DU use. So this is a rather tricky issue. ] (]) 19:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC) | |||
| == incorporated DU will directly harm body cell DNA == | |||
| Natural uranium contains about 0.72% U-235, while the DU used by the ] contains 0.3% U-235 or less, according to the US Mod, but this is debated<ref>{{cite news|last1=Koeppel|first1=Barbara|title=More Evidence Suggests Radiation Caused Illness in U.S. War Zones|url=https://washingtonspectator.org/radiation-war-zones-koeppel/|accessdate=21 March 2017|publisher=Washington Spectator}}</ref>. In urine tests of civilian populations in Afghanistan, for which the mean concentration of uranium was found to be considerably greater than what is regarded as a reference range, the U234/U238 ratios were consistant with natural uranium (not depleted)<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Durakovic|first1=Asaf|title=The quantitative analysis of uranium isotopes in the urine of the civilian population of eastern Afghanistan after Operation Enduring Freedom|journal=Military Medicine|date=2005|pmid=15916293|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15916293|accessdate=21 March 2017}}</ref> | |||
| There should be at least some explanation in the text concerning DU dusts entering body cells when inhaled. This causes radioactive radiation to be created directly in body cells, obviously causing direct harm to cellular DNA, thus probably causing cancer and various birth defects. So far, there is no such aspect mentioned in the article... ?! ] (]) 19:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC) | |||
| Asaf Durakovic found several occurences of uranium 236 contamination in veterans<ref>{{cite news|last1=Simons|first1=Marlise|title=Doctor's Gulf War Studies Link Cancer to Depleted Uranium|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/29/world/doctor-s-gulf-war-studies-link-cancer-to-depleted-uranium.html|publisher=New York Times}}</ref>. | |||
| == Density of depleted uranium == | |||
| DU used in US munitions has 60% of the radioactivity of natural uranium, according to the US army<ref name="USOSD"> U.S. Office of the Secretary of Defense</ref>. The radioactivity near tanks destroyed by these weapons, however, can reach at least up to 1000 times the average background radiation<ref>{{cite web|title=High levels of radioactive pollution seen in the south|url=http://www.irinnews.org/fr/node/193357|website=IRIN|accessdate=21 March 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Remains of toxic bullets litter Iraq|url=http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0515/p01s02-woiq.html|publisher=Christian Science Monitor}}</ref>. Trace ]s (another indicator of the use of reprocessed material) have been reported to be present in some US tank armor<ref name="USOSD"/> as well as in weapons<ref>{{cite news|title=Iraq, Depleted Uranium Contaminated with Deadly Plutonium|url=https://www.democracynow.org/2001/1/17/iraq_depleted_uranium_contaminated_with_deadly|publisher=Democracy Now}}</ref>. | |||
| The article currently says: | |||
| One formulation has a composition of 99.25% by mass of depleted uranium and 0.75% by mass of ], but there is a debate regarding the isotopic composition or the uranium that is used because of the findings of non depleted uranium in battlefields<ref>{{cite news|last1=Koeppel|first1=Barbara|title=More Evidence Suggests Radiation Caused Illness in U.S. War Zones|url=https://washingtonspectator.org/radiation-war-zones-koeppel/|accessdate=21 March 2017|publisher=Washington Spectator}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Durakovic|first1=Asaf|title=The quantitative analysis of uranium isotopes in the urine of the civilian population of eastern Afghanistan after Operation Enduring Freedom|journal=Military Medicine|date=2005|pmid=15916293|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15916293|accessdate=21 March 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/unep81.doc.htm|title=UN Press Release UNEP/81: Uranium 236 found in depleted uranium penetrators|publisher=UN|pages=}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|last1=Simons|first1=Marlise|title=Doctor's Gulf War Studies Link Cancer to Depleted Uranium|url=http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/29/world/doctor-s-gulf-war-studies-link-cancer-to-depleted-uranium.html|publisher=New York Times}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Iraq, Depleted Uranium Contaminated with Deadly Plutonium|url=https://www.democracynow.org/2001/1/17/iraq_depleted_uranium_contaminated_with_deadly|publisher=Democracy Now}}</ref> | |||
| :Depleted uranium is notable for the extremely high density of its metallic form: at 19.1 grams per cubic centimetre (0.69 lb/cu in), DU is 68.4% denser than lead. | |||
| This is misleading; depleted uranium has the same density as natural ]. It's just that its lower radioactivity makes it useful in applications where the radioactivity of natural uranium would be a problem. | |||
| Please tell me where does that violate ANY Misplaced Pages policy. I have been undoed by ]. Thanks. ] (]) 22:09, 21 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| {{reflist talk}} | |||
| == Edit on shaped charge warheads and uranium == | |||
| This section should be modified to make that clear. ] (]) 18:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Here are the changes I want to bring on the "Ammunition" section re. shaped charges and uranium : | |||
| :Technically, depleted uranium is marginally denser than natural uranium, since U-238 has a higher atomic mass than U-235. ;-) But the difference is less than 0.1%, so I would also support a rewording for clarity. One could also mention that DU is not the densest material - gold and most other precious metals are denser, osmium by almost 20%. ] (]) 13:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC) | |||
| It is known since the years 70s that uranium can be used as a liner in shaped charge warheads<ref>{{cite book|title=Trends in the use of depleted uranium|date=1971|publisher=National Academy of Science|pages=38|url=https://books.google.fr/books?id=qJArAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA38&lpg=PA38&dq=shaped+charge+liner+uranium&source=bl&ots=y1QG-EIyHf&sig=GE4XeIc25mhKH6mv2bR-6ycn6S8&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwilnvnGvejSAhXLhRoKHeR2CSEQ6AEIczAQ#v=onepage&q=shaped%20charge%20liner%20uranium&f=false}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Building characteristics into a shaped charge to achieve unique performance requirements|journal=International Journal of Impact Engineering|date=1995|volume=17|issue=1-3|pages=121-130|url=http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0734743X9599841E|accessdate=21 March 2017}}</ref>. Many shaped charge warheads patents include uranium as a liner. The "K-charge" patent EP 1164348 A2 notes that "other metals that have been disclosed as useful for shaped charge liners include depleted uranium and their alloys<ref>{{cite web|title=K charge patent|url=https://www.google.com/patents/EP1164348A2?cl=en&hl=fr|website=Google patents}}</ref>". Another seems to acknowledge that it is better, for incendiary (reactive) purposes, to use non-depleted uranium as it differenciates "depleted uranium" used for kinetic purposes and "uranium" used for incendiary purposes. | |||
| ::I made this change. ] (]) 00:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Please tell me where does that violate any Misplaced Pages policy. Thanks. ] (]) 22:09, 21 March 2017 (UTC) | |||
| ==Calorimeters== | |||
| {{reflist talk}} | |||
| I've read a significant amount about these calorimeters, the closest I have come to finding that radioactivity is a desirable property is a mention of using it to calibrate the calorimeter. I think we need something far more solid to show that it is a desirable feature, as I see no mention of it vs. Pb, the benefits I saw mentioned are pragmatic relating to the properties of the resulting instruments in detecting scintillations. Of course what I have read has only scratched the surface, so the text may well be correct. All the best: ''] ]''<small> 13:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC).</small><br /> | |||
Latest revision as of 00:19, 5 December 2024
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Depleted uranium article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
 | This article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referencing and citation: criterion met
 | This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Misplaced Pages's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
 Archives | |||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
 |
Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
|
Yacht keels
At least one of the French 12 metre yachts that were built as America's Cup challengers used a DU keel, possibly France 3. I'm looking for references, any help appreciated. Andrewa (talk) 17:27, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
From memory it was one of the yachts financed by Marcel Bich, which means in 1970, 1974, 1977 or 1980, so it wasn't France 3 which was a 1983 effort. Andrewa (talk) 17:35, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm now less confident that it wasn't France 3. There was involvement by a Baron Bic or Baron Bich involved in that one too. Andrewa (talk) 20:55, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
- There was a Sydney headline "A Baron of beef" at the time but I can't find it in Trove. Andrewa (talk) 21:57, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
Radiological weapon?
Can be the DU ammo be categorized as a radiological weapon? Though not used as an area-denial material, the DU has the secondary effect of contaminating the targets it hit (tanks, armoured vehicles, bunkers, etc.). The US vehicles struck by friendly DU rounds in both the Gulf War and the Invasion of Iraq had to be "washed" as they represented some radiological hazard.----Darius (talk) 00:58, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
- That doesn't make it a radiological weapon, which are nuclear weapons or dirty bombs used for area denial, . VQuakr (talk) 17:39, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
- Well, as DU creates vast contamination areas on battlefields, there is no way to deny that this aspect actually does exist. However, this is not an effect intended by the military. At least they claim not to intend such effects. Nevertheless it might be seen as a criminal act to cause such contamination as an unintended, but predictable and well known effect of DU use. So this is a rather tricky issue. 88.67.87.171 (talk) 19:48, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
incorporated DU will directly harm body cell DNA
There should be at least some explanation in the text concerning DU dusts entering body cells when inhaled. This causes radioactive radiation to be created directly in body cells, obviously causing direct harm to cellular DNA, thus probably causing cancer and various birth defects. So far, there is no such aspect mentioned in the article... ?! 88.67.87.171 (talk) 19:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Density of depleted uranium
The article currently says:
- Depleted uranium is notable for the extremely high density of its metallic form: at 19.1 grams per cubic centimetre (0.69 lb/cu in), DU is 68.4% denser than lead.
This is misleading; depleted uranium has the same density as natural uranium. It's just that its lower radioactivity makes it useful in applications where the radioactivity of natural uranium would be a problem.
This section should be modified to make that clear. TypoBoy (talk) 18:53, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Technically, depleted uranium is marginally denser than natural uranium, since U-238 has a higher atomic mass than U-235. ;-) But the difference is less than 0.1%, so I would also support a rewording for clarity. One could also mention that DU is not the densest material - gold and most other precious metals are denser, osmium by almost 20%. Roentgenium111 (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- I made this change. TypoBoy (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
Calorimeters
I've read a significant amount about these calorimeters, the closest I have come to finding that radioactivity is a desirable property is a mention of using it to calibrate the calorimeter. I think we need something far more solid to show that it is a desirable feature, as I see no mention of it vs. Pb, the benefits I saw mentioned are pragmatic relating to the properties of the resulting instruments in detecting scintillations. Of course what I have read has only scratched the surface, so the text may well be correct. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC).
- B-Class military history articles
- B-Class military science, technology, and theory articles
- Military science, technology, and theory task force articles
- B-Class weaponry articles
- Weaponry task force articles
- B-Class Chemistry articles
- Low-importance Chemistry articles
- WikiProject Chemistry articles
- B-Class Environment articles
- High-importance Environment articles
- Sustainability task force articles
- Misplaced Pages controversial topics