Production of Medical Radioisotopes Without A Nuclear Reactor


The Pallas business case - between dream and reality

In June 2013, the Laka Foundation published The Pallas business case  ('between dream and reality', in Dutch). The report assesses the plans for a new nuclear research reactor which is said to be necessary for the production of medical radioisotopes. The reactor should be privately funded and enter operation in 2023. Laka raised serious concerns about the business case and fears that the government will step in at a later stage to salvage the project with public money.
This could be alright if there would be no alternatives for the production of medical radioisotopes but there are: See below the May 2010 Laka report: Medical Radioisotope Production Without A Nuclear Reactor.

Here you can find an English summary of the June 2013 report.


Reactors not necessary for the production of medical radioisotopes

(May 22, 2010) Medical imaging is one of the fastest growing disciplines in medicine. The development of innovative imaging modalities and radio-pharmaceuticals has improved the ability to study biological structures and functions in health and disease, and continues to contribute to the evolution of medical care.

Artificial radioisotopes, among which those for medical use, are mainly produced by research reactors.
Currently more than 80% of the medical radioisotopes are produced by research reactors. The remaining radioisotopes are made with particle accelerators, mostly with circular accelerators (cyclotrons) and sometimes with linear accelerators (linac), or by other methods. Medical isotope-production is used by the nuclear industry as PR for nuclear research reactors.

The Laka report is answering the key question: Is it possible to ban the use of research reactors for the production of medical radioisotopes?

The answer is Yes!

Radioisotope production with particle accelerators offers many advantages over production with a nuclear reactor:

  1. The volume of radioactive waste produced by cyclotrons is far less and much less hazardous than the radioactive waste of research reactors;
  2. The production is decentralized. Cyclotrons are located hospital-based, by which the delivery of pharmaceuticals to patients is much more secured. In addition the risk of transport accidents is practically zero;
  3. There are no risks due to nuclear-power accidents, because there is no need for controlled chain reactions;
  4. There is no risk for nuclear proliferation.

Download the research report (38 pages, 800kb).

An abridged Dutch version is available for download here.

This entry was posted on by .

About Stichting Laka

Het documentatie- en onderzoekscentrum kernenergie - Ketelhuisplein 43, Amsterdam - tel: 020-6168294 - mail: info@laka.org - Bsky: @laka.org - FB: facebook.com/stg.laka - Linkedin: company:stichting-laka - Mastodon: @laka@www.laka.org



Related posts:

 

  • 10 February 2026: Authorized Noise: Normalising Risks

    Behnam Raeesian is an internationally recognized visual artist and poster designer from Iran, known for bold political and cultural works. Through exhibitions, workshops, jury roles, and collaborations with cultural institutions worldwide, he has built a strong voice in contemporary political graphic design. His projects confront complex issues such as nuclear risk and technological impact, transforming […]


  • 14 July 2025: The Nuclear Mirage: Why SMRs Won’t Save Nuclear Power

    Everywhere you look, the nuclear industry’s hype machine is in overdrive. Goldman Sachs, Microsoft, and the UK government all tout small modular reactors as the silver bullet for climate change and energy security. Tech billionaires are hiring nuclear veterans. Wall Street is whispering about “round-the-clock power” for artificial intelligence data centers. For those old enough […]


  • 25 March 2025: War games: aanval op Zuid-Korea’s nucleaire faciliteiten als ‘smoke-screen’ voor invasie Taiwan

    Kernenergie en veiligheid: A wargame sought to test if a major radiological release that would prompt the evacuation of millions of civilians in South Korea could distract key US allies from assisting and rebuffing an all-out military invasion of Taiwan. The short answer was yes. The game originally presumed that China, wanting to keep the […]


  • 22 November 2024: Problemen met nieuwe kerncentrale Olkiluoto in Scandinavië

    Big batteries and EVs to the rescue again as faults with new nuclear plant cause chaos on Nordic grids The Finnish nuclear power plant Olkiluoto was finally connected to the grid last year, at an estimated cost of €11 billion compared to the original budget of €3 billion. That cost blowout forced its developer, the […]


  • 6 May 2024: UK: Estimated cost of undersea nuclear graveyard now £66bn

    A vast subsea nuclear graveyard planned to hold Britain’s burgeoning piles of radioactive waste is set to become the biggest, longest-lasting and most expensive infrastructure project ever undertaken in the UK. The project [UK's nuclear waste dump] is now predicted to take more than 150yrs to complete with lifetime costs of £66bn in today’s money...The […]


  • 20 April 2024: Chemelot: SMR at Limburg chemical cluster undesirable

    Last year, the Dutch Province of Limburg started an alliance in which, besides the local government, research institutes, small nuclear reactor (SMR) developers, utilities, industrial customers and funders cooperated. With this "Limburg SMR alliance" Limburg  tried to lead the way towards an SMR in Limburg. The preferred site for a first SMR would be Chemelot, […]