Dirty Bombs: Making Them & A Response To The Threat
|
|
Thread rating:  |
D. Spencer Hines - 16 Jun 2007 02:26 GMT Loose Nukes Can Kill 'What Me Worry' Kooks...
Such As Pogue Gans.
DSH ----------------------------------------------------------------
How Bad Can a 'Dirty Bomb' Be?
Noah Shachtman 06.10.02 Wired
Science and military experts disagreed on Monday on the impact of a radiological weapon, like the kind accused al-Qaida operative Abdullah al Mujahir was allegedly plotting to explode.
Some see only a "minuscule" rise in cancer rates, while others predict that huge sections of New York or Washington would become uninhabitable if such a bomb were ever to go off.
All the experts stress that a "dirty bomb" is not the same as a nuclear weapon, which generates intense heat and radiation from splitting atoms, according to a statement from Rob Fanney and Jim Tinsley of defense watchdog Jane's Information Group. A dirty bomb packs radioactive material inside or around conventional explosives, which are then detonated to spread the radioactive material.
The radiation wouldn't immediately kill, Naval War College professor William Martel said. "But it'd create huge amounts of terror, havoc, and panic."
Especially for Gans -- even worse than his terror, havoc, panic and loose feces on 9/11. -- DSH
The most likely radioactive element in a dirty bomb is cesium-137, according to Phil Anderson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. And the "consensus government view," according to a March report in The Washington Post, is that al-Qaida "has probably acquired" the isotope, which has a half-life of 30 years.
Cesium-137 is used to treat cancer and to maintain accurate atomic clocks. And it's created as a byproduct of nuclear reaction -- the splitting of uranium in a nuclear power plant, for example.
As cesium-137 "cools" from its radioactive to its normal state, the isotope emits gamma radiation, waves of ultra-high electromagnetic energy. These rays, while not as toxic as the heavier, alpha particle emitted by uranium, travel further, and are extremely difficult to contain. Only concrete, steel or lead can keep gamma radiation in check.
What's worse, cesium is the most "reactive" metal there is -- in nature, cesium's always found combined with another element. So the isotope becomes easily attached to roofing materials, concrete, and soil, said Fritz Steinhausler, who led the International Atomic Energy Agency's environmental assessment of the disaster at Chernobyl.
Once contaminated, it becomes nearly impossible to cleanse the radioactive cesium off of these materials.
"The Russians tried to clean it up for years, and they eventually gave up. It just wasn't economically viable," said Steinhausler, who's currently a physics professor and visiting scholar at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation.
"People had to give up their village or city. Large areas became simply empty," he added. "It really destroys a society."
Hmmmmmm... "Give up their village..." As in GREENWICH VILLAGE, NEW YORK, or HORSELL VILLAGE, SURREY, ENGLAND? -- DSH
In Goiania, Brazil, four people died and more than 34,000 people had to be individually screened for contamination after a man in 1987 found an abandoned medical device filled with cesium-137 in a junkyard.
And just consider how minor that case was as compared to a True Dirty Bomb, with more Cesium-137. -- DSH
That's because cesium interacts disturbingly well with muscle tissue because of its chemical similarity to potassium, which muscles need to flex.
Indeed. -- DSH
Fortunately, the body is used to processing these kind of chemicals, and excretes half of the cesium it absorbs within 100 days. (In contrast, radioactive strontium-90, similar to calcium, is absorbed into bone, and can take 30 years for the body to get rid of half.) But the absorbed cesium "would nevertheless cause a radiation dose, potentially increasing the risk for cancer," Steinhausler said.
The risk is actually pretty minimal, replied Steve Koonin, a physics professor at the California Institute of Technology.
"Long exposure to low-level gamma radiation, if you do the numbers, produces a miniscule increase in cancer rates -- one extra cancer per 100,000 people," he said.
Members of the Federation of American Scientists paint a much darker picture.
If a relatively tiny "dirty bomb" -- one containing only ten pounds of TNT and pea-sized amount of cesium-137 -- were detonated in Washington, federation scientists recently told Congress, "The initial passing of the radioactive cloud would be relatively harmless, and no one would have to evacuate immediately."
"However," the scientists continued, "residents of an area of about five city blocks ... would have a one-in-a-thousand chance of getting cancer. A swath about one mile long covering an area of forty city blocks would exceed EPA contamination limits, with remaining residents having a one-in-ten thousand chance of getting cancer. If decontamination were not possible, these areas would have to be abandoned for decades."
As in the FEDERAL TRIANGLE in Washington, D.C.? Catastrophic! -- DSH
<http://www.washington-landmarks.com/federal.html>
"The Federal Triangle is an area just north of the National Mall that stretches from the White House to the Capitol Building and contains a number of key Federal office and Government buildings such as the FBI Building, the National Archives, the Hoover Building and the Department of Justice."
"The Federal Triangle is adjacent to the downtown area and other popular districts such as China Town. As a result, there is an abundance of premier shopping and fine dining close by."
And:
http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/Wash/dc42.htm
In February, a missing medical gauge containing exactly this amount of cesium-137 was discovered in a North Carolina scrap yard. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it receives nearly 300 reports of lost or stolen radioactive materials every year. --------------------------------------------------------
Just a PEA-SIZED bit of CESIUM-137...
Then consider COBALT-60...
And Americium-241 -- with a half-life of 432 years.
Also See:
<http://www.fas.org/faspir/2002/v55n2/dirtybomb.htm>
<http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/LooseNukes/story?id=1077341&page=1>
And:
<http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2005/Apr/14/ln/ln24p.html>
Then there is the famous Doomsday Bomb, of _Dr. Strangelove_ fame:
<http://www.rense.com/general40/dooms.htm>
Cobalt-60 anyone?
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Deus Vult
Dies Irae
D. Spencer Hines - 16 Jun 2007 02:27 GMT Loose Nukes Can Kill 'What, Me Worry?' Kooks...
Such As Pogue Gans.
DSH ----------------------------------------------------------------
How Bad Can a 'Dirty Bomb' Be?
Noah Shachtman 06.10.02 Wired
Science and military experts disagreed on Monday on the impact of a radiological weapon, like the kind accused al-Qaida operative Abdullah al Mujahir was allegedly plotting to explode.
Some see only a "minuscule" rise in cancer rates, while others predict that huge sections of New York or Washington would become uninhabitable if such a bomb were ever to go off.
All the experts stress that a "dirty bomb" is not the same as a nuclear weapon, which generates intense heat and radiation from splitting atoms, according to a statement from Rob Fanney and Jim Tinsley of defense watchdog Jane's Information Group. A dirty bomb packs radioactive material inside or around conventional explosives, which are then detonated to spread the radioactive material.
The radiation wouldn't immediately kill, Naval War College professor William Martel said. "But it'd create huge amounts of terror, havoc, and panic."
Especially for Gans -- even worse than his terror, havoc, panic and loose feces on 9/11. -- DSH
The most likely radioactive element in a dirty bomb is cesium-137, according to Phil Anderson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. And the "consensus government view," according to a March report in The Washington Post, is that al-Qaida "has probably acquired" the isotope, which has a half-life of 30 years.
Cesium-137 is used to treat cancer and to maintain accurate atomic clocks. And it's created as a byproduct of nuclear reaction -- the splitting of uranium in a nuclear power plant, for example.
As cesium-137 "cools" from its radioactive to its normal state, the isotope emits gamma radiation, waves of ultra-high electromagnetic energy. These rays, while not as toxic as the heavier, alpha particle emitted by uranium, travel further, and are extremely difficult to contain. Only concrete, steel or lead can keep gamma radiation in check.
What's worse, cesium is the most "reactive" metal there is -- in nature, cesium's always found combined with another element. So the isotope becomes easily attached to roofing materials, concrete, and soil, said Fritz Steinhausler, who led the International Atomic Energy Agency's environmental assessment of the disaster at Chernobyl.
Once contaminated, it becomes nearly impossible to cleanse the radioactive cesium off of these materials.
"The Russians tried to clean it up for years, and they eventually gave up. It just wasn't economically viable," said Steinhausler, who's currently a physics professor and visiting scholar at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation.
"People had to give up their village or city. Large areas became simply empty," he added. "It really destroys a society."
Hmmmmmm... "Give up their village..." As in GREENWICH VILLAGE, NEW YORK, or HORSELL VILLAGE, SURREY, ENGLAND? -- DSH
In Goiania, Brazil, four people died and more than 34,000 people had to be individually screened for contamination after a man in 1987 found an abandoned medical device filled with cesium-137 in a junkyard.
And just consider how minor that case was as compared to a True Dirty Bomb, with more Cesium-137. -- DSH
That's because cesium interacts disturbingly well with muscle tissue because of its chemical similarity to potassium, which muscles need to flex.
Indeed. -- DSH
Fortunately, the body is used to processing these kind of chemicals, and excretes half of the cesium it absorbs within 100 days. (In contrast, radioactive strontium-90, similar to calcium, is absorbed into bone, and can take 30 years for the body to get rid of half.) But the absorbed cesium "would nevertheless cause a radiation dose, potentially increasing the risk for cancer," Steinhausler said.
The risk is actually pretty minimal, replied Steve Koonin, a physics professor at the California Institute of Technology.
"Long exposure to low-level gamma radiation, if you do the numbers, produces a miniscule increase in cancer rates -- one extra cancer per 100,000 people," he said.
Members of the Federation of American Scientists paint a much darker picture.
If a relatively tiny "dirty bomb" -- one containing only ten pounds of TNT and pea-sized amount of cesium-137 -- were detonated in Washington, federation scientists recently told Congress, "The initial passing of the radioactive cloud would be relatively harmless, and no one would have to evacuate immediately."
"However," the scientists continued, "residents of an area of about five city blocks ... would have a one-in-a-thousand chance of getting cancer. A swath about one mile long covering an area of forty city blocks would exceed EPA contamination limits, with remaining residents having a one-in-ten thousand chance of getting cancer. If decontamination were not possible, these areas would have to be abandoned for decades."
As in the FEDERAL TRIANGLE in Washington, D.C.? Catastrophic! -- DSH
<http://www.washington-landmarks.com/federal.html>
"The Federal Triangle is an area just north of the National Mall that stretches from the White House to the Capitol Building and contains a number of key Federal office and Government buildings such as the FBI Building, the National Archives, the Hoover Building and the Department of Justice."
"The Federal Triangle is adjacent to the downtown area and other popular districts such as China Town. As a result, there is an abundance of premier shopping and fine dining close by."
And:
http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/Wash/dc42.htm
In February, a missing medical gauge containing exactly this amount of cesium-137 was discovered in a North Carolina scrap yard. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it receives nearly 300 reports of lost or stolen radioactive materials every year. --------------------------------------------------------
Just a PEA-SIZED bit of CESIUM-137...
Then consider COBALT-60...
And Americium-241 -- with a half-life of 432 years.
Also See:
<http://www.fas.org/faspir/2002/v55n2/dirtybomb.htm>
<http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/LooseNukes/story?id=1077341&page=1>
And:
<http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2005/Apr/14/ln/ln24p.html>
Then there is the famous Doomsday Bomb, of _Dr. Strangelove_ fame:
<http://www.rense.com/general40/dooms.htm>
Cobalt-60 anyone?
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Deus Vult
Dies Irae
Peter Jason - 16 Jun 2007 02:36 GMT > Cobalt-60 anyone? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Dies Irae Of course it's all very dreadful but the mUSLIM maniacs might do better to manufacture automobiles which together worldwide kill over 1 million people per annum. Of course these machines maim and cripple many more.
The mUSLIMS of Afghanistan with their opium production are destroying countless western lives and families, far more than possible with a dirty bomb.
O weep, weep, for the past Cold War of the 20th century when these and other maniacs were sequestered behind iron & bamboo curtains.
La N - 16 Jun 2007 02:43 GMT .
> The mUSLIMS of Afghanistan with their opium production are destroying > countless western lives and families, far more than possible with a dirty > bomb. That is because ... "western" people, particularly those in the U.S. ... have a voracious appetite for drugs. IOW, not *all* is rosy about America. Having said that, the so-called "War Against Drugs" is about as effective as the "War Against Poverty", the "War Against Terrorism" and the "War Against Crime."
- nil
Paul J Gans - 16 Jun 2007 02:55 GMT In soc.history.medieval La N <nilita2004NOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote:
> . >> >> The mUSLIMS of Afghanistan with their opium production are destroying >> countless western lives and families, far more than possible with a dirty >> bomb.
>That is because ... "western" people, particularly those in the U.S. ... >have a voracious appetite for drugs. IOW, not *all* is rosy about America. >Having said that, the so-called "War Against Drugs" is about as effective >as the "War Against Poverty", the "War Against Terrorism" and the "War >Against Crime." And the War against Iraq.
 Signature --- Paul J. Gans
D. Spencer Hines - 16 Jun 2007 03:04 GMT There is no "War Against Iraq".
Once again, Gans betrays his abysmal ignorance of the Global War On Islamofascist Jihadist Terrorists.
No Surprises There...
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas --------------------------------------
>>That is because ... "western" people, particularly those in the U.S. ... >>have a voracious appetite for drugs. IOW, not *all* is rosy about >>America.
>>Having said that, the so-called "War Against Drugs" is about as >>effective as the "War Against Poverty", the "War Against Terrorism" >> and the "War against Crime." [SOP] > > And the War against Iraq. [sic] William Black - 16 Jun 2007 09:31 GMT > There is no "War Against Iraq". That'll make the people of Iraq very surprised indeed.
I mean, if there isn't one then what are all those loud bangs about?
 Signature William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach Time for tea.
Jack Linthicum - 16 Jun 2007 12:59 GMT On Jun 16, 4:31 am, "William Black" <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> > There is no "War Against Iraq". > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach > Time for tea. They are celebrating their liberation. http://icasualties.org/oif/
http://www.brook.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
Iraq Index Tracking Variables of Reconstruction & Security in Post-Saddam Iraq www.brookings.edu/iraqindex June 7, 2007
Doug McDonald - 16 Jun 2007 17:12 GMT >> There is no "War Against Iraq". > > That'll make the people of Iraq very surprised indeed. > > I mean, if there isn't one then what are all those loud bangs about? I think it fair to say that there IS a "war against Iraq", at least, against its elected government. It is ... or rather they are ... being waged by Iran and al Qaeda. Both of these are mortally afraid of a stable Iraq, especially one with cooperating Kurds, Sunnis, and Shiites.
Doug McDonald
Paul J Gans - 16 Jun 2007 18:07 GMT In alt.history.british Doug McDonald <mcdonald@snpoam_scs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>>> There is no "War Against Iraq". >> >> That'll make the people of Iraq very surprised indeed. >> >> I mean, if there isn't one then what are all those loud bangs about?
>I think it fair to say that there IS a "war against Iraq", at least, >against its elected government. It is ... or rather they are ... being >waged by Iran and al Qaeda. Both of these are mortally afraid of >a stable Iraq, especially one with cooperating Kurds, Sunnis, and >Shiites. And if you will read the legislation passed by Congress authorizing the use of force by the President you will find that it nowhere authorizes anything like this. The two objectives set out in that legislation have both been met. They were to remove the threat from Saddam and the destruction of any WMD's that he might have.
There is no authorization for the policing of Iraq, the fighting with various groups of Iraqis and outsiders, or anybody else. If the President wants such authorization he is constitutionally bound to ask Congress for it.
Of course most of you who support Bush on this have never read the actual resolution.
 Signature --- Paul J. Gans
Fred J. McCall - 17 Jun 2007 07:37 GMT :There is no authorization for the policing of Iraq, the fighting with :various groups of Iraqis and outsiders, or anybody else. If the :President wants such authorization he is constitutionally bound to :ask Congress for it. And so he does. And by funding it, they give him such authorization.
:Of course most of you who support Bush on this have never read the :actual resolution. Try reading the Constitution. If Congress doesn't want something done by the Executive, the only real power they have to prevent it is the power of the purse.
Whether you want an immediate pullout or not, the feckless behaviour by the Democratic Congress is at the root of the problem. They don't want to refuse funding but they do everything they can to make sure everything in Iraq fails.
This is why their approval rating is even lower than Bush's. He's screwed up the occupation of Iraq, but at least he is operating from his principles.
Congress is just too busy playing the usual political payback games to actually govern (which is what they were sent there for).
 Signature You are What you do When it counts.
Vince - 17 Jun 2007 13:46 GMT > :There is no authorization for the policing of Iraq, the fighting with > :various groups of Iraqis and outsiders, or anybody else. If the [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > by the Executive, the only real power they have to prevent it is the > power of the purse. only if the president is false to his oath.
''I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.''
among the duties of that office are
"he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed"
The president is Oath bound to faithfully execute the laws passed by congress. Which is why the disgrace of Iran contra was so inimical to the constitution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair
Vince
La N - 17 Jun 2007 14:03 GMT >> :There is no authorization for the policing of Iraq, the fighting with >> :various groups of Iraqis and outsiders, or anybody else. If the [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair Interesting. That mess, much of which is "still shrouded in secrecy", according to the wiki site IIRC set off rumours worldwide that the CIA were involved in narcotics trafficking.
- nilita
Fred J. McCall - 17 Jun 2007 18:26 GMT :>> :There is no authorization for the policing of Iraq, the fighting with :>> :various groups of Iraqis and outsiders, or anybody else. If the [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] :> :> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair Yes. Note that it had to do with illicitly giving aid to operations that Congress closed the purse on.
:Interesting. That mess, much of which is "still shrouded in secrecy", :according to the wiki site IIRC set off rumours worldwide that the CIA were :involved in narcotics trafficking. Of course it did. But then, the world seems fully prepared to believe all sorts of silly sh.t for absolutely no reason at all.
 Signature "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -- Thomas Jefferson
Vince - 17 Jun 2007 20:36 GMT > :>> :There is no authorization for the policing of Iraq, the fighting with > :>> :various groups of Iraqis and outsiders, or anybody else. If the [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > Yes. Note that it had to do with illicitly giving aid to operations > that Congress closed the purse on. no it also violated the arms export control act
"The Iran-Contra report found that the sales of arms to Iran violated United States Government policy; it also violated the Arms Export Control Act"
vince
La N - 17 Jun 2007 22:55 GMT >> :>> :There is no authorization for the policing of Iraq, the fighting >> with [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > United States Government policy; it also violated the Arms Export Control > Act" Yup.
Robert Peffers. - 17 Jun 2007 02:10 GMT >>> There is no "War Against Iraq". >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Doug McDonald First up that elected government was not exactly freely elected. More USA approved.
 Signature
Robert Peffers, Kelty, Fife, Scotland, (UK).
Paul J Gans - 16 Jun 2007 17:54 GMT In alt.history.british William Black <william.black@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> There is no "War Against Iraq".
>That'll make the people of Iraq very surprised indeed.
>I mean, if there isn't one then what are all those loud bangs about? In the creed according to St. Hines, they are *all* Islamofascists. The ones that are not yet soon will be. Killing them all is the only way to guarantee the safety of our women and our precious body fluids.
 Signature --- Paul J. Gans
Jack Linthicum - 16 Jun 2007 18:30 GMT > In alt.history.british William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > -- > --- Paul J. Gans Which is why we are arming the Sunnis, who were the arm of Saddam and the killers of a majority of Americans.
http://www.brook.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
Hal - 16 Jun 2007 20:23 GMT On Jun 16, 1:30 pm, Jack Linthicum <jacklinthi...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> > In alt.history.british William Black <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > http://www.brook.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf Thanks for the url. It was inevitable someone was going to do it; and where there's a buck to be made, why shouldn't it go to an american?
Hal
Tiglath - 17 Jun 2007 05:58 GMT >> There is no "War Against Iraq". > > That'll make the people of Iraq very surprised indeed. > > I mean, if there isn't one then what are all those loud bangs about? They are the fireworks to celebrate their liberation.
Adam Whyte-Settlar - 17 Jun 2007 04:43 GMT > . >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > That is because ... "western" people, particularly those in the U.S. ... > have a voracious appetite for drugs. Oh come on - it's one of the few business success stories to come out of Afghanistan since the occupation. Opium production has soared from virtually zero in 2000 before the US-led invasion to an all-time record of 6,100 tonnes in 2006 - 92 % of the world's supply. Some 165,000 hectares are now producing poppies - reducing wheat production capacity by over 10%.
Far from 'The Muslims of Afghanistan' being responsible for opium production The Taliban rigorously enforced a total ban on it's cultivation on pain of a nasty death. As I mentioned already - in the year before the US-led invasion poppy cultivation was virtually zero.
One good thing to come out of this for the US - by far the biggest demander of illegal drugs of every kind in the world - is that there is now an overproduction of Heroin. The simple laws of supply and demand effect the drug business as much as any other business and the 30% over-supply of the raw product, opium, has resulted in lower street prices for heroin in the US. As a large proportion of the money for drug use comes from street crime, muggings, hold-ups and burglaries, it is anticipated that these types of crimes will record a decrease this year.
Yep - more opium equals LESS crime on the streets of L.A. not more. Funny old world isn't it?
D. Spencer Hines - 19 Jun 2007 04:05 GMT There he goes again!
Gans spouts, spews, spumes and sputters idiocy.
Islamofascist Jihadist Terrorist Suicide-Homicide Bombers would just LOVE to set off a Bioweapon or a Dirty Bomb, say a Cesium-137 bomb, in the midst of New York City -- panicking and killing all sorts of people -- with no regard from which Nation they actually hail.
They would certainly kill lots of Americans and perhaps contaminate parts of the city for years -- or even decades.
George Tenet, DCI/DCIA at the time, says this was one of his Major Worries, right after 9/11.
The Panic alone would kill some people and lead many to soil their underwear -- as Gans did on 9/11.
With proper placement -- Washington Square and other easy to determine locations -- they could kill many of their arch enemies too -- the Jews.
This is no matter for the sloppy, lackadaisical, "What, me worry!" thinking that Pogue Gans is so fond of inflicting on these audiences.
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
> In alt.history.british D. Spencer Hines <panther@excelsior.com> wrote:
>>Nonsense. > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >>He's mentally "in irons" -- the sailing metaphor. <baldersnip>
D. Spencer Hines - 19 Jun 2007 04:07 GMT Loose Nukes Can Kill 'What, Me Worry?' Kooks...
Such As Pogue Gans.
DSH ----------------------------------------------------------------
How Bad Can a 'Dirty Bomb' Be?
Noah Shachtman 06.10.02 Wired
Science and military experts disagreed on Monday on the impact of a radiological weapon, like the kind accused al-Qaida operative Abdullah al Mujahir was allegedly plotting to explode.
Some see only a "minuscule" rise in cancer rates, while others predict that huge sections of New York or Washington would become uninhabitable if such a bomb were ever to go off.
All the experts stress that a "dirty bomb" is not the same as a nuclear weapon, which generates intense heat and radiation from splitting atoms, according to a statement from Rob Fanney and Jim Tinsley of defense watchdog Jane's Information Group. A dirty bomb packs radioactive material inside or around conventional explosives, which are then detonated to spread the radioactive material.
The radiation wouldn't immediately kill, Naval War College professor William Martel said. "But it'd create huge amounts of terror, havoc, and panic."
Especially for Gans -- even worse than his terror, havoc, panic and loose feces on 9/11. -- DSH
The most likely radioactive element in a dirty bomb is cesium-137, according to Phil Anderson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. And the "consensus government view," according to a March report in The Washington Post, is that al-Qaida "has probably acquired" the isotope, which has a half-life of 30 years.
Cesium-137 is used to treat cancer and to maintain accurate atomic clocks. And it's created as a byproduct of nuclear reaction -- the splitting of uranium in a nuclear power plant, for example.
As cesium-137 "cools" from its radioactive to its normal state, the isotope emits gamma radiation, waves of ultra-high electromagnetic energy. These rays, while not as toxic as the heavier, alpha particle emitted by uranium, travel further, and are extremely difficult to contain. Only concrete, steel or lead can keep gamma radiation in check.
What's worse, cesium is the most "reactive" metal there is -- in nature, cesium's always found combined with another element. So the isotope becomes easily attached to roofing materials, concrete, and soil, said Fritz Steinhausler, who led the International Atomic Energy Agency's environmental assessment of the disaster at Chernobyl.
Once contaminated, it becomes nearly impossible to cleanse the radioactive cesium off of these materials.
"The Russians tried to clean it up for years, and they eventually gave up. It just wasn't economically viable," said Steinhausler, who's currently a physics professor and visiting scholar at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation.
"People had to give up their village or city. Large areas became simply empty," he added. "It really destroys a society."
Hmmmmmm... "Give up their village..." As in GREENWICH VILLAGE, NEW YORK, or HORSELL VILLAGE, SURREY, ENGLAND? -- DSH
In Goiania, Brazil, four people died and more than 34,000 people had to be individually screened for contamination after a man in 1987 found an abandoned medical device filled with cesium-137 in a junkyard.
And just consider how minor that case was as compared to a True Dirty Bomb, with more Cesium-137. -- DSH
That's because cesium interacts disturbingly well with muscle tissue because of its chemical similarity to potassium, which muscles need to flex.
Indeed. -- DSH
Fortunately, the body is used to processing these kind of chemicals, and excretes half of the cesium it absorbs within 100 days. (In contrast, radioactive strontium-90, similar to calcium, is absorbed into bone, and can take 30 years for the body to get rid of half.) But the absorbed cesium "would nevertheless cause a radiation dose, potentially increasing the risk for cancer," Steinhausler said.
The risk is actually pretty minimal, replied Steve Koonin, a physics professor at the California Institute of Technology.
"Long exposure to low-level gamma radiation, if you do the numbers, produces a miniscule increase in cancer rates -- one extra cancer per 100,000 people," he said.
Members of the Federation of American Scientists paint a much darker picture.
If a relatively tiny "dirty bomb" -- one containing only ten pounds of TNT and pea-sized amount of cesium-137 -- were detonated in Washington, federation scientists recently told Congress, "The initial passing of the radioactive cloud would be relatively harmless, and no one would have to evacuate immediately."
"However," the scientists continued, "residents of an area of about five city blocks ... would have a one-in-a-thousand chance of getting cancer. A swath about one mile long covering an area of forty city blocks would exceed EPA contamination limits, with remaining residents having a one-in-ten thousand chance of getting cancer. If decontamination were not possible, these areas would have to be abandoned for decades."
As in the FEDERAL TRIANGLE in Washington, D.C.? Catastrophic! -- DSH
<http://www.washington-landmarks.com/federal.html>
"The Federal Triangle is an area just north of the National Mall that stretches from the White House to the Capitol Building and contains a number of key Federal office and Government buildings such as the FBI Building, the National Archives, the Hoover Building and the Department of Justice."
"The Federal Triangle is adjacent to the downtown area and other popular districts such as China Town. As a result, there is an abundance of premier shopping and fine dining close by."
And:
http://www.nps.gov/history/nr/travel/Wash/dc42.htm
In February, a missing medical gauge containing exactly this amount of cesium-137 was discovered in a North Carolina scrap yard. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it receives nearly 300 reports of lost or stolen radioactive materials every year. --------------------------------------------------------
Just a PEA-SIZED bit of CESIUM-137...
Then consider COBALT-60...
And Americium-241 -- with a half-life of 432 years.
Also See:
<http://www.fas.org/faspir/2002/v55n2/dirtybomb.htm>
<http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/LooseNukes/story?id=1077341&page=1>
And:
<http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2005/Apr/14/ln/ln24p.html>
Then there is the famous Doomsday Bomb, of _Dr. Strangelove_ fame:
<http://www.rense.com/general40/dooms.htm>
Cobalt-60 anyone?
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Deus Vult
Dies Irae
|
|
|