Nuclear ("..material.." _JW) traffic doubles since '90s - USA Today

[JohnWxy]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-12-25-nuclear-traffic_x.htm

Annual incidents of trafficking and mishandling of nuclear and other radioactive material reported to U.S. intelligence officials have more than doubled since the early 1990s, says the director of domestic nuclear detection at the Department of Homeland Security.


~~
~~

Some of the incidents have involved enriched uranium or plutonium of the type that can be used to make a nuclear weapon. In June 2003, for instance, a smuggler was arrested trying to carry 170 grams of enriched uranium across a border in Sadahlo, Georgia, in the former Soviet Union.

Most incidents involved very small amounts of material that were mishandled by authorities and never intended to be sold, the IAEA said. In New Jersey last year, a package containing 3.3 grams of enriched helium was "accidentally disposed of," the IAEA reported.

~~

"We're only seeing the dysfunctional part of the market — the supplier who's dumb enough to try to sell it to the police," said Jeffrey Lewis, director of the Project on Managing the Atom at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.

[hunter]

1. Oh Fuck! Not enriched helium!!!!

:rofl:

[JohnWxy]

2. DoD 51 OO.52-M RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, CHARACTERISTICS, HAZARDS AND HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS

www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/doctrine/dod/5100-52m/chap9.pdf


DoD 51 OO.52-M
CHAPTER 9
RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS, CHARACTERISTICS,
HAZARDS AND HEALTH CONSIDERATIONS

c. Hazards and Health Considerations: Tritium
constitutes a health hazard when personnel are engaged
in specific weapon render-safe procedures, when
responding to an accident that has occurred in an
enclosed space, and during accidents which have
occurred in rain, snow, or in a body of water. In its
gaseous state, tritium is not absorbed by the skin to
any significant degree. The hazardous nature of tritium
is due to its ability to combine with other materials.
Tritium water vapor (TO or HTO) is readily absorbed
by the body, both through inhalation and absorption
through the skin. The radioactive water that enters the
body is chemically identical to ordinary water and is
distributed throughout the body tissue. Although it takes
a relatively large amount of tritium to be a significant
radiation hazard, caution should be taken. Tritium which
has plated out on a surface or combined chemically with
solid materials is a contact hazard. The human body
normally eliminates and renews 50 percent of its water
in about 8-12 days. This turnover time or biological
half-life varies with the fluid intake. Since tritium oxide
is water, its residence time in the body may be
significantly reduced by increasing the fluid intake.
Under medical supervision, the biological half-life may
be reduced to about three days. If forced-fluid treatment
is deemed necessary, and medical supervision is
unavailable, a recommended procedure is to have the
patient drink one quart of water within one-half hour
after exposure. Thereafter, maintain the body’s water
content by imbibing the same amount as that excreted
until medical assistance can be obtained. Medical
assistance should be obtained as soon as possible.
9-2

Although the biological half-life of tritium is short,
personal hazard results because of the ease with which
tritium water vapor is absorbed and its rapid distribution
throughout the body tissue. A self-contained breathing
apparatus and protective clothing will protect personnel
against tritium absorption for short periods of time. A
filter mask such as M 17 has no protective value for
tritium.:dunce:

[hunter]

3. Please, do explain...

How is tritium related to your "enriched helium?"

(Bonus points for framing it as a nuclear arms control issue...)

[JohnWxy]

5. I really wish I could, but I cannot - - except to say to myself:

"Self, do try to not post and talk to friends (unexpected visitors) at the same time." I do have one track mind. Can't do two mental tasks at once without one, or both, suffering in quality. There was just a embarrassing lapse in concentration on my part.

Two hours later, when I was at home, the realization bubbled up from background processing in my brain, slowly acheiving concious doubt in the form of a question: "Waait a minute, didn't that article and quote speak of "enriched helium"?? I double-checked the article and it did say "enriched Helium". Big goof on my part. (I dooo know that helium and tritium are two different elements - that's, well, .... elementary). By this time, I knew someone would have spotted my egregious error and pounced. Figured I'd wait till tomorrow to 'face the music'.

Moral of story: if you have a one tracked mind (as I do) don't try to talk to friends and post (even if just pasting from an article) at the same time to the web. Otherwise, you end up looking stupid

But my lapse in concentration notwithstanding, the article presents the problem of increasing slip-ups (sometimes due to lapses in concentration - the well known element of 'human error' - to wit, I offer my own posting error as an example.) due to increasing facilities holding nuclear material. As more facilities holding nuclear material (such as possible new nukes, especially China) the chance of loss of this material in handling increases. This is not so much of a concern in the U.S. but in other parts of the world where resources are more limited and controls are not up to our standards. (think of Russia where starving former, and current, military types are guarding nuclear material. They don't even know where all their nuclear material is!). This is a situation rife with possibilities for opportunism (by terrorist organizations, for example) as well as human error.

I'll try to not talk and post at the same time in the future.

[Dogmudgeon]

4. Sounds like you're bragging about its success

Of course, I do understand that you oppose nuclear power in all its forms.

Still, the article mentions many incidents that were handled promptly and without further problems, even in countries that we have come to expect the worst from.

Nuclear material demands the highest degree of care that we can muster, if for no other reason than many people are terrified of it; and I'm not debating whether that terror is justified. Although I think the fear has been exaggerated, there are many radioactive substances that are horrendously dangerous. There are many substances, period, that are horrendously dangerous, like ricin, anthrax spores, H5N1 influenza, and dioxin. Our overall ability to respond to ANY such threats is still sluggish and inadequate.

And I'll repeat a point USA Today made: most of these nuclear incidents took place in the former Soviet Empire. This problem has been a matter of concern for years, yet two Republican administrations and several GOP-run Congresses have repeatedly voted against increasing American participation in the IAEA to adequate levels even while the USSR and its satellite states were collapsing. The fact that nearly all of the incidents cited by USA Today were over small amounts of non-fissionable material indicates that large-scale trafficking of large amounts of fissionable material is at a minimum, and this was the main fear that many had. But "minimum" does not mean "none", and we need to depend on the IAEA as more than just a club to beat over the head of countries that the Idiot Bastard Son does not take a shine to.

The article should be a small source of pride, but not complacency. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration is not likely to give the IAEA the American support it requires unless it drops the "I" (for "international") -- or we re-name neutrons as "Moslemons".

--p!

[JohnWxy]

6. Yeah, the GOP showing typical appalling ignorance and irresponsibility, had prevented funding a

program to help Russia and former Soviet block cuontries get control of their nuclear stockpiles BEFORE, something happened. THe Democrats tried to do the responsible thing, and show good governance only to be thwarted by the idiot GOP. (then of course, later when questioned as to why something wasn't done in a timely manner to prevent whatever problem from developing, the Repunks always say: "Well, well, the Democrats couldn't do anything about it either!. Blame THEM why dontcha?").

The article did point out:

"Reported incidents may be increasing, Oxford says, because since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, governments have become more diligent about policing material that could be used by terrorists to build a radioactive "dirty bomb" or similar device."

But also indicated:

"Some experts are concerned that the increase in trafficking incidents makes it more likely terrorists could acquire nuclear material."

and then:

"We're only seeing the dysfunctional part of the market — the supplier who's dumb enough to try to sell it to the police," said Jeffrey Lewis, director of the Project on Managing the Atom at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.


I agree, this is not so much of a concern here in the U.S. but in other parts of the world where resources aren't so plentiful and standards aren't so high there is cause for concern. It's just that if more facilities containing nuclear material are built (such as possible nuclear reactors in places like China, for example) and as nuclear material becomes more available, the situation becomes more rife with possibilities for accidents or theft (e.g. from terrorist groups).

I am glad for it's successes but what concerns me is that statement by Jeffrey Lewis: "We're only seeing the dysfunctional part of the market — the supplier who's dumb enough to try to sell it to the police,"