Home » Weapons » Nukes » So Where Are All The Dirty Bombs?

So Where Are All The Dirty Bombs?

I’ve never been one to fully understand the great fear that many state and federal emergency response managers seem to have over dirty bombs, given the many training exercises that seem to include the threat as the main hazard. This USA Today article talks about the issue of loose and stolen radioactive material.
radioactive.jpg

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.
Also up: scams in which fake or non-existent nuclear or radioactive material is offered for sale, often online, says Vayl Oxford, nuclear detection director at the department.
“We sense that people have recognized the value of nuclear material as a useful way of making money,” Oxford said. “Nuclear material is becoming a marketable commodity.“
The incidents tracked by the department, based on its reporting and information from foreign diplomatic and intelligence sources, average about twice the number made public each year by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Oxford said reports of nuclear and radioactive materials trafficking have ranged from 200 to 250 a year since 2000, up from about 100 a year in the 1990s.

But here’s the thing ‚Vayl. When you look at the amount of materials stolen or lost (some data are shown in the article’s sidebar), we’re talking about ounces and a few pounds at best of gamma emitters. No one’s tracking the alpha/beta radioactive material out there (polonium anyone?). Still, not exactly enough for an improvised nuclear weapon, maybe enough to scare unknowledgable people.
You might have seen the last season’s “Sleeper Cell” that only reinforced some of these fears. I enjoyed watching the terrorist cell use americium 241 to “test” their lead-lined cooler container for radiation leaks (except that americium isn’t a strong gamma emitter), talk about how exploding an aircraft holding one nuclear fuel rod over Los Angeles would “cover the city in nuclear fallout” (ah, not really), and how the authorities “got a hit from the radioactive sniffers” on the lead-lined cooler on its way to the last target. Yeah, it’s only a drama, but I’ll bet people believe this stuff. Maybe it was just disinformation for the real terrorists… yeah, that’s the ticket.
Jason Sigger, crossposted at Armchair Generalist
UPDATE 12/29/06 11:36 AM: David Hambling writes in to say: “Also, the UK police are ordering some 12,000 CBR [chemical-biological-radiological] suits — looks like they’re expecting those famous/mythical dirty bombs too.“
UPDATE 12/29/06 12:05 PM: J here. Great conversation in the comments, especially the cool-headed plugger noting that “dirty bombs” are hazards, not life-threatening events. Many of the comments seem to go to the question of “what’s your point?” Without getting too academic (hey, I’m not the ArmsControlWonk, after all), my point is simply this. While there’s lots of radioactive hazards out there, the really bad ones aren’t being moved in great quantities to cause a mass casualty incident. Given that “dirty bombs” of whatever flavor — alpha, beta, gamma — are largely more of a clean-up job, and while costly to clean up, government goes on. The anthrax letters didn’t shut down the USPS, but it did slow things down on the east coast. The polonium poisoning didn’t shut down Heathrow Airport for a minute.
They’re hazards, they are low-probability events, they’re not mass casualty events. Given that basis, what’s the appropriate federal response? I suggest that it is not to put rad detectors in every port and every border crossing into the United States and within every major metropolitan area, as DHS’s DNDO has suggested (which would cost billions of dollars to implement plus annual sustainment and training costs). The appropriate response is to lock down the bad rads (cesium, uranium, and plutonium), get the terrorists before they attack, and be prepared (like our UK brethern) to clean it up if it happens. Simple. Smart. Efficient. But not the course of action being implemented by the government.

Share |

{ 44 comments… read them below or add one }

thermopile December 28, 2006 at 8:07 am

I’m not trying to be overly critical, but what’s your point? While gram-quantity levels of trafficking are not an immediate concern for a fear-instigating weapon, are we supposed to just ignore those and not care? Take care of the pennies and the dollars take care of themselves … the trading of illicit nuclear materials is something that is important to watch at a very low level.
And, just to be pedantic, most heavy metals that are alpha and beta emitters are also gamma emitters, making them more easily detectable. For example, the 16th edition of the Chart of the Nuclides lists our friend Polonium-210 as a very weak gamma emitter at 803.1 KeV. Yes, you CAN detect microgram levels of Po-210. I’m sure someone can pore through the whole list of isotopes and find a few pure alpha or beta emitters, but those are the exceptions, not the rule.

Reply

Nicholas weaver December 28, 2006 at 9:56 am

Its that for most dirty bombs with enough radiation to cause radiation damage, this will probably fry the terrorists first.
Otherwise, it is the explosive in the bomb which is the biggest danger, and the radiation is just an expensive clean-up task.

Reply

Robot.Economist December 28, 2006 at 10:24 am

I wouldn’t completely dismiss the significance of illegal trade in even small amounts of radioactive materials. Sure, they don’t actually pose any harm in themselves, but each instance can probably teach us something about hidden weaknesses in the nonproliferation system.
I read an interesting article on asahi.com about how a Chinese research scientist apparently ordered 3 grams of yellowcake from the U.S. over the internet. What was so compelling about the story was not the materials involved, but how this absent-minded researcher managed to order the stuff without the necessary liscenses and safeguards required.

Reply

plugger December 29, 2006 at 1:53 am

I’m just waiting for people to realize that dirty bombs aren’t threats. If it was a legitimate weapon, don’t you think militaries all over the world would have developed them for their arsenals? They’re nothing more than movie terror plot weapons that scare the masses into believing they’re a threat.

Reply

Bill Dickerson December 29, 2006 at 2:04 am

I think the amount of radiation is not the issue. Look at the Sarin gas attack in the Tokyo subway. Very few people were killed but the panic and fear caused a huge problem.
Take a little radioactive material disperse it on the top of a building downtown with a small explosion. The danger is very little except for people except in the immediate area. The panic that would ensue would be great.
Imagine thousands of people descending on the hospitals and tens of thousands fleeing the city. The break down of civilian authorities ability to maintain order will occur quickly. If order is not restored quickly riots and looting on local business will begin as soon as it gets dark.
That is the real danger. Look at New Orleans where rescue workers and helicopters came under fire while attempting to help the cities population.

Reply

Patrick December 29, 2006 at 7:09 am

I thought the purpose of the “dirty bomb” was more to disrupt and create fear than actual casualties? From most people’s perspective (thouse who have no idea what a gamma or alpha/beta emmitter is) radiation is radiation, and it’s scary. I think plugger is right and wrong, dirty bombs aren’t “real” threats in the military sense, but I think they are in a civilian sense. Bill hit the nail on the head referencing the sarin attack in Tokyo. Create panic, it works as well as a terror weapon as a lot of other things…

Reply

Joseph A. Belle-Isle December 29, 2006 at 10:03 am

Dirty bombs are the ones that fell in mud puddles.

Reply

Doug Fingles December 29, 2006 at 10:29 am

Having participated in a number of chemical and nuclear exercises over the years, I can tell you that these types of scenarios are by far the hardest to contain and control. Even the simplest scenarios (single building, limited personnel and exits) require lots of manpower, coordination, and equipment. Anything with multiple buildings or heavy pedestrian traffic instantly turns into a nightmare scenario. The nice thing about bombs is they don’t inflict harm further than their blast radius. Contaminants, chemical or nuclear, easily migrate. Just look at how many people are affected by 1, count ‘em one, person dying from polonium poisoning.
That’s why emergency management agencies fear chemical or nuclear contamination.

Reply

DavidMac December 29, 2006 at 10:52 am

Most people are scared silly of nuclear radiation, yet they don’t have a problem with lying on the beach all day in the sun.
The sun is a huge nuclear fusion reactor, the pressure at the core (340 billion times earth’s air pressure at sea level) creates helium by fusing 4 hydrogen nuclei together to form one helium nucleus. This releases heat (27 million degrees F.) and radiation.
When you get a tan outside, it’s the result of nuclear radiation. That’s why some people who love to get suntans also get skin cancer.
The sun will stop converting hydrogen to helium in about 5 billion years, then start converting (fusing) helium into heavy metals. The sun will expand, becoming a red giant and destroy the earth.

Reply

TBird December 29, 2006 at 12:18 pm

Once the Genie is out of the bottle it will be too late to go back and revise your outlook on this. I had rather be overly cautious than sorry…very sorry…while counting up the toll…especially if any of your (my) loved ones are included. Remember that the people believed the “Peace in our time” bit when Chamberlin made a deal with the devil.

Reply

Frank December 29, 2006 at 1:14 pm

Nuclear bombs can be made by terrorist groups or map otherwise be obtained. Keep the Radiation detectors up and running. Suitcase nuclear bombs have been made and will in all likelyhood continue to be made. I wonder, would we all like to learn someday that Iran, or some other rogue nation has smuggled a nuclear device into our country?

Reply

J C M December 29, 2006 at 1:43 pm

Dirty Bombs, in the strictest sense as an actual weapon, are minimum threat level weapons. On the psychological side however, they wield a heavy punch. Part of the problem lies in the ignorance if the general populace. Most people have no clue as to the level of exposure, amount of rads absorbed, amount of shielding, etc…. all the things that go along with radioactive materials and their production, storage and use.
And there’s the rub my friends. To most people, radiocativity is an “unknown”. And being the predictable animals we are, we fear the unknown. The panic that can be caused by placing these weapons in areas that large groups of people gather can be catastrauphic. An example: take your average ballpark, football stadium, etc. Hundreds could be trampled to death just trying to escape the area.
The actual damage from a bomb set off in such a place would be minimal, but the psych factor would be through the roof. When one person panics, it tends to spread to others, who feed the fear of others, until you have masses of people who will literally try to climb over eachother to escape.
We could start off by educating the public about nuclear safety. If it turns out that such education saved even one life, it would be worth it. Better detection methods are another part of the answer “puzzle”.
At D.O.T. truck scale houses across the nation, rad detectors are being installed. The problem? Only commercial class A trucks are required to pass through these. Smaller class B “Do-it-yourself” trucks like U-haul, are not required to go through them. Even motorhomes could be rigged to carry bombs, that’s why they are no longer allowed to cross Hoover Dam. These are the vehicles of choice to haul large explosive devices. It would not be difficult to install these detectors in various places on the roads. Any freeway sign that spans all lanes would make an ideal detection point.
Last, as said before, refuse to be terrorized. There are many things that can be controlled by others in our lives. Traffic patterns, food and other necessities costs, the time you have to be at work and how much they pay you, what you are taught in your early years at school…all these things are pretty much out of our hands. But one thing that we DO control is our way of thinking, and the way we want to live. I choose to life without fear.
The so called terrorist is going to:
Plant a bomb somewhere…
Place biological agents somewhere…
Fire a missile at an aircraft…
A sniper is going to start shooting at people…
And some people are going to die. There isn’t much I can do to stop him from performing these actions. But I can prevent him from controlling me by refusing to fear him and his random attack. If attacked directly, I will fight back. If attacked indirectly, I may die. Again, there’s not much I can do to prevent the insane from doing the insane.
BUT WE MUST STOP BEING CONTROLLED BY FEAR!

Reply

Bob Ehling December 29, 2006 at 3:27 pm

The emphasis on dirty bombs might also be a way of preparing the public and first responders for the advent of low yield devices, including subcritical or “fizzle” yield weapons.
In the aftermath of a terrorist radiological event, the perpetrators may want to claim full nuclear capability; the authorities would most likely seek to dispute it. The dirty bomb scenario provides such plausible deniability, as well as a relatively unthreatening, politically acceptable rationale for preparing for terrorist nuclear attack.

Reply

Tom Pearson December 29, 2006 at 3:47 pm

The Brits had a made for TV movie that was shown on HBO in the USA a couple of years ago called “The Dirty War” which was about Muslim terrorists (many of whom lived in England)setting off a “dirty bomb” containing large amounts of both Alpha and Gamma radiation materials dispersed by the explosion of a van containing a large amount of ammonium nitrate based explosive in the London financial district. Good movie that upset many of the “politically correct types” because it showed some rather tough interrogation methods used to try to force one of the terrorists to disclose where the other vans containing other bombs were. It also shows the fundalmentalist Muslim mentality of the dedicated terrorist who is willing to sacrifice everything including his family to carry out his terror strike. I got my copy recently from Amazon.com. Worth while watching, especially with liberal friends who have their heads up some place dark!
Tom

Reply

TBird December 29, 2006 at 4:02 pm

To read more about suitcase bombs see Fox News at:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,76990,00.html

Reply

Daryl December 29, 2006 at 4:51 pm

The Indian Government seems to be taking the threat very seriously.
We should too, considering that irresponsible, unstable, nuclear proliferator, and terrorism sponsor Pakistan is planning to build a fast breeder reactor.
See:
First step in war on

Reply

Rick December 29, 2006 at 10:13 pm

JCM hits it right on the head. Don’t let them control you!

Reply

lee December 30, 2006 at 9:51 am

The release of ANY radioactive material [even alpha emitters] in a place like the subway in NYC or DC would cause panic. This is after all what terror merchants want.

Reply

James Berryhill December 30, 2006 at 4:38 pm

A few days ago a patient reported that she had detained and intensly questioned trying to leave a Tour Ship, She had a CT scan three weeks before and her system still had a trace of radioactive dye used in the exam. Nothing happened other than being treated badly, at least they didn’t send her to Cuba, but it shows the extent of fear involved.

Reply

ROB December 31, 2006 at 8:20 am

HAS OUR GOVERNMENT GONE MAD THAT THERE IS SO MUCH POLITICAL POSTURING THAT WE HAVE FORGOT HOW TO DO THE RIGHT THING TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS AND OUR BORDERS

Reply

Bill January 2, 2007 at 11:07 am

Something that you also must consider is that a dirty bomb doesn’t necessarly have to be something that is transported, there are places that if combined with enough explosives would cause a dirty bomb and may not cause mass death, but would definately inflict mass panic, and get a lot of people very ill.

Reply

Sergeant Nemo January 2, 2007 at 9:45 pm

Hey, folks:
The IAEC says there are fissionable nuclear deVICES–not merely material–missing from that criminally-inclined social septic-tank called Russia.
Some are who knows where. Some, on the other hand, are here.
Let’s not forget our old friends the Pakis. Some of their devices are who knows where. Some are here.
Is it believable? Gosh, I’m not sure. Look up something called the One-Percent Doctrine in the meantime.
Or, watch what happens if an American CiC does to Iran what should have been done thirty years ago.
Has everybody got his meds, pure water and potassium iodide? Okay then.
Good job, stand by, and love to you all.

Reply

J Ramos January 3, 2007 at 7:31 am

I remember several “fiction” writers exploiting the “terrorist crashes a plane against building X” plot several years before 9-11 (Ex. Tom Clancy).
Dirty bombs are easy to make and require no more expertise than what the terrorists already have. Thus they are a credible and plausible threat that can not be discounted. We must always prepare for what our enemy is capable of doing, not what we “think” it is rational for them to do.
All it takes is for one of those guys to get smart.

Reply

Tom Pearson January 3, 2007 at 1:49 pm

Peter’s commentary of January 2 about the bomb makers putting themselves at risk of death while assembling a dirty bomb is an important point. Unfortunately, the scary truth is that the Muslim Fundalmentalists who would be involved would have no fear of the materials they were handling nor the death that would quickly come. They are prepared to die, either in the assembly or detonation of the dirty bomb. For an illuminating illustration of this, get a copy of the DVD (HBO/BBC)called “The Dirty War”.
Tom

Reply

Novak January 15, 2007 at 9:01 pm

The point of terrorism is not to kill people, it is to terrorize them… to disrupt daily life, cost money, etc. Case in point, the snipers in the DC area. One rifle and ONE box of ammo totally terrorize the nation… it disrupted daily life, it cost businesses in the area money. How many trips to that area were canceled by families, schools, etc…. this costs the area money… mission accomplished. This was 2 people, one gun and one box of ammo, millions of people in panic. Now immaging the news stations screaming that a “nuclear device” device has been detonated and there is radioactive fallout… it doesn’t matter what kind of radiation or how concentrated it is, that will not be in the headline. Result: milions terrorized, our way of life disrupted, millions (if not billios) of dollars lost in commerse, not to mention in cleanup. These dirty bombs may not be extremely lethal, but they will almost certainly be successful in the terrorists eyes.

Reply

Miguel Salles January 17, 2007 at 11:22 am

Comments to Where are the Dirty Bombs: Too much has been written about this subject! Much to the point of crying wolf. Instead of writing and worrying citizens half to death about it….Why don

Reply

fffff December 16, 2007 at 8:35 pm

fdfdfdfdf

Reply

Maegnor April 27, 2008 at 2:14 pm

Modular Buildings & Portable Buildings Comark Modular Building
Hi, Admin! Your site is very interesting. Keep work.
http://www.modbuilding.100freemb.com/

Reply

Alex May 4, 2008 at 6:17 am

Reverse mortgage lead providers work untiringly to formulate a database of prospective reverse mortgage customers.
http://www.mortrev.greatnow.com/
http://www.steelbuil.greatnow.com

Reply

Maegnor May 13, 2008 at 3:06 pm

Apply for credit card
While you start to read through this knowledgeable apply for credit card applications article, give each tip a chance to sink in before you continue to the following.
http://aplycard.coolpage.biz/

Reply

Maegnor May 13, 2008 at 3:10 pm

The building standards are published in the Code of Regulations, Title 24, known as the Building Standards Code.
http://www.builcode.narod.ru

Reply

McFly May 13, 2008 at 3:12 pm

Reverse mortgage lead providers work untiringly to formulate a database of prospective reverse mortgage customers.
http://www.mortrev.greatnow.com/
http://www.steelbuil.greatnow.com

Reply

Maegnor June 2, 2008 at 2:10 pm

Apply for credit card
While you start to read through this knowledgeable apply for credit card applications article, give each tip a chance to sink in before you continue to the following.
http://aplycard.storm.prohosting.com/

Reply

????????? June 5, 2008 at 6:49 am

????????- ??????? ??????????? ??????? “FACTOR” ?????????? ???????, ????????????, ???????, ??????, ????????, ?????????????, ???????? ? ????????

Reply

????????? June 5, 2008 at 6:52 am

????????- ??????? ??????????? ??????? “FACTOR” ?????????? ???????, ????????????, ???????, ??????, ????????, ?????????????, ???????? ? ????????

Reply

Scott July 21, 2008 at 6:28 am

Hello, nice site look this:
sex tip
bath sex teen tub video
pic sex teen tiffany
black lesbian sex story
See you. Thanks!

Reply

fenugreek extract July 30, 2008 at 4:17 am

The problem of radioactive material being stolen is a serious one. The Bush administration should think about tome strategies to resolve this issue because it’s putting in danger our lives.

Reply

joyous_monk January 19, 2009 at 3:35 pm

AGGRESS AutoPost Test

Reply

anh nghi May 17, 2009 at 4:28 am

Legend has ????? it that one day ??? ????after victory ?????? over the ??? ????? Chinese Ming invaders ???? when King Le Thai To
?? was boating ?? on the lake ?????? a golden tortoise ?????? came up ??? out of the ???? water to
???? ?????? take back
?? ?????? the sacred sword ?? ?????? that had been
?? ?????? given to him ??? ?????? by the god
?? ?????? to save the homeland
sod (15th C.) ??? Noteworthy ???? ??? the Huc Sunrise brige
?? ????? ????? Tower of the Pen Brush
???? Portico of the Ink ??????? – Slab ??? ?????? Ngoc Son (Jade hill) temple. . . ??? ??? That

Reply

koolgirl92 August 21, 2009 at 8:07 am

??? ?????
??? ?????
??
??
??????
??????
???
???
????
???? ?????
?
?? ??????
?? ??????
?? ??????
??? ??????
?? ??????
sod
???
???? ???
?? ????? ?????
????
???????
?? ??
?? ??
?? ??
?DVD
?DVD
?? ??
?? ??
???? ??
???? ??

Reply

hangcn September 24, 2009 at 5:12 am

??
????
??
???? ??
????
??????
?? ??????
???
???
????
???? ?????
?
?? ??????
?? ??????
?? ??????
??? ??????
?? ??????
sod
???
???? ???
?? ????? ?????
????
?? ??
?? ??
?? ??
?DVD
?DVD
?? ??
?? ??
???? ??
???? ??
???? ????
??? ????
??? ????
??? ????

Reply

jake September 28, 2009 at 12:55 pm

Classic UGG 5819 Cardy
Classic UGG 5819 Cardy
UGG 1760 Persephone Sandal

Reply

magingam October 1, 2009 at 3:11 am

??
????
??
???? ??
????
??????
?? ??????
???
???
????
???? ?????
?
?? ??????
?? ??????
?? ??????
??? ??????
?? ??????
sod
???
???? ???
?? ????? ?????
????
?? ??
?? ??
?? ??
?DVD
?DVD
?? ??
?? ??
???? ??
???? ??
???? ????
??? ????
??? ????
??? ????

Reply

Anonymous December 10, 2010 at 9:08 pm

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: