[ RadSafe ] Government eyes Supertanker for dirty duty

[Perrero, Daren]

Thank you Barbara for the quick interject.  

I'd also add that dirty bombs run a range of effect just like raising
the kiloton yield on a fission device gives a range.  In the case of a
dirty bomb it could be a small black powder pipe bomb with a solid
source strapped to it creating radioactive shrapnel to a fertilizer
device with a dispersible radioactive powder (and various combinations
of the above), but in ALL CASES, no where near comparable in results
when it comes to the radiation/radioactivity that's released in a
fission event.

The opinions expresses are mine, all mine.....
I'm with the government and I'm here to help you (ack!)
daren.perrero(a)Illinois.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of blhamrick at aol.com
Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 7:43 PM
To: Doug Huffman; radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl; Brennan, Mike (DOH);
radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Government eyes Supertanker for dirty duty

Whoa, wait!  A nuclear device is orders of magnitude more significant
than any dirty bomb could be.

A dirty bomb is just ordinary explosives conjoined to radioactive
material in order to disperse said material.  A nuclear device unleashes
the energy in fissionable material and can (if effectively designed and
detonated) cause far more damage than conventional explosions.  They're
really not comparable events.

Barbara L. Hamrick
------Original Message------
From: Doug Huffman
Sender: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl
To: Brennan, Mike (DOH)
To: radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Government eyes Supertanker for dirty duty
Sent: Aug 20, 2009 5:10 PM

Have we that may know merely dirty from 'bomb' ever put a sharp pencil 
on one?

I find it hard to believe that an effectively dirty bomb is much 
different from a nuclear device or that a practical dirty bomb is 
particularly dirty at all.  'Practical' constrained by mass, specific 
activity and so on.

Brennan, Mike (DOH) wrote:

> For dirty bombs, the first thing to do is keep ignorant policy makers
from doing stupid things, like requiring wounded people be deconned
before they are treated, or ordering evacuations when shelter in place
is called for.  As for deconning big chunks of a city; fire hoses and
the storm drain system will be more useful than airplanes full of hair
gel.
>