Re: Dirty Bomb

["Vincent A King/KINGVA/CC01/INEEL/US" <KINGVA@INEL.GOV>]

Kai and Radsafers,



The conclusion below is correct -  when you start putting real numbers with

'dirty bomb' scenarios, it is difficult to make the risk consequences very

significant (other than from the bomb itself).  If you have enough

radioactive material to be truly hazardous, it becomes a life-threatening

proposition (to the terrrorist) to handle the material while preparing a

dispersal device.  And if you succeed in preparing such a device and

setting it off, the dispersion will most likely reduce the concentration of

material to be below levels that would be immediately harmful to anyone.



If this were broadly known, it might reduce the 'panic' aspect of this

issue.  But don't expect the media to publish it, because it would take

away a good headline.  And the anti's certainly don't want the public well

informed on this - it would contradict their assertion that such an event

could kill thousands and expose that they don't know what they are talking

about or that they are purposely distorting.



True story:  a few weeks ago, I read a newspaper article in the local paper

about Al-Qaeda and dirty bombs.  It stood out because it was written with a

rarely-seen balanced point of view (i.e., it included a discussion of the

low likelihood of significant health effects from such an event; the

reporter apparently did the unthinkable and sought information from an

actual expert).  Oddly enough, on the VERY NEXT DAY, the SAME story was

printed again, only this time WITHOUT the balanced portion about low

expected health consequences.  I guess the editorial staff really slipped

up by letting the first version out, so they 'corrected' it the next day.



In fact, when you apply real numbers to many other 'terror' scenarios (How

likely is it a plane will penetrate a containment building? How likely is

it a terrorist could breach a spent fuel shipping cask?), the futility of

attempting such attacks becomes apparent.  It seems the media would be

doing the country a service by being more informative rather than whipping

up anxiety with their "...Wouldn't it be awful?..." headlines, which just

plays into the hands of those who thrive on causing terror.



Vincent King,

Idaho Falls









...The "dirty bomb" scenarios all seem to be quite tame from a radiological

impact point of view...



Kai









************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/