Re: Kosov DU - New Scientist Report

["Arthur and Marian Desrosiers" <52deerjump@mediaone.net>]

arthur@bartlettinc.com

Radiologicaly speaking, U is not the same at Pu.  The chemistry and
dosimetry are completely different.

No one's health should be impaired as a result of deconning vehicles if
simple precautions are implemented.  These  precautions are available in
every NBC warfare kit:  protective clothing and respiratory protection.

----- Original Message -----
From: Frederic Dawson <ydc90@dial.pipex.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Sent: Saturday, June 05, 1999 11:45 AM
Subject: Kosov DU - New Scientist Report


> From New Scientist, 5 June 1999
>
> IN 1991 Doug Rokke went to the Middle East as a US army health physicist
to
> clean up uranium left by the Gulf War. He helped decontaminate 23 armoured
> vehicles hit by shells in "friendly fire" incidents.
>
> Today he has difficulty breathing. His lungs are scarred and he has skin
> problems and kidney damage. Rokke, a major in the US Army Reserve's
Medical
> Service Corps, has no doubt what made him ill--contact with radioactive
> metal.Three years after he worked in the Gulf, the US Department of Energy
> tested his urine. They found that the level of uranium in his sample was
> over 4000 times higher than the US safety limit of 0.1 micrograms per
litre.
>
> Now aged 50 and an environmental scientist at Jacksonville State
University
> in Alabama, Rokke is campaigning to stop the US firing uranium weapons in
> the Balkans. "It is a war crime to use uranium munitions when men, women
and
> children are exposed to them without any medical screening or care," he
> says. "It is totally, totally wrong."
>
> Depleted uranium, or DU, is a radioactive heavy metal. It is the waste
left
> over when the isotope uranium-235 is extracted from naturally-occurring
> uranium to fuel nuclear power stations and build nuclear bombs. DU
typically
> consists of 99.7 per cent uranium-238.
>
> As a by-product of the nuclear industry, DU is cheap and plentiful. And DU
> shells are a very effective weapon against tanks and armoured cars. They
can
> pierce several inches of armour-plated steel thanks to DU's extremely high
> density. They're better at penetrating armour than traditional anti-tank
> weapons made of tungsten.
>
> DU was used for the first time in battle during the 1991 Gulf conflict
with
> Iraq. The US Department of Defense says that US planes and tanks fired 860
> 000 rounds of ammunition containing 290 tonnes of DU. British tanks fired
> 100 rounds containing less than 1 tonne of DU, according to the Ministry
of
> Defence.
>
> Gulf veterans such as Rokke believe exposure to this DU is one of the
causes
> of Gulf War Syndrome, the unexplained illness or group of illnesses that
has
> afflicted thousands of soldiers since the war. Iraqi scientists also claim
> that DU was responsible for a rise in the numbers of cancers and birth
> defects in southern Iraq. But both the US and British governments dispute
> this. They say there is no evidence that DU has damaged the health of
> military personnel.
>
> But the row is erupting again with the US admission it is using DU weapons
> in the two-month-old war against Serbia. In a press briefing in Washington
> DC on 3 May, Major General Charles Wald, vice-director for strategic plans
> and policy for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed that A10 Warthog
> aircraft had fired DU munitions against Serbian forces. The US Joint
Chiefs'
> spokesman, James Brooks, told New Scientist that AV-8 Harriers and Abrams
> battle tanks in the Balkans also carried DU munitions. The British Foreign
> Secretary, Robin Cook, has said that no DU is "in use" by British forces.
> But there are more than 20 British Challenger tanks, which fired DU
> ammunition in the Gulf conflict, stationed in Macedonia ready for action
if
> ground troops move into Kosovo--a move supported by Britain as the
> limitations of an air offensive become apparent.
>
> NATO says that DU has been used against Serbian forces since the second
week
> of May. "It has not been used extensively," says a NATO spokesman. "It has
> never been proved that the use of DU endangers the health of people. It is
> no more dangerous than mercury."
>
> Neither NATO nor the US will say how just much DU has been fired in the
> Balkans. But there are 40 A10s and 6 Harriers in action, capable of
> unleashing a lot of uranium. A10s, for example, are armed with a
> 30-millimetre Gatling gun that can fire 3900 shells a minute, one in five
of
> which contains 300 grams of DU. This means that each A10 could release 234
> kilograms of DU a minute. If US and British tanks take part in a ground
> offensive, observers say more DU is likely to be fired.
>
> As well as its ability to pierce armour plating, DU has the unfortunate
> tendency to ignite on impact, creating clouds of uranium oxide
> dust--facilitating its spread in the environment and increasing the danger
> posed by the alpha radiation it emits. Mike Thorne, a uranium expert from
> AEA Technology at Harwell in Oxfordshire, formerly part of the UK Atomic
> Energy Authority, points out that as an alpha-emitter, it poses a similar
> risk to plutonium if it gets inside the body. As such, even the tiniest
> amounts could cause cell damage that marginally increases the risk of
> cancer. DU also emits dangerous beta radiation. Its main component,
> uranium-238, has a half-life of 4.46 billion years. Thorne argues that it
> could in theory contribute to Gulf War Syndrome: "In view of its poorly
> defined biochemical effects, DU could be a contributory factor," he says.
>
> Chemically, DU poses a great threat to the kidneys, where high
> concentrations can lead to organ failure. But according to Thorne, even
> small amounts could have subtle but ill-understood effects. That is why a
> major study by the US Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1989 recommended
> reducing the safety limit for uranium in kidneys from 3 micrograms per
gram
> to 0.3 micrograms per gram.
>
> There is evidence that civilian authorities take the threat from DU very
> seriously. In the aftermath of the Gulf conflict, the UK Atomic Energy
> Authority came up with some frightening estimates for the potential
effects
> of the DU contamination left by the conflict. It calculated that if 23
> tonnes of DU were inhaled--8 per cent of the amount actually fired in the
> Gulf--this could cause "500 000 potential deaths". This was "a theoretical
> figure", it stressed, that indicated "a significant problem".
>
> Potential deaths
>
> The AEA's calculation was made in a confidential memo to the privatised
> munitions company, Royal Ordnance, dated 30 April 1991. The memo offered
to
> send a team to Kuwait to clear up the DU--an offer that was never taken
up.
> The high number of potential deaths was dismissed last year as "very far
> from realistic" by a British defence minister, Lord Gilbert. "Since the
> rounds were fired in the desert, many kilometres from the nearest village,
> it is highly unlikely that the local population would have been exposed to
> any significant amount of respirable oxide," he said. The Balkans war,
> however, is not being fought in a desert but in areas where people have,
or
> did have, houses.
>
> As a result of earlier pressure from Gulf veterans, the British government
> commissioned two reports. In April this year, Lord Gilbert quoted the 1993
> investigation by the Defence Radiological Protection Service, which
> concluded "that there was no indication that any British troops had been
> subjected to harmful over-exposure to DU during the Gulf conflict".
>
> But the other report, published by the Ministry of Defence in March, did
> acknowledge that troops could have inhaled DU dust in the Gulf and that
this
> "could theoretically lead to damage to lung tissue and subsequently to a
> raised probability of lung cancer some years later".
>
> The ultimate irony is that DU could poison the very land that NATO is
trying
> to protect, says Rokke. "The aim of this war is to enable the Kosovars to
> return home. But unless the uranium is cleaned up, those that survive the
> Serb atrocities and the NATO aerial attacks will have to return to a
> contaminated environment where they may become ill."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Fred Dawson
> 3 Barnsbury Close, New Malden
> Surrey. KT3 5BP
> England
> 44(181) 287 2176
> Personal webb page : http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/town/drive/ydc90/
> Work Email : modsafety@gtnet.gov.uk
>
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html