# Radiation Dispersal Devices - A little myth busting



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

All,

As a small contribution I want to do a small write up about RDD's since there are many myths surrounding them in the general public and even in some among senior descion makers (if they are poorly briefed)

First a review of what RDD's are;

- Some terrorist collects some "significant" amount of radioactive isotope
- Puts it into a dispersal device (likely explosive)
- set it off in a populated area.

What kind of threat will this be?

Pretty much none.

Why?

a)You could take a double digit %age of a years production of isotopes of a major nation state and still not have enough to be dangerous when dispersed.

b)While there ARE some high activity industrial isotopes out there, they are highly controlled and collecting a bunch of them would lead invariably to detection and arrest ( and you'd still not have enough to be dangerous)

c)even if b) were not to apply, collecting enough over time putting them together in a device may be very hazardous and the culprit would display debilitating symptoms over time also possibly leading to his arrest when he seeks medical treatment for his symptoms.

d) and perhaps most importantly even if the bad guy had somehow surmounted obstacles a,b and c and assembled such a device , exploding it would dilute it's effect quickly to such an extent as to render it harmless.

And while it may be possible to get a dose that is bigger, than OSHA allows for a member of the general public outside of getting an X ray please remember this:

*No even remotely realistic RDD will ever pose a radiation hazard of any significance to the public-at-large*

The consequences for a prepper are these:

Don't go shopping on credit card to head to your BOL when an RDD goes off in your city.
Better yet, do not head off to your BOL at all.

Getting in an accident on streets full of wrongly panicked people will be your greatest hazard in an RDD event.

Shelter in place is the way to go here.
And not to protect you from any "radioactive hazard" but to stay off the streets that will be full of panicked people.

Eric..

PS: Hi FBI guys:wave:.
I know the title was probably worrisome to you, but as you can see this is just about educating the public.


----------



## lexsurivor (Jul 5, 2010)

Good information. Thanks for sharing.


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

Lex:

No Prob.. I know it was kinda a short write up but there is a lot of fear out there on RDD's that is uneccessary and I dont want anyone to put his family in a bad position through a well-intentioned over reaction.


----------



## Tweto (Nov 26, 2011)

BlueZ said:


> All,
> 
> As a small contribution I want to do a small write up about RDD's since there are many myths surrounding them in the general public and even in some among senior descion makers (if they are either briefed)
> 
> ...


Only one problem with your statement. Radiation is not the issue. Inhalation and ingestion of the "dirty" parts of the bomb are. Radiation has never been the dangerous issue.


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

Tweto said:


> Only one problem with your statement. Radiation is not the issue. Inhalation and ingestion of the "dirty" parts of the bomb are. Radiation has never been the dangerous issue.


I knew someone would bring this up.
Now your making me work by writing more.. (sigh) 

A) *IF *the isotopes used are alpha emitters (and most isotopes that might be useful for an RDD are NOT.. (since industrial sources, where you find quantities that one could use to build anything, are all gamma and beta emitters for reasons I dont want to spend the time explaining)

But even in this unrealistic case, the amount of particles that are alpha emitters would simply be too strewn out to have a high enough concentration to be an issue of any kind.

Unless you stand right next to the explosion but then you have other problems namely the explosion.

Many many years ago when I was a much younger man, a very wise and senior HAZMAT first responder gave me this to remember: Radioactive isotopes by themselves are Never an emergency.

Also what is the rule of thumb for decontamination?:
"DILUTION is the SOLUTION"

So what is an exploded RDD?
A radioactive device that has just self decontaminated itself 

B) If you are alluding to the supposed toxicity of *artificial* radioactive elements:

- Unlike say Am241, they are so invaluable you'd never have enough of them to put in an RDD *and *they a re so tightly controlled you would be arrested for even thinking about getting at them..*and* even if you did get enough them you wouldnt use them since they are so valuable, you'd sell them and use somehting else.
- *and * their supposed toxicity is a myth.

Plutonium for example only has about the toxicology of lead. 
Dr Cohen ( if memory serves the last person to have seen Albert Einstein alive) has spent years explaining that plutonium is less toxic than caffeine by weight (and it is)..

He even offered the anti nuke crowd that he would eat a gram of plutonium for ever gram of caffeine they would be willing to eat. (they never did, the LD50 for caffeine is 192 mg/per kg body weight in rats and likely much lower in humans per kg of BW.......)

Cheers,

Eric


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

PS: Just in case this wasn't clear... Of course if the isotopes used are Gamma emitters it's also not an issue, since the radiation is so penetrating nearly all of it will have the body left long behind before it interacts with your cells.
This is because since low Z atoms that our body's tissue is made of, of interact poorly with Gamma radiation.
In any event the quantities will be so small, it will be more dangerous to make your living as a stewardess ( since they incur dose as part of working so high).

Doesn't mean gamma isnt dangerous, it is, it means you need to see a lot more of it than is plausible in this scenario, to have an effect.

I hope I covered it from the major bases now: mainly Alpha emitters , mainly gamma emitters, and toxicity.


----------



## Magus (Dec 1, 2008)

Nice thread new guy!I was afraid it was another "garden sprayer and cooking oil" type thing for decontamination.good thing radium is so hard to get or we'd had a dose by now.

Tell you folks a little secret about me, just so you can see the new guy knows what he's saying:
I grew up 2 miles from where H-bomb triggers were made AND STORED IN THE GROUND WATER IN A LEAKING POOL!you can probably see the creepy trees where it used to be to this day.anyway,all my family drank well water.we didn't know what was over the hill until it was gone for a decade.anyway,nobody yet has died of ANY cancer, but we were surrounded by those who had brain tumors, pancreas cancer etc.know what wiped us out? fast living and alcohol.Oh, and what was causing the illnesses? we figure it was the mega doses of fluoride they were putting in the "city water" or the agent orange TVA used to spray the power lines with back in those days.


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

Magus:

Thank you for the kind words especially coming form a high postnumber guy.

Eric..

PS: The Ironic thing about that group near the test site, that calls itself the "downwinders" is that when you look up the wind direction the day of the test they are all referring too, they were actually NOT downwind from the test and hence received Zero falllout


----------



## Magus (Dec 1, 2008)

N.P truth is truth.I see you used to make a living advising on such things.any clues about the bumrub about the Japan fallout?


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

Magus said:


> N.P truth is truth.I see you used to make a living advising on such things.any clues about the bumrub about the Japan fallout?


yes but that's for another seperate thread sometime in the future.
And since I can tell form other threads there will be some sharpshooting going on I will have to weigh every word carefully so starting a thread will take me a bit longer


----------



## Padre (Oct 7, 2011)

I don't mean to keep "sharpshooting" but you keep on referring to people being "arrested" while building a radiological device. Who do you think would build a bomb like this and where do you think they are going to be building it? If I was a terrorist, I think I would do it in a country that wouldn't arrest me for doing it.... maybe they'd even help me! 

And I don't think the threat comes from isotope production in legitimate reactors, I think the concern is vast stock-piles of waste and weaponized materials that exist in certain parts of the world with questionable security and even more questionable inventory control practices. As to handling the materials, most people know that certain percautions are needed when handling radiological materials, and its not like protective clothing is that expensive or rare, so I think most people building a dirty bomb could do so without getting sick. 

Finally, I think TWETO hits the nail on the head. I am not sure what you are alluding to when you are talking about isotopes in production, but if you are talking about nuclear waste or weaponize material the issue is not radiation from the bomb, but continued exposure to the decaying particles and particularly inhaling radioactive particles. "Dilution is Solution" doesn't solve the problem of a particle with a 1, 2, or 10 hundred year half life irradiating you constantly from the inside out. Inhaling radioactive particles is a death sentenc, I mean isn't that why NBC kits include a respirator? and why they tell you to shelter in place until the fall out ends in the case of a nuke blast?

One thing I can agree with you on is in case of any NBC event sheltering in place is the smart move. Federal protocol when I worked for them was to shelter in place sealing all windows and doors. Plastic sheeting to cover gaps and over-pressurizing the room you are in will also help.


----------



## FrankW (Mar 10, 2012)

Padre said:


> 1) Who do you think would build a bomb like this and where do you think they are going to be building it?
> 
> 2)If I was a terrorist, I think I would do it in a country that wouldn't arrest me for doing it.... maybe they'd even help me!
> 
> ...


1) As written in the original post i was covering my bases by also discussing the (negligible), danger of artificial elements. And I referred to them specifically.
When we discuss such e have to be exact and specific which "kind" of radioactive material we are discussing in a given paragraph.
every sentence written only has meaning in regard to the *specific case* referred to at the beginning of the paragraph.

And yes artificial elements especially fissile ones need to be excluded frim this discusson because a) they are so well guarded b) their value is so high you would never use them for this (an ounce of Plutonium is worth roughly 500 times what an ounce of Gold is worth. c) they dont offer any utility in such an application, because they dont have a lot of radioactive activity per mass ( called specific activity) and their toxicity is not remarkable.

2) true.. but the threat of arrest and the challenge of carrying abig chunk of explosive over multiple borders is pretty high for a group constantly under US detection threat. the further you have to carry such a device with every passing day the risk of detection by law enforcement goes up. Ergo: a device would have to be assembled relative vicinity of point of use.

3) a)First of all we really are not worried about weaponized stuff in this context.. No one would ever waste it on an RDD.. and that stuff is very well guardrd by anyone who has i tin the world.. if you had a kilo of something worth 500 times its weight in Gold wkuldnt you guard it well? No matter what country you are from.
b)As for *used *reactor elementsd they are indeed very very dangerous and contain lots of material..
But they are what we call "self protecting" the radiation from them is so humoungous that the mere act of stealing one would be enough to give you tens thousands of rads since oyu will ave to be in its close vicinity to accmplish that. 
And e if you "wat if" had a guy who could burn through ven if you burn through 30 suicidal volunteerss.. after you ahv it secured. you'd still need to break open the zircomium cladding and make a device out of it..
people who can do that are not like sand in the sea and you cna afford to lose them like flies.

4) You are correct if it is a relatively harmless material.. but a very powerful source like an industrial radiation source or a used reactor burn elements would kill its handlers very quickly not matter how many plastic gloved thyet put on.
TO work with material like that you need a multi million dollar facility with motorized remote "hands" protected by a couple yards of steel reinfiorced concrete and yard thick lead glass to see...
Thta kind of money buys many many truck loads of conventional explosives

5) See previous in this post.

6)Already answered in a previous post.

7) a modern filter element such as in an M40 consists of HEPA filter and an activated charcoal filter. one filters particles (HEPA) and one filters chemical molecules. 
It is overkill for any rad threat.

A P95 papermask is plenty just to keep particles out.
But In any RDD that's remotely realistic even those lacking this basic protection will see no significant dose or toxic effects. the main threat will be the explosion used to "disperse" or the panic in the streets.


----------

