# Chemical weapons



## NaeKid (Oct 17, 2008)

With all the talk about Syria and chemical weapons, I wanted to try to come to a better understanding of what they really are, how to protect myself in case I come into contact with the chemicals and if I should just kiss my own butt goodbye ... 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_weapon

Without doing a complete copy and paste from Wikipedia, it looks like there are many different types of chemical - from something as simple as a tear-gas canister to make the eyes water, to smoke-bombs that can cause someone to cough and choke all the way to weapons of mass-destruction where even a hint of the chemical can worm its way into your body, attack the nerves and cause a shut-down of your entire system. Not a reboot, a shutdown (nice way to say .... YerDead).

According to Wikipedia, many countries have stockpiles of chemical-weapons and some of the "weapons" could be made in a home laboratory - if you can find the right ingredients that is.

From doing further reading, I found out that MustardGas was the basis for what we now know as chemotherapy, so, it might not be all that bad ... except for the blisters on the skin if it touches you, or blisters in the lungs if you breath it in ... :doh:

I am sure that there are experts in these matters ... I know nothing beyond what I can find on the 'net .. awaiting your responses.


----------



## Magus (Dec 1, 2008)

PM me bro. 
I got your makeshift stuff.


----------



## buggy (Dec 9, 2012)

So what protection to get? I see these gas masks at Amazon but a lot of remarks that the filters are expired.


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

Personally I think the risk of a major chemical attack in the USA is very small. Small quite localized attacks may be a possibility but I see them as not to much of a threat either(though if You were in the middle of a small local attack you may feel it is quite an issue). 
I will consider economic collapse to continue to be the most likely threat to our survival.


----------



## CrackbottomLouis (May 20, 2012)

I'd be more worried about chemical fires from plants in a natural disaster here in the states. If I lived close to one I would add a J List suit to my preps along with my gas mask. Basically just a rubber coverall suit. It was the suit the army issued before the new mopp gear if I'm correct. The army made me give my mopp gear back when I left


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

I'm concerned about the largest nuclear generating plant in the USA is only about 80 miles from my house.


----------



## FatTire (Mar 20, 2012)

I dont know much about chemical, biological, or radiological preparedness. A quick search on the net yielded little info. The CDC has systems in place for a response, but so far Ive not found anything good on what sort of basic kit an individual should have. I would be very interested in that, even though such an attack is, I think, pretty low on the probability scale. If a basic kit could be put together cheaply, I would do it.


----------



## Hooch (Jul 22, 2011)

I read a book about this guy who defected from when then at the time USSR, more like just after they sorta broke up in different countries. Anyways, he was the top biological n chemical weapons guy during the hieght of his career with russia and developed their program for production n research. It was a very interesting book...scarry to. Even tho many countries all agreed to not make these weapons n blah blah blah...we all did. He didnt get into great detail about each n every one but It left me with an impression that we have some crazy weaponized stuff. 
I remember after 9/11 sometime emergency responders all got enough "chemical gear" for each person n member. We all got assigned a suitbag n whatnot and I asked my teamleader ok...any training?? what does this protect me from?? a lil tyvek suit n green rubber boots ...ok I remember thinking someone gonna kill themselves trying to be a hero...what a waste of money. They sat for years getting old n foul. 
But I too would consider a "prep" if it's feasable n not to pricey..


----------



## drfacefixer (Mar 8, 2013)

FatTire said:


> I dont know much about chemical, biological, or radiological preparedness. A quick search on the net yielded little info. The CDC has systems in place for a response, but so far Ive not found anything good on what sort of basic kit an individual should have. I would be very interested in that, even though such an attack is, I think, pretty low on the probability scale. If a basic kit could be put together cheaply, I would do it.


You can find CBRNE classes online - they vary from basic to very involved depending on the role of the responder. The awesome classes cost some cash because they are usually federal agencies training and bring in some costly toys. Some of the classes are also long. Mine was 20 hours lecture with additional days of setup of Decon stations and mass cal exercises. You also get hands on with some of the more advanced radiation detectors as well as biochemical/toxin identification kits.

From all this there is more than enough info on what you would want to put to together for an individual kit, but realistically your going to clear the area. Hazmat/biochemrad suits and all the toys are really for going into and dealing with those coming out of the hot zone.

I've known people that went nuts thinking they were going to be able to cover all windows in 4mm thick plastic, attach radiation filters to their house and invest in detectors for alpha beta and gamma. That's great if they are planning for world wide fallout, but dumb if its a local detonation or dirty bomb - just move. Radiation will linger there years longer than you will.

Chemical weapons are expensive and dispersal technology is cost prohibitive for use on a wide scale. It's very unlikely unless it was a modern military force using it.

Bio weapons can be made with junior college know how which is why they are the most likely to be used. Problem is they are indiscriminate, hard to contain and travel outside the targeted zone by those they affect. Prophylactic antibiotic antiviral therapies are not very cost effective on a individual level. It's in the national best interest to respond to an outbreak immediately. The higher the r0, the faster your going to see a response.


----------



## Hooch (Jul 22, 2011)

I just thought of this but sometimes local firestations, cal fire, police will give away their outdated quick referance books they keep in their cars/engines. They can be a interesting read n referance tool for known chemicals, not weaponized ones but still a interesting read. I used to thumb though ours when bored at the station with not much going on. It might be a good ref to have in our librarys just in case..there will be chemical spills from vehicles/tankers on the road traveling for those buggin out...just a thought...


----------



## Marcus (May 13, 2012)

To me, the persistent nerve agents are the big concern since it'll take a while for nature to cleanse the affected area.
The rest of the chemical weapons, besides the nerve agents, can be defeated using respirators and hazmat suits as long as the chemical levels are below the IDLH level. Inhalation and ingestion are the main pathways to exposure.

But I don't really see chemical weapons being used *except against concentrated populations* since delivery is somewhat problematic and dependent on atmospheric conditions (wind/rain.) The US doesn't differentiate by policy between different forms of WMDs. So any attack will likely be by non-state players since the response will be extreme.

The best way to protect yourself is to avoid large crowds (like in big cities.)

Living anywhere near a large chemical or petroleum plant or in an area where these products are stored is a really bad idea. I'll also point out that nerve agents are made from insecticides or pesticides so you'll especially want to avoid those types of plants (remember Bhopal.)


----------



## Davarm (Oct 22, 2011)

If my little piece of the world gets hit with a military grade chemical weapon, gonna just bend over and kiss it good by! Its near impossible(for the average Joe) to completely protect yourself and clean-up would not be possible unless you were adequately protected.

If I remember my schooling(Army NBC School in the late 70's-early 80's) a strong chlorine bleach is the next best thing available to the public for decontamination of most Chemical Agents. The best method for the lay person to decontaminate an area is to un-ass it and let time break the agents down.


----------



## FatTire (Mar 20, 2012)

I did some research last night, and it appears that being prepared for a CBRN type attack/disaster is a lot more complicated than just having a military gas mask and a tyvex suit. To be effective filters and suits must be matched to classes of chemicals and biologicals. If you dont have a filter for a particular threat, (eg. if a train derails, or a tanker truck has wrecked on your bug out route) it will kill you. Its going to take a lot of research to find the most likely threats and prepare accordingly. Positively identifying the threat, which means a pretty good working knowledge of chemicals and msds, is critical to survival. The question quickly becomes how high you feel the threat is to justify the resources expended preparing for it.


----------



## Lake Windsong (Nov 27, 2009)

FatTire said:


> I did some research last night, and it appears that being prepared for a CBRN type attack/disaster is a lot more complicated than just having a military gas mask and a tyvex suit. To be effective filters and suits must be matched to classes of chemicals and biologicals.


True. At work, we have different setups issued to us depending on the chemicals we come in contact with and whether or not we are first responders: SCBA (self-contained breathing apparatus), full-face or half-face respirators with filters, that must be replaced with each use, or disposable dust masks. The other PPE we wear differs also, goggles/glasses, face shields, the gloves and suits made from different materials depending on what we are in contact with. Respirators also come in different sizes, so you have to have the correct size for your face and no beard/goatee in order to have a proper seal.


----------



## FatTire (Mar 20, 2012)

Another interesting note; military gas masks are not designed to provide long term survivability, but rather to ensure short term ability to complete a specific mission. Civilian models are produced to higher standards for limiting contamination over prolonged periods and multiple exposures.


----------



## BlueShoe (Aug 7, 2010)

hiwall said:


> I'm concerned about the largest nuclear generating plant in the USA is only about 80 miles from my house.


If there's a CME (coronal mass ejection) that shuts down large portions of grid for some duration, coolant systems for nuke plants won't run forever on backup generators will they?


----------



## drfacefixer (Mar 8, 2013)

FatTire said:


> I did some research last night, and it appears that being prepared for a CBRN type attack/disaster is a lot more complicated than just having a military gas mask and a tyvex suit. To be effective filters and suits must be matched to classes of chemicals and biologicals. If you dont have a filter for a particular threat, (eg. if a train derails, or a tanker truck has wrecked on your bug out route) it will kill you. Its going to take a lot of research to find the most likely threats and prepare accordingly. Positively identifying the threat, which means a pretty good working knowledge of chemicals and msds, is critical to survival. The question quickly becomes how high you feel the threat is to justify the resources expended preparing for it.


So are correct about military NBC gear. Its made to get the majority of the soldiers affected TIME to get out of the area, undergo decontamination and receive medical treatment. When deciding the cost vs effectiveness of the gear you have a number of factors. So many of the soldiers with perish due to proximity of the strike. There will likely be secondary coordinated attacks which they will have to fight through. Some soldiers won't have time or will fail to don their MOP gear. And the gear has to be small/light enough to carry in environments NBC is expected. The filters will take care of alpha particles, chlorine, phosgene, various choking agents, and most of the less volatile nerve agents. The good news is that the more potent nerve agents aren't volatile and rely mainly on transdermal absorption. The more volatile an agent is the quicker it clears in an open environment. The bad news is those tend to stick around and make the area dangerous.

Someone before had asked about Mark I NAAK kits. They aren't sold to the public because of the restrictions on the medications in them. States stockpile them, but it would be an expensive venture to outfit subways in the US with gasmasks and mark 1 kits as they have done in Asian countries (after the use of sarin gas in the subway). There are extensive networks of sniffers through out cities that you're probably not aware of. most hospitals have them since they would be the lynch pin identifying a potential mass cal.


----------



## Davarm (Oct 22, 2011)

tenOC said:


> If there's a CME (coronal mass ejection) that shuts down large portions of grid for some duration, coolant systems for nuke plants won't run forever on backup generators will they?


They will run long enough to shut the reactors down, the bigger worry would be that the generators and back-up systems would also be damaged preventing a shutdown.


----------



## BlueShoe (Aug 7, 2010)

That's a good point. Emergency shut down is commonly called a SCRAM. A Carrington CME event could take down a majority of a region and could impact several plant sites. Are we sure every plant will be able to properly shut down? I believe there are 64 reactor sites with over a hundred reactors operating. It doesn't take many to impact a large portion of a continent.



> Safety procedures call for the operators to immediately scram the reactor *when two or more control rods are moving in the reactor core.* (The operators didn't.) It took more than two control rods to be moving in order to to drop the water level down to the automatic scram setpoint. It also took several seconds for the water level to drop low enough to invoke the automatic scram.
> 
> The requirement to immediately scram the reactor when more than one control rod is moving has significant safety implications. The control rods are moved by hydraulic pistons relying upon differential pressure. One side of the pistons is exposed to high pressure water while the other side is vented to a large volume at atmospheric pressure. If, as in these cases at Hope Creek, some control rods move before the rest get the message, the water vented from the hydraulic pistons of the moving control rods can fill the vent volume. The remainder of the control rods may not move because there is no place for the water vented from their hydraulic pistons to go. As will soon be detailed further in a Fission Story about three failed reactor scrams at Browns Ferry, this scenario is reality rather than speculation.


The SCRAM rods move when pressure escapes as happened in the Hope Creek events. The SCRAM rods move down into the water to shut down the fission reaction. It appears that twice at Hope Creek the safety procedures weren't followed when air pipes burst twice in 20 years venting pressure from the system.


----------



## hiwall (Jun 15, 2012)

I'm concerned how they will cool rods. The plant is in the desert with NO water nearby. It uses waste water that is pumped from Phoenix(50 miles away). No power equals no water being pumped. The plant evaporates over 50 million gallons of waste water per DAY. I think it is the only nuke plant that is not near a water supply. If it ran out of water they would have a melt down, right?


----------



## Marcus (May 13, 2012)

FatTire said:


> I did some research last night, and it appears that being prepared for a CBRN type attack/disaster is a lot more complicated than just having a military gas mask and a tyvex suit. To be effective filters and suits must be matched to classes of chemicals and biologicals. If you dont have a filter for a particular threat, (eg. if a train derails, or a tanker truck has wrecked on your bug out route) it will kill you. Its going to take a lot of research to find the most likely threats and prepare accordingly. Positively identifying the threat, which means a pretty good working knowledge of chemicals and msds, is critical to survival. The question quickly becomes how high you feel the threat is to justify the resources expended preparing for it.


This is true.
It's not likely many folks here will be interested in investing the necessary time and money in preparing themselves for for such a low probability threat. 
If you choose to do so however, I recommend going with a SCBA-type system, the appropriate clothing, and a good detector. You're probably looking at a minimum investment of $10,000 for which you'll buy 15-30 minutes protection during a release. I doubt many will find it cost effective.
It's much better to just relocate to a safer area.


----------

