Dealing with the repercussions of a ‘dirty bomb’
https://arab.news/pcptr
Recent security discussions over the potential use of a radiological detonation device, known as an RDD, in Europe necessitates the need to bring up logical questions about previous potential events, in addition to cleanup methodologies in the event of such an attack.
The idea of using RDDs is not new and there are approaches to minimizing contamination that are part of hazmat doctrine.
The good news is that an RDD has never been used. However, they are the ultimate toxic weapon that can create a contamination situation. RDDs are a psychological tool used to create panic. The recent dispersal of iodine tablets as a first-level response to their potential use is important. That treatment helps but is not a cure.
Neighboring states and the international community need to be fully aware of the potential impact of RDDs and be ready to implement the mitigation strategies that are necessary to halt this nasty problem, which can result in “toxic warfare” scenarios.
Research shows that a “dirty bomb” is one type of RDD that uses a conventional explosion to disperse radioactive material over a targeted area. Most injuries from a dirty bomb would probably occur from the heat, debris, radiological dust and force of the conventional explosion, affecting only individuals close to the site of the blast. At the low radiation levels expected from an RDD, the immediate health effects of radiation exposure would likely be minimal.
The terms dirty bomb and RDD are often used interchangeably in technical literature. However, RDDs could also include other means of dispersal, such as placing a container of radioactive material in a public place or using an airplane to disperse powdered or aerosolized forms of radioactive material. RDDs have a profound psychological impact, which can now be based on superior information campaigns, thereby capitalizing on any potential use with full effect.
RDDs are the ultimate toxic weapon that can create a contamination situation
Dr. Theodore Karasik
In the 1990s, during the Chechen wars, Russia quickly learned about threats from radioactive waste when raids on Chechen positions found low-level radioactive waste stolen from medical and research disposal facilities. Later, in Iraq, Daesh reportedly took “eighty pounds” of uranium compounds from Mosul University, which were to be part of an impact study on the American use of depleted uranium shells on, for instance, local flora and fauna. Some reports suggested that the material was plutonium-238 from the Vostochny Integrated Mining and Concentrating Plant in Ukraine. At the time, security officials were afraid that Daesh may dump this toxic material into the Euphrates. The information environment was confusing and contradictory.
Other actors have looked into but not used an RDD. But the prevalence of such materials in factories and hospitals, which are greatly regulated, may still not have enough oversight. And if a state actor uses an RDD, then the Rubicon will have been crossed. Hazmat teams, along with chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear technicians, would be required on site quickly. The effects on the environment would only add to the cost of an RDD clean-up.
Most dirty bombs and other RDDs would have only very localized effects, ranging from less than a city block to several square miles. Research shows that, if the radioactive material is released as fine particles, the plume’s spread would depend on the speed and direction of the wind. As a radioactive plume spreads over a large area, the radioactivity becomes less concentrated. Atmospheric models might be used to estimate the location and movement of a radioactive plume. Evacuations as a plume passes could result in greater exposures than sheltering in place.
Cleanup management from such an event would mostly involve the treatment of patients. In terms of treatment, there is an effect that is much like dealing with COVID-19 — contamination. Contaminated individuals can expose or contaminate other people who they come into close contact with and they should avoid contact with others until they are decontaminated. People who have inhaled or ingested radioactive material require assistance by medical personnel.
RDD and medical specialists argue that there are no reliable antidotes once radioactive material is inhaled or ingested. However, symptoms can be treated. There are some chemicals that help cleanse the body of specific radioactive materials. Prussian blue has been proven to be effective for cesium-137 ingestion. Potassium iodide tablets, meanwhile, are recommended only for exposure to iodine-131, a short-lived radioactive element produced in nuclear power plants. Trained medical professionals will determine how to treat symptoms, but they will need as much scientific data as possible to determine RDD treatment options.
The implications of the use of an RDD would put state actors in the same category as nonstate actors. Such an event would have practical effects on the use of radioactive materials by other actors, resulting in the requirement for proactive and faster first responders. Cleaning up an RDD event would be a real mess in terms of toxic warfare.
• Dr. Theodore Karasik is a senior adviser to Gulf State Analytics in Washington. Twitter: @tkarasik
