There’s a story doing the rounds at the moment that Colombian rebel group FARC is planning to make a ‘dirty bomb’ out of uranium. This story first blew up last week and has been recycled ever since, and it’s not really true.
The government has seized 30 kg of “radioactive” depleted uranium according to a number of reports. Except depleted uranium is barely radioactive. It’s dangerous alright, but only when made into tank shells.
It is toxic, but so are most heavy metals. You’d be better off making a dirty bomb out of mercury than DU.
The head of Colombia’s armed forces says a buried cache of uranium was found thanks to information from those close to an arms dealer whose name was found on a computer belonging to deceased rebel Raul Reyes (Bloomberg). “It’s exactly the same material listed on Reyes’ computer. Why the FARC were so anxious to obtain this material we still don’t know,” says General Freddy Padilla.
Pro-FARC news agency ANNCOL has rubbished the claims.
Below the fold are a couple of people who got it right about depleted uranium.
Depleted uranium is not sufficiently radioactive to be suitable for a device that could be used as a dirty bomb, said Charles Ferguson, a nuclear affairs specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations. … A bomb made with depleted uranium might “have panicked people for a little while, but the alarm wouldn’t have lasted” once the public realized that the health threat was negligible, he said.
Given the consequences, any possibly, even a remote possibility, that terrorists might have got hold of enriched uranium should be taken seriously and investigated.
But many related past newspaper articles have been weak on several points: they are vague on the important differences between uranium and enriched uranium; they incorrectly assert or imply that, even if not useful for a nuclear bomb, then uranium could be used to make a dirty bomb; and they are insufficiently skeptical of these reports, failing to put them into context by explaining how common uranium and dirty bomb scams are.
Image: Punchstock
Report this comment
The UN General Assembly agendized another look at DU because of this problem with a WHO report saying it was harmless: https://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/reports/international/uranium_20061101.shtml
I have a great deal more peer-reviewed sources on this topic, and I greatly enjoy discussing it. I am not affiliated with any anti-DU group but I have filed three petitions on the subject with the NRC in 2005-2007, one of which is still in process.
James Salsman
Report this comment
The troubling thing is where or whom did the FARC rebels buy the depleted Uranium from? There are no nuclear plants nor nuclear facilities known in Colombia, nor Ecuador, Venezuela, Panama, or Peru. It is apparent that the FARC were attempting to use it in a money making scam.
Report this comment
Dear Dr. Cressey,
I am checking these comments daily, and I’m interested if the excerpts I posted have made you change your mind.
Nature Publishing Group has some exhibits in Second Life, and I have been helping to contribute but not done anything with DU there yet.
I wonder if you would like to collaborate — the minimum would simply be to review the exhibits, say in a month’s time, and provide critical comments. Is that something you might have an hour or two for in a month?
James Salsman
Report this comment
This was a very interesting discussion to follow. I will be very eager to see more light shed on this story in the future.