Pres Bush, I salute you!

Hero For Sale said:

This is true, right? He wouldn't say it if it wasn't true.

Click to expand...

Sure ....

If this is true though then I am suprised.

"radiation portal detectors"

That sounds waaaayyyy too high tech for me to think about this morning...

This has been the plan for the last 2 years. It's not new news. I know we are on track at Port Everglades (I have clearance there).

Here is a recent interview but you an google and get references back to 2002.


Remarks by Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff and Professor of Public Policy and Communication at George Mason University Frank Sesno in a Conversation

Fairfax, Virginia
George Mason University
April 26, 2006

[snip]
Mr. Sesno: We've got some great questions here, so let me try to tick through a few of them. As of today, what percentage of total daily cargo containers are vetted upon entry into the U.S.? This is port security.

Secretary Chertoff: One hundred percent are screened, meaning we know what is inside. We get information about what is inside each container from manifests and other loading documents.
Of those that are screened, based on our intelligence and the information we have about the container, the shipper, and the destination, we inspect 100 percent of those that we deem to be high risk. We will have by the end of October approximately 70 percent of the containers coming into the United States coming through radiation portal detectors at our ports.

Mr. Sesno: Seventy percent of all containers.

Secretary Chertoff: Correct. By the end of next year, it will be virtually 100 percent of all containers coming in through radiation portal detectors.
[/snip]

But read this carefully. What is this reallly telling you?

rtilryarms said:

Secretary Chertoff: One hundred percent are screened, meaning we know what is inside. We get information about what is inside each container from manifests and other loading documents.
Of those that are screened, based on our intelligence and the information we have about the container, the shipper, and the destination, we inspect 100 percent of those that we deem to be high risk. We will have by the end of October approximately 70 percent of the containers coming into the United States coming through radiation portal detectors at our ports.



But read this carefully. What is this reallly telling you?

Click to expand...

It tells me that they're taking someone's word that the information on the manifests is correct. (Sure, I believe everything I'm told; don't you?)

and

Their screening procedures are for detecting contents that emit radiation. Doesn't say a darn thing about biological hazards, (or any other material that might be used as a weapon)

So, here's my salute. How many fingers do you see?
But seriously...one hel* of a lot of cargo comes into our ports. To check each and every container staggers my imagination.

Wow. That's really cool. It's only taken them what? 5 years since the 9/11 attack to get around to doing something like this.

*the sound of one hand clapping*

Unbelievable being the operative word.

It said - 100% of those they deemed high risk.
It doesn't say what percentage of the total they consider high risk.

It could be five containers in the course of a year for all we know.

Unique said:

It said - 100% of those they deemed high risk.
It doesn't say what percentage of the total they consider high risk.

It could be five containers in the course of a year for all we know.

Click to expand...

To add (and as someone else pointed out), it doesn't sound like they're even going to open ANY container up.

It's just a cleverly worded release putting emphasis on saying stuff like "100% of all containers" and "100% are screened", in the meantime, burying the facts that they aren't actually inspected (i.e. opened up), this screening is based upon trusting the docs provided, and they're only screening ones that are DEEMED a high risk (which could only be 2% of all containers).

Also, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't an iron box within the container sheild any radiation from being detected by the portal detector? Isn't iron used to suppress radiation in nuclear cores and the such? Again, correct me if I'm wrong.

There's so many holes in this plan, they might as well not even spend the money.

I’ve done some research in my writing a novel on this subject. I’ve found we are doing research developing a system on a secret network of Nuclear Radiation counters placed in the hands of Government agents in the field. These will be much more accurate than the handheld General-Purpose Geiger Counters, they’re quite accurate, reliable Geiger-Muller Detectors designed for checking and recording ambient radiation levels at airports and at all of our boarder entries. There’s also a wish to have FBI agents in Government cars detecting high ambient radiation level on the nations highways.

I suspect this research has come a long way with what Michael Chertoff is talking about.

Anyway, that’s the plan, but it takes time between the research and implementation.

If you wish, you might want go Google “Geiger-Muller Detectors” and see what you come up with.

Read this funny story. http://www.darwinawards.com/darwin/darwin2002-35.html


This might be close to what he was talking about. http://www.rftrax.com/radiation_sensor.xml

I believe the metal you're looking for is lead, Madd. That's why the dentist drapes you and X-ray techs wear lead lined aprons - to protect you from the scatter radiation.

Talk about your 'crisis that came out of nowhere'...sheesz.

Rob

A smart way to check containers with a radiation portal detector would be to mount it, with an appropraiate alarm system to each crane that lifts them off the ship, and each truck that unloads them.

Know what they use to test these things? Kitty litter. 'Cause it's radioactive.

Weird, huh?

BottomlessCup said:

Know what they use to test these things? Kitty litter. 'Cause it's radioactive.

Weird, huh?

Click to expand...

There are all kinds of fun radioactive items - Coleman lantern mantels, smoke detectors, original orange Fiestaware from the 1930s (uranium-based paint)* . . .

* In college I heard a story about a Fiestaware-collecting chemist who would bring a Geiger counter to antique stores to make sure any plates he found were authentic antiques. Probably apocryphal, but I like to imagine the face of a shop owner whose plates get the Geiger counter clicking.

Peggy said:

In college I heard a story about a Fiestaware-collecting chemist who would bring a Geiger counter to antique stores to make sure any plates he found were authentic antiques. Probably apocryphal, but I like to imagine the face of a shop owner whose plates get the Geiger counter clicking.

Click to expand...

LOL I’ve seen that done in the past at times Peggy.

Maddwriter said:

To add (and as someone else pointed out), it doesn't sound like they're even going to open ANY container up.

It's just a cleverly worded release putting emphasis on saying stuff like "100% of all containers" and "100% are screened", in the meantime, burying the facts that they aren't actually inspected (i.e. opened up), this screening is based upon trusting the docs provided, and they're only screening ones that are DEEMED a high risk (which could only be 2% of all containers).

Also, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't an iron box within the container sheild any radiation from being detected by the portal detector? Isn't iron used to suppress radiation in nuclear cores and the such? Again, correct me if I'm wrong.

There's so many holes in this plan, they might as well not even spend the money.

Click to expand...

And this:

Unique said:

I believe the metal you're looking for is lead, Madd. That's why the dentist drapes you and X-ray techs wear lead lined aprons - to protect you from the scatter radiation.

Click to expand...

And this:

Melisande said:

A smart way to check containers with a radiation portal detector would be to mount it, with an appropraiate alarm system to each crane that lifts them off the ship, and each truck that unloads them.

Click to expand...

I’ve given all this some thought and I’ve wrestled with how much lead it would take to shield the ambient radiation levels from a small triggered two-piece eight-kilogram suitcase nuclear device, or a full size one piece high yield triggered nuclear bomb with a predicted yield range from ten to a hundred kilotons with the most probable yield between fifty and sixty kilotons.

With what detection we may have available at the moment I think it would take very little lead to shield it, but what I suspect we will have soon for a detector I think it would take way too much lead to shield all of the ambient radiation levels, from a reasonable distance of a few hundred feet away.

I hope I am right, I’m no expert on this, any thoughts on this?

GPatten said:

I hope I am right, I’m no expert on this, any thoughts on this?

Click to expand...

I'm no physicist but from what I remember, radioactive particles come in three sizes: alpha, beta, and gamma. Their danger comes from their wave frequency and which isotope they decay into, i.e. their half-life.

What kind of radiation you get would depend on what type of reaction you had to start with. From what I understand, in the 'unreacted' state, these elements aren't terribly harmful. It's once you get them going that a problem develops because you can't stop the reaction.

I'll see if I can find a good layperson explanation and get back with you.
.....in my spare time.... ..... yeah, like I have any of that....

Try this, GP. In Wiki under Physics. It explains generally but doesn't go into a lot of detail.

If I find anything else of value, I'll share it in this thread.

Unique said:

I'm no physicist but from what I remember, radioactive particles come in three sizes: alpha, beta, and gamma.

Click to expand...

You forgot 'super-size.'

robeiae said:

You forgot 'super-size.'

Click to expand...

If they've come up with more since I graduated I'm really not aware. It's not my field to begin with.

Can you get 'super-size' at the drive through or is it special order only?

Unique said:

Can you get 'super-size' at the drive through or is it special order only?

Click to expand...

<--- My sides hurt. Where do you come up with these ‘come-backs’?

Some people bring out the worst in me. I think that's why I like to hang out here.

Unique said:

I'm no physicist but from what I remember, radioactive particles come in three sizes: alpha, beta, and gamma. Their danger comes from their wave frequency and which isotope they decay into, i.e. their half-life.

Click to expand...

I'm no expert in radiation, so anyone with better info should point out my mistakes. Alpha particles are very low energy, and as far as I am aware, wouldn't be detectable outside of the container (they can be blocked by a sheet of paper). Beta particles (electrons) are a bit higher energy, but probably could be shielded (in the lab plexiglass is used as a shield against beta emissions). Gamma particles are the highest energy, but could be mostly blocked if there was enough dense lead shielding.

Non-depleted uranium (U238) emits gamma radiation, so the shielding would have to be heavy to block it.

What kind of radiation you get would depend on what type of reaction you had to start with. From what I understand, in the 'unreacted' state, these elements aren't terribly harmful. It's once you get them going that a problem develops because you can't stop the reaction.

Click to expand...

My understanding was that the main concern is not that there will be a nuclear explosion, but that terrorists would have a "dirty bomb". That essentially would be a regular bomb designed to spread radioactive material, causing widespread contamination and illness.
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/dirty-bombs.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/dirtybomb/

That's what puzzles me about all the hoopla about scanning for radioactivity; there is plenty of radioactive material in the U.S. already. What the terrorists need are recruits that would steal or otherwise collect materials, assemble the bomb, then be willing to set it off. Biological and chemical weapons are also serious dangers, but they too could probably be assembled from materials already inside the U.S.

To me, the biggest danger seems to be a human one, not a technological one.