Nuclear terrorism defense shield: A waste of money

Dylith · 07-03-2007, 02:44 AM

The threat of a terrorists getting their hands on a nuclear weapon and detonating it within the US is a popular fear. The American public has been constantly reminded that terrorist organizations have been trying to get their hands on radioactive material that could be used to build nuclear or dirty bombs.

Billions of dollars have gone into securing nuclear materials overseas, destroying old stockpiles, and tracking down nuclear material on the black market. After 9/11 though, some thought that such measures, coupled with heightened security measures, were not enough.

For the past several years the Bush administration has been funding the installation of a new nuclear terrorist defense shield. This shield is composed of thousands of radiation detectors that are being installed in ports (both domestic and abroad), along our borders, and in and around major cities such as New York. These radiation detectors are connected to command centers which respond when the alarms go off and help to prevent the movement of illegal radioactive materials across our borders.

The problem with these radiation detectors is that there happens to be a lot of everyday products that give off radiation, or have radioactive components in them. The detectors that we are currently employing cannot distinguish between radiation that a nuclear device gives off and the radiation that a crate of bananas gives off. These detectors ring over a thousand times every day, and each alarm must be investigated at the expense of the American taxpayer.

Nuclear surveillance systems are installed via funds from the National Nuclear Security Administration which is an agency within the Department of Energy. Currently, we do not possess the technology required to make such detectors capable of distinguishing radiation given off by denture cleaners and radiation given off by uranium. In fact, highly enriched uranium gives off a rather “dull” signature, making it very easy to conceal in a briefcase lined with lead.

These detectors are also used primarily as a defense against the use of fission weapons within the United States even though the international nuclear black market holds much more promise for the building of dirty bombs.

So far, with little public discussion, the federal government has distributed more than 1500 detectors overseas and along our nation’s borders, with more being distributed every month. Over 400 million dollars is spent annually on research with regards to improving radiation detection technology. Rough estimates for how much simply purchasing the required number of detectors needed for the program easily exceed $10 billion.

While supporting a passive nuclear defense system that works well and is advanced enough to actually protect us may be reasonable, the fact is that these detectors don’t provide a level of security to justify their cost, let alone the cost of monitoring them and responding to them.

The current detection system in place was tested in 2005 by the Government Accountability Office which successfully imported enough radioactive material to easily make a dirty bomb. Spending money on such a crude defense system diverts resources for more important tasks such as securing radioactive material overseas, and helping dispose of dirty bomb components such as highly enriched uranium.

Until we can develop a system that can actually distinguish the different between man hole covers and plutonium, we shouldn’t be willing to spend so much money on this so called nuclear defense shield program.

6SpeedTA95 · 07-12-2007, 08:51 AM

I think you raise some interesting points but the most important is how do you propose we "secure" radioactive material internationally? That seems to have a couple potential problems.

Where do you think the money should go? Should we search every container coming into the US? Should we develop some sort of plutonium/radiation detection machine that could see into large numbers of containers at one time?

If we do not spend money on this type of stuff what makes you believe we will ever develop a system capable of keeping us safe? Afterall it takes money to fuel development.

DosEquis · 07-12-2007, 10:20 AM

While I agree that it is difficult to screen cargo coming in I still believe we should do it given our limited technology at this time. I also think we should continue to research new and improved detection equipment at the same time. Should we spend less on it? Eh, maybe. I don't really know enough about what they are spending it on to say for sure.

The enriched uranium is probably not going to be our issue. I do think the 'dirty bomb' is definitely a threat considering our lack of technology in radiation detection and lack of port security in general. Terrorism is about exploiting vulnerabilities and that is a big one.

Dylith · 07-12-2007, 09:37 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I think you raise some interesting points but the most important is how do you propose we "secure" radioactive material internationally? That seems to have a couple potential problems.

Mainly we spend a lot of money to help countries secure these materials within their own borders and then help them get rid of it. I wasn't suggesting charging into other countries and taking it all away.

Where do you think the money should go? Should we search every container coming into the US? Should we develop some sort of plutonium/radiation detection machine that could see into large numbers of containers at one time?

I have no problem with funding research as I think that a working shield would be benificial. I am also not so much against putting them in ports and borders as much as I am against the next step of the plan, which is to put them inside the United States (such as outside of big cities) could you imagine the traffic nightmare that woold happen if a truck of bananas tried to enter New York? They would have to stop it and investigate it. Thousdands of such incidents would happen every day.

If we do not spend money on this type of stuff what makes you believe we will ever develop a system capable of keeping us safe? Afterall it takes money to fuel development.

I agree, and I am not so much against research for such topics as I am against the wide implimentation of something that doesn't work very well. The shield has failed past security tests.

Dylith · 07-12-2007, 09:39 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

The enriched uranium is probably not going to be our issue. I do think the 'dirty bomb' is definitely a threat considering our lack of technology in radiation detection and lack of port security in general. Terrorism is about exploiting vulnerabilities and that is a big one.

I agree that we are probably more likely to see a dirty bomb attack then a nuclear attack. This net was built more so to prevent nuclear attacks than a dirty bomb though.