Truthout Original

Facebook DIGG

The Depleted Uranium Threat

by: Thomas D. Williams, t r u t h o u t | Report

photo
Explosive depleted uranium tank round. (Photo: Tuberose.com)

"The DoD, the nation's biggest polluter, is now cleaning up 29,500 currently or formerly contaminated sites in every state and territory. California alone has 3,912 contaminated sites on 441 current and former DoD installations. Many of DoD's facilities have already contaminated groundwater sources of drinking water.... The cost to clean up toxic munitions contamination and unexploded ordnance at active and former military installations around the country may reach $200 billion." - The National Resources Defense Council, April 21, 2004.

"The Defense Department is refusing to comply with orders or sign contracts to clean up 11 hazardous waste sites, including one in Hawaii, and has asked the White House and Justice Department to intervene on its behalf." - The Associated Press, July 1, 2008

    While attempting to act as the planet's nuclear watchdogs, the United States and Great Britain have become two of the world's largest, cancer-causing radiated dust and rusty depleted uranium projectile polluters.

    Using tanks and planes, the US and British military have fired hundreds of tons of radioactive depleted uranium munitions (DU) while fighting the first Gulf War, the Balkans War, and the more recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. For two decades, successive US and British government leadership has done little overall to clean up the hazardous war waste. And, when repeatedly asked questions about it, spokespersons for Britain's Prime Minister Gordon Brown and US President George W. Bush, as well as the two presidential candidates, Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois) and Senator John McCain (R-Arizona), didn't respond to a large number of e-mails and telephone calls over a month's time.

    Ironically, while firing this nuclear by-product all over Iraq, Afghanistan and the former Yugoslavia, both Britain and the US regularly criticized and put financial or political pressure on Iran, Syria, North Korea and Pakistan for developing nuclear weapons. Of those four countries, only Pakistan is said to possess depleted uranium munitions, but their military forces have not been notorious for using them.

    Depleted uranium is a by-product of the enrichment of natural uranium for nuclear reactor-grade or nuclear weapons-grade uranium. It is additionally used as an armor to protect tanks. Its metallic density is ideal for manufacturing munitions that readily pierce tank and other armor by burning and burrowing through it. But, while doing so, the munition creates large quantities of radioactive dust that the wind can carry for 20 to 30 miles. Sometimes the projectiles didn't explode. Instead, they buried themselves and degraded. Now they pollute or threaten water supplies, soil, plants, birds and animals in war-torn regions.

    Potentially Serious Health Impacts

    Dangerous DU debris is credited by some with creating higher child cancer and other illness rates in Europe and the Middle East. DU's fine particles can be harmful as well to the kidneys, skin and the lenses of the eyes. And, when inhaled or swallowed by humans, animals or fish, that dust can create serious and permanent health hazards. Expended DU is a permanent terrain contaminant with a half-life of 4.5 billion years. Uranium dust can linger in the lungs, the blood and other organs for years. It is reported to have caused some of the so-called mysterious ailments among the more than 350,000 US service members, many of whom unsuccessfully sought medical treatment after the first Gulf War.

    At least four states - New York, California, Louisiana and Connecticut - passed bills in an unsuccessful attempt to force the Department of Defense to better test and care for war veterans for DU exposures. Their legislatures and governors were all concerned about sick service members exposed to DU wartime dust.

    "Large numbers of corroding depleted uranium penetrators embedded in the ground might pose a long-term threat if the uranium leaches into water supplies," a British Royal Society scientific study says. After shell firings, the ground becomes polluted with depleted uranium particulate waste and some parts of the munitions themselves. DU contamination should be removed from areas around known penetrator impact sites," says the Royal Society. "Long-term environmental sampling, particularly of water and milk, is required and provides a cost-effective method of monitoring sensitive components of the environment, and of providing information about uranium levels to concerned local populations. Monitoring may need to be enhanced in some areas, by site-specific risk assessment, if the situation warrants further consideration."

    Although the Royal Society insists threats of health damage to those inhaling depleted uranium dust is remote and limited to those who took in large quantities, a study of Iraqi children, exposed to wartime DU dust, contradicts that assessment. Dr. Souad N. Al-Azzawi, a member of the Brussels Tribunal Advisory Committee, says that children breathing or swallowing those radiated particles in areas of intense United States DU munitions firings "offer strong evidence of the correlation between low level radiation exposure and result(ing) health damages." DU exposures created "a shift of leukemia incidence rates towards younger children during the recent years," said the doctor. Another inquiry by three professors at the University of Massachusetts and Tufts University concludes: "In aggregate the human epidemiological evidence is consistent with increased risk of birth defects in offspring of persons exposed to DU."

    Four years ago, Iraq's provisional government sought help from the United Nations in cleaning up wide swaths of its country, littered with expended munitions projectiles, DU destroyed equipment, broken random particles and wind showers of DU dust. The United Nations, without effective result, urged the British and U.S. military to clear many of the DU hazards they had created. In fact, United Nations environmental cleanup specialists asked U.S. and British officials for locations where the munitions were fired in Iraq, but they only reported receiving DU firing coordinates from Britain.

    DU Cleanup Required But Ignored

    Neither British nor U.S. authorities have offered to augment the $4.7 million donated mainly by Japan to the United Nations to evaluate sites of wartime contamination that health experts say threaten the well-being of millions of Iraqi civilians. But, contrary to scientific evidence, in late October 2004, Army Lt. Col. Mark Melanson said a five-year, $6 million Defense Department experiment with a simulated DU tank explosion shows "the chemical risks of breathing in uranium dust are so low that it won't cause any long-term health risks," even for the tank crew.

    However, U.S. Army regulation 700-48 and its Technical Bulletin 9-1300-278 have for years required cleanups of the residue of depleted uranium firings and destruction. "Radioactive material and waste will not be locally disposed of through burial, submersion, incineration, destruction in place, or abandonment without approval from overall commander," says the regulation. "If local disposal is approved, the responsible commander must document the general nature of the disposed material and the exact location of the disposal." Radioactive equipment under that same regulation must be cleaned up and disposed of as soon as practicable. Other crucial military regulations call for DU tank drivers to be medically examined if they are exposed to dust or other radioactive debris. Similar British requirements prohibit unauthorized collection of radioactive waste.

    One of the most salient examples of the problems with depleted uranium munitions and their dangers to the public recently opened a new chapter in the munition's long, nagging history. In the face of the Pentagon's and the Army's repeated denials of the need to follow their own regulations, that very same leadership was involved this spring in one final large and expensive DU munitions cleanup of Camp Doha, a 500-acre base in Kuwait.

    Despite the potential health dangers to anyone walking close to the area, most of the particulate hazards remained right there in the soil above and below ground at this active military camp for more than a decade and a half. In the years since 1991, the site's larger waste hazards have been cleaned up in varying incomplete manners. This sloppiness caused health issues for all living nearby or stationed there. The military camp is on a peninsula relatively close to Kuwait City, holding the capital's government offices. Its population was about 191,000 people when a depleted uranium munitions accident occurred. Right around the corner is Kuwait City International Airport.

    Seventeen years ago, during the first Gulf War, Doha was the site of one of the largest fires and explosions of a depleted uranium munitions and tank storage area ever. On July 11, 1991, at about 10:20 a.m., says a Pentagon inquiry, a defective heater in an M992 ammunition carrier loaded with 155mm artillery shells caught fire and set off a sustained series of explosions and fires. The blaze and blasts sent chemicals and radiation dust from munitions and tanks into the air for miles, as the black hazardous smoke rose high into the sky. Tanks, other equipment, vehicles and a huge store of munitions were scorched. Fifty American and six British soldiers were injured. Two American soldiers' injuries were serious. It took many months and hundreds of millions of dollars to rebuild this significant military base. "The destruction was overwhelming," said a Pentagon inquiry. "The fire and explosions damaged or destroyed 102 vehicles, including four M1A1 tanks and numerous other combat vehicles. More than two dozen buildings sustained damage as well. Among the estimated almost $15 million in damaged or destroyed ammunition were 660 M829 120mm DU sabot rounds."

    Initially, the Army worked for months on a major cleanup. Then in late 1991, the second and final phase of hazardous equipment removal was assigned to the Environmental Chemical Corporation. And the Pentagon's investigation report said: "Personnel packing the drums with DU penetrators wore surgeon's caps, safety glasses, half face protective masks, coveralls, butyl rubber aprons, rubber surgeon's gloves with cotton inserts, and rubber 'booties' over their normal work boots. A total of eight drums were filled with about 250 DU penetrators."

    The Kuwaiti government hired its own U.S. private contractor, the Halliburton Corporation, to move most of the burned-out hulks in the vicinity of Kuwait City to a dump in the western desert. But, not until three years ago, when the U.S. planned to stop using the base, did the Army dispose of additional shell fragments. And, it was just in April of this year that the rest of this gigantic mess was finally neutralized on site. The cleanup, accomplished by MKM Engineers, headquartered in Stafford, Texas, was financed by the Kuwaiti government.

    David Foster, an Army public affairs spokesman, said "under the circumstances, the Army had no legal obligation to clean up the (particulate) material" at Camp Doha. The Army originally brought the munitions and equipment to protect Kuwait, so it was now Kuwait's responsibility to pay for the cleanup, transportation of the hazards and final, safe burial, he said.

    A total of 6,700 tons of contaminated sand with particles of depleted uranium and lead from Kuwait was shipped in April to the Port of Longview in Washington. The barrels were then transferred to railway cars for final delivery to the American Ecology Corporation's Idaho's Grand View low-level radiation waste facility, 70 miles southeast of Boise in the Owyhee Desert.

    "Based on the very low levels of contamination present," American Ecology spokesman Chad Hyslop, "the soil is not regulated as 'radioactive material' by the US Department of Transportation." Damaged depleted uranium penetrators were separated out by MKM and sent separately to the United States for disposal, said Army spokesman Foster. Both the Department of Environmental Protection and the Nuclear Regulatory Agency, accepting the Army's tests and descriptions of the hazards of the dust, allowed this form of disposal.

    EPA and NRC Leave Cleanup and Burial to the Army

    Those two agencies' officials took the Army's word that these shipments of depleted uranium dust did not pose a threat to humans or the environment while in transit or stored away in its final Idaho waste site. Mark MacIntyre, an EPA spokesman, said: "The Army is responsible for characterizing the material for the purposes of complying with transportation and disposal requirements.... The EPA does not have a specific standard related to depleted uranium. For the purposes of disposal, depleted uranium is considered a low level radioactive waste and is subject to U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations." Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the NRC, explained: "The sand - with small amounts of depleted uranium being sent to the U.S. Ecology Idaho facility for disposal - contains 'exempt' concentrations of uranium, less than 0.5-percent weight. If the concentrations were greater than this, we would have oversight."

    Retired Army Maj. Doug Rokke, who has a Ph.D. in education - physics and technology - from the University of Illinois, fought the use of DU for years through the Internet and other means. He believes this current Doha DU waste-disposal operation violates safe guidelines. He worked with the special operations team, the 3rd U.S. Army captured equipment project team, and with the 3rd U.S. Army Depleted Uranium Assessment team during Gulf War One. As a result of his DU cleanup work, Rokke says he is ill with radiation damage to his lungs and kidneys. He also has radiation cataracts, fibromyalgia, rash, hearing loss, diarrhea, reactive airway disease, brain lesions, teeth breaking off and falling out, and neurological abnormalities.

    It is ludicrous, said Rokke, for the NRC, the EPA and the Army to deny the Doha depleted uranium's dangers. They are doing this, he said, even as the U.S. government is mandating a huge cleanup of the Concord, Massachusetts, depleted uranium munitions manufacturer Starmet's Superfund site, and is indeed taking those pains to ship DU from Camp Doha, Kuwait, to the United States while endangering the environment and all persons who come anywhere near that shipment.

    Health Destroyed by DU

    Former First Lt. Todd Lightfoot is one of many Army veterans who believes he became sick from the aftermath of the fire while stationed at Camp Doha in 1991. He explains at his Internet web site that: "During my entire tour; one could say that, 'I was in the loop' (in the know about operations)." Lightfoot added that he has reviewed "my notes from all of the meetings we had ... and we had meetings twice a day every day ... and many times having a meeting or two in between. I can still not find one mention of potential health hazards from depleted uranium or the possible contamination of any area at Camp Doha." and "I've been sick now since about 1995," said Lightfoot. "I have what they call IBS (irritable bowel syndrome), but they've not been able to treat it with any success. (It creates constant) bad, bad cramping in the lower abdomen, severe fatigue, bad joint pain, all of the norms rolled up into the 'Gulf War Illness' tag!"

    "As for what I believe is the cause of my declining health," said Lightfoot, "there were three constants when I arrived a DOHA. There were the burning oil well fires. There was a constant presence of insects/pesticides. And then there was the DU. I've always believed that there is more to the DU than the US government and DoD would like us to believe." Army spokesman Foster did not answer queries about Lightfoot.

    International Calls to Ban and Clean Up DU

    Back as far as 1999, a United Nations committee called for a DU munitions ban worldwide because its long-term adverse health impact on civilians violates international law. More recently, in January, the United Nations voted to approve an inquiry among member nations to determine the harmful impacts of depleted uranium munitions. Three years later, the World Health Organization recommended that "young children's exposure to depleted uranium must be monitored and preventive measures taken, and heavily affected impact zones for depleted uranium munitions should be cordoned off and cleaned up." United States officials failed to effectively warn the government of Afghanistan about that very danger. BBC News reported in April: "Doctors in Afghanistan say rates of some health problems affecting children have doubled in the last two years. Some scientists say the rise is linked to use of weapons containing depleted uranium (DU) by the U.S.-led coalition that invaded the country in 2001. A Canadian research group found very high levels of uranium in Afghans during tests just after the invasion. A U.S. forces spokesman denied its weapons were affecting the health of Afghans or the country's environment."

    Some cleanups were conducted in the Balkans, but otherwise the recommendations found little cooperation. Finally, in late May, the European Parliament passed a global ban on such weapons with a landslide approval vote. The rationale: "Ever since its use by the allied forces in the first war against Iraq, there have been serious concerns about the radiological and chemical toxicity of the fine uranium particles produced when such weapons impact on hard targets. Concerns have also been expressed about the contamination of soil and groundwater by expended rounds that have missed their targets and their implications for civilian populations. Despite the fact that scientific research has so far been unable to find conclusive evidence of harm, there are numerous testimonies as to the harmful and often deadly effects on both military personnel and civilians. The last few years have seen great advances in terms of understanding the environmental and health hazards posed by depleted uranium, and whereas it is high time that this was reflected in international military standards, as they develop. The use of depleted uranium in warfare runs counter to the basic rules and principles enshrined in written and customary international, humanitarian and environmental law."

    Press spokespersons for both President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have told this reporter in the past they rely upon the Pentagon for advice about the use of depleted uranium munitions, their health impacts and cleanups. Neither British Prime Minister Gordon Brown nor the British Environment Agency specifically answered this reporter's repeated queries about their policies toward DU munitions and cleanups.

    The British Ministry of Defense says on its Internet site: "There is no reliable scientific or medical evidence to link DU with the ill health of either Gulf or Balkans veterans or people living in these regions. Many independent reports have been produced and researchers continue to consider the battlefield effects of using DU munitions. These reports include work by the Royal Society, the European Commission, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Health Organization (WHO). None of these organizations has found a connection between DU exposure and illness, and none has found widespread DU contamination sufficient to impact the health of the general population or deployed personnel."

    Jasem Al-Budaiwi, first secretary of the Kuwaiti Embassy in Washington, sent this reporter's inquiries to his government, but no reply came back. Repeated inquiries to presidential candidates Senator Barack Obama (D-Illinois) and Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) over a month's time netted no answer to phone calls or e-mails.

    It was not until October 2006, after decades of complaints about the hazards that President Bush signed into law a Congressional bill calling for a study of the health effects of depleted uranium munitions' firings on American troops, but not on the millions of foreign civilians exposed. As a result, a legislative committee is expected to ask the Army to review the accuracy of acute exposures and the cancer risks posed by them.

    This summer, a Canadian Member of Parliament, Alex Atamanenko (British Columbia Southern Interior, NDP) called on his government "to undertake every measure possible to ensure that depleted uranium weapons of mass destruction are banned forever." Atamanenko continued: "Belgium has banned the use of uranium in all conventional weapon systems. However, at least 18 countries, including the U.S., use depleted uranium in their arsenals. They are considered weapons of mass destruction under international law. According to a Canada-U.S. agreement, Canadian uranium exports may only be used for peaceful purposes." Nonetheless, he said, Canada provides raw uranium to the United States and other countries for processing and the resulting depleted uranium is then used in weapons.

    DU Munitions Abandoned by Some

    Now says Dai Williams, a British uranium expert, who posts on www.eoslifework.co.uk, most DU munitions are becoming pass, but in their wake, undepleted uranium shells made of natural uranium have been fired and are being manufactured by arms makers worldwide. "Why is this a problem?" asks Williams. "Because natural uranium in the general environment is mostly in large particles created from natural weathering processes. The body seems to be able to eject these. But weapons uranium dust is formed at very high temperature into ultra-fine particles described as aerosols that can pass through cell walls etc. In the lungs these will go into soft tissue and stay there, rather than being coughed out," Williams explains. In the meantime, he says, tons of the old DU munitions are still in storage for potential firing by countries including the Great Britain and the United States. The British, he said, are now using the hard metal tungsten to manufacture munitions formerly made of uranium. Even the U.S. Navy and Marines have abandoned depleted uranium munitions in light of their potential health hazards.

    A Government Accountability Office investigation two years ago found the military's and the Department of Energy's handling of depleted uranium and other nuclear waste a fiscal quagmire to clean up. In the United States, DU munitions manufacturing operations have created numerous hazardous-waste concerns. The military has had to deal with firing range cleanups of DU, while the Energy Department is responsible for oversight of nuclear installations. "The nation's military installations and nuclear weapons production facilities," said the GAO, "have accumulated many types of waste and contamination over the years. The federal government estimated its environmental liability to clean up this waste at $249 billion in fiscal year 2004, representing the federal government's third-largest reported liability. It represents a significant future outflow of funds at the same time as many other competing demands for federal dollars, but is currently not auditable," the GAO said.

»


Thomas "Dennie" Williams is a former state and federal court reporter, specializing in investigations, for the Hartford Courant. Since the 1970s, he has written extensively about irregularities in the Connecticut Superior Court, Probate Court systems for disciplining both judges and lawyers for misconduct and the failures of the Pentagon and the VA to assist sick veterans returning from war. He can be reached at denniew@optonline.net.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

This is probably a terrible

This is probably a terrible problem but it's not helped by writing that includes a pileup of 10 adjectives in the third paragraph between "largest" and "polluters."

Good article revealing use

Good article revealing use of DU, depleted Uranium. So what else is new? When was the last time your heard a public official or elected representative actually TALK about the depleted uranium problems? One of our esteemed presidential candidates, perhaps? Well, actually, there IS one. A former 6-term Congresswoman DID talk about this repeatedly and actually introduced bills to deal with the DU problems. As she also spoike out aagainst the war and occupation of Iraq,she was subsequently thrown undere the bus by her Democratic Party for doing so. She should have known better. than to question certain areas forbidden to public discussion, like anything dealing with war, weapons, defense, or even healthcare, the "untouchable" areas of Power. She is now running for President for the Green Party, Cynthia McKinney. Heaven forbid that the "electable" and "serious" parties actually discuss DU and other important issues in the sunlight with truth. Without the"irrelevant" small parties, NO one would be talking about it on the campaign trail. It's time for big change in our politics if we wish to have a liveable world.

Weapons of Mass

Weapons of Mass Contamination Breakfast of Champions

Independents and third party

Independents and third party candidates are important to bring up issues such as DU, and the corporate takeover of government, which the two major parties will avoid fastidiously. In substantial ways the current crop of Democrats are no different than their Republican counterparts. Any organization that gets too big (and we know it when it happens) is a detriment to the society it exists in, the society that has created it and supports it. It is detrimental because it is incapable of doing the right things in spite of its continued support from the community. Call it human nature, or corruption through power, or a flawed model. We always seem surprised when the corruption is exposed no matter how many times it happens. With DU, an industry created from military research recycles its byproducts back to the military in an environmentally degrading circle. The list of products and byproducts created by the nuclear industry is not compatible with life on Earth, and thus should be dismantled and outlawed in its entirety. There are other, better solutions to the problems purportedly solved by nuclear fission.

Great article, Mr. Williams.

Great article, Mr. Williams. Dai Williams comment "..tons of the old DU munitions are still in storage..." is a very serious issue. The high levels of radiation the chemical explosives are exposed to in uranium munitions renders the high explosives "unstable." As a result the nuclear based munitions must be dismantled and recycled. Sandia Labs, a Nuclear Weapons Lab contractor built some computer controlled, very efficient water cannons to cut open "old" shells. Unstable high explosives will give anyone a bad day.

How much will it cost us to

How much will it cost us to clean up the DU we unconscionably spread in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere and deal with the Iraqi, Afghani, US, and allied medical problems that result? How long will it take for the US to deny the military the authority to make decisions to use DU and other weapons without regard for consequences, long term costs, and undue suffering? I remember in the early days of the war in Iraq hearing a US general state that we'd use whatever we need to win the war... as if we needed DU to defeat the Iraqi army. How long will it take the US to adopt policies that are not based in fear but that allow us to deal with uncertainty and uncomfortable fears as a normal part of life, conflict, diversity, and uncertainty? C.G. Jung said that the foundation of all mental illness is the avoidance of legitimate suffering. We suffer from a collective mental illness and prefer preemptive warfare—justified by fear—to having deep, complex, challenging, and painfully uncomfortable interactions with those with whom we disagree. "The task of the mind is to understand what happened, and this understanding, according to Hegel, is man’s way of reconciling himself with reality; its actual end is to be at peace with the world. The trouble is that if the mind is unable to bring peace and to induce reconciliation, it finds itself immediately engaged in its own kind of warfare." (Hannah Arendt, 1961, p. 8)

I've been studying this and

I've been studying this and related environmental degradation issues for years. Conclusion: It is too late to reverse the damage humans have wrecked on the only inhabitable planet in the known universe.

Aloha Thomas, Just wanted

Aloha Thomas, Just wanted to point out one 'fact' that may not be true in your DU article at Truthout. You said (they said) the Navy and Marines are not using DU weapons anymore.... this may not be true. I met my friends' brother a couple of weeks ago, in Hawaii, he is in the Navy and was out on an huge exercise west of Hawaii, last month, (July 08) called Rim-Pac. I asked him about DU and he told me nearly all of the ammo they used was DU. Just wanted you to know. I am a concerned resident of Hawaii working to find out about the contamination of our training ranges here. Many ranges across our own country are 'hot and dirty'. The military told residents and state officials that they had never used DU here, Not true. An Earthjustice lawyer in Hawaii, discovered in an email, while doing research for a Stryker lawsuit, that they had used it. The military, (Army) then had to finally admit its use after decades of denial. After several years of badgering, our local Hawaii County Council finally passed a resolution last month, (8-1) to ask the Army to stop all live fire, bombing, and anything else that will disturb the dust of our local range. The resolution does not have the force of law of course, but it is a start. Schofield Barracks, on O'ahu, (Honolulu) is also radiologically contaminated, and we suspect a couple of others. The military reports, (2006) it has 824 contaminated sites in Hawaii, (not DU) and this does not include active ranges, such as the ones where DU is present. The military is very skilled at playing this issue down at many training ranges across the U.S.

During the gulf war of 1991

During the gulf war of 1991 the allies tossed just under 770 pounds of potentially bomb making U235, including in big chunks, over the battlefields of Iraq, in the form of so-called depleted Uranium. And this could be much more dangerous than indicated by the simple implication that somebody might separate out U235 and makes a bomb. Issue #1: How Much, and Chunks: From the AP, "Pentagon: Depleted Uranium No Health Risk", March 14, 2003, we learn that 320 tons of depleted Uranium (DU) was used in the gulf war in the form of large caliber rounds. But wait-- that was depleted Uranium, with no bomb-worthy U235 in it, right? Actually, it simply doesn't have quite as much of the bad stuff in it. Presumably, enrichers stop trying to get more U235 out of the raw U238 material as soon as overall efficiency of such a process drops to some unproductive level, for the given separation method. One wonders if technological advances may occur is this area... We learn from: http://www.iacenter.org/depleted/duupdate.htm, that enrichment process has merely taken the percentage of U235 down from 0.7 % to 0.2 % of the U238, in order to get a small amount of concentrated U235. Since 0.2% of 320 tons is 0.64 tons, nearly 1300 pounds of U235 was distributed in Iraq. But wait again-- the munitions turn to dust on impact-- even burn, converting to Uranium Oxide-- so are we talking about a impossibly difficult "mining" operation for someone to gather some Uranium? Or is the battlefield concentration so low that it is not even as good as a mine ? From the same iacenter website, "During an impact approximately 40 % of the penetrator forms DU oxides which are left on the terrain, within or on impacted equipment, or within impacted structures. The remainder of the penetrator (60%) retains its initial shape. Thus we are left with a solid piece of uranium lying someplace which can be picked up by children or adults" If you used gloves and a dust mask, you could find the chunks with metal detector and/or Geiger counter without getting into too much trouble. And a chunk of DU would be quite distinctive-- it would seem so incredibly heavy for its size that most people would recognize it as very unusual: 10% denser than Gold, and three times denser than steel. So 60% of the 320 tons of the 0.2% of the DU, or 768 pounds of U235, is available in big chunks, but at concentrations that would be rather inconvenient, depending on what kind or how much technology is applied to it. The atomic bomb lore says 15 to 30 pounds is what were are talking about for a fission bomb. A softball sized amount for Plutonium, larger if it is U235. Issue #2: What else can they do with it? This Uranium is off the books as far as accounting for Uranium goes. Recall that one reason the Nigerian yellow cake story was debunked, is that the Niger operation was too tightly controlled for the alleged misallocation to occur. If on the other hand, a rogue operation at a nuclear facility was daring enough, they could alter the material by exposing it to the reactor, and make more readily fissionable stuff. This is how Plutonium is made in a breeder reactor. (The earth hasn't had any of its original Pu for billions of years since it lasts only a couple of hundred thousands years at best, until people made some) Hmmm. How could THAT happen? From the AP, "Libya Converted Small Amount of Plutonium", February 20, 2004". "Libya used technology and know-how acquired on the black market to process uranium into a small amount of plutonium, the U.N. nuclear watchdog said Friday. Diplomats citing a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency said the country was able to "separate a small amount of plutonium." The report did not specify the amount, but it appeared to be less than the approximate 7 pounds required to make a nuclear bomb....” In short, by placing ANY kind of Uranium near the nuclear reactor's core, the huge neutron flux changes some of it into other, similar-sized nuclei, like Plutonium, or whatever. More fancy high-tech needed: Pu can be CHEMICALLY separated. Issue #3 Forget the other issues. But never mind that-- any Uranium would make a good radiological bomb, and a very convincing threat. How would an nuclear bomb squad, even using instruments applied to an actual terrorist bomb, know for sure that it was nowhere near the right concentration? Elaborate instruments could probably tell if a lot of U235 was present or not, due to signatures of its decay, and daughter products. However, the DU would make a very good bluff.

"This is probably a terrible

"This is probably a terrible problem but it's not helped by writing that includes a pileup of 10 adjectives in the third paragraph between "largest" and "polluters."" Yes, it may be awkward but sometimes the truth is more than awkward. Jeez, whine, whine, whine. You sound like a republican with nothing constructive to say. Great article by the way. Too bad those that need to read it will find it awkward and give up before they grasp the seriousness of the situation.

Dear Dennie, Glad to see

Dear Dennie, Glad to see you writing about DU again at Truthout.org - very much better than most recent writing on the subject. Friends and I were just out vigiling again this week at Davis-Monthan AFB with signs asking "Where is the depleted uranium?" "Iraq asks, U.S. won't tell?!" and "Please tell Iraq where A-10 pilots shot DU ammo" because all A-10 pilots, who shot most of the DU used in combat, train at the base. Your article is only marred by this entirely unsubstantiated comment from Dai Williams: "Now says Dai Williams, a British uranium expert, who posts on www.eoslifework.co.uk, most DU munitions are becoming passe, but in their wake, undepleted uranium shells made of natural uranium have been fired and are being manufactured by arms makers worldwide." Dai can show you warhead patents (I've actually spoken by phone with two of the patent holders he cites...), but there is simply ZERO evidence such warheads or shells are being manufactured with depleted or "undepleted uranium" here in the USA or anywhere. Patents are not products, and uranium is mentioned only as a suitably dense substitute material in the patented warhead designs. (Dai Williams has long made the equally misleading claim of uranium in cruise missile and bunker-busting conventional warheads - something I have debunked at http://nuclearresister.org/du-disinfo.pdf) Uranium handling licenses, manufacturing contracts, ordnance manifests, handling protocols, etc. exist in the public record for all the known classes of DU weapons, but none regarding "undepleted uranium" have been produced by Williams or others who make similar claims (including URMC and Dr. Chris Busby). I can point you to this related and unequivocal DoD denial, http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/pdf/lamiq04.pdf for what it is worth - my point is that extraordinary claims like this one made by Williams require extraordinary evidence. There is also the strategic error Williams and others make who promote (as you notably did not) an estimate that the US has used 1,000-4,000 tons of DU in Iraq since 2003. My comments on that are below. Best wishes, Jack Cohen-Joppa co-editor, the Nuclear Resister newsletter The strategic error of exaggerating DU use. The Pentagon admits to using about 150 tons of DU ammo in Iraq since 2003. A vocal minority of activists who claim to oppose DU weapons, including Doug Rokke, Leuren Moret, Bob Nichols, and others routinely state that between 1,000 - 4,000 tons of DU was used in ammo and bombs and missiles in Iraq since 2003 (citations for both on request). As opponents, we point to a certain incidence of ill health effects as being the likely result of DU weapons. Call that incidence "X". The Pentagon admits to using about 150 tons of DU in Iraq since 2003. Call that quantity "Y". This gives us a sickness-to-uranium ratio of X::Y, or one. By contrast, this subgroup of activists would have us believe that it actually requires about 10-25 times more uranium to result in the same observed health impact. Logically, this would lead to a sickness-to-uranium ratio of x::10(Y), or 1/10th the ratio of harm per unit of uranium used compared to the more conservative Pentagon numbers. This amounts to conceding the argument about hazardous dosage, such that these activists are in fact proclaiming a belief that DU is LESS hazardous than Pentagon numbers would have us believe. Why assert that DU is less dangerous by claiming it takes much more of it to cause the observed ill health effects? This is a strategic error that serious opponents of DU weapons should avoid. Jack Cohen-Joppa

great article... but i think

great article... but i think depleted uranium is a byproduct of the uranium conversion process.. not the enrichment process... uranium conversion, also known as uranium hexafluoride or UF6, is the step between mining and enrichment. The ENTIRE nuclear fuel/weapons process is a mess beyond most peoples comprehension.

Between the 1200 nuclear

Between the 1200 nuclear bombs that they exploded on America ,this depleted Uranium problem and God knows what else is out there. here are the deadly facts 1 ) Uranium will be floating down main street every town USA for billions of years. 2 ) It changes your cells and is auto degrading, meaning it is passed on from generation to generation. 3 ) One of the common effects is babies born retarded. Look around America you are faced with a society that has been degrading and will continue to degrade. people getting dumber and dumber. and it isn't ever going to go away. America has bombed itself into oblivion ,The people too retarded to even take notice. the Depleted Uranium problem is minor compared with the Uranium that is floating around from the 1200 nuclear bombs that they exploded on America. The War Industrial Complex ,you were warned by one of your War heroes and president. yet still today you fail to comprehend your own destruction.

Yes, this would be a pretty

Yes, this would be a pretty serious problem _if_ depleted uranium was dangerously radioactive. It was even emphasized in this article that DU has a "half-life of 4.5 billion years" - pretty scary if you don't know what a half-life is. Everything in the universe is radioactive - but the longer the half-life, the less radioactive it is. As you point out in this article (although whether it is through a total misunderstanding of radioactivity or just phrasing things so as to deliberately mislead the readers) DU is actually _less_ radioactive than normal dirt. And yes, DU dust can irritate the eyes and lungs - of course anyone who has ever had sand in their eyes or breathed in a lot of dust knows that _any_ kind of dust can do that. And as far as someone using leftovers to make a bomb - this stuff is called _depleted_ uranium for a reason. It's what's left over when you take out everything that _could_ be used to make a bomb or fuel a reactor!

One of the many problems we

One of the many problems we have on our plate as the fascists plan for world domination. They and their corporate cronies are so dislocated from the world they live in. Many people here are too. We have lost the rosy future we might have had. Now we need to stop the grim future planned for us by our would be masters. Stop them then we can clean up the rest of the mess both here and abroad they have caused. But we are running out of time.

The article misses an

The article misses an important source of exposure to natural uranium by focusing on weaponized DU. In the USA, coal-fired power plants emit more than 1000 tons of uranium every year. This uranium starts out dispersed in the coal, and is released when the coal is burned. Most of it goes right out the stack and into the environment. Over the last century, US coal power has released over 50,000 tons of uranium into the air we breath. This has got to stop!

Nuke Waste ...And what are

Nuke Waste ...And what are we going to do with all that extra Nuke waste from all those new Nuke plants the Repugs want to build? Drop it some other nations' back yards (preferably those with OIL) that we want to De-populate!?

Sincere thanks to Thomas

Sincere thanks to Thomas Williams and Truthout for the excellent long needed Depleted Uranium Threat article. One must wonder why this earthshaking threat to humanity is almost totally unknown to the caring folks in America. Can it be that our government controlled major media is getting all their information on the issue from government sources and hiding it for instance, two from Google.com 1. Expert: No US troops have taken ill from depleted uranium. stated Dr. Kilpatrick, head of Pentagon's Department of Health Affairs in Stars and Stripes Dec 14, 2007. 2. VA withholds data for up to 70,000 veteran cases a year from US cancer registries. 3. Aug. 25,2004 letter to Arizona Senator Kyl from G. Lamartin, Dir. Pentagon Defense Systems. "Our review regarding the use of certain munitions in recent operations confirms that none of the guided bombs or cruise missiles that the US used in Iraq and Afghanistan contained uranium of any type. Consequently, nearly all health statistics and information on DU has had to be obtained from health and scientific agencies in other countries where it was first used in the 1991 Gulf War and continues to be used to this day. Three of these can be found in Google- 1. Nothing depleted about depleted uranium. 2. Doctors to study Iraq birth defects. 3.Depleted uranium radioactive contamination in Iraq. An overview. Official records show that since the Gulf War up to this time, we have had close to 2 millions troops, contract and government workers cycle in and out of the war zones, some on their 3rd or 4th tour of duty, ALL, exposed to the very same conditions that have killed and maimed countless thousands of innocent victims of our wars. PLEASE, kindly join me in asking your members of Congress to introduce and support the 2 following bills. 1. Every service member who has served in the MID-East wars since 1991 will be offered state of the art testing for DU contamination . 2. Every military family where one or both parent has served in the Mid-East wars since 1991 will be offered early, prenatal birth-defect screening. This is the very least we can do for our veterans and other workers who have already given so much of their lives and future for our country. Bud Deraps

DU dust is bad stuff.

DU dust is bad stuff. Myself and other civilian and military personnel who worked at the Military Traffic Management Command (MTMC) in Falls Church VA during the first gulf war were exposed to DU dust from the uniforms of others who traveled to and from the ports and around where the tanks and vehicles were being loaded. Military persons in the pentagon command center who worked closely with people coming back from the gulf were getting sick. We got Walter Reed to come in and monitor the building and they came up with nothing - because the stuff was in people's uniforms. We had every test done to determine what was making us sick and everything came back negative. What we had was low level radiation sickness and they never wanted to admit it.

Good article on an extremely

Good article on an extremely important topic. I read all the comments posted so far. Two facts that were new to me: 1. When DU is in the form of extremely small particles, it becomes extremely dangerous and causes DNA to breakdown. No wonder that cancer rates are zooming in Iraqis and within our troops who have fought in the mid-East. Also, severe birth defects are rising too. 2. Coal fired power plants emit fine particles of DU in huge quantities. In addition, these plants emit mercury, cadmium, etc. Thus, we need to begin to phase these plants out very quickly as they are WMDs. BTW, cement kilns emit toxic particles like mercury.

Hmmm...why has the World

Hmmm...why has the World Health Organization concluded that DU is NOT a significant health threat? Guess it's just those pro-US shills at the UN that are caving in to US pressure once again... http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.