Slashdot Mirror


UK Lab Traces Polonium To Russian Nuclear Plant

reporter writes "British authorities had identified polonium 210 to be the radioactive poison that killed Alexander Litvinenko, the former Russian spy who defected to Great Britain. Now, according to a disturbing report, the authorities have identified the source of the poison to be Russia. Bloomberg ominously reports, 'Scientists at the U.K.'s Atomic Weapons Establishment in Aldermaston, west of London, have traced the polonium 210 found in London to a nuclear power plant in Russia, the capital's Evening Standard newspaper reported today. Officials at the establishment didn't return calls.' A cold chill just fell on relations between Russia and the West." In another twist to this developing story, the shadowy Italian security consultant who dined with Litvinenko has also fallen ill with radiation poisoning.

29 of 413 comments (clear)

  1. Where is the reactor? by interiot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The article doesn't say... Do they know if it came from a reactor near Moscow, or if it came from a reactor on the periphery of Russia? That is, does Russia have plausible deniability by saying that rogue agents unattached to the central government did it? Or is it clear that the assassination was ordered by the higher-ups in the Russian government?

    1. Re:Where is the reactor? by WarlockD · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A more disturbing question however is what are we going to do about it? Even if we did trace it to the reactor to Russia, what do we do? Europe is stuck by being reliant on Russia for their gas supplies. US has more issues with Iraq and Iran to worry about it. Not to mention being a veto power in the security consol, where do you think demands of an investigation are going to lead to?

      Russia could just come out and say they killed the guy, but with the power they pushed on the Ukraine on energy supplies, the Russians have much more leverage.

    2. Re:Where is the reactor? by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

      You're thinking of polonium-218, with the radon. Its half life is 3 minutes. Polonium-210 is different. It's a popular radioisotope for 3 reasons:

      1. Its half life is a convenient 120 days or something (not microseconds or decades).
      2. It decays to lead 208 which is stable.
      3. It is a pure alpha emitter (no beta or gamma) which makes it relatively safe to handle as long as you do not ingest it.

      Polonium-218 has none of these properties.

      They sell small amounts of polonium-210 in those little plastic red disks you find in high school chem labs. United Nuclear was selling them for like $69. You'd need to buy a lot of disks to kill a Russian spy.

    3. Re:Where is the reactor? by westlake · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Its still not clear that it was an assassination.
      We still don't know just how much of this polonium is around our normal lives to be worried about the scaremongering.

      Good lord.

      When was the last time you heard of an accidental death traced to ingested Polonium?

      When was the last time you heard of any death caused by radioactive poisoning that couldn't be immediately traced to an industrial accident or something of that sort?

      It's pure coincidence of course when Russian made Polonium kills a Russian dissident living in exile in Britain.

  2. A cold chill in relations? by Peter+Cooper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A cold chill just fell on relations between Russia and the West.

    An even bigger chill will occur if we get too uppity with Russia about this. As a major supplier of European natural gas, we could be sitting freezing in our homes within a week or two if Russia turned off the taps. We have been on the verge of a gas crisis here in the UK for some time now.

    Diplomacy cuts both ways, and I dare say the UK government isn't going to push this too far given the energy situation.

    1. Re:A cold chill in relations? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful
      As a major supplier of European natural gas, we could be sitting freezing in our homes within a week or two if Russia turned off the taps.

      Build more atomic power stations and invest in reprocessing technologies and you won't have to worry about the Russians. You're still using MAGNOX reactors from the 60s since the NIMBY (not in my backyard) crowd has blocked building of new ones.

      -b.

    2. Re:A cold chill in relations? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Plus, if you build more nuclear stations you'll have your own supply of Polonium-210 with which to poison the Russians!

    3. Re:A cold chill in relations? by Mateo_LeFou · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree with you. Nobody's going to give Russia an ultimatum unless they do something *really bad, like for example unauthorized copying of people's intellectual property.

      --
      My turnips listen for the soft cry of your love
    4. Re:A cold chill in relations? by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Informative
      All the nuclear power stations in the world won't help when you need gas to heat your house and cook your food.

      Last time I checked, electrical resistance heaters for cooking and heating homes had been around for the best part of a century. In the British climate, which is moderate year round, you could probably even get away with using heat pumps for climate control since the winter temperatures (at least in Southern England) seldom stay below freezing for long.

      -b.

    5. Re:A cold chill in relations? by TheGavster · · Score: 4, Informative

      I've lived in an all-electric home for 15 years. The electric heaters keep the room pretty much exactly at the temperature you set on the thermostat. In addition, they make almost no noise (silent in operation, a little bit of popping from the housings expanding when they turn on at night) compared to the constant rushing sound of steam or water radiators. The glass-top electric stove heats up in under a minute, and in a definate win over gas can be cleaned just by wiping it down like the rest of the counter. Oh, and it can manage it's own surface temperature too, since it can turn the element on and off. Best of all: no pilot light to have go out and leave you with a smoking crater to return home to.

      Oh, and since my power comes from the local nuclear plant, I'm not sending clouds of greenhouse gases and radioactive carbon isotopes billowing into the atmosphere.

      The depressing part is that the house and the nuke plant were put up in the 70's ... not new tech we're looking at here (the stove is an early-90's replacement for the original unit)

      --
      "Because Science" is one step from "Because old book". Try "Because of my experiment testing my falsifiable assertion".
  3. Bad for nuclear energy by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    *note* I feel sorry for the families for their loss, this post is not ment to sound as thouhg I mean otherwise.

    This is a terrible event for nuclear energy. Directly connecting murder to radiation poisoning to only-in-nuclear-plants-production is devistating for public opinion. It won't matter that radiation generated by polonium can't even pentrate paper, let alone paper; that it is lethal (if ingested or inhaled) is what will stick in people's mind. Worse yet, news reports other people unrelated to the victims showing signs of minor levels; one analyst called it the 'equivalent of a dirty bomb' which is ludicrous but it'll still going to stick in the public's mind just as we really need to start developing new nuclear plants and technology.

    --
    Demented But Determined.
    1. Re:Bad for nuclear energy by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Informative
      It won't matter that radiation generated by polonium can't even pentrate paper, let alone paper; that it is lethal (if ingested or inhaled) is what will stick in people's mind.

      What's worse is that coal contains traces of natural polonium. Burning coal releases more radioisotopes into the atmosphere than the equivalent energy production by a decently-run (i.e. no serious accidents) nuke power station.

      -b.

  4. It doesn't much matter.... by Marnhinn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As someone that spent several years recently (2001 - 2004) in Russia, the location of the reactor doesn't much matter. The government in Moscow is just as corrupt as anywhere else (we bribed low level officials all the time for registration [simply put - people aren't paid enough and often turn to outside sources of income]).

    I don't think any higher up (in organized government) would be dumb enough to order a hit this sloppy. The FSB, underfunded and undermanned as they are, is still very professional. They (the FSB) would have known that the radioactive elements would be traced. Personally, I'd bet this was done by some elements of government that are mafia (very common and they can afford to be sloppy since they are much harder to track). The dead guy had a long history of making enemies...

    --
    There is always a frontier where there is an open and willing mind
  5. Re:Could Putin ever be so stupid? by Ryan+Amos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because they WANTED to get caught. Litvinenko was a critic of Russia who had fled because he didn't want to "disappear." There are others like him. The best way to get them to shut up is to kill one where he thinks he is safe, and let everyone figure out exactly how you did it. The whole incident will get blamed on a mid-level military officer, but the message it sent is clear.

  6. Re:A question I have about the poisoning? by RsG · · Score: 5, Informative

    Not sure exactly what you meant to ask, but here goes.

    Alpha radiation can't penetrate skin. So superficial contact with an alpha emitter isn't really a concern. OTOH, if you ingest/inhale an alpha emitter (like polonium 210), then your internal organs can be exposed to it. This, obviously, is a bad thing. In polonium's case, IIRC, it's soluble in bodily tissues, and has a very short half life of 138 days, so it's quite dangerous (remember that half life and radioactivity are inversely linked).

    Beta, gamma and neutron radiation are somewhat different. Those can get through skin, so superficial contact is a potential concern. Beta is blocked by aluminum foil (get out your tinfoil hats!), gamma and neutron require denser materials such as lead, or thicker, less dense materials like deep soil. Neutron radiation has the added hazard of neutron activation (it can render previously safe materials radioactive).

    Additionally, ionizing radiation from sources other than radioactive decay, like X-rays and UV, can generally be bad for your health; these can be seen as less serious than gamma radiation, but more serious than alpha (UV is blocked by sunblock for example). Non ionizing radiation is de facto harmless, barring intensities severe enough to cause thermal burns.

    --
    Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
  7. Re:Could Putin ever be so stupid? by hairykrishna · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A low dose of an alpha emitter would be a perfect untracable poison. There would be no acute radiation posioning systoms - it would just screw up his bone marrow and kill him via infection. It would be VERY hard to detect the polonium. It is possible they screwed up the dosage.

    --
    "Physics is to math as sex is to masturbation." -R. Feynman
  8. UK lab declines to name specific nuclear plant. by reporter · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Below are two more sources reporting that UK scientists have traced the polonium to a nuclear plant in Russia.

    1. Deadly polonium traced to Russian nuclear plant
    2. Plot Thickens as Spy Poison is Traced to a Nuke Plant in Putin's Russia

    The second source suggests that the isotope composition is the signature that identifies a specific power plant. However, the Atomic Weapons Establishment declined to give the location of the plant.

    I am sticking to my original guess of the culprit: a renegade group in Russia. Various reports have indicated that numerous factions, answering to no one, operate within the Russian government. One of these factions likely committed the crime.

    Putin is just too smart to kill someone in such a blatant way. He would have known that such a gruesome murder would have serious negative consequences.

    1. Re:UK lab declines to name specific nuclear plant. by Cyberax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      First of all, I'm Russian and I live in Russia.

      You see, Litvinenko, Politkovskaya (and his friend http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Berezovsky) are not real threats to Putin. They are considered 'political corpses' since about 2002. Most people under no circumstances will support either of them.

      But these guys are token 'democracy fighters' for most Westerns who do not know intricacies of Russian politics. Now ask yourself: why would Putin kill them?

      So it's much more complex than you think.

  9. Re:Well... by KingArthur10 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Polonium 210 has a half life of only 138 days. To have enough survive from the cold war era that they'd still have lethal amounts is far fetched at best. Wikipedia link on Polonium 210

    --
    I came, I saw, She conquered.
  10. in soviet russia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    in soviet russia the... hang on, I'm not feeling to well... /slumps over keyboarddddddddddddddddddddd...

  11. Re:Further clarification by RsG · · Score: 4, Informative

    Ah, well smoke detectors use Americium:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americium

    Which is indeed radioactive (and a gamma emitter to boot), but has a longer half life than Polonium (hundreds of years instead of hundreds of days). Remember that decay is a finite process; the longer it takes to finish, the less radiation is emitted per second. So Americium isn't as strong as Polonium.

    Plus, the quantities used in smoke detectors is small - less than a microgram. You'd need an awful lot of smoke detectors to amass a dangerous amount of Americium. That doesn't mean you couldn't kill somebody, but it's a poor choice to slip into food or drink.

    What makes Polonium an attractive poison is the lethal dose. You don't need to slip much into someone's food to kill them. Other alpha emitters aren't as good candidates in this regard. Now, as to why they used a radioactive poison in the first place, I don't know; perhaps they wanted to send a message?

    --
    Erotic is when you use a feather. Exotic is when you use the whole chicken.
  12. Re:More like... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The neocons prematurely declared victory when the soviets imploded from within with their socialist disaster.

    Nah, the Cold War "victory" was of the same type as the "victory" over Germany after WW 1. The Allies beat the Germans, but they left an impoverished, dispirited people who were educated and in possession of fairly advanced technology. The time was ripe for a charismatic leader to come in with promises of wealth and victory and rebuild their war machine. Same goes for Russia ca. 2006.

    -b.

  13. Re:Further clarification by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Alpha-radiation poisons are one of the very few poisons where even if you identify the poison that was administered, there is nothing you can do. In essence, once you have administered the poison, the guy is dead. Even if he doesn't know it yet. As for why they didn't use good ol' fashioned lead poisoning... I suspect that it is harder to find out who administered polonium as opposed to a couple of slugs to the head.

    This does denote a very sophisticated organization though. Polonium is not easy to obtain, and most people don't think polonium when they want to off someone. As a matter of fact, the method of death often points to the group - everyone's got their favorite methods.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  14. Re:More like... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Still, the whole "Putin did it because he's bad" line of reasoning

    I'm not convinced that Putin did it. In fact, we're unlikely to know for certain *who* did it. Ever. The guy made a lot of enemies, and there are also a lot of people who'd be glad to sacrifice one ex-spy to make Putin look like a villain.

    -b.

  15. Re:More like... by JavaLord · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Nah, the Cold War "victory" was of the same type as the "victory" over Germany after WW 1. The Allies beat the Germans, but they left an impoverished, dispirited people who were educated and in possession of fairly advanced technology. The time was ripe for a charismatic leader to come in with promises of wealth and victory and rebuild their war machine. Same goes for Russia ca. 2006.

    -b.


    The cold war never ended. The soviet empire coming down was a farce according to KGB agents who defected. Notice that book was published back in 1984.

    Russia is slowly getting back onto her feet economically. She paid off the last of her Paris club debt from the Soviet era under Putin. She helped Bush stumble into the Iraqi war by provinding false intellegence much like America did to Russia to lure them into Afghanistan years ago. The spike in oil prices has helped the Russian economy. So why was Litvinenko killed? Well, he was alleged that al-Qaeda number two Ayman al-Zawahiri was trained by the FSB (KGB)in Dagestan in the years before the 9/11 attacks.

    The US is still fighting the cold war by proxy, even if they don't realize it.

  16. Re:Gah! Not more on the Polonium! by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Foreign government secret services kills man. film at 10. Seriously why is it a big deal"

    He was a British citizen, or at least was granted asylum.

    I know that Bush has played into the whole Gen-X apathy towards politics and history, but you have to understand that poisoning another country's citizen is called "an act of war". Really.

  17. Re:More like... by rednip · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Still, the whole "Putin did it because he's bad" line of reasoning

    I'm not convinced that Putin did it. In fact, we're unlikely to know for certain *who* did it. Ever. The guy made a lot of enemies, and there are also a lot of people who'd be glad to sacrifice one ex-spy to make Putin look like a villain.

    -b.

    The guy made a lot of enemies, and there are also a lot of people who'd be glad to sacrifice one ex-spy to make Putin look like a villain.
    That comment is strait from the 'official talking points' from the state supported media. It would seem that the 'anti-Putin' faction seems to be particularly blood thirsty, as they are killing of numerous reporters, and other dissidents. They really need to get that plot to Hollywood as it might make a good thriller. While the tin-hat folk would disagree, I cannot recall one proven historical event where people were 'sacrificed' for a cause in such a way. Sure a few times accidents and random crimes have been 'spun' for political affect (like the Maine in Cuba), but killing off people who agree with you is not a conventional nor logical tactic.

    Hell, the state-corrupted media has even gone as far as suggesting that the former spy killed himself, perhaps with the polonium 210 pack all spies carry.

    The fact is that killing dissidents is old Soviet SOP, the fact that it is making a come back with an old KGB guy at the helm is no real surprise. In my mind the only real question is 'does Putin know or is it being done without his knowledge by those who benefit from his coattails?'. Frankly, I suspect the latter, but only because I don't really want to piss him off, because every one knows what happens to his critics.

    --
    The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.
  18. The Putin Bride by TMB · · Score: 4, Funny

    But it's so simple. All I have to do is divine from what I know of Putin: is he the sort of man who would get the polonium-210 from his own nuclear reactor or his enemy's? Now, a clever man would get the polonium-210 from his own reactor, because he would know that only a great fool would put the evidence within reach. I am not a great fool, so clearly I can clearly not believe the evidence in Russia. But he must have known I was not a great fool, he would have counted on it, so I can clearly not believe the evidence in front of me.

    [TMB]

  19. Re:More like... by rednip · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What the state-controlled media is suggesting is that 'some unknown persons killed a leading voice of dissent by an exotic poison in an effort to create negative press for a political leader they all oppose'.

    It is so common among that Japanese they actually have a title for those they do it to. Kamikaze. Terrorists were sacrificed in a similar manner if you believe the official 911.. These are not comparative examples, first of all movements sacrifice foot soldiers, or innocents not leaders and primary voices of opposition. Second both of your examples are of the 'we'll kill until you surrender' type, and not an orchestrated media ploy.

    There are some who say that Bush (or the Jews) plotted 9/11, but there are also some who still believe OJ is innocent, that aliens do anal probes, and that a Nigerian will make them rich. P. T. Barnum never did say "There's a Sucker Born Every Minute", but whoever did gave a fair estimation of the availability of gullible people.

    --
    The force that blew the Big Bang continues to accelerate.