Slashdot Mirror


Radioactive Tool Goes Missing In Texas

Hugh Pickens writes "Oil-field service companies lower radioactive units into wells to let workers identify places to break apart rock for a drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, which frees oil and natural gas. Now Bloomberg reports that Halliburton workers have discovered that a lock on the container used to transport one such device has gone missing, along with the unit, after employees drove a truck from a site near Peco to a well south of Odessa and while the loss of radioactive rods occurs from time to time, it has been years since a device with americium-241/beryllium, the material in Halliburton's device, was misplaced in Texas. NRC spokeswoman Maureen Conley says the material would have to be in someone's physical possession for several hours for it to be considered harmful as teams comb the route between the two wellsites searching for the seven-inch tube, which is clearly marked with the words 'DANGER RADIOACTIVE' as well as a radiation warning symbol, "Halliburton strongly cautions members of the public that if they locate this source, they should not touch or handle it, stay a minimum of 25 feet away," and contact local law enforcement or the company's emergency hotline if they find the cylinder, says the company which is also offering a reward for information about the tube's whereabouts."

163 comments

  1. "I'll offer you $50 for it" by grumling · · Score: 5, Funny

    Looking forward to seeing what the experts think it's worth on next week's Pawn Stars.

    --
    "Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
    1. Re:"I'll offer you $50 for it" by dontclapthrowmoney · · Score: 1

      I came here to make a porn movie joke which is the first thing I thought of when I read "radioactive tool", sadly... "I'm a bad bad Mormon" style.

      I figure with your pawn reference and sig that you've beaten me to it.

    2. Re:"I'll offer you $50 for it" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aw man...I just got my new phone it and doesn't have my old geiger counter app.

  2. Not just hydrofrac... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Such tools are routinely use to estimate density in pretty much all oilfield well logging.

    1. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Around 1990 I was working at an oilfield testing company that had the grown kid of the original company owner at the helm. The guy was a moron and didn't care how the company functioned as long as the money kept coming in for him to go play the horses at a local racetrack.

      Anyway, the field guys lost a radioactive source and couldn't find it. They thought it bounced out of an unsecured lead canister along a road somewhere.

      They got their hand slapped for it but somewhere in the midwest there is a hot source laying by the road. Or was. Who knows if anyone ever found it.

      These kinds of things are inexcusable because anyone who happens to find one and pick it up has their life changed. Cancer and death awaits if anyone spends any length of time with one of those sources. If a company cannot follow a checklist for handling one of those sources, they should not be allowed to use them.

    2. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes. It's not peculiar to hydraulic fracturing operations. It's usually used to measure the density (kg/m^3) and porosity (essentially space that can be occupied by water, oil, or gas between the mineral grains). It's one of the key tools to estimate the volume of oil and/or gas in a formation of rock for ALL wells. It's usually referred to as a neutron porosity tool and the resulting measurements are neutron logs. The security surrounding these tools is usually pretty thorough, given that they are strong neutron sources.

    3. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by cellocgw · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Around 1990 I was working at an oilfield testing company that had the grown kid of the original company owner at the helm. The guy was a moron and didn't care how the company functioned as long as the money kept coming in for him to go play the horses at a local racetrack.
      I'm sorry, but I just can't resist asking: were the owner and his kid named George H W and George W?

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
    4. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Give me 5 minutes. I should be able to twist this to prove that deregulation is in the public interest.

    5. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

      So...you never told anyone outside the company about it???

    6. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    7. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How hard would it be to retrace their steps with geiger counters on each side of the vehicle, stopping once they go off?

    8. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In america, we dont put a company out of business because they did something wrong. We wont do it.

    9. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, corporation esp. with morons at the helm will fire you for doing the right thing. Thus the "at will" state of employment. Until doing the right thing is protected in our country this sort of thing will remain the standard. I work for a company that you are "required to report" and there is a "no retaliation" and guess who I have to report it to? If you guessed my manager you're correct. Now take a guess of who ritually disregards those rules/policies. If you guessed management then you would be correct. If you report on high as I have done on a different issue that had to do with policy I was told to remind my manager. So you have a policy that X needs to be done by Y and the response is Z. Z being remind your manager to do his/her job. Seems rather dysfunctional to me. So by exposing the opportunity to correct the issue by putting counter measures in place to insure it does not happen again I have signed myself up for more work. So the policies are meant to demoralize you into just not reporting a thing or you sit in jeopardy of losing your income that your family depends on. Seems kind of twisted to me, but it's reality.

    10. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by rastoboy29 · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, I understand all that.  I just wouldn't have been willing for someone to potentially get killed just to keep my job.

      Sorry.

    11. Re:Not just hydrofrac... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      The sources used in wireline / LWD logging are moderately dangerous - I'd not carry one in my pocket - but not that bad. It's not like they're going to flay your flesh if you approach them closer than a kilometre.

      When I have to do a site survey to check for background radiation (before doing pre- and post- job calibrations, before doing core-gamma), it's generally hard to tell where the transit container had sat on the catwalk just a couple of hours previously.

      If you were talking about a source for radiography / NDT, then they can be a lot hotter (your comment is ambiguous, "testing" covers a lot of sins). But even so, for a flagrant routine abuser of the source-handling rules of my acquaintance, it still took years of him breaking the rules, leaving his radiation badge in the locker room, working un-logged overtime ... He eventually died of cancer. But he'd built up the company and made 20-odd million quid selling it a couple of years before he died. The enquiries into his death lead to a considerable number of changes in the source-handling rules in the UK.

      But even back in the bad old days of the 1980s, you'd not have got away with moving a source in an "unsecured canister" ; the source goes from the tool into the transit container (about 15kilos, mostly of lead) ; the transit container goes into the bunker (about 4 tonnes of steel and barytes-loaded cement, with an acoustic transponder, buoy and about 100m of free-running 1-tonne SWL buoyant line), then the bunker gets craned back to the radiation storage area. And when the source goes home (for calibration), the bunker goes over the side onto the boat (hence the anti-sinking provisions). When sources are transported around on road (there is some onshore oil here too), the same bunkers are used because they've got to be fit for the journey from harbour up to several hundred miles by road to the field base. Besides, trucks do go off bridges from time to time.

      I had to do some of the paperwork for moving sources around onshore in Africa earlier this year. Explosives too. That required one truck for the sources (and explosives ; the sources bunker is proof against more explosives than inside the explosives bunker, even without the intervening bunker walls), and a second truck for the half-dozen soldiers. Then, because of the fuel supply problems, a third truck with fuel for the journey. And finally, once the bunkers had got to the site, the keys could be hand-carried to the site. Those are rules mostly demanded by America, so I assume that the same rules apply within America too?

      It's such a pain in the arse moving sources these days (under USA political rules, not radiation safety rules) that all of the MWD companies are developing electronically controlled neutron sources that are "cold" until turned on, and go cold again an hour or so after being turned off. We still have to use radioactive sources for the bulk density though.

      Which reminds me - I've got several pieces of uranium and thorium-rich minerals in the rock collection, and a Geiger counter to repair!

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  3. Thoughts by Sparticus789 · · Score: 5, Funny

    If the finder does not contact law enforcement, then I feel this issue is best left up to natural selection. First to nominate for a Darwin award.

    --
    sudo make me a sandwich
    1. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm thinking more sinister....

      Dispersing the Americium all over the place would be a bad thing for people. There's a reason they're telling you to get back a bit of a distance.

    2. Re:Thoughts by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the finder does not contact law enforcement, then I feel this issue is best left up to natural selection. First to nominate for a Darwin award.

      Depending on exactly how the source is encapulated, it may well not work out so neatly. If mechanically damaged, Americium-241 could come out to play and get all over the place, including friends, family, and general passers-by who hardly did anything to deserve an award...

      This thing isn't exactly an unalterable inventory item that just happens to do 1d6 radiation damage every hour it remains in a character's inventory.

    3. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if it was your child? Not funny.

    4. Re:Thoughts by Greyfox · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah! It's at least 2d20 area effect, unless you make the saving throw against radiation!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    5. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking more sinister....

      Dispersing the Americium all over the place would be a bad thing for people. There's a reason they're telling you to get back a bit of a distance.

      I couldn't find any estimated dosage you get for staying close to this device but I suspect that as long as you keep it 25 feet away you will keep you below the IAEA recommendation of 1 mSv/year. Staying a bit closer to it will bring you up to 3 mSv/year, this is the dosage you will get if you stay in Sweden or Finland. (A lot of granite in that area.)
      Storing this device in your tool shed is not likely to be dangerous to your health. Storing it in you bedroom and using it as a sex toy might be.

    6. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if it was your child?

      That would be a double Darwin Award. You get an extra Darwin award for every one of your offspring that you kill with your stupidity. Brothers and sisters of breeding age count as half and nephews and nieces count as a quarter (unless they have another Darwin Award winner in the family which makes the math a little more complicated).

    7. Re:Thoughts by interkin3tic · · Score: 2

      No one said natural selection was fair. Just ask all those dinosaurs whose only fault was adapting well to a time before the comet hit. Or all those other organisms we're driving to extinction now, who are well adapted to a world without humans.

      Anyway, the darwin awards were always a joke. It started well after Eldrege and Gould came out with punctuated equalibrium: the founders of the Darwin Awards were probably aware that natural selection doesn't work like that, with individual animals taking themselves out of the gene pool. Stupid is usually preferred evolutionarily speaking anyway. Bacteria are winning at evolution. It's not even close.

    8. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Face facts...Halliburton probably sold the radioactive unit to the terrorists and a re now in the midst of a cover-up or a "blame some low-level field hand." I nominate Halliburton executives for the Death by Fire Ants Punishment - ahem I mean Award. I'll volunteer to pour honey all over the naked body of Dick Cheney and watch as the fire ants remove that scumbag from the the planet.

    9. Re:Thoughts by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

      Radiation follows the usual inverse-square law. You can't render a large area dangerous with a point source, unless it's something crazy-radioactive like an unshielded nuclear reactor. If it were spread over a large area it could be more dangerous - even if the radiation itsself is of a very low level, radiation is scary, and could easily cause a panic.

    10. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Soon metal thieves glow in the dark and are more easily spotted.

    11. Re:Thoughts by wed128 · · Score: 1

      Face facts...Halliburton probably sold the radioactive unit to the terrorists and a re now in the midst of a cover-up or a "blame some low-level field hand."

      Facts...if by facts you mean paranoid rambling...

    12. Re:Thoughts by wed128 · · Score: 1

      Stupid is usually preferred evolutionarily speaking anyway. Bacteria are winning at evolution. It's not even close.

      Close...

      Simple wins at evolution. Bacteria are the simplist solution.

    13. Re:Thoughts by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      And what is stupid if not "simple." Most of the darwin winners are people who simply failed to think things through. Having no foresight = simpler or stupider.

      There are also feasible mechanisms for how this could play out with human evolution: either failing to think out the consequences of unprotected sex, or thinking that their God wants them to have as many children as possible.

      Fortunately, if that hypothesis was true, it would have occurred earlier in human history.

    14. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And what is stupid if not "simple."

      Stupidity and Simplicity are orthogonal. Complex solutions can be stupid. Simplicity can be brilliant.

    15. Re:Thoughts by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      Wow. As much as I might dislike Dick Cheney i'll leave looking at that particular image to you. I really don't want the details of what you would do with an radioactive rod. some fantasies are best kept private.

    16. Re:Thoughts by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      Except people tend to share this sort of thing. He could take it somewhere that others are exposed without the benefit of having had the chance to see what it is and make a smart decision. Worst case, and this has happened, he removes the radioactive warning stamp, or mixes it in with other metals so that one doesn't see it and sells it to a recycler. Then it gets melted and becomes part of some product you go buy in a store.

    17. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stupid is usually preferred evolutionarily speaking anyway. Bacteria are winning at evolution. It's not even close.

      A species wins evolution when they build a rocket big enough to get a breeding population off their rock before the next asteroid hits.

      Otherwise they get caught in the "bottleneck event" and lose permanently.

    18. Re:Thoughts by morgauxo · · Score: 1

      Intelligent brains are extremely complex. Yes, simple is stupid in this context. Simple brains require far less food to keep alive. Yes.. evolution prefers stupid. We are a very strange anomaly.

    19. Re:Thoughts by marcosdumay · · Score: 1

      There's a reason they're telling you to get back a bit of a distance.

      And I keep wondering what that reason may be. Isn't it an alpha particle emmiter? Just keeping it inside the contained should be enough. Or maybe the warning is in case it isn't kept inside the container. That coule be the safe distance to the unshielded material.

      Anyway, americium has plenty of civilian uses. Any terrorist that wants to get it will have an easier time stealing from somebody else than looking for this one.

    20. Re:Thoughts by marcosdumay · · Score: 2

      I'd say that neither is true. Bacteria aren't neither the simplest nor the most stupid (define as you like) thing to ever live on Earth.

      What is or is not advantajeous to an organism isn't so simple to rule. If you look at Earth's history, several times a increase in complexity allowed a small set of organisms to competely outcompete every other organism on the planet (we have at least 3 such botlenecks on our past). Also, several times complexity doomed a species.

    21. Re:Thoughts by ChumpusRex2003 · · Score: 3, Informative

      It's a neutron emitter. Alpha-particles will interact with Beryllium nuclei to emit neutrons. By encapsulating a mixture of Americium 241 and Beryllium, the alpha radiation (and gamma radiation) can be contained, but the neutrons allowed out, where they can be used for chemical analysis (in this case for analysing the composition of the rocks around the well bore).

      Quite apart from the fact that the source is dangerous in its own right, emitting neutrons which are an ionising radiation, they are a particular nuisance, because they can leave "radioactivity behind" by activating the nuclei of nearby materials (metals are particularly troublesome).

    22. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Yeah! It's at least 2d20 area effect, unless you make the saving throw against radiation!

      Back in my day, they called this 'Death Magic'.

    23. Re:Thoughts by steveg · · Score: 1

      A well logging source will be contained in a double pressure vessel that's really pretty tough. A neutron source like this is pretty big as downhole sources go -- the pressure vessel is maybe a bit less than two inches in diameter and 8 or 9 inches long. The ones I used years ago when I was logging wells were 16Ci sources, so fairly significant strength.

      If it were inside the shield it wouldn't be lost -- it's a large cylinder a couple of feet in diameter and a couple of feet tall, filled with some kind of hydrocarbon (parafin or plastic or something.) Also painted bright yellow. The best shield for neutrons is something with a lot of hydrogen.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    24. Re:Thoughts by steveg · · Score: 1

      Well logging sources are very well encapsulated -- they have two layers of pressure vessel around them, and they're pretty tough. Nothing's invulnerable, but anyone trying to break one open would really have to be *trying*.

      The real danger is exposure to the radiation itself, not so much chemical contamination.

      --
      Ignorance killed the cat. Curiosity was framed.
    25. Re:Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Place it in a metal or lead container and sell or give it you someone else.

  4. oblig by binarylarry · · Score: 1

    Great Scott!

    --
    Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
  5. From time to time? by djdanlib · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Wait. Who's saying that "the loss of radioactive rods occurs from time to time" in such a nonchalant way, like they're trying to convince the readers that it's no big deal? It's a big deal. You don't just lose stuff like that.. they're transported in large, heavy packages!

    1. Re:From time to time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is no big deal. *waves the jedi mind trick*

      Seriously though, Halliburton's disasters must be measured on a different scale. Hell, they were involved in the Deepwater Horizon and got away with it. Do you think that a few rods of nuclear material worries them? The worst case is that they get a new government contract for building a nuclear bunker against terrorism.

    2. Re:From time to time? by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 1

      It sadly does occur from time to time. You don't always have the brightest bulbs handling those things out in the field.

      I used to work at a company that lost one.

      I think people should go to jail if they lose a source. It's inexcusable.

    3. Re:From time to time? by sula9876 · · Score: 1

      Heh! that's a bit harsh, 43 000 dies in traffic every year and you worry over a metal rod that only kills if someone is swinging it.

    4. Re:From time to time? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      Heh! that's a bit harsh, 43 000 dies in traffic every year and you worry over a metal rod that only kills if someone is swinging it.

      or standing too close to it.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    5. Re:From time to time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reminds me of the whole "Broken Arrow" thing... the guy said something along the lines of "I'm not as concerned by the fact that a nuclear weapon has gone missing, as I am by the fact that it happens often enough that there is a name for it."

    6. Re:From time to time? by sula9876 · · Score: 1

      Heh! that's a bit harsh, 43 000 dies in traffic every year and you worry over a metal rod that only kills if someone is swinging it.

      or standing too close to it.

      Yes distance is a factor, but besides from chewing on it it should be relatively safe ;)

    7. Re:From time to time? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      It's a neutron gun. It's designed to penetrate several meters of rock. Relatively safe? Maybe without the beryllium screen.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    8. Re:From time to time? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      i would think that there are entire BOOKS of codewords and such for stuff that "should not happen" just so you don't have to say "%unthinkable% has happened" in front of civilians. besides with stuff classifed and Protocol and Procedure defined you tend to panic later and act now.

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    9. Re:From time to time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh! that's a bit harsh, 43 000 dies in traffic every year and you worry over a metal rod that only kills if someone is swinging it.

      Or shoving it up their arse for extended periods...

    10. Re:From time to time? by djdanlib · · Score: 1

      We put a man on the moon, and I still get tangled in my phone cord! Gosh! (What does that have to do with the issue?)

      People go to jail for traffic misdemeanors and worse. There's little to no punishment for losing a highly radioactive source. These things have to be reported and monitored, and the subsequent search for the object consumes tons of taxpayers' money. If the government represents the people's collective wealth, and the people don't want their money wasted, then shouldn't the people say hey, penalize these guys for wasting our money?

    11. Re:From time to time? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Heh! that's a bit harsh,

      [That anyone who loses a source should go to jail.]

      I don't think it's too harsh at all. There are complex procedures for handling sources, with a lot of accompanying paperwork, because they ARE pretty dangerous, and IT IS NOT OBVIOUS that they are dangerous while they are doing you harm. They can kill you (it's difficult, but not impossible) and they can fairly easily injure you, but unlike a red-hot lump of coal, you can't see or feel the harm. Put it in your mouth and you won't feel an immediate urge to spit it out (yes, they are swallowable).

      If some of the people handling the sources are not the sharpest knives in the drawer ("Co-Co" Ian, I'm thinking of you!), that is why source-handling courses are strict and thorough. If you really are dumb enough to not understand the courses, then you really SHOULD NOT BE HANDLING THEM. ("Co-Co", a classmate of mine at university, while held in derision by many of his colleagues, and definitely not a razor-sharp intellect, is still a 2-1 honours graduate and he does understand that the procedures are there for a good reason ; his breaking of procedure is through incompetence, failure of planning and inadequate memory, not utter stupidity.)

      I'd go a step further : if a source gets lost like this, then not only should the person responsible go to jail, but the SUPERVISOR who assembled the crew responsible for the source should go to jail too. Someone fucked up on the rig (or road) clearly ; but someone CHOSE that crew to work together and didn't take proper account of the human factors within the crew. Which, unfortunately for "Co-Co", would mean that he'd struggle to find work, despite being a certified radiation worker. Which is a shame, because he's a nice guy. But if his colleagues who know his work better than I do, don't trust him, then he really shouldn't be juggling those sources.

      Management don't give a shit about stuff until they are personally afraid of (1) getting caught and (2) paying a real penalty.

      At a trade union conference once we had a presentation from a member of the (UK Government) Health and Safety Executive about their continuing campaign to try to push down the number of LOC incidents (Loss Of Containment - leaks of kilos or tonnes of flammable hydrocarbons) in the UK oilfield. That morning, the English courts had just jailed two directors of a building company who had caused the death of one of their workers. So I asked the talking head, "How do you feel about jailing directors." He tried to keep a straight face, and be politically correct, but you could tell that he (and the rest of the HSE "troops") liked the idea of jailing senior management for their failings. I assume that the government have sacked some of them, because still very few directors are in jail for killing their staff (many more are in jail for tax fraud). And LOCs continue to happen more frequently.

      As I indicated up-thread, I don't think that (drilling logging) sources are screamingly dangerous (some NDT sources OTOH, are much more dangerous!). But they are definitely hazardous enough to warrant care and attention to detail. I know people who'd refuse to take a source-handling course (and thus become required to handle sources) because they think they're too dangerous. I'd do such a course if required (it's not ; not quite my game ; but I might plausibly change jobs). Then again, I'd also SCUBA dive solo, but with two independent air systems. I'm quite happy to accept risk, but I'm definitely aware that there is risk there.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    12. Re:From time to time? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      Depth of investigation for a porosity tool is 10-20cm (varies with company, individual source and the PEF of the lithology. There is significant attenuation of signal with thick (2-3mm) barytes-rich mud cake, or a stand-off of more than a few cm. That's why LWD porosity (and density) sensors are on an upset on the collar, and on wireline they're on an eccentric knuckled part of the tool-string, offset by a caliper arm.

      When you're QC-ing logs, you need to plot up the standoff. If they don't provide that curve, there is a smell of extremely dead rodent.

      Resistivity tools can have depths of investigation up to several metres. If you believe some of the geosteering claims ... up to 10m. Take a large pinch of halite.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    13. Re:From time to time? by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      I'm gonna assume from your username that you might have a clue. I'll still salt it before I eat it, though.

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    14. Re:From time to time? by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      I get paid to know about these things. Shocking, but true!

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  6. Better link by vlm · · Score: 5, Interesting

    while the loss of radioactive rods occurs from time to time

    This is a better link

    http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/event/

    Its pretty interesting reading. I think I heard about it from RISKS digest maybe a decade ago. About a half dozen reports are filed every day. At least one will be interesting, or at least WTF worthy. The story about the weld radiographer getting the source stuck while he was up a ladder so he took the source out and wore it like a necklace as he went down the ladder a couple days ago is WTF worthy.

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    1. Re:Better link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dry and up to point reports but still quite interesting to skim through. Makes me wish I could read the corresponding Japanese reports from the Fukushima Daiichi accident.

    2. Re:Better link by Magada · · Score: 1

      A collection of TEPCO's correspondence with NISA can be found on rather easily on the TEPCO website.

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    3. Re:Better link by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Particularly liking this one:

      "FITNESS FOR DUTY - CONTRACT SUPERVISOR TESTED POSITIVE FOR ALCOHOL"

      Maybe that's what it takes to work at a nuclear power plant in Florida...

    4. Re:Better link by Beorytis · · Score: 1

      D'oh! Quite a wide range of events there... Pu-238 pacemaker recovered from funeral home (fortunately before cremation). Y-90 microspheres administered to wrong site. (A Medical Event may indicate potential problems in a medical facility's use of radioactive materials. It does not necessarily result in harm to the patient.)

    5. Re:Better link by vlm · · Score: 1

      (A Medical Event may indicate potential problems in a medical facility's use of radioactive materials. It does not necessarily result in harm to the patient.)

      Yeah not directly. They're full of stories like "shipping envelope received torn and empty" (would not want to be the fedex driver at a hospital) and seemingly endless reports along the lines of "shipping manifest listed 4 sources only 3 found in shipment". Where are all those things going, anyway?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    6. Re:Better link by Beorytis · · Score: 1

      I think that parenthetical comment was just NRC's clarification regarding their definition of the term "Medical Event". The scenario you describe wouldn't be called a "Medical Event".

    7. Re:Better link by Cramer · · Score: 1

      A) There's really not a lot of PU in a pacemaker. Granted, that stuff is *very* toxic.
      B) Pacemaker power cells are designed to withstand cremation. (think "house fire"; there's plenty of ways people get incinerated.) However, it is best to remove medical devices prior to cremation.

    8. Re:Better link by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      WTF worthy? Not according to his co-workers who he visited recently. They simply thought he looked old; others thought he just put on weight.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  7. 24? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ATF: We need jack Bauer back in action ASAP!

  8. Re: from time to time by TaoPhoenix · · Score: 1

    This sounds funny in a John de Lancie "Q" voice.

    --
    My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
  9. If it wasn't the insidious company in question... by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    If it wasn't the insidious company in question, I wouldn't be nearly as skeptical and suspicious that there's something deeper and far more nefarious going on here...

  10. I've worked with these before I think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't think the description of purpose is actually accurate. Pretty sure they're talking about a Radioactive Densometer used to measure fluid density, which is used at the surface and attached to pipes pumping fluid, and isn't lowered into a well or whatever. It's basically a section of pipe with a very small radioactive source on one side, and a detector across from it. The measured decay rate tells you the fluid density accurately (the denser the fluid, the more radiation is blocked). They're actually fairly harmless in terms of radiation levels, although it's still important to recover lost ones.

    1. Re:I've worked with these before I think? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their description is accurate. I work in the industry and see them handling this piece quite frequently. The common term is E-Logging or Electronic logging. The trucks bear resemblance to old garbage trucks with the rounded back that contains a large winch. The radioactive source is usually kept in a crucible located behind the rear tires on the passenger side. They extract it with a long grasping tool, place it in the neutron density tool, and then run it into the hole. If dropped in the dirt this "Source" as they call it, could easily be lost as it is relatively small.

  11. Nuclear density gauges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The nuclear density gauges are relatively common in civil engineering.Yeah, they go missing from time to time.

    How they usually go missing--some joker steals a worker's truck on a job site. The idiot doesn't realize he has taken a van with a restricted device in the back. Then a world of hurt descends on the person when they are finally caught.

    The person who was in charge of the gauge finds they are in trouble for leaving the vehicle unsecured.

  12. Oh boy! by bmo · · Score: 5, Informative

    This reminds me of the Goiania accident, a horrifying incident where someone stole the radiation source to a radiotherapy machine.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident

    A choice bit:

    On September 24, Ivo, Devair's brother, scraped dust out of the source, taking it to his house a short distance away. There he spread some of it on the cement floor. His six-year-old daughter, Leide das Neves Ferreira, later ate a sandwich while sitting on the floor. She was also fascinated by the blue glow of the powder, and applying it to her body, showed it off to her mother. Dust from the powder fell on the sandwich she was consuming; she eventually absorbed 1.0 GBq, total dose 6.0 Gy

    It glows, let's use it for makeup.

    --
    BMO

    1. Re:Oh boy! by lobiusmoop · · Score: 3, Informative

      Reminded me more of Davd Hahn - thought he was maybe up to his old tricks again and looking for a large amount of Americium (not from fire alarms this time though).

      --
      "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    2. Re:Oh boy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Category 3 means this is maybe 1/1000 to 1/100,000 as strong as the source in Goiania, and it's a single metal rod, not a large container of powder. Very different scenario. Industrial radiography sources are ubiquitous and are lost/damaged on a regular basis with minimal consequences.

    3. Re:Oh boy! by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Informative

      TFA(to the best of my layman's understanding) suggests that this one is a stainless steel pipe with an Americum source behind a beryllium window.

      If some dumbass cuts it open, or decides to look down the tube for an extended period, things will get bad; but as long as it is mechanically undisturbed it won't be a huge deal.

      The Goiania incident was particularly nasty because the source was opened and Caesium chloride(started out as a dust, also readily water-soluble, for extra pollution potential...) went all over the place. Had nobody opened the source, exposure would have been trivial. Incidents like that are(part of) the reason why the graphic designers behind the nuclear trefoil attempted to come up with something that was overtly threatening looking, even to somebody who might not speak English or even be literate in their local language.

    4. Re:Oh boy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, if whoever has it decides to break it open that will make things worse, but still, this source is several orders of magnitude smaller than the medical source in Goiania. We're probably looking at a few giga-becquerel. Goiania was 51 tera-becquerel. On top of that, Goiania was Cs-137, which is a beta/gamma emitter. This is Am-241, an alpha emitter. As several other people have mentioned, you (hopefully) have some of it hanging from your kitchen ceiling. As long as you don't eat it or rub it in your eyes you'll be fine. Trust me. If this were a serious mess, I would be the one cleaning it up.

    5. Re:Oh boy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Oh boy! by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

      Wow, what a story. All because a guard blew off work to go see, 'Herbie Goes Bananas'.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    7. Re:Oh boy! by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      As recently as 2007, David Hahn was up to old tricks and it's literally written on his face if you see the mugshot.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    8. Re:Oh boy! by fak3r · · Score: 1

      No, the REAL Choice bit: "On September 13, 1987, the guard in charge of daytime security, Voudireinão da Silva, did not show up to work, using a sick day to attend a cinema screening of Herbie Goes Bananas with his family"

  13. Americium? by scorp1us · · Score: 1

    This is the same stuff that is used in smoke detectors. IIRC, it only emits alpha radiation which can be blocked by a sheet of paper.
    I don't know about beryllium though.

    --
    Slashdot's rate-of-post filter: Preventing you from posting too many great ideas at once.
    1. Re:Americium? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This would however not only emit alpha particles. If you send alpha praticles into the beryllium you will end up with a nice little neutron gun, or neutron howitzer ...

      Just ask the Radioactive Boy Scout, he gather smoke detectors to build just such a device. There are probably quite a few young and slightly foolish "scientists" out there who would love to find this one to experiment with.

    2. Re:Americium? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The beryllium is used to convert the alpha radiation of the Americium to neutrons. These are pretty nasty sources. Typically in the tens of Curies of intensity. It should be in a shielded container, but if someone opens that they could be in a world of hurt.

    3. Re:Americium? by Magada · · Score: 1

      Yes, I was rather astonished and alarmed to read the article, which basically states "don't touch it and you'll be fine".

      --
      Something bad is coming when people are suddenly anxious to tell the truth.
    4. Re:Americium? by volsung · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you don't want to mess with neutron sources. Fast neutrons penetrate lots of materials (due to the lack of charge), much like gammas, and can produce short-lived isotopes that continue to decay after the source has been removed.

  14. Re:If it wasn't the insidious company in question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, what're you implying?

  15. Advice to police by TheGoodNamesWereGone · · Score: 1

    Stake out the metal recycling places nearby

  16. But isn't it safe? by gtirloni · · Score: 1

    "NRC spokeswoman Maureen Conley says the material would have to be in someone's physical possession for several hours for it to be considered harmful"

    So there is no problem handling it for a few minutes until you bring it to the nearest Halliburton site. Then employees can take turns handling the material for less than an hour and no one will be harmed.

    See, no reason for panic.. just RTFA.

    --
    none
  17. , stay a minimum of 25 feet away.. by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Interesting

    From the picture I would say that if you get close enough to read the "Danger Radioactive" you've already got problems.

    1. Re:, stay a minimum of 25 feet away.. by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      If you read at about ten minutes a word, then sure you'll have problems.

    2. Re:, stay a minimum of 25 feet away.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I presume your joking, rather than incredibly stupid, but for the benefit of anyone reading:

      It's normally stored in a shielded case, which is also labeled.

      Yes, now that it's out of the storage case, you'd receive unacceptable exposure from handling it for prolonged periods, which is why as soon as you identify it, you back up and stay a safe distance away; the exposure in the minute it might take to approach and read it is not significant, but the next hour (if you stayed up close) would be...

    3. Re:, stay a minimum of 25 feet away.. by PPH · · Score: 1

      To Texans, that's meaningless. They need Yosemite Sam with the caption 'Back Off'.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    4. Re:, stay a minimum of 25 feet away.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, what's pictured isn't what they're looking for. The picture is the source, which screws into the measuring device (which also mostly shields it). Then the whole measuring device, when taken off-site, also gets locked in an outer case. They lost the whole device, not just the unscrewed source. So what they're looking for is, in fact, still mostly shielded.

    5. Re:, stay a minimum of 25 feet away.. by IAN · · Score: 1

      From the picture

      They photographed it alongside a metric ruler? Blasphemy!

  18. Re:Americium is also a gamma emitter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Actually, Americium also emits gamma rays as well though not very much. Polonium is what is commonly used as a pure alpha emitter and can even be obtained in small quantities without a license.

  19. Radioactive tool? It can only be... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...Homer Simpson!

    I actually want to mod myself down for that one.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  20. Have they checked by Colourspace · · Score: 2

    Down the back of Homer Simpsons rad suit yet?

  21. Joe Dirt by Westwood0720 · · Score: 0

    Joe Dirt is the first thing that came into my mind.

  22. Re:If it wasn't the insidious company in question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They intentionally "lost" that tool in order to make the front page of Slashdot. ;-)

  23. I saw the name of the company by SlippyToad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Halliburton: Endangering American Lives, With Taxpayer Dollars!

    God, if there were ever a corporation that needed to be dissolved in a vat of acid and the remains scattered to the far corners of the earth, Halliburton is it. They are the epitome of casual, incompetent, expensive evil.

    --
    One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
  24. Should only be a problem if ingested by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Americium-241 decays mostly by alpha emission, and is near harmless as long as it is not ingested or inhaled. It's in smoke detectors.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_americium#Americium-241
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americium#Isotopes

    1. Re:Should only be a problem if ingested by PPH · · Score: 1

      But in California they force fed smoke detectors to lab rats. And they died.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Should only be a problem if ingested by jbeaupre · · Score: 3, Funny

      But in California they force fed smoke detectors to lab rats. And they died.

      Moral of the story: don't feed smoke detectors to rats if you value your life.

      --
      The world is made by those who show up for the job.
    3. Re:Should only be a problem if ingested by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Ratman! Bitten by a rat irradiated by Halliburton, he develops super rat powers! Among these are a cute wiggly nose, the ability to eat cheese (A LOT of cheese) and the ability to pop out with cancer at the drop of a hat! He spends the rest of his days hawking third-rate pizza to unsuspecting children!

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    4. Re:Should only be a problem if ingested by hawguy · · Score: 1

      Americium-241 decays mostly by alpha emission, and is near harmless as long as it is not ingested or inhaled. It's in smoke detectors.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_americium#Americium-241
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americium#Isotopes

      The bigger problem is that the Beryllium makes the Am-241 into a Neutron Source.

      Which is isn't all that great for human health

      So I still wouldn't sleep with one of these under my bed even though I have Am-241 in the smoke detector over my bed.

    5. Re:Should only be a problem if ingested by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Captain Planet already did a rat-mutated villain. Verminous Skumm. Specialist in biological warfare, and aspiring ruler of the world. Due to his extreme ugliness and residence in the sewers he is often shunned even by the other villains, but his demonstrated scientific abilities are second only to Blight.

    6. Re:Should only be a problem if ingested by triffid_98 · · Score: 1

      I claim prior art

    7. Re:Should only be a problem if ingested by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      You're far from the first to notice that simularity, but it seems to be entirely coincidential. They are both characters using the popular (accurate) perception of sewer rats as disease-ridden filthy animals, but Verminous just draws upon that image while Splinter subverts it. Both use it though to explain the character's isolation. Like all Captain Planet villains, Verminous never got a true origin story. I wonder if any fanfics address this.

  25. Re:Americium is also a gamma emitter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Polonium is used in industrial applications to remove static electricity from compressed air, mostly for painting, to prevent the surface from attracting dust. However, the amount of polonium in those devices is very small, and it's capsulated in a way that is meant to make it impossible to actually extract the polonium.

    Since the death of Alexander Litvinenko from polonium poisoning, they control those sources quite well. Around here you can not get a polonium based static remover without a license. And it's not that easy to get.

    It takes such an incredibly small amount of polonium to poison and kill someone.

  26. Re:Americium is also a gamma emitter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We got our polonium source through a leasing option a company offered. By leasing us the source, it was still technically owned by the company, so only they needed the license. Since the half-life limited its use to a year or two anyways, it was not like we were losing much by having to return it at that point.

  27. Bent Spear, Broken Arrow? by srussia · · Score: 1

    I propose a new term for this category of nuclear incident: Lost American

    --
    Set your phasers on "funky"!
  28. Radioactivity! OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This stuff is radioactive! What is the govenment to do? It could be ter'ists out to make an atom bomb to kill us all. Where is Homeland Security when we really need them the most? We are all going to die, DHS, please save us

    1. Re:Radioactivity! OMG! by SlippyToad · · Score: 1

      This stuff is radioactive! What is the govenment to do?

      Obviously they hand it out to incompetent fuckwits like Halliburton.

      --
      One day I feel I'm ahead of the wheel / the next it's rolling over me / I can get back on / I can get back on
    2. Re:Radioactivity! OMG! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I've been surprised that Homeland Security isn't more concerned with the well-logging trucks. They're basically build your own dirty bomb kits. Frequently in the same convoy you've got both highly radioactive sources and high explosives. Traveling in remote areas without security. A reasonably competent terrorist organization in the U.S. would be going after them. Of course, competent terrorist organizations in the US are in short supply.

  29. Doc Brown took it by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

    What with the events in the Middle East these days, it's getting too dangerous to steal radioactive material from the Libyans.

    --

    Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  30. If I remember correctly by kilodelta · · Score: 1

    Am-241 is an alpha emitter. It barely penetrates a sheet of paper. And it's used in virtually every smoke detector out there.

    Now a seven inch rod of the stuff - yeah I can see why they'd want that one back.

    1. Re:If I remember correctly by Bugler412 · · Score: 1

      Except that the inclusion of beryllium with the Americium makes it a neutron source, which is NOT blocked by a peice of paper.

    2. Re:If I remember correctly by kilodelta · · Score: 1

      Well yeah - that does change it a bit. And Beryllium in general is some fairly toxic stuff.

    3. Re:If I remember correctly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is an Americium-Berrylium source. The Americium produces alpha particles which then hit the Berrylium which in turn produces large amounts of neutrons. The purpose of these sources in the oil industry is to be put down a well and penetrate several meters through the rock. The returning signal can then be used to to determine the rock composition, porosity, and whether oil, water, or gas fills the pores.

    4. Re:If I remember correctly by Alioth · · Score: 2

      A seven inch rod of the stuff plus beryllium - which turns it into a neutron source - making it pretty damned dangerous (much more dangerous than a mere alpha emitter).

  31. Re:Americium is also a gamma emitter. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Although the amount of polonium used to kill Litvinenko was so large as to make it a very expensive and ostentatious way to kill someone. Buying that quantity of polonium would have required millions of dollars. It was pretty much a James Bond villian's technique for murder...

  32. idiot by p51d007 · · Score: 1

    I guess you realize that the only reason Halliburton does some of these jobs is because THEY ARE THE ONLY ONES LEFT that do it? Next time, step away from the kool-aid.

    1. Re:idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...*AND* *why* is that ? ? ?
      (i'm sure there are a multiplicity of reasons, but i'm betting their own rapacious actions account for much of that state of affairs)
      let me guess: you're an unfettered, freemarketeer idiot, aren't you ? ? ?
      well, then, *certainly* another company will spring into action to fill that void, won't they ? ? ?
      um, what, it don't *really* work like that ? ? ?
      huh, who would have thought things weren't as simple as that...

  33. Re:If it wasn't the insidious company in question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go away and die, shill.

  34. Re:If it wasn't the insidious company in question. by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    Go away and die, shill.

    Indeed.

  35. Re:More Thoughts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    There is a slim chance that the device was left behind at the last well-head where it was used. That would explain both the radioactive source and the container padlock being missing. More distressing is the prospect that an outsider with ill intent wandered into the area of the well-head while the crew was on lunch break/siesta, broke into the container and stole it. That person should definitely be awarded a Darwin Award. That doesn't necessarily explain the missing padlock, as it is just something of little worth to carry off. But the most distressing prospect is that this was theft by an insider who knew the value of the device, and wished to conceal the fact that the padlock was not broken.

    Regardless of whether the device was lost or stolen, the company that owned this radioactive source should be heavily fined, as well as suspended from any further ability to own/possess/use such devices. I would go so far as to propose criminal liability charges brought against this company. Err, wait. This was Halliburton. Never mind. Move along. Nothing to see here.

    Would anyone care to bet against the prospect that the TSA will use this event to perform full body cavity searches everywhere they have now been deployed, far beyond the security lines at airports? I wouldn't.

  36. Physical description? by Nkwe · · Score: 1

    The articles reference warnings to the public to "stay back" if you see it, but don’t seem to really describe what it looks like. It has been described as a rod, so it's a cylindrical shape, but what size? Would it be similar to a pencil, hot dog, can of soda, 5 gallon paint bucket, oil barrel, what? Is it in a container? If so, what size and color? Bigger than a bread box?, etc

  37. Re:I've worked with these before I think? NO by DCFusor · · Score: 2, Informative

    Something consisting of Am and Be is going to be a neutron source, and be used to make the minerals exposed to it radioactive via neutron capture. Not long ago, nearly all neutron sources for this were "Active" in that they shot a beam of mixed DT against a target holding more D and T, on batteries. They're hot as hell, and like I said - make things around them radioactive. If you have this, and a gamma spectrometer down the same hole, by the resulting gamma spectrum, you can tell what's there. Am has only about a 6 mo half life, so if it's not found, it's getting weaker fast. I've made my ow such sources with the Am source from a staticmaster brush and some Be to convert the alpha hits to emitted neutrons. I use my source to test neutron detectors for my fusion device. I have to replace the Am fairly frequently to keep the source emitting enough neutrons for this - my homebrew source is very small and not a big risk to anybody - you can barely detect it against the neutrons made in cosmic ray showers. But I could be wrong too - there's not enough info to say.

    --
    Why guess when you can know? Measure!
  38. Re:Oh boy! Worse than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    FYI: While the Americium-241 radioactive source is primarily an alpha emitter (with some considerably lesser amount of gamma particles), the device makes use of a beryllium window. Beryllium is a metal that readily emits a copious quantity of gamma radiation with exposure to any radiation, including alpha radiation.

    While this is not on the scale of the Fukushima Dai-ichi by any stretch of the imagination, this is hardly an insignificant NRC nuclear event. OTOH, considering the government's penchant for trivializing the radioactive fallout from Fukushima by raising the permissible dosage levels of some radioactive isotope fallout by 1000x, the government will unlikely to even penalize the company involved (especially considering that company is Halliburton).

  39. Homer Simpson's Collar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on, just check Homer Simpson's collar and you'll find it.

  40. Neutron Porosity tool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OP doesn't know what he's talking about.

    A good log suite for any well will run both a bulk density tool and a neutron porosity tool. Crossover of the neutron porosity and density porosity is the best indicator of hydrocarbons.

    Logging tools are expensive. The fools who lost it are in a world of trouble w/ the boss.

    Density tool uses a Cesium source.

    1. Re:Neutron Porosity tool by Todd+Knarr · · Score: 1

      Probably they didn't lose the tool itself, just the radioactive source. When I did geotech work, we kept the sources separate and in a lead pig in the back of the truck and only put them on the tool when we were about to do a run. I'll bet the tech got distracted (did things in a different order and missed a step, one of the well crew wanted to know what the results were, could've been many things) and failed to put the lock on the pig before pulling out. Without the lock shank in place the door can come open and the source can rattle it's way out. But even without losing the tool, the boss is going to rip the tech a new one because even though there's no real danger to the public (or at least the non-terminally-braindead members of the public) the boss now has to fill out far too much paperwork on the incident. Plus the tech may well lose his certificate over this, which may cost him his job (no safety cert means he can't use sources, and since it's his fault he lost his cert it's grounds to let him go for cause).

  41. "Radioactive" by gatfirls · · Score: 1

    ....Ready, set, lose your shit.

  42. Re:If it wasn't the insidious company in question. by wed128 · · Score: 0

    Wish i had modpoints, to get this comment out of the dump.

    Major corperations are NOT insidious. They are a nesessary part of our economy.

  43. Wait, isn't this desirable? by Phase+Shifter · · Score: 2
    It's an election year.

    Aren't potentially dangerous tools supposed to be getting lost?

    1. Re:Wait, isn't this desirable? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Too late. Paul Ryan got tapped for the Vice President spot.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  44. 100 comments, and no Joe Biden gags by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2

    Poor old Uncle Choo-Choo. No love on /. for that radioactive tool.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  45. Re:If it wasn't the insidious company in question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Go away and die, shill.

    Indeed.

    Didn't work.

    You're still here.

    Brainwashed twerp.

  46. Only read the headline... by medcalf · · Score: 0

    But what happened to Ron Paul?

    --
    -- Two men say they're Jesus. One of them must be wrong. - Dire Straits
  47. Re:If it wasn't the insidious company in question. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wish i had modpoints, to get this comment out of the dump.

    Major corperations are NOT insidious. They are a nesessary part of our economy.

    *sigh* Let me guess: They're also our happy friends, they're real people just like us, why would we want to hurt our friends, what they've done to destroy innovation and stagnate development is Good(tm) and Right(tm), profits come from Heaven itself, aaaaaaand then a few lines imploring us to trust big corporations implicitly, give ourselves to them willingly, and they only act the way they do because they love us and know what's right for us, blah blah blah.

  48. Highway Patrol - Radioactive by waltlaw · · Score: 1

    Mathews and his crew track a stolen radioactive oil detector: http://www.hulu.com/watch/104147

  49. Further APB by ThatsNotPudding · · Score: 1

    Be on the lookout for a 1964 Chevrolet Malibu. Do not open the trunk. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repo_Man_(film)

  50. Am + Be = N by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Americium/Berylium is a neutron source.
    The alpha particles hit the berylium and dislodge neutrons. A neutron source can be used to transmutate common materials into related radioactive isotopes. Over time, a sizable store of irradiated and now radioactive material could be accumulated. Shielding requirements for neutrons are much greater than for alpha particles. Kits to make your own inexpensive radiation detectors are available online. I foresee a dirty bomb in a major democratic-leaning urban area just before election day. Remember you heard it here first! Zaza

    1. Re:Am + Be = N by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ALSO, neutron sources are used for neutron activation analysis, which is different than the density or porosity applications other posters have noted. NAA tells you WHAT is down there, as each newly-created radioactive version of the stuff exposed to the neutrons has a characteristic spectrum of decay emissions. Zaza Rulz

  51. Obligatory Buffy Reference by fm6 · · Score: 1

    "Did you look under the sofa cushions — in Hell?

  52. Clearly Marked by fm6 · · Score: 1

    clearly marked with the words 'DANGER RADIOACTIVE' as well as a radiation warning symbol,

    So, everything's fine as long as Bart Simpson doesn't find it.

  53. Smoke Detectors have americium, it's safe enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Relax, no one is going to make a weapon with Americium LOL. WOW. This is the same radioactive source used in smoke/fire alarms.

    Coleman Lanterns are a more powerful radioactive source! In fact I used one to calibrate my hand held personal Geiger counter. It's good to know what the background radiation level is.

  54. September 11th by morgauxo · · Score: 1

    Did nobody notice that it was discovered missing on September 11th? Surely there is some crackpot reading this who should have come up with a terrorist or conspiracy theory to scare people with by now!

    1. Re:September 11th by ZFox · · Score: 1

      No need to jump to conclusions. The thieves were obviously just upset from watching anti-islam youtube videos.

  55. Re:Oh boy! Worse than that. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FYI: While the Americium-241 radioactive source is primarily an alpha emitter (with some considerably lesser amount of gamma particles), the device makes use of a beryllium window. Beryllium is a metal that readily emits a copious quantity of gamma radiation with exposure to any radiation, including alpha radiation.

    Beryllium emits energetic neutrons when bombarded with alpha particles. The first implosion nuclear weapons (Trinity, Fat Man, &c.) used a Po-Be initiator to send a strong neutron pulse into the supercritical fuel mass. The lost device is designed as a neutron source (someone posted a link to Wikipedia above.)

  56. oh noes by jason777 · · Score: 1

    They fracked up!

  57. Re:Americium is also a gamma emitter. by grahamsz · · Score: 1

    That's mostly based on extrapolation of buying a needle source from somewhere like united nuclear. I suspect whoever carried out the poisoning had a more wholesale source for the material.

  58. A radioactive tool, you say? by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 2

    The radioactive tool's gone missing in Texas? Did they check his dad's compound in Kennebunkport?

  59. Smoke detector by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So how does this compare to a smoke detector? How much more Am does it have?

  60. Re:Better link Pu-238 "Grandma went out with..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a BANG!
    http://www.prometheus-music.com/audio/grandma.mp3

    Not scientifically accurate, but fun!

  61. Start looking for a... by SwampChicken · · Score: 1

    ...silver Delorean.

  62. Congratulations ... by Dabido · · Score: 1

    Finder of radioactive tool auditioning for role in a movie - Look out, Radioactive Man!

    Director - Congratulations, you are our next Fallout Boy ... is what I'd be saying if you weren't lying on the floor vomiting blood from radiation poisoning.

    --
    Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)