Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mediterranean Sea To Possibly Become Site of Chemical Weapons Dump

Posted by samzenpus on from the scuttle-the-gas dept.

An anonymous reader writes "The organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has proposed destroying at least 1000 tons of the confiscated Syrian chemical weapon stockpile out at sea, which some fear will destroy delicate ecosystems vital to sea and human life alike. The OPCW claims the plan is 'technically feasible' and is apparently willing to risk ecological disaster to destroy the toxic contents of the weaponry in or above the sea. Members of the press were told, 'the group is considering whether to destroy the chemical weapons in the ocean, either on a ship or by loading them onto an offshore rig.'"

10 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. Send them to mars by wbr1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    We'll never go.

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:Send them to mars by rubycodez · · Score: 5, Informative

      here's a nice summary:
      http://www.csicop.org/sb/show/shooting_for_the_sun/

      From Earth's surface it only takes 16 km/sec to reach escape velocity for Sun (and your rocket can just fall into Alpha Centauri) because Earth's velocity around Sun gives you head start, but from earth's surface it takes 32 km/sec to cancel Earth's orbital velocity and reach Sun.

    2. Re:Send them to mars by Patch86 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Short answer is "no". Orbital mechanics don't work like that. (Big disclaimer- I'm not an expert, and while what I'm about to type should be basically correct, I can't guarantee (at this time in the morning) that I haven't made some mistakes).

      Your basic mistake is assuming that the bullet you're firing is stationary before you fire it, so all you're having to do is propel it towards it's target. It isn't. The bullet (and the gun, and the marksman) are all orbiting the sun at 29.8 km/s (which is the speed that the Earth is orbiting at). By "orbiting at 29.8 km/s", what we mean is "travelling in such a way as to miss the Sun at 29.8 km/s". So if you want your bullet to hit the Sun, you need to cause it to stop doing that- you need it to lose 29.8 km/s of orbital speed. I know you were only using it as a metaphor, but for reference- a bullet from a typical gun travels (i.e. changes velocity) at less than 0.5 km/s.

      Counter intuitively, travelling to Alpha Centauri would be much easier (although of course it would take a long time!). Solar escape velocity starting from Earth is only 42.1 km/s, which means that you only need to at ~13 km/s before you're away from the Sun's gravitational grip. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, Earth's orbital velocity is already quite fast, so getting to escape velocity means adding a relatively small amount (albeit to get to an overall high speed). Secondly, gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance- that is, moving 100 km closer to the sun will increase the gravity you experience by more than moving 100 km away from the sun will decrease it. Without getting into the messy details of it, this means that the necessary changes in velocity get sharper the closer you get to the sun- hence why Earth (which seems quite close to the Sun, in the grand scheme of things) is in a stable orbit at 29.8 km/s, but could escape completely for a mere 13 km/s more.

      Clear as crystal?

  2. send them to washington DC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    unlike DC, we're still not sure if there's intelligent life on mars.

  3. Homeopathic Terrorism! by NIK282000 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its a trap! They are trying to kill us all!

    --
    Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
  4. Re:the key word is "destroy" by murdocj · · Score: 4, Informative

    For a better and less inflammatory description of what is proposed, see http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/11/30/21686393-us-to-destroy-syrias-chemicals-at-sea-weapons-watchdog-says
     

  5. They're destroyed first...that's the whole idea by daveschroeder · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The whole idea is that the chemical weapons are destroyed FIRST...they are being destroyed AT SEA, not "destroyed" by simply dumping them into the ocean.

    The fact that the other blog entries hosted at the same site as TFA include:

    - Rihanna Displays Illuminati Hand Gesture at Latest Music Award Performance

    - SSDI Death Index: Sandy Hook 'Shooter' Adam Lanza Died One Day Before School Massacre?

    - 15 Citizens Petition to Secede from the United States

    - Will U.S. Troops Fire On American Citizens?

    - Illuminati Figurehead Prince William Takes the Stage with Jon Bon Jovi and Taylor Swift

    - Has the Earth Shifted â" Or Is It Just Me?

    - Mexican Government Releases Proof of E.T.'s and Ancient Space Travel ...should give you a hint as to the veracity of the content. (And yes, I realize it's simply a blog site with a variety of authors and content.)

    As should the first comment, from "LibertyTreeBud", saying:

    "Why not add it to some new vaccine? Or, perhaps add it to the drinking water and feed it to the live stock? These creatures will do anything for profits. Lowest bidder mentality rules."

    What "creatures", exactly? The international organization explicitly charged with the prohibition and destruction of chemical weapons? What alternatives are people suggesting, exactly?

    If you want a real article discussing this situation factually, not the tripe linked in the summary, see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25146980

  6. Re:Oh yes, such a good idea.. by plover · · Score: 5, Informative

    The entire article is a troll. Nobody's talking about dumping the chemical weapons into the sea. They're going to move the chemicals to a U.S. Navy ship where they'll be neutralized by incineration. By cooking them hot enough, the molecular bonds will break and all they'll be left with are the constituent elements.

    Despite the scary suppositions about performing this task over the sea ("what if there's a leak???"), it's actually far safer for the world if the U.S. Navy disposes of them right there in the middle of the Med. If they wanted to dispose of them on land, they'd have a couple of challenges -- the first of which is finding a stable country willing to accept a chemical weapons processing plant. Guarding the lines hauling the weapons to the processing site would be an ongoing problem. And securing the site against local attacks is another. One thing the U.S. Navy can do very very well is guarantee the security of one of their naval ships at sea. The chemicals will have a much safer journey to neutralization than anywhere else.

    --
    John
  7. Re:Oh yes, such a good idea.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...there's so little of it that it would be diluted so quickly it would be entirely harmless.

    Apparently you are unfamiliar with homeopathy. If you were, you would know that diluting a substance makes it vastly more potent, not harmless. With the amount of dilution they'd be looking at, the whole planet would be quickly rendered too toxic to sustain life.

    (Tongue planted firmly in cheek.)

  8. Re:Oh yes, such a good idea.. by dpidcoe · · Score: 4, Funny

    even if they did dump the stuff in the sea, there's so little of it that it would be diluted so quickly it would be entirely harmless.

    Unless you're a homeopath, at which point you can make millions selling mediterranean seawater as an antidote for use in the event of a chemical attack.