JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for CRIT-GEOG-FORUM Archives


CRIT-GEOG-FORUM Archives

CRIT-GEOG-FORUM Archives


CRIT-GEOG-FORUM@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CRIT-GEOG-FORUM Home

CRIT-GEOG-FORUM Home

CRIT-GEOG-FORUM  June 1999

CRIT-GEOG-FORUM June 1999

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

NATO Depleted Uranium bombs in the Balkans

From:

"Dimitris Ballas" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Dimitris Ballas

Date:

Fri, 4 Jun 1999 07:45:17 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (146 lines)

For whoever had any doubts about the use of Depleted Uranium bombs by NATO
in the Balkans and their environmental impact, here is a very interesting
article by Rob Edwards from the New Scientist:

(available at New Scientist's web-site:
http://www.newscientist.com/ns/19990605/news.html
follow the link: A Balkan nightmare)

Too hot to handle

Rob Edwards

IN 1991 Doug Rokke went to the Middle East as a US army health physicist to
clean up uranium left by the Gulf War. He helped decontaminate 23 armoured
vehicles hit by shells in "friendly fire" incidents.

Today he has difficulty breathing. His lungs are scarred and he has skin
problems and kidney damage. Rokke, a major in the US Army Reserve's Medical
Service Corps, has no doubt what made him ill--contact with radioactive
metal.Three years after he worked in the Gulf, the US Department of Energy
tested his urine. They found that the level of uranium in his sample was
over 4000 times higher than the US safety limit of 0.1 micrograms per litre.

Now aged 50 and an environmental scientist at Jacksonville State University
in Alabama, Rokke is campaigning to stop the US firing uranium weapons in
the Balkans. "It is a war crime to use uranium munitions when men, women and
children are exposed to them without any medical screening or care," he
says. "It is totally, totally wrong."

Depleted uranium, or DU, is a radioactive heavy metal. It is the waste left
over when the isotope uranium-235 is extracted from naturally-occurring
uranium to fuel nuclear power stations and build nuclear bombs. DU typically
consists of 99.7 per cent uranium-238.

As a by-product of the nuclear industry, DU is cheap and plentiful. And DU
shells are a very effective weapon against tanks and armoured cars. They can
pierce several inches of armour-plated steel thanks to DU's extremely high
density. They're better at penetrating armour than traditional anti-tank
weapons made of tungsten.

DU was used for the first time in battle during the 1991 Gulf conflict with
Iraq. The US Department of Defense says that US planes and tanks fired 860
000 rounds of ammunition containing 290 tonnes of DU. British tanks fired
100 rounds containing less than 1 tonne of DU, according to the Ministry of
Defence.

Gulf veterans such as Rokke believe exposure to this DU is one of the causes
of Gulf War Syndrome, the unexplained illness or group of illnesses that has
afflicted thousands of soldiers since the war. Iraqi scientists also claim
that DU was responsible for a rise in the numbers of cancers and birth
defects in southern Iraq. But both the US and British governments dispute
this. They say there is no evidence that DU has damaged the health of
military personnel.

But the row is erupting again with the US admission it is using DU weapons
in the two-month-old war against Serbia. In a press briefing in Washington
DC on 3 May, Major General Charles Wald, vice-director for strategic plans
and policy for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed that A10 Warthog
aircraft had fired DU munitions against Serbian forces. The US Joint Chiefs'
spokesman, James Brooks, told New Scientist that AV-8 Harriers and Abrams
battle tanks in the Balkans also carried DU munitions. The British Foreign
Secretary, Robin Cook, has said that no DU is "in use" by British forces.
But there are more than 20 British Challenger tanks, which fired DU
ammunition in the Gulf conflict, stationed in Macedonia ready for action if
ground troops move into Kosovo--a move supported by Britain as the
limitations of an air offensive become apparent.

NATO says that DU has been used against Serbian forces since the second week
of May. "It has not been used extensively," says a NATO spokesman. "It has
never been proved that the use of DU endangers the health of people. It is
no more dangerous than mercury."

Neither NATO nor the US will say how just much DU has been fired in the
Balkans. But there are 40 A10s and 6 Harriers in action, capable of
unleashing a lot of uranium. A10s, for example, are armed with a
30-millimetre Gatling gun that can fire 3900 shells a minute, one in five of
which contains 300 grams of DU. This means that each A10 could release 234
kilograms of DU a minute. If US and British tanks take part in a ground
offensive, observers say more DU is likely to be fired.

As well as its ability to pierce armour plating, DU has the unfortunate
tendency to ignite on impact, creating clouds of uranium oxide
dust--facilitating its spread in the environment and increasing the danger
posed by the alpha radiation it emits. Mike Thorne, a uranium expert from
AEA Technology at Harwell in Oxfordshire, formerly part of the UK Atomic
Energy Authority, points out that as an alpha-emitter, it poses a similar
risk to plutonium if it gets inside the body. As such, even the tiniest
amounts could cause cell damage that marginally increases the risk of
cancer. DU also emits dangerous beta radiation. Its main component,
uranium-238, has a half-life of 4.46 billion years. Thorne argues that it
could in theory contribute to Gulf War Syndrome: "In view of its poorly
defined biochemical effects, DU could be a contributory factor," he says.

Chemically, DU poses a great threat to the kidneys, where high
concentrations can lead to organ failure. But according to Thorne, even
small amounts could have subtle but ill-understood effects. That is why a
major study by the US Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 1989 recommended
reducing the safety limit for uranium in kidneys from 3 micrograms per gram
to 0.3 micrograms per gram.

There is evidence that civilian authorities take the threat from DU very
seriously. In the aftermath of the Gulf conflict, the UK Atomic Energy
Authority came up with some frightening estimates for the potential effects
of the DU contamination left by the conflict. It calculated that if 23
tonnes of DU were inhaled--8 per cent of the amount actually fired in the
Gulf--this could cause "500 000 potential deaths". This was "a theoretical
figure", it stressed, that indicated "a significant problem".

Potential deaths

The AEA's calculation was made in a confidential memo to the privatised
munitions company, Royal Ordnance, dated 30 April 1991. The memo offered to
send a team to Kuwait to clear up the DU--an offer that was never taken up.
The high number of potential deaths was dismissed last year as "very far
from realistic" by a British defence minister, Lord Gilbert. "Since the
rounds were fired in the desert, many kilometres from the nearest village,
it is highly unlikely that the local population would have been exposed to
any significant amount of respirable oxide," he said. The Balkans war,
however, is not being fought in a desert but in areas where people have, or
did have, houses.

As a result of earlier pressure from Gulf veterans, the British government
commissioned two reports. In April this year, Lord Gilbert quoted the 1993
investigation by the Defence Radiological Protection Service, which
concluded "that there was no indication that any British troops had been
subjected to harmful over-exposure to DU during the Gulf conflict".

But the other report, published by the Ministry of Defence in March, did
acknowledge that troops could have inhaled DU dust in the Gulf and that this
"could theoretically lead to damage to lung tissue and subsequently to a
raised probability of lung cancer some years later".

The ultimate irony is that DU could poison the very land that NATO is trying
to protect, says Rokke. "The aim of this war is to enable the Kosovars to
return home. But unless the uranium is cleaned up, those that survive the
Serb atrocities and the NATO aerial attacks will have to return to a
contaminated environment where they may become ill."

>From New Scientist, 5 June 1999

© Copyright New Scientist, RBI Limited 1999



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager