BA Aircraft grounded - Radioactive Scare

[Jamie-Southend]

ITV news are reporting 3 BA aircraft grounded, as radioactive scare. A/c grounded in UK and 1 in Moscow i gather.

[Jamie-Southend]

Here`s the press release.....

British Airways has been advised that three of its Boeing 767 short haul aircraft have been identified by the UK government as part of the investigation into the death of Alexander Litvinenko.

The airline was contacted last night (Tuesday, November 28) by the government. It has taken the three B767s out of service to enable forensic examination to be carried out.
The initial results of the forensic tests, which was confirmed late this afternoon, has shown very low traces of a radioactive substance onboard two of the three aircraft.
British Airways has been advised that this investigation is confined solely to these three B767 aircraft, which will remain out of service until further notice.
British Airways understands that from advice it has been given that the risk to public health is low.
The airline is in the process of making contact with customers who have travelled on flights operated by these aircraft, which operate within Europe.
The airline has published the flights affected on its website, www.ba.com (http://www.ba.com/), and customers on these flights who wish to receive further advice are advised to telephone NHS Direct on 0845 4647. Only customers who have travelled on these specific flights are asked to telephone NHS Direct.
British Airways has set up a special helpline for customers and staff on 0845 6040171 or 0191 211 3690 for international calls.
Further information will be released as it becomes available and information will be posted on the airline's website.
ends
29 November, 2006 123/AP/06

[gordonroxburgh]

aircraft affected are

G-BNWX
G-BNWB
G-BZHA

[Digby-dude]

I flew G-BNWX on 6th October to Madrid on the BA461, Do we know when they were contaminated???

Were the traces found in the cabins or washrooms or in the hold I wonder....

A.

[Skeleton]

I flew G-BNWX on 6th October to Madrid on the BA461, Do we know when they were contaminated???

Were the traces found in the cabins or washrooms or in the hold I wonder....

A.

The numbers and people you need to be talking to are listed above.

[Tolsti]

''Sufficient polonium-210 to kill several people is available in anti-static devices''
Would these perhaps include those fitted to aircraft?
Source:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/29/npoison129.xml

[11K-AVML]

I'm surprised the airport security doesn't have basic radioactive detectors.
.
.

Whether or not airport security have basic radioactivity detectors, I'd doubt this would have been detected. It's alpha radiation for a start so easy (relative to other types of radiation) to transport without the exposing oneself to harmful levels and without the need for lead or other metal pots that would be detected during screening.But, that's assuming material would have come through the airports. I doubt it'd be hard to get such material across or under the sea. Even easier via private transport as has been widely shown in the media recently.If the amounts present on board these affected aircraft are indeed at the low levels announced, then it's just as possible that they'd be there through secondary contact from a contaminated person/s or object as much as by transportation.

[visibility3miles]

I'm surprised the airport security doesn't have basic radioactive detectors.
.

It's not that easy to detect unless there is a lot of it and you are looking for it carefully. Still, it sounds like somebody was tracking around a fair amount of it for it to be found in so many places. Labs that use radioactive compounds routinely check common surfaces for radioactive contamination.

The question is where they found it. If it was on surfaces that others may have touched with their hands, then put their hands in their mouth (e.g., chewing nails, licking their finger, contaminating food), that would be a problem. If they tracked it on the carpet, there is less likely of dangerous exposure.

Polonium-210 is an alpha emitter, and alpha particles do not travel very far. They are basically Helium atoms minus their electrons, so very heavy and easily stopped relaritive to beta particles or gamma rays. A layer of paint or some other simple substance, or even a relatively small amount of air is enough to stop them. They are bad if you ingest it and it stays inside your body blasting alpha particles at critical places.

It has a a half-life of 138 days, so you could let the jets sit around for several years and it will go away. There are ways to clean it up. :sad: :eek:

Edited to add that 11K-AVML posted while I was typing. So, what he said.

[Sunfish]

If you read up in Wikipedia about Polonium 210, this is potentially more than just a scare.

"The maximum allowable body burden for ingested polonium is only 1,100 becquerels (0.03 microcurie), which is equivalent to a particle weighing only 6.8 × 10-12 gram. Weight for weight, polonium is approximately 2.5 × 1011 (250 billion) times as toxic as hydrogen cyanide. The maximum permissible concentration for airborne soluble polonium compounds is about 7,500 Bq/m3 (2 × 10-11 µCi/cm3). The biological halflife of polonium in humans is 30 to 50 days.[10]"

I think it is safe to assume that whoever dosed Litvinenko with Polonium is himself already dead.

God help us if anyone else has been contaminated with it.

[theskyboy]

I operated as cabin crew on the ZHA twice last week, including DME. BA sent an e-mail detailing all the affected flights and have set up a help line for all crews.

Check ESS mail if you're worried.

I have to give a big thumbs up for they way they've dealt with things so far.:ok:

Watch this space I guess!

tsb

[The_Banking_Scot]

I flew G-BNWX on 6th October to Madrid on the BA461, Do we know when they were contaminated???

Were the traces found in the cabins or washrooms or in the hold I wonder....

A.


Hi,

The earliest date affected as per the BA website ias quoted as; 25th October

https://lfn.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/lfn.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=2433&p_sid=fatfbVni&p_lva=2432#

Regards

TBS

[Consol]

So airport security in the U.K. have been taking tubes of toothpaste and yogurts of airline pilots but no one could detect polonium 210 passing through an airport? Makes you wonder:ugh:

[TURIN]

So airport security in the U.K. have been taking tubes of toothpaste and yogurts of airline pilots but no one could detect polonium 210 passing through an airport? Makes you wonder:ugh:

Only thing it makes me wonder is if you actually read this thread. :ugh: :rolleyes: :D

[caos]

Hi,

The earliest date affected as per the BA website ias quoted as; 25th October

https://lfn.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/lfn.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=2433&p_sid=fatfbVni&p_lva=2432#

Regards

TBS
Right, and by single deduction all started at flight BA875 Moscow to Heathrow, for sure UK police have the name of the responsible passenger.
Litvinenko was poisoned on November 1º.

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

Good grief - who would want to run an airline nowadays? Three aircraft grounded, thousands of people potentially affected, and the compensation lawyers gearing up for business!

Oh for the good old days when the worst thing that ever happened was a few stewards smuggling gold from Beirut! :hmm:

[180backtrack]

To me, Turin made a valid point that airport security are rigorously seeking out innocuous substances like toothpaste and yoghurt, while deadly substances like Polinium 210m can pass through unchallenged. Fair point?

[stagger]

I think it is safe to assume that whoever dosed Litvinenko with Polonium is himself already dead.
God help us if anyone else has been contaminated with it.

It is worth bearing in mind that Polonium 210 emits alpha particles which do not pass through the skin. Alpha emitters need to be ingested or inhaled to cause serious harm.

So until it is explained exactly where these "traces" of radioactivity were found it's hard to know whether people are likely to be in significant danger.

[airamerica]

And I as a Pilot are not allowed to take ***** eye drops in the name of security.

[fox niner]

Hold on guys.

Polonium 210 is indeed VERY poisonous....if you eat it. It emits alpha radiation only, and that means that the radiation is incapable of even penetrating a piece of paper.

Yes, that's right, a simple piece of paper will stop the radiation. A foot of air will do the same, it will stop the alpha particles.

The problem starts when you eat polonium 210. (or otherwise ingest it, say, by inhaling a powder which contains Po 210)

But......trace amounts of polonium in airplanes will only cause mass hysteria and not necessarily a health hazard.

[GS-Alpha]

To the people worrying about airport security - if you put some of this stuff in your eye drop bottle, without getting any on the outside, then screwed the lid on it, there would be nothing to detect. Alpha particles as mentioned several times, cannot escape a container.

Also, Alpha particles are only harmful if emitted from inside the body. Unless you have somehow got the Polonium from a contaminated seat, into your body then you are at zero risk. If you have managed to get it in your body - perhaps by licking the seat or something, I'd say the dosage is likely to be too low to do any significant harm. (This is based on my undertstanding that the seat contamination has simply come from the sweat of contaminated individuals). Yes the stuff is harmful even at very very low doses. But the amount secreted in a bit of sweat is going to be a very very tiny amount of an already very very small dose.

Incidentally, you breath in Radon every time you sit watching TV in your lounge. Radon decays by Alpha emission too.

Also, just over 10% of cosmic radioation is made up of Alpha particles. Mind you, they don't even make it as far as the aircraft. It is the protons, and more seriously the Beta particles and Gamma rays you have to watch out for. Cosmic radiation is a subject that is taken far too lightly by the airlines in my view, and yet we as pilots and passengers don't seem to worry about it too much either. But we certainly should.

[TopBunk]

It sounds to me as if the aircraft grounded in Moscow is an act of retaliation by the Russians. I can't believe that BA would choose to check it there rather than bring it back to base. After all, it's been flying around for a few weeks since this substance was on board, one more sector wouldn't have been a problem.

[goshdarnit]

It sounds to me as if the aircraft grounded in Moscow is an act of retaliation by the Russians. I can't believe that BA would choose to check it there rather than bring it back to base. After all, it's been flying around for a few weeks since this substance was on board, one more sector wouldn't have been a problem.

If they had returned it to the UK whilst being aware there was a potential problem they would be opening themselves up to all kinds of issues, hence the reason it remains in Moscow for tests. Flying the plane around exposing people to potential risk when you are ignorant of that is entirely different.

[Sunfish]

The Telegraph is reporting that 33,000 pax have been potentially exposed to Polonium 210. So much for searching for suspicious liquid explosives at security checkpoints. Ain't science grand?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=WV43222W314OLQFIQMFCFGGAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2006/11/30/npoison30.xml

[cwatters]

To me, Turin made a valid point that airport security are rigorously seeking out innocuous substances like toothpaste and yoghurt, while deadly substances like Polinium 210m can pass through unchallenged. Fair point?

How exactly would you detect a particle the size of a few grains of sand when the radaition can be shielded using a cardboard box?

[old,not bold]

Interesting thread, especially the information from those who clearly know what they are talking about.

The rants about airport security are misguided, as several have pointed out. The purpose of screening passengers, crew, baggage, cargo and mail prior to boarding, and ground staff working in the RZ, is to prevent acts of terrorism and/or piracy against passenger aircraft in flight, not to save the world from assassins. No-one is ever going to carry out either of those with a few grams/milligrams of Polonium 210, undetectable in a container anyway.

You could of course say exactly the same about some of the other things that are banned, and you would be right. But that's another issue.

[mary_hinge]

Not sure if I’ve missed this but:

Have BA only checked these 2 or 3 aircraft? If so it would be interesting to test a further batch of aircraft, perhaps BMI, Virgin, a couple of charter and a freight operator or 2.

See if this also gives a reading for Polonium 210

[SaturnV]

Not sure if I’ve missed this but:
Have BA only checked these 2 or 3 aircraft? If so it would be interesting to test a further batch of aircraft, perhaps BMI, Virgin, a couple of charter and a freight operator or 2.
See if this also gives a reading for Polonium 210

From what I have read, the authorities have detected a very low level of radioactivity. They have not indicated what element(s) were detected, nor where the radioactivity was detected on the plane.

If indeed it was polonium 210 detected, they have not indicated whether the levels were consistent with natural background levels, or significantly higher.

I am willing to wager that you could take any three planes in the BA fleet and detect very low levels of raqdioactivity, even Polonium 210 perhaps.

As for becoming poisoned by having been a passenger on one of these flights, virtually zero chance. After all, anyone who smokes is poisoning him- or herself with polonium 210 every day.

Polonium-210, which emits alpha particles, is a natural contaminant of tobacco. For an individual smoking two packages of cigarettes a day, the radiation dose to bronchial epithelium from Po210 inhaled in cigarette smoke probably is at least seven times that from background sources, and in localized areas may be up to 1000 rem or more in 25 years. Radiation from this source may, therefore, be significant in the genesis of bronchial cancer in smokers. Science 17 January 1964: Vol. 143. no. 3603, pp. 247 - 249
DOI: 10.1126/science.143.3603.247

I've read that the levels of polonium in tobacco have increased in recent years, apparently from greater use of phosphates to fertilize the fields, with plants taking up the polonium and metabolizing it.

It would be interesting to see what the level of polonium 210 might be on one's clothing after a long night in a smoke-filled pub.

[Jetstream Rider]

For those worried about airport security it is worth bearing in mind that Alpha particles are stopped by about 30mm of air. Even if a container had some on the outside, detecting them would entail getting a radiation detector within 30mm of everything in the luggage and on the person without even a piece of paper getting in the way. Then trying to decide whether the reading was background or something larger.

It is also worth mentioning that Brazil nuts are Beta emitters and that the glowing bits of your watch or snazzy compass are firing radiation as we speak. Alpha is hardly a problem unless you eat it - having said that, BA are obviously doing the right thing.

Its fun to play with a Geiger counter (Beta detector) as more than you would imagine is radioactive. What about the Granite we have on our kitchen work surfaces? (If you are richer than me!).

[HKPAX]

Shurely the 3 a/c have been grounded not primarily for safety reasons but to permit investigation of where the stuff was carried - in cabin or in hold - and this could indicate by whom. One of us has commented that the poisoner would be killing him-herself by handling the stuff: Madam Curie did this for years before she died, and even then not demonstrably from radioactive poisoning. Brave lady nonetheless.

[Gertcha]

This may seem like a stupid question, but if Polonium 210 can be shielded by a simple cardboard box or piece of paper, then how have traces of it been found on board these aircraft?

[msmorley]

This may seem like a stupid question...
I don't think it's a stupid question at all: I would have thought that the traces found around London could be explained by the victim excreting traces of his "dose" but not those on the aircraft. Unless the would-be "assassin" was already poisoned himself, I wonder what is being seen here... :hmm:

[haughtney1]

It now appears that a TRANSERO 737 is also on the "contaminated" list...the plot thickens.....

[GS-Alpha]

It is the Alpha particles emitted by the Polonium that can not pass through stuff. The contaminant on the aircraft is Polonium itself, which was presumably on the clothes of some passengers, or worse still in the sweat or other bodily fluids of contaminated individuals.

Also there is no reason why the assassin has to be dead. A drop or two of a Polonium containing solution in his soy sauce for example, and Bob's your uncle. Just don't eat it yourself.

[Skipness One Echo]

I still remember the demo in third year physics at school where the alpha radiaiton source was held in front of a piece of paper and the detector immediately went quiet. Oh useful to know I thought.......

IMHO this has been way over milked by the media. Unless I was being remarkably and uncharacteristically intimate with a Russian spy I am confident that I am not about to pop my clogs of radiation poisoning. However the media heard "Radiation" and went into full public scare mongering frenzy as they are too dim to know that Alpha radiation and Gama radiation (the stuff from Plutonium etrc) are VERY different animals. Gamma will kill you stone dead. Alpha will be stopped by your skin. UNLESS you are ingeniously forced to eat it in which case it will kill you as surely as ............say rat poison.
However I'm sure that if rat poison were found to have been carried on a BA767 without permission we would not be grounding aircraft and talking to the BBC.

[ALLDAYDELI]

Some of th initial TV news footage showed a BA aircraft next to a TransAero B737. BBC News reported that the BA aircraft has empty ferried back MOW-LHR today.

[SaturnV]

I don't think it's a stupid question at all: I would have thought that the traces found around London could be explained by the victim excreting traces of his "dose" but not those on the aircraft. Unless the would-be "assassin" was already poisoned himself, I wonder what is being seen here... :hmm:
Assuming specific evidence of Polonium 210 was found, and not just any old radio-nuclide, what is being seen here is almost surely background stuff. For example, Polonium 210 is present in lead solder, so prospectively, electronic circuitry aboard an aircraft could emit alpha particles from Polonium 210. [Assuming the alpha particles could freely reach the scanning device.]

Almost suredly, the assassin did not poison himself or herself and thus none of his or her bodily secretions (sweat, mucus, saliva) would contaminate an aircraft with the poison.

This whole issue of the planes strikes me as an investigative tangent gone amuck, and will ultimately prove to be non-productive other than for journos in search of big headlines.

[Lucifer]

This may seem like a stupid question, but if Polonium 210 can be shielded by a simple cardboard box or piece of paper, then how have traces of it been found on board these aircraft?
Infected person sweating it out perhaps.

[ORAC]

Well, if it was the Transaero in Moscow, I don´t think it will be leaving LHR for a while. Not sure if it was a passenger carrying or ferry flight. If it was carrying passengers it raises questions of when it became suspect....

The Grauniad: .......Mr Reid said in a statement to the Commons: "A fourth aircraft of interest, which is a Boeing 737 leased by Transaero, arrived at London Heathrow Terminal One this morning. Passenger details will be collected and the Health Protection Agency (HPA) will contact individuals if any matters of concern are found."

[Jetstream Rider]

There is no reason to think the poisoner would be dead unless he ate the stuff or sucked it off his fingers. Unlikely. The poisoner could have washed his hands in Polonium and been quite safe unless he ingested it.

The BA stuff to staff says that the holds are not affected and it is the cabin that is the subject of these tests, so baggage handlers need not worry. I'm sure none of the rest of us need worry either.

Oh, and your smoke detectors contain an Alpha source too. There is an emitter and a detector. If smoke gets inbetween the two, it stops the Alpha getting to the detector and sets it off. I wouldn't be surprised it it were Polonium in them, but it could be many things.

[BWBriscoe]

What has been the knock on effect on the airlines schedules?

[ILS27LEFT]

Flight information for aircraft undergoing forensic tests

Summary
The following British Airways flights are involved.

London Heathrow to Moscow/Moscow to London Heathrow
October 25, BA874 and BA875
October 26, BA872 and BA873
October 28, BA872 and BA873
October 31, BA874 and BA875
November 1, BA874 and BA875
November 3, BA874 and BA875
November 5, BA872 and BA873
November 6, BA874 and BA875
November 7, BA874 and BA875
November 7, BA872 and BA873
November 8, BA874 and BA875
November 9, BA872 and BA873
November 9, BA874 and BA875
November 13, BA874 and BA875
November 14, BA872 and BA873
November 15, BA874 and BA875
November 16, BA872 and BA873
November 17, BA874 and BA875
November 18, BA874 and BA875
November 20, BA872 and BA873
November 22, BA872 and BA873
November 24, BA874 and BA875
November 25, BA872 and BA873
November 27, BA872 and BA873
November 28, BA872 and BA873


London Heathrow to Moscow
October 25, BA874
November 29, BA872

Moscow to London Heathrow
October 31, BA873

London Heathrow to Barcelona/Barcelona to London Heathrow
November 4, BA478 and BA479
November 14, BA478 and BA479
November 15, BA478 and BA479
November 16, BA478 and BA479
November 17, BA478 and BA479
November 19, BA478 and BA479
November 20, BA478 and BA479
November 21, BA478 and BA479
November 22, BA478 and BA479
November 23, BA478 and BA479
November 24, BA478 and BA479
November 26, BA478 and BA479

London Heathrow to Dusseldorf/Dusseldorf to London Heathrow
October 30, BA936 and BA937
November 6, BA936 and BA937
November 8, BA936 and BA937
November 9, BA936 and BA937
November 11, BA936 and BA937
November 13, BA936 and BA937
November 18, BA936 and BA937
November 19, BA936 and BA937
November 24, BA936 and BA937
November 25, BA936 and BA937
November 27, BA936 and BA937

London Heathrow to Athens/Athens to London Heathrow
October 30, BA632 and BA633
November 4, BA632 and BA633
November 6, BA632 and BA633
November 8, BA632 and BA633
November 11, BA632 and BA633
November 19, BA632 and BA633
November 23, BA632 and BA633
November 24, BA632 and BA633
November 25, BA632 and BA633
November 27, BA632 and BA633
November 28, BA632 and BA633

London Heathrow to Athens
October 31, BA634
November 5, BA634
November 6, BA632
November 7, BA634
November 9, BA634
November 10, BA632
November 14, BA634
November 20, BA634
November 21, BA632
November 22, BA634
November 23, BA634
November 25, BA632
November 27, BA634
November 28, BA634
November 29, BA631


Athens to London Heathrow
November 1, BA631
November 6, BA631
November 8, BA631
November 10, BA631
November 10, BA633
November 15, BA631
November 21, BA631
November 21, BA633
November 23, BA631
November 24, BA631
November 25, BA633
November 28, BA631

London Heathrow to Larnaca/Larnaca to London Heathrow
October 29, BA662 and BA663
November 11, BA662 and BA663
November 12, BA662 and BA663
November 13, BA662 and BA663
November 18, BA662 and BA663
November 25, BA662 and BA663
November 26, BA662 and BA663

London Heathrow to Stockholm/Stockholm to London Heathrow
November 14, BA780 and BA781
November 15, BA780 and BA781
November 16, BA780 and BA781
November 17, BA780 and BA781
November 19, BA780 and BA781
November 20, BA780 and BA781
November 21, BA780 and BA781
November 22, BA780 and BA781
November 23, BA780 and BA781
November 24, BA780 and BA781
November 26, BA780 and BA781

London Heathrow to Stockholm
November 3, BA786
November 19, BA780

Stockholm to London Heathrow
November 4, BA773
November 19, BA781

London Heathrow to Warsaw (diverted to Vienna)
November 28, BA846 and BA847

London Heathrow to Frankfurt
October 26, BA916
November 2, BA916
November 16, BA916
November 17, BA916
November 19, BA916
November 20, BA916
November 21, BA916
November 22, BA916

Frankfurt to London Heathrow
October 27, BA901
November 3, BA901
November 17, BA901
November 18, BA901
November 20, BA901
November 21, BA901
November 22, BA901
November 23, BA901

London Heathrow to Istanbul/Istanbul to London Heathrow
October 27, BA676 and BA677
November 2, BA676 and BA677
November 3, BA676 and BA677
November 17, BA676 and BA677
November 18, BA676 and BA677
November 19, BA676 and BA677
November 20, BA676 and BA677
November 21, BA676 and BA677
November 22, BA676 and BA677
November 23, BA676 and BA677

London Heathrow to Madrid/Madrid to London Heathrow
November 26, BA460 and 461

[derekl]

http://www.unitednuclear.com/isotopes.htm

[ILS27LEFT]

The substance found on the BA 767s has not been officially confirmed yet.
It is likely to be the Polonium 210.

Scientists and experts are reiterating that this substance is not harmful unless ingested.
Polonium-210 is only harmful if taken into the body.

Only if taken into the body? ...I am now very worried then:
this is a very crucial question as inhalation would have definitely happened in a contaminated cabin.
If Polonium-210 is present in the environment, it would need to enter people's bodies to give them a radiation dose, again through ingestion, inhalation or through wound entry. Inhalation is the scary one (in this BA case) because I think this would happen in any case in a contaminated aircraft Cabin. Am I wrong? I am not a radiation expert so I hope to be wrong.

Now I would really appreciate if the media would be more careful when reporting this type of news as hundreds of BA staff and thousands of passengers are now directly involved.

Is this just a forensic procedure (BA 767 planes grounded!) or the quantities of Polonium found on the BA aircrafts are sufficient to justify this "health warning" and then the MHZ should test all passengers and Crew involved as inhalation would have necessarily happened?

I would like an answer from the Authorities as I am directly involved.


I think they should clarify the quantities found (apparently it takes around 50 days for the Polonium to disappear at a 50% rate-50% every 50 days.) and establish the real "inhalation" risk as the aircraft Cabin is a very dangerous environment if contaminated.:{

[archae86]

Oh, and your smoke detectors contain an Alpha source too. There is an emitter and a detector. If smoke gets inbetween the two, it stops the Alpha getting to the detector and sets it off. I wouldn't be surprised it it were Polonium in them, but it could be many things.
I'd be surprised if any used the Polonium isotope in question here, as the half-life is so short as to give unacceptable product endurance (138 days). The one Polonium isotope with a more appropriate half-life is 209, but I don't think that is cheaply available.

The one detector I personally have disposed of (by shipping back the manufacturer, as instructed) used Americium. A quick check of references suggests it was probably Americium-241, with a several hundred year half-life.

As a minor clarification, I don't think these inexpensive devices contain a direct alpha detector. Rather they detect the flow of current resulting from ionization of air in the normal case. Smoke particles alter the ionization and hence the current.

None of which alters my agreement with what I take to be your underlying point. We do safely use a number of items containing radiation sources. Home smoke detectors are definitely one of them.

[edited to correct spelling error]

[Dyls]

Taken off Wikipedia


210Po
This isotope of polonium is an alpha emitter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_decay) that has a half-life of 138.376 days. A milligram of 210Po emits as many alpha particles as 5 grams of radium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radium). A great deal of energy is released by its decay with half a gram quickly reaching a temperature above 750 K. A few curies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curie) (gigabecquerels (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Becquerel)) of 210Po emit a blue glow which is caused by excitation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excitation) of surrounding air. A single gram of 210Po generates 140 watts of power.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium-210#_note-2) Because it emits many alpha particles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_radiation), which are stopped within a very short distance in dense media and release their energy, 210Po has been used as a lightweight heat source to power thermoelectric cells (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator) in artificial satellites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_satellite). A 210Po heat source was also used in each of the Lunokhod (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunokhod) rovers deployed on the surface of the Moon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon), to keep their internal components warm during the lunar nights. Some anti-static brushes contain up to 500 microcuries of 210Po as a source of charged particles for neutralizing static electricity in materials like photographic film.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium-210#_note-3). 210Po has very rare properties as an unstable isotope, as it decays only by emission of an alpha particle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_particle), not by emission of an alpha particle and a gamma ray (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamma_ray).

Polonium is a highly radioactive and toxic element and is very difficult to handle. Even in milligram or microgram (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilogram) amounts, handling 210Po is extremely dangerous, requiring specialized equipment and strict handling procedures. Alpha particles emitted by polonium will damage organic tissue easily if polonium is ingested, inhaled, or absorbed (though they do not penetrate the epidermis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidermis) and hence are not hazardous if the polonium is outside the body).

[Jetstream Rider]

I wouldn't worry about inhalation, in order to inhale enough to affect you, the Polonium would need to be in a state that was inhaleable. It is unlikely that it is*. Furthermore, the fact that no one has reported any symptoms (the media would jump on this pronto) and the fact that it has been stated that very small quantities were found, means the risk to you is extremely small. I understand your worries, but really, this is not a major cause for concern in terms of your own health. It may well be a major cause for concern to others, such as MI5 and 6, but not to you directly.

* if you had a lump of polonium on your desk, there is no danger of inhallation risk, if you had it mixed in with a liquid, it would need to be atomised or sprayed around to risk inhallation. Mixed with a liquid and just sitting there is no risk. The other form would be a powder, but even then it would need to be airborne rather than just sitting somewhere for inhallation to be a factor.

You are more at risk from stress related things due to worrying than health affects caused by Polonium.

86 - thanks for the added info on smoke detectors.

[archae86]

I think they should clarify the quantities found (apparently it takes around 50 days for the Polonium to disappear at a 50% rate-50% every 50 days.)
The radioactive decay half-life for Polonium 210 is a bit over 138 days. The 50 day number gets into the discussion as an approximate half-life for biological elimination from the human body, which is not relevant to the airplane contamination issue.

Given the length of time he lived, the man in question probably did not get more than a few times the lethal dose. I'd be stunned if secondary contamination victims in this incident got more than a tiny fraction. The short or long-term consequences at those levels would be exceedingly hard to detect on an individual level.

I'd estimate that the notifications are being done as a matter of courtesy, or bureaucratic pre-emption, not as a matter of health concern.

[late developer]

* if you had a lump of polonium on your desk, there is no danger of inhallation risk.
A. Right, and if you put a 'lump' as you put it, on your desk, how hot might it get under its own steam so to speak?

And when it warms up a bit? Then what?

B. I think if you throw a lighted match into a tank of JetA1 it is quite likely to go out. That doesn't make it something to ignore in aviation risk assessments.

This one warms up by itself .... it is not on the 'very radioactive' list of the 30most radioactive isotopes for nothing.

Someone earlier this afternoon on the beeb said a pepperpot full of Po210 can wipe out a town.

We might be getting real nuclear physicist spinners on the BBC now. A University of Surrey guest has just poo-pooed that and has said there isn't a pepperpot full of Polonium 210 in the whole world - yet I have read the largest amount manufactured at one go was 600g. If it wasn't full, then it was some pepperpot! It'll be long gone now of course - refer to A.

[vaneyck]

This may seem like a stupid question, but if Polonium 210 can be shielded by a simple cardboard box or piece of paper, then how have traces of it been found on board these aircraft?
I too was wondering why they were finding Po 210 everywhere, including the aircraft. By coincidence I read this last night, in The Making of the Atomic Bomb, by Richard Rhodes, pp579-80:...for reasons never satisfactorily explained by experiment, the metal migrates from place to place and can quickly contaminate large areas. "This isotope has been observed to migrate upstream against a current of air," notes a postwar British report on polonium, "and to translocate under conditions where it would appear to be doing so of its own accord." Chemists at Los Alamos learned to look for it in the walls of shipping containers when Thomas' foils came up short.

[Mac the Knife]

If you read up in Wikipedia about Polonium 210, this is potentially more than just a scare.
"The maximum allowable body burden for ingested polonium is only 1,100 becquerels (0.03 microcurie), which is equivalent to a particle weighing only 6.8 × 10-12 gram. Weight for weight, polonium is approximately 2.5 × 1011 (250 billion) times as toxic as hydrogen cyanide. The maximum permissible concentration for airborne soluble polonium compounds is about 7,500 Bq/m3 (2 × 10-11 µCi/cm3). The biological halflife of polonium in humans is 30 to 50 days.[10]"
I think it is safe to assume that whoever dosed Litvinenko with Polonium is himself already dead.
God help us if anyone else has been contaminated with it.

That's the maximum allowable (safe-ish) body burden bright boy, NOT the LD50 lethal dose (which is at least 150 times higher).

Get a grip.

[Jetstream Rider]

Have a look at the excellent:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polonium

Also see:

http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/search/r?dbs+hsdb:@term+@na+@rel+polonium,+radioactive

Where you will see that loads of people have been exposed to (very small amounts of) Polonium, without much effect. Those that did have higher incidence of cancer were exposed to more than you expect are on the aircraft in question.

Polonium certainly is dangerous stuff, however the amounts involved here and the means by which it kills you means the risk here is incredibly tiny.

Further to my post above, Polonium is easier to breathe in than I first suggested, however it is still unlikely that this is a factor in this case.

21 people have been referred for specialist testing in the same way that 3000 or so people were tested fairly recently for HIV when it was discovered that a nurse had it - its called being careful rather than suggesting all 3000 had HIV. This case is similar, it is unlikely that any of the 21 have anything to worry about.

To quote one doctor on the radio, you would have to had "licked the feet" of a poisoned person in order to feel the need to worry.

It still remains that if it were that much of a problem, people would have exhibited symptoms and died already. That hasn't happened (the media would have jumped on it), so I doubt there is much need for concern, although it is correct to be careful.

[11K-AVML]

And yes, although maybe 600 grams of polonium 210 may have been produced at one time per someone on this thread (what I'd seen was that 100 grams a year is produced worldwide), all the people who have or use polonium have publicly stated that no losses or thefts have been reported, so most of it is still under control.
Although this isn't strictly true because although we know the half-life of the isotope, no-one can say exactly how much there is at any one time because the decay is spontaneous and truly random.
As such, accounting for such materials always involves a degree of approximation.

Secondly, we don't know what the isotope involved on these aircraft are nor how they got there. Whether by accident or intentionally.
Let's not forget the Machiavellian nature of this - could conceivably be a red herring or a set up!

The reason, as I see it, for the aircraft examinations is not so much decontamination, but forensic inspection - obtaining evidence.
And if on considers the people so far known to be involved (i.e. by those investigating the case, not by the general public) they'd know their movements by now and thereby know which aircraft to inspect, hence how they know which aircraft are likely to be contaminated.

Unless of course it is all part of a ruse.

[kansasw]

Apparently* certain aircraft have been targeted for inspection and traces of polonium identified.
Apparently* polonium is a naturally occurring element found in tobacco, celery, or whatever other innocuous (well, tobacco is not, let's not quibble) sources.
Apparently* polonium is difficult to trace.
I have to wonder if the same processes used to identify polonium in certain suspect aircraft, would turn up similar evidence of polonium in other, or any, non-suspect aircraft. After all it does occur naturally so there might be some on the average airplane.
I have no dog in this race except to seek accuracy and truth.
*"Apparently" means "somebody else said this," and does not mean "I believe this."

[SaturnV]

Again, polonium 210 is a known contaminant of lead solder. How many grams of lead solder do you suppose might be on an airplane?

It seems you don't need a nuclear processing facility to extract polonium from lead solder. See
Polonium-210 is readily separable from a dissolved sample of lead by various chemical steps and autoelectroplates onto a silver disc with high efficiency. This disc can then be analyzed in a low-background alpha particle spectrometer to quantify the number of 21Po [sic] atoms on the disc. A tracer of 20$Po [sic] or 209Po is usually added at dissolution and simultaneously quantified in the alpha energy spectrometer to determine the chemical yield. A typical sample size is a few grams of lead, and a typical sensitivity for the procedure is on the order of 100 mBq/kg for an old lead sample that has the 210po in secular equilibrium with the 21Pb. Since the 21lPo half-life is -138 days, if the sample is analyzed three weeks after separation of the polonium, the sensitivity of any analytical procedure based on the determination of zl*Po will be reduced by an order of magnitude. Worse, if the processing step (melting, etc.) does not remove all the 210po from the lead sample, it would not be possible to accurately correct for fractional equilibrium, and the analytical result would lead to an erroneously high value for the 21Pb. (emphasis added)
"The "discovery" of alpha activity in lead and solder"
Journal of Electronic Materials, Oct 2000 by Brodzinski, Ron

[late developer]

Again, polonium 210 is a known contaminant of lead solder. How many grams of lead solder do you suppose might be on an airplane? Well plenty! Especially an Airbus! But I also read that the solder used in computer applications (I assume airplanes might qualify?) use 'clean' or low-alpha lead (LAL), because 'normal' (part 210Pb which decays to 210Po) solder is a known cause of soft errors in chips.

Soggy chips anyone?

[Anotherpost75]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/12/01/matt.gif
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/stylesheets/news/images/matt/matt_sig.gif
Daily Telegraph

[sky9]

An article in today's times that puts it all in perspective:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2481350,00.html

[pee]

Today one Finnair A/C has been grounded in Moscow as well. After the Airbus plane from Berlin via Helsinki landed in Sheremetyevo airport and all passengers left, some checks were carried on and the radiation level was found to be above normal. That was possibly due to the radioactive material contained in one piece of the luggage, some suggest. The return flight has been cancelled.

[cwatters]

Today one Finnair A/C has been grounded in Moscow as well.

Now cleared...

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L02139832.htm

Quote: Finnair's spokesman Taneli Hassinen said the investigation had discovered that the presence of radiation was due to a fully authorised low-level radiation cargo.

[cwatters]

It seems some commercial products contain more than just tiny ammounts. This article claims one antistatic brush available for $225 contains enough for 10 lethal doses...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/03/weekinreview/03broad.html