Effects of Radiological Dispersion Device - Research Paper Example

Effects of Radiological Dispersion Device In recent times, the U.S, Great Britain and most of Europe have seen the use of radiological dispersal devices by terrorists as a key insecurity threat (Runge and Buddemeier, 2009). In addition to the threats, the impacts that come with the detonation of the radioactive devices in public places have some effects depending on a number of factors like wind and temperature among others. The possibility that terrorists can employ a radiological dispersal device in a public area has even enlarged the concerns of governments and the public regarding such weapons.

A Radiological Dispersal Device (RDD) is a gadget aimed at disseminating radioactive materials with the purpose of causing destruction, injuries and damage to the habitats around the detonation site (Radiological Dispersal Device, 2005). A suitable example of an RDD is a dirty bomb which is usually made of explosives that disperse radioactive materials upon detonation which is contrary to the norm that RDDs do not require explosives. RDDs are usually used with intent to cause injuries or damage, which are essentially the goals of terrorists.

According to Radiological Dispersal Device (2005), an RDD is any kind of device that results in the intentional dissemination of radioactive matter with no nuclear detonation. The mode of dispersion of these radioactive materials is usually via a dirty bomb which explodes to release radioactive dust plus radioactive and nonradioactive shrapnel (Runge and Buddemeier, 2009). The effects of the explosion include radiation contamination, exposure to radiation in certain circumstances, physical injuries, burns, panic and fear.

Other methods of dispersion include active or passive dispersion of sources of radioactive materials that are unsealed with contamination of the people coming from the air, food, soil or water. Harper, Musolino and Wente (2007) argue that the effect of RDD explosion is local although the psychological impact it has is worldwide as well as the attention of the media; hence an overestimation of the effects of the exposure may result. In addition, Musolino and Harper (2006) affirm that RDDs are usually located or rather placed in unexpected areas; thus when they explode, the explosion and the selected location will surprise many.

The long-term effect of radioactive dispersion will be easy to realize but the short-term may be hard as it takes time to discover the contamination’s source. The initial indicators of contamination include prior threats, routine monitoring techniques and activities to identify the first responders, monitoring of activities of suspected groups by the intelligence community or plainly by chance. Urban population is usually high in many nations of the world. It is for this reason that terrorists least prefer RDDs since it is tricky to design one that will administer plentiful doses of radiation to result in immediate health defects in a densely populated area (Management of Terrorist, 2001).

As a result, Tochner and Glatstein (2008) debated and concluded that an RDD is likely to be used to; i. Cause uneasiness in people who are of the view that they have been exposed or are exposed to the radiation. ii. Disrupt the lives of people by contaminating the facilities they use or the places they work or live. The experts went ahead to determine the factors that affect the efficiency of the RDD attacks which include weather conditions, local topography, physical and chemical composition of the