« Previous | Main | Next »

$1 Million Hit? The Real Deal on Polonium

November 30, 2006 4:58 PM

Polonium210_nr Polonium-210, the radioactive substance that killed former Russian agent Alexander Litvinenko, is easily available on the Internet, but it could take $1 million to amass a lethal amount, according to leading authorities.

Polonium-210 isotopes are offered online by a number of companies, including United Nuclear of New Mexico. The company sells polonium-210 isotopes for about $69 but says it would take about 15,000 orders, for a total cost of over $1 million, to have a toxic amount.

United Nuclear today posted an online clarification to answer concerns they are selling weapons of assassination.

"These quantities of radioactive material are not hazardous," says the statement on United Nuclear's Web site. "Another point to keep in mind is that an order for 15,000 sources would look a tad suspicious, considering we sell about one or two sources every three months."

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) agrees that the quantities sold by United Nuclear and similar companies are not hazardous.  Even a large amount of polonium-210 is only toxic if swallowed or absorbed.

It remains unclear how anyone could have obtained the amount apparently used in the poisoning death of the former Russian spy.  Speculation that it must have come from a Russian nuclear reactor is being discounted by many experts. 

"The idea that you'd have to have access to the Russian nuclear complex is silly," said Michael Levi, Fellow for Science and Technology at the Council on Foreign Relations. Levi says that while it isn't easy to obtain a deadly amount of polonium online, it also isn't prohibitively difficult.

Some devices that are used to clean records and film contain polonium-210, which Levi says could be extracted from the devices given some chemistry skills and provided the person had the other necessary materials. That equipment could be bought for a couple hundred dollars.

Many of those devices, however, are designed to prevent the polonium from being extractable and, according to the NRC, the devices would be a "highly unlikely source" from which someone would acquire a hazardous amount of polonium-210.

"It's not easy to get," said David McIntyre at the NRC. "Any amount if you were to disassemble the device would be very difficult to get, and it still wouldn't be in a hazardous form."

Levi agrees with the NRC that it would be hard, but he says it is far from impossible. "It doesn't help that vendors provide engineering diagrams of their devices on the web," he said.

So where else could one get polonium-210 without climbing the walls at a Russian nuclear complex? Other possible sources include commercial and research reactors overseas that deal with polonium isotopes.

Whatever the source, experts agree that the use of polonium as a murder weapon is a peculiar choice.

"There certainly are more tried and true ways to kill people," said Levi. "You shouldn't be particularly scared about polonium because there are a lot of other ways to kill people by slipping something into their drink."

November 30, 2006 | Permalink | User Comments (28)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The WikInfo is: "Since 210Po radiates 166 TBq per gram[22], a fatal 4-Sv dose can be caused by ingesting 8 MBq (200 microcurie), about 50 nanograms (ng), or inhaling 1.6 MBq (40 microcurie), about 10 ng."

Ten billionths of a gram is a vanishingly small amount. I wonder if the claims that you'd have to buy thousands of static devices to make a fatal dose are right? Does anyone know how much 210Po is in a static device?

Of course this is the smallest dose (on average) that Litvinenko could have gotten - I haven't seen reports that actually quantify it.

So his dose could have been much larger.

Posted by: Jeff Sutter | Dec 3, 2006 12:11:22 AM

Let's negotiate with IRAN while they develop Polonium...


Remember it's America's fault that Iran is angry with the world!!

Posted by: Shane Wilson | Dec 4, 2006 7:23:14 AM

Pete...

Would you oppose assination of a terrorist with a dirty bomb strapped to his chest in Times Square on New Years Eve, if it would save the lives of hundreds of thousands and make NYC inhabitable for 100 years?

Of course not... you have "Principles"!


Ugh... the mind of the Leftist!


"...Didn't OUR republican controlled government , just pass a law that gave Bush the right to assassinate anyone he wishes?????

Posted by: Shane Wilson | Dec 4, 2006 7:28:22 AM

Well Booman they might be reading this but they must to know this things need to stop, if they are smart enough to kill someone who knows all mistakes they made as it says, they could be smart enough to face the situation and fix whatever they did wrong in a good way,and i'm wondering how ppl can sell this Polonium-210 on the net, that means anyone can get it, i'm not sourprised about what this world had become, hopefully one day we gonna realize what we need to do to make this world better.

Posted by: Maggie | Dec 4, 2006 7:49:01 AM

News Flash, the guy who did it is now in a Russian hospital.

Posted by: Informed | Dec 5, 2006 11:38:30 PM

Wait... we ar talking about a spy right? Aren't spies supposed to get killed?

It's like part of the job description right?

It's not new worthy.

Posted by: Grizwold | Dec 6, 2006 4:54:59 AM

That's nice of the Council on Foreign Relations to go to bat for the Russians with a dis-information campaign. It's still operated by the same interests that financed the BLOODY Bolshevik Revolution. That ignored the warnings from the Austrailians about Pearl Harbor, that orchestrated Vietnam, and Neo-CONNED us into Iraq.

Posted by: Knosis | Dec 8, 2006 11:05:28 AM

reply to Shanes comment:
technically such a law would give Bush the same power that most people claim Putin has; the power to assassinate whoever he wants, be it for political motoivation or any other reason. Unfortunately, when a political opponent gets killed in this country (the US) we can immediately look around for viable options to pinpoint our blame on someone else other than the most likely candidate: the US government.
if the US government can cover up a Pentagon conspiracy than what else can they cover up. remember, do not believe everything you hear, and question the things you see.
conspiracies are all around us in the tinniest of nitches, and they are put there for a reason.

Posted by: Thizz | Dec 10, 2006 2:21:03 PM

Post a comment