
Why Is This Cargo Container Emitting So Much Radiation? - there
http://www.wired.com/magazine/2011/10/ff_radioactivecargo/all/1
======
bh42222
If you enjoy reading long prose articles, with plenty of human content, do not
let the following tl;dr: spoil this article for you:

tl;dr:

A cylinder of cobalt, probably used in a medical instrument. Things like that
are understandably very expensive to properly and legally dispose of. Somehow
it ended up in a heap of scrap copper.

~~~
w1ntermute
> If you enjoy reading long prose articles

Well-written, long form articles are increasingly difficult to find in this
day & age of Twitter-sized sound bites, even off the internet. It's nice to
see that a publication billed as a sci/tech magazine is taking the time and
effort to write them.

~~~
ticks
It was far too verbose and meandering. I like long articles provided there's
plenty "meat" to justify the whole. This one reads like it was padded with
descriptions of how well the container was passed from port-to-port and so on.

It also starts with an intriguing hook but ends like a damp squid. I looked at
the bottom thinking "oh great I have another three more pages to endure before
finding out why the rod was there" and then realised that was it.

~~~
ascuttlefish
Did you mean damp squib?

~~~
ticks
Yep, d'oh.

------
runningdogx
The capsule could have been from some industrial entity that should have
protected the capsule until it was handed off to a recycler (one who knew what
they were getting), but didn't (maybe to cut disposal costs, or by
accident/laziness). Someone could then have sold the capsule to a Saudi
Arabian scrapyard, and they packed it into a container to be melted down in
Italy.

Another historical radiation incident caused by failure to protect a radiation
source from scrap thieves:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goiania_accident>

If those thieves in the Goiania incident had just sold the the Cs source to a
scrapyard immediately without breaking it open first, the two incidents might
have been similar.

~~~
aristus
There was another incident 25-odd years ago near where I grew up on the
US/Mexico border. Radioactive steel (with cesium or cobalt, from medical
equipment, IIRC) was sold for scrap and turned into various things like
restaurant tables. It was only discovered when a geiger counter was turned on
by a bored geologist waiting for food.

~~~
abbasmehdi
Wow, anything written on the subject?

~~~
lgv
There's this:

<http://www.window.state.tx.us/border/ch09/cobalto.html>

------
tectonic
"It was hardly the first fishy shipment to pass through Gioia Tauro. Famously,
just six weeks after 9/11, workers there heard noises coming from inside a
container being transshipped to Nova Scotia via Rotterdam. Inside, police
found an Egyptian-born Canadian carrying a Canadian passport, a satellite
phone, a cell phone, a laptop, cameras, maps, and security passes to airports
in Canada, Thailand, and Egypt. The container’s interior was outfitted with a
bed, a water supply, a heater, and a toilet. Nicknamed Container Bob, the man
posted bail in Italian court and was never seen again."

~~~
rsanchez1
A man like that shouldn't have just been let go without finding out exactly
what he was doing.

~~~
brazzy
Really? Why do you think so?

~~~
tsotha
I dunno what he's thinking, but I agree with him because of the airport
security passes. They should have held him unless he had a damn good reason
for security passes to three different airports.

------
apaprocki
While reading this I was thinking it would be interesting to see an
infographic which showed the relative size/mass you would need of various
isotopes to detect, say, 500 msv/hr in open air at a fixed distance. Since
most people never _see_ radioactive substances, it could be interesting to
compare them visually.

------
charliepark
Thank you for posting the "entire article as one page". It's appreciated.

------
FuzzyDunlop
In comparison to their long form story on the Stuxnet virus, which was really
boosted by the personal element, this one reads mostly as a tease with no
satisfying pay-off.

As a story trying to build a narrative it frequently concerns itself too much
with the technical detail, or 'setting the scene', with little to no
consideration for closing the personal elements it opens up throughout. It's
littered with incidental detail but not a great deal of substance.

For example: what happened to Montagna? He's the first person to be mentioned,
is described as doing something pretty dangerous, and is forgotten about.

It then ends on such a note as to trivialise the entire article. All of this
is only a problem because the article was written in such a way to make it
one.

------
jerrya
Reminds me of a Daily Mail reports from February that an assistant port
director in San Diego made a statement interpreted to mean that dirty bombs
have been found shipped to, and within, the United States.

[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1356645/A-weapon-
mas...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1356645/A-weapon-mass-
destruction-U-S--Shock-confession-Customs-officer.html)

------
CurtHagenlocher
How can the number "307703" uniquely identify a container owned by a company
that "owns more than 2.4 million boxes just like it"? (SSCC-18 codes are all-
numeric.)

~~~
Retric
They might own 2.4 million boxes but they don't own 2.4 million "22G1" aka
_unventilated, 20-foot-long dry shipping container_ boxes.

Worst case they just add another company code to handel the next million
_unventilated, 20-foot-long dry shipping container_ boxes.

~~~
nikcub
The '22G1' isn't part of the ISO 6346 code that is used to identify containers

~~~
Retric
No, your incorrect:<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_6346>

 _Size and Type Codes

ISO 6346 also gives size and type codes for containers. When displayed on the
container, the size and type codes shall be used as a whole._

~~~
nikcub
this image shows pretty clearly what is part of the ISO code that is required:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Containernumber.jpg>

the size and type codes aren't used in the check digit, are not required, and
are usually displayed on a separate line:

[http://www.containerking.co.uk/buy-
cabins/images/Shipping%20...](http://www.containerking.co.uk/buy-
cabins/images/Shipping%20Container%20001.jpg)

anyway, back to the original question, you can't have two containers with the
same owner code, same container ID and made unique through the size and type
codes

the problem is solved because the large shipping firms (ie. the 5 or 6 that
control the industry) each have dozens of manufacturing codes. see my answer
in the other part of this thread

~~~
Retric
Hmm, I maintained software dealing with shipping containers for the trucking
industry and occasionally there where identical boxes that had different size
and type codes. Granted they could have been data entry errors, but the
software used the size and type codes to uniquely identify things.

------
thebigshane
They never mention the intended destination. I am sure the intended recipient
was investigated and all but it's a curious detail to omit in an otherwise,
very thorough article.

~~~
thebigshane
As maaku and castewart point out: I just missed it.

    
    
       307703’s load was bound for a foundry called Sigimet
       in the town of Pozzolo Formigaro, 40 miles north of Genoa.
    

I think I was thrown off with all of the talk about US policy, DHS, 9/11:

    
    
       So after 10 years and more than $1 billion spent on 
       scanners, radiation detectors, and beefed-up intelligence, 
       most US ports are still scanning containers onshore, after unloading.
    

I still don't get the connection here. It seems they are implying we need
tighter security to avoid this happening in this US. Instead, I inferred that
this container was heading here. Oops.

~~~
mikeash
I think the connection is that one reason to scan containers for radiation is
to prevent a nuclear bomb from being smuggled in. Detecting a nuclear bomb
after it's already on the loading dock is too late. I assume they mentioned
the US simply because Wired is US-centric.

------
helipad
I love the bureaucracy. Not a plight against Italians, most would be the same,
but "Woah, this is more radioactive than Fukushima and none of us will go
within 250 yards of it!" - 12 months, $700,000 later, government and port
authority decide it's probably worth opening up. Good job, everyone!

~~~
rbanffy
> this is more radioactive than Fukushima

... and is contained in a steel box. This gave them time to decide what would
be the proper course of action.

~~~
nobody31
And there is more than one of these in every hospital radiotherapy machine, in
every machine for sterilizing surgical instruments or medical supplies and
even in machines for preserving seeds.

Amazing this sort of thing doesn't happen more often

~~~
rbanffy
You mean... like being discovered?

I'm quite sure these accidents happen more frequently than they are
discovered.

~~~
nobody31
Hospitals tend to notice clusters of people dying of radiation poisoning - at
least in places with hospitals.

In places without hospitals - I'm sure the contents of a lot of these machines
end up being dumped in the 3rd world, to be 'recycled' like most toxic waste

~~~
rbanffy
Only if it is acute poisoning and only if they cluster in time and space.
Devices as nasty as this, of course, would be detected, but less deadly
materials would easily go undetected until someone, 50 years later, notices
something like leukemia being 20% more deadly in a given region than the
surrounding areas.

------
joejohnson
I know this article is long, but Wired writes such interesting and well-
researched pieces. This story reads like an awesome thriller novel.

~~~
kleiba
Really? I found the 20 or so times of "but that day wasn't an ordinary day for
Montagna" phrases quite tiring, and the off-takes into background information
too frequent, long and sometimes too unrelated. Sometimes less is more.

------
clintboxe
I'm a BI Developer for a big logistics company and I immediately hit up our
data warehouse to see if we had ever moved this container. Alas, we hadn't.
Only it's near relatives. :)

~~~
tzs
Assuming your username reflects your real name, did you take the job to fit in
with your last name? If not, do people ever joke about the coincidence?

~~~
sbov
Off topic but related anecdotes: \- when my dad broke his hand his doctor was
"dr. feely" \- my girlfriend's gynecologist is "dr. beaver"

------
gravitronic
100 million dollars in US $100 bills have been shot with 9 slugs of cesium?

~~~
tallanvor
Read that a year or two ago, but I only started Reading Pattern Recognition a
week ago (not sure how I ended up reading them out of order).

~~~
mindcrime
Don't feel bad, I did as well. Or maybe "am as well" would be more apt, since
I read Spook Country, then Zero History, and haven't started Pattern
Recognition yet.

~~~
gravitronic
augh. I read it only to find this out too. Not sure if I am going to read the
other two though, to be honest... it's no sprawl trilogy..

------
tomeast
Someone needs to make a for-pay service that lets me submit quality long form
articles like this and get back a (quality) audio file that I can listen to on
my commute home.

~~~
rsanchez1
With celebrity narrators! I can't decide if I would want Morgan Freeman, Liam
Neeson, or that guy from the Mass Effect codex.

~~~
tsotha
Shatner.

------
c4urself
This struck me as security which makes you feel safe aot security that makes
you safe.

“The radiation portals that were deployed in the aftermath of 9/11 are
essentially fine, except for three problems: They won’t find a nuclear bomb,
they won’t find highly enriched uranium, and they won’t find a shielded dirty
bomb,” says Stephen Flynn, a terrorism expert and president of the Center for
National Policy. “Other than that, they’re great pieces of equipment.”

------
yycom
It seems to me stupendously incompetent to scan for radiation without a plan.

~~~
ars
It's even more incompetent to not scan at all.

Better to do some than none.

------
charliesome
I particularly enjoyed this part:

    
    
        bearing logos like Yang Ming, Hamburg S\0xFCd, ...

~~~
nobody31
Don't you just want to see this painted on a ship due to a small email screw-
up

------
jakeonthemove
How can someone just dump a highly radioactive (at short distances) source in
a scrap yard? Gee, some people... I bet the guy who did it is dead now. This
reminds me of this list: [http://listverse.com/2011/08/07/10-more-cases-of-
deadly-radi...](http://listverse.com/2011/08/07/10-more-cases-of-deadly-
radioactive-exposure/) and how most people should never be trusted with
something that can affect thousands of other people...

~~~
ceejayoz
> How can someone just dump a highly radioactive (at short distances) source
> in a scrap yard?

"I could pay a few thousand dollars to properly dispose of this, or I could
throw it over the fence of the local junkyard."

~~~
catch23
although usually those who own the equipment containing the radioactive
material usually have a financial incentive to dispose it properly. The
doctors owning the medical device in the Goiania incident were essentially
fined to bankruptcy for their mistake.

~~~
ceejayoz
> although usually those who own the equipment containing the radioactive
> material usually have a financial incentive to dispose it properly.

Only if you get caught.

------
thewisedude
I am sure this was an interesting article. But I did NOT read the whole
article. Let me reason that in a fair way. The internet has a plethora of
interesting information. the style used here makes me spend 20 minutes on this
article without knowing if what I find in the end would be worth my time. I
rather like a style where you get to the outcome soon( say in the first
paragraph), and then get into more detail for those people who think that this
article is relevant or interesting.

I remember reading an article on HN where there was a recommendation for a
style of prose that might be useful in today's lifestyle. The author
recommended summarizing everything in the first paragraph, then having having
a more detailed middle section ( few paragraphs), and then having even more
detailed paragraphs in the end. Depending on the interest level of the reader,
if he stopped at the end of any paragraph, he would have still gotten the
gist, only the finer details would be missing!

------
tlrobinson
Why don't they just attach a radiation detector to each crane or something?

~~~
nobody31
Because if it's sensitive enough to detect a bomb it will be set off by
marble, bananas or a dozen other things.

So the port only checks containers likely to have radioactive contamination,
like scrap metal, which they did and they found this - system worked precisely
as it should.

You could have monitors on the cranes to detect very high levels of radiation,
so high you don't even want to check it manual - as in this case, But these
happen so rarely it's not worth it. And with 250 Million container movements a
year what sort of error rate would you need to achieve?

~~~
maaku
And, as is mentioned in the article, pretty pointless. A bomb can be shielded
to the point of giving off less radiation than normal cargo.

That said, the eventually used a much more precise germanium-based detector
that was able to identify the radiation by source. Such a detector could
distinguish the decay of shielded U-235 from a shipment of bananas. I wonder
how much those detectors cost...

~~~
msbarnett
> I wonder how much those detectors cost...

"The team then brought in one of the most sensitive portable detectors on the
market, an $80,000 Ortec HPGe Detective DX-100T. Inside the unit, a 1.65-pound
chunk of germanium..."

~~~
cnvogel
I have no idea if this is a reasonable price, but the mentioned product is a
self-contained measurement system in a ruggedized enclosure with built in
computer and software that identifies isotopes automatically. It is marketed
to "homeland security" type agencies, so expect it to have quite a sales-
margin :-)

If you'd want to be on the cheap side, there's a used Ge on eBay for $3k right
now, add a HV supply anda suitable ADC card for your PC and you can go
recording γ-spectra in no time, possibly on a $5k budget.

As you'll have to identify the isotopes yourself, check
<http://www.inl.gov/gammaray/catalogs/catalogs.shtml> for reference spectra.

------
mariuolo
I find a bit disturbing that the Italian press never mentioned the story.
Anyway the 'ndrangheta explanation (cheap disposal of hospital waste) more
credible than the international plot.

------
mmaunder
4476 words. IMO this is badly written. The article stalls at "That mix of
ubiquity and interchangeability makes the shipping container one of the most
radical developments in global commerce since World War II. The first
dedicated container ship was built in 1956, and virtually overnight the new
logistical approach transformed the cargo business..."

I'd guess an intern took over at that point, fired up wikipedia and started
filling in the other 4000 words.

~~~
westicle
Not sure why you're being downvoted. I got a similar impression - lots of
words, little pay-off.

~~~
jablan
Not only that (it would be OK if it was the only problem): the article is in a
form of a thriller-movie rather than a scientific (or popular science) article
- too many interspersed digressions, you have to read it until the very end to
get the basic facts (contrary to the "inverted pyramid" principle). I would
expect such an article to be broken down, with trivia such as details about
the container markings extracted to text boxes.

------
dbbo
My first thought was of the prologue level of Modern Warfare 1.

------
leanucci
TL;DR

------
nicwest
I was sad to see that 307703 was ripped to pieces and scrapped, it's like the
companion cube all over again :(

