Log in

View Full Version : The use of osmium tetroxide as a chemical weapon.


megalomania
May 2nd, 2004, 08:59 PM
I read a news report today that said those Pakistani individuals who were arrested a few weeks ago in England with the huge stockpile of ammonium nitrate were planning on adding osmium tetroxide to the explosive.

There is an article here: http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Investigation/poison_bomb_plot_040405-1.html

The only thing I knew osmium tetroxide was useful for was preparing vicenyl diols from alkenes. I am rather skeptical of its use in a bomb though. First things first, can it survive the high temperatures of an explosion unscathed? My guess is no as osmium tetroxide decomposes at higher temperatures to osmium dioxide. It does seem to have some uses for doping an explosive; it has a boiling point of 130 degrees C and is easily vaporizable well below that temperature.

I wonder what would be the ideal means of dispersion? Mix the OsO4 directly with the explosive, or place an explosive charge within a container of OsO4? I would have to vote on the latter as an inert diluent may decrease the performance of the explosive and give the osmium more chance to react during detonation. There is another article deriding its use here: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994863

It has a rather high vapor pressure, and it would be a persistent gas after detonation, especially in an enclosed space. I found a website that compares the toxicity of osmium tetroxide with some common chemical weapon agents. Their conclusion was, based on osmium tetroxide�s high vapor pressure it is more comparable to sarin nerve gas. The website is here: http://www.navyseals.com/community/articles/article.cfm?id=3313 although the story looks like it was ripped from here: http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/week/040413.htm

That website gives the lowest lethal concentration of osmium tetroxide as 0.1 mg per cubic meter. A single Kg of this stuff vaporized in a small area like a shopping mall would spread a death cloud throughout the facility that would persist for hours. Simply hosing it down with water would suffice to decontaminate the area, but those in the vicinity, and first responders would get the worst of it.

The greatest downside to using osmium is its great cost. Osmium is found along with platinum, and is considered a rare metal. The previously mentioned website gives some costs and availability data. That website also stated osmium tetroxide is routinely sold as a polymerized mixture in batches greater than 5 g to reduce its vaporization hazard. To this I say it would be foolish for anyone to purchase osmium tetroxide directly. Rather one should obtain osmium powder or an osmium ore and extract it themselves. Osmium is quite readily reacted to osmium tetroxide in the presence of oxygen.

The navy seals website correctly concludes that osmium tetroxide is more of an intellectual curiosity than a viable weapon. A small explosive device with a limited quantity of osmium tetroxide obtained from a laboratory would add an extra dimension of lethality, but a large device and massive quantities of osmium tetroxide would be uneconomical.

It is the thinking behind using this kind of chemical that throws the authorities. Osmium tetroxide is but one of thousands of chemicals that could increase the lethality of an explosive device considerably. I am just surprised it has taken them this long to come up with the idea of using a doping chemical. I suppose since regular military doctrines forbid using such weapons nobody caught on to the idea.

Perhaps a better idea would be to disperse the osmium tetroxide via heating instead of via an explosive. A chemical or electrical heat source could be used. Something as simple as a coffee maker with a pot full of the compound could be plugged in someplace crowded and no one would know until hours later.

vulture
May 3rd, 2004, 04:05 PM
Osmium tetroxide...Could you give the media something that sounds more chemical than that? They love it!

To me it's a load of bogus. Scaremongering, nothing more. A kg of osmium would buy you a few tons of explosive or allow you to produce a few liters of Sarin or Tabun.

And it's not like chem suppliers stock large quantities of it.

Arkangel
May 4th, 2004, 09:08 AM
To me, it was way too coincidental that this story came up the exact week that they were pushing the introduction of ID cards to the UK. It's a really controversial move, and if it wasn't staged, they certainly made the most of it. EVERY statement by a politician referring to the ID card scheme referred to this "plot" as being reason to go ahead with it.

What made it seem more bogus was them saying "a plot has been foiled", without actually producing any evidence, or charging anyone, or even detaining anyone (iirc).

Everything I read at the time suggested that this chemical had potentially harmful effects, but was too fragile to be weaponised.

Surely there are much cheaper, much more effective chemicals reasonably readily available? But "Osmium Tetroxide.....maaan that sounds some scary shit"

mrcfitzgerald
May 5th, 2004, 12:37 AM
I wouldn't be surprised if osmium tetroxide was able to survive explosive dissemination; I have an excellent patent reference, number 3,207,071, that provides wonderful data on the explosive dissemination of Ricin -a rather unstable toxin (Check Example II). Nevertheless, since the agent is rather expensive -I think an aerosol bomblet as detailed in patent number 3,492,944 is preferable for its dispersion. On a side note, why osmium tetroxide? It seems to me anyone with the capability to handle this also has the same ability to handle at least Ga(Tabun) nerve agent -which could be manufacture in much larger quantities, for a much smaller price.
Just a thought...

aikon
May 5th, 2004, 06:32 AM
Read this article about osmium tetroxide on "bbc news uk edition":http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3604857.stm

The last sentence in the article is the most important:"I would say this report sounds like it was dated 1 April."

kingspaz
May 5th, 2004, 11:15 AM
Would it matter if the OsO4 was decomposed upon detonation of the charge?

http://www.scescape.net/~woods/elements/osmium.html

IIRC all Os compounds are very toxic anyway.

nbk2000
May 5th, 2004, 07:38 PM
Lead salts would be much cheaper, and very easily made from tire weights or fishing lures, making osmium a moot issue, especially as the money could be better used for making even more lead bombs.

It wouldn't be very toxic, as such, but the contamination would require expensive remediation, as everyone knows just how "dangerous" lead is, especially to The Children. :rolleyes:

Throw in some lead salt with your explosive filler, maybe some asbestos fibers you can find in the pipe insulation of old factories, and a simple sweep up of the rubble becomes a hazmat cleanup with moonsuits at 100x the cost. :)

I've also found concentrated 2,4-D solution at an ag shop. It's like 30% 2,4-D in a solvent and is used for soil sterilization. Considering how 2,4-D becomes Dioxin upon heating in acidic conditions, it'd be ridiculously easy to use dioxin as a co-contaminant, making every bombed site a mini "Love Canal", with comiserate cleanup costs.

A bomb that costs you $100 to make, including the contaminate, costs $100,000 in cleanup, demolition of the targeted structure (probably more throughly than the original bomb) because of the contamination, and subsequent terror of your "dirty" bomb, "dirty" being properly defined (IMnonHO) as anything that contaminates with a hazardous substance that is not radioactive or a conventional NBC agent.

megalomania
May 6th, 2004, 01:07 AM
They probably chose osmium tetroxide because they would not have to make anything. These guys sound like they were trying to get everything through legit channels. That is in all probability what got them arrested as it tipped of the government.

Lead, or mercury, would be a top choice to contaminate the area. I am sure there are a number of commercial pesticides that could be employed. Banned pesticides can be purchased from third world suppliers who don't care if people die (Mexico, India, and Africa). There are a large number of second string organophosphorus compounds that may not be as deadly as VX or sarin, but they are deadly. The inclusion of any toxic chemical in a blast will get peoples attention because it has never been done yet.

NBK touched on a theory of mine, people care more for buildings than they do human life. Anything that contaminates a building requiring expensive cleanup or complete demolition will be percieved as worse. Would you want to be the guy working at the US mail facility that was contaminated with anthrax? The headquarters of the National Inquirer was on the real estate market before it was contaminated with anthrax. Price: $25,000,000. After the attack? Price: $1,500,000. Nobody wants it now...

Corona
May 6th, 2004, 07:48 AM
I doubt if there is much truth left in this so called �war on terror� or anything connected to it, the very least of which might be Osmium Tetroxide.

Case in point:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3674533.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3683721.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1850501.stm

I�m taking such alarmist news reports with a heavy pinch of salt these days. Its now a fashion to manufacture news rather than report it.

nbk2000
May 6th, 2004, 06:47 PM
The thought of contamination is enough to render property worthless, even if the traces of the contaminate are at the thresehold of detectablility and the second-hand smoke from your co-worker was 1,000x more likely to kill you.

People are cheap and easy to replace, infrastructure is neither. Attacking the infrastructure is much easier, more effective, and longer-lasting than the death of any number of people.

Kill the president of the US, and he'll be replaced within minutes and the country carries on.

Destroy the US stock exchange, with the people in it of course, and the world economy goes into a tailspin.