New Compound Quickly Disables Chemical Weapons 52
sciencehabit writes: In 2013, the Syrian military allegedly launched sarin gas rockets into a rebel-held town, killing hundreds. After diplomats brokered a deal to eradicate the weapons, international organizations began the dangerous job of destroying them. One roadblock to chemical weapons disposal is that heat and humidity quickly break down enzymes that can disable the deadly chemicals. Now, researchers have developed a highly stable compound that can inactivate nerve agents like sarin in a matter of minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if it could be distributed globally. I mean like an epi pen or even in a sensor in a subway that would automatically use the stuff if sarin or some other chemical gas is detected.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if it could be distributed globally. I mean like an epi pen or even in a sensor in a subway that would automatically use the stuff if sarin or some other chemical gas is detected.
Yes, this should be a top priority, along with installing a titanium shield on everyone's house, just in case they are hit by a meteor. We can fund these programs by reducing spending on silly frivolities like vaccinations, nutrition, and literacy.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know abut a top priority or taking funds from other programs but I think it is reasonable to have some level of protection should this turn out to be cheap and easily administered. We already have chemical sensors in subways after the Tokyo incident, we also already have fire suppression systems. The chemical sensors were in the works ever since the subway in Tokyo in 1995 and rushed into service after 9/11. It's been expanding ever since. [nytimes.com]
It's not like it would be a major retrofit or some sort of ex
Re: (Score:2)
And yet we already have the chemical sensors in place and more being installed. But lets ignore all that for some stupid reason that amounts to you basically thinking you know it all and sit on our hands when something could be cheap and easily integrated into existing systems and possibly save lives or lowers suffering from effects. But hey, you know it all right?
Re: (Score:2)
OR...a titanium dioxide shield on your house, to raise its albedo and counteract your family's carbon footprint:
http://www.homedepot.com/p/BEH... [homedepot.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if it could be distributed globally. I mean like an epi pen or even in a sensor in a subway that would automatically use the stuff if sarin or some other chemical gas is detected.
Yes, this should be a top priority, along with installing a titanium shield on everyone's house, just in case they are hit by a meteor. We can fund these programs by reducing spending on silly frivolities like vaccinations, nutrition, and literacy.
Or you could spend less on the gas masks you have currently in all major subway stations, such as in Seoul [quora.com]. Not everyone of us lives as far from the enemy as you do.
Re: (Score:2)
The sticky bit is stopping it from entering people via their skin or lungs, eyes, etc. when the toxin is already dispersed.
In short, this wonderful new compound is utterly useless.
Re: (Score:2)
The destruction of a chemical weapon is rather trivial, when you can conveniantly dunk the toxin in a vat of acid, or base, or solvent or whatever. Dioxins burn really well, for example.
Maybe, but spraying acid everywhere is not really a viable decontamination strategy. This catalyst is not for destroying stockpiles, but for helping with decontamination. Previously they were using an enzyme that is hard to deploy, and they've replaced that enzyme with an engineered catalyst that does the same chemistry, albeit less efficiently. Hopefully it will get better with further refinement.
Re: (Score:2)
So, they already had a way. But it was "hard". And now they have another way but it is "less efficient" (i.e. probably costs more). How is any of this news?
reading must be very difficult for you (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
Because it is *new* and promising and interesting. No one claimed *perfect*.
It's a common lament on /. but if you don't want to hear about stuff until it's on the shelves in your local store stop wasting time reading /. and other information outlets, else stop whining when you get an early heads up.
Really.
Tell me what potential life-saving breakthrough *you* made today, please.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Someone slips on a clear liquid, whangs their head on the store shelf on the way down, then has their head impact the nice hard floor. Person dies.
Or, a parent slips on the unseen liquid and falls on their three year old walking next to them, snapping the kids neck and crushing them under the falling weight.
Yes, clean up in aisle two can be potentially life saving.
Re: (Score:2)
The clean up we are actually talking about would be measured in micrograms.
Kill it with Fire! (Score:4, Interesting)
The destruction of intact chemical weapons is not very hard, you just need a hot incinerator. It's a little more complicated than that, but there are incinerators that are made to do this (IIRC one was deployed to Syria on a ship a few years ago to do this).
But, if what they are really talking about is decontamination of areas where these weapons were deployed, that is a much harder problem. You can't just rinse this stuff off because that just moves the problem. You have to got to chemically break down the chemical. If you have lots of masony and textiles contaminated, forget it, you'll need to kill that with fire too.
Bullshit (Score:2)
The first and crucial step was high-temperature hydrolysis with sodium hydroxide. The remaining soup is harmless enough to be dumped.
Government researchers hate her (Score:5, Funny)
This one weird trick, discovered by a housewife, breaks down sarin gas in just minutes a day!
Who used sarin? (Score:5, Informative)
Summary says: "Syrian military allegedly launched sarin gas rockets".
It is not that obvious who used chemical weapons. We have evidence rebells used sarin [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Other applications? (Score:2)
Any oxidizer should do ... (Score:2)