Talk:David Hahn

The second sentence is grammatically incorrect, it has no predicate. Wikidiego 19:57, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Why?

WHY in the world was he trying to build a toxic nuclear reactor? --Menchi 01:35, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

Read the article. He was trying, supposedly, to solve all the world's energy problems. He also didn't really realize how dangerous it was. (And most of us have an inflated idea of how dangerous radiation is, compared to, say, heavy metal poisoning - have you ever handled mercury? I have) --Andrew 01:56, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

Why did my father and his buddies make radios when they were kids? Why did they also make explosives (hardly more than a couple firecrackers from what I recall of the stories)? They were interested. They were smart enough and had the know how. They never used this knowledge for any nefarious acts, they just wanted to do these things to learn. I doubt that this kid ever thought that'd he'd have something substantial in his shed. I doubt that he ever thought it would do much harm and if the EPA hadn't stepped in, he probably would have disposed of it all once his curiousity was sated.

And yes, I've played with mercury too. Wicked cool stuff! Dismas 06:40, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Although it's eluded to in the article, in the biography it states he wanted to collect all the elements in the periodic table, hence his wish to obtain uranium. The book is an excellent read, by the way. Andromeda321 01:49, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

What is not compulsory is forbidden, what is not compulsory is forbidden...

David Hahn had already earned the Boy Scouts of America merit badge in Atomic Energy and apparently had enough genuine interest in the subject to want to create a nuclear fission chain reaction on his own.

So he called people up in the US Department of Energy, told them what he wanted to do, and they told him where to look for what he needed to have.

Nuclear reactors are no more "toxic" than many chemical reactor vessels. In both cases, the skill and knowledge of the operator is what determines the "toxicity" of the reactor.

In Hahn's case, the US Environmental Protection Agency was probably guilty of grandstanding about what it was doing, and possibly even slandering Hahn. The radionuclide burden of what Hahn had assembled out of junked smoke detectors and gas lantern mantles couldn't have measured over a few grams, total, and yet the EPA was squawking over Hahn having assembled enough radioactivity to contaminate the entire town he lived in.

What they didn't say is that the jewelry counter in an average K-Mart or Wal-Mart has about the same amount of radionuclides. How d'ya think the little dots by the numbers in a wristwatch glow in the dark? It's because they have tritium - radioactive hydrogen, very evil stuff if you get enough in you - in the paint on those dots. You'd have to spend a LOT of time scraping those dots into a test tube and then carrying off the tritium in order to get into trouble.

Likewise, to contaminate anything but David Hahn's backyard, every bit of what he'd collected in the way of radioactives would have had to have been ground into fine dust and then sprayed over the city by crop duster aircraft. But the EPA never mentioned this, because then they might have had to explain to Mr. Hahn's Representative and Senators why they were conducting a huge raid to contain a tiny amount of contamination.

As far as I'm concerned, Hahn's motive was purely scientific - he wanted to understand first hand how fission chain reactions work. In other words, this kid was doing what Enrico Fermi tried in one of the squash courts of the University of Chicago in 1942. Fermi got a lot of recognition and awards, while Hahn got hassled.

Hahn might have been guilty of not contacting his state's regulatory agency for radiation, but he'd already contacted the US Department of Energy and not only did they say they thought his project would be legal, they gave him hints on where to find what he needed. I'd say that showed a good faith effort on Mr. Hahn's part to make sure he was working within the bounds of the law.

This is not exactly true. If you read the magazine article, what you find is that he was measuring radiation many houses away. This is not, of course, because the radiation travelled that far; it is because he was tracking radioactive dust all over the place.

It is indeed true that you can produce chemical contamination, if sufficiently determined; I myself made chlorine gas for a science project in high school. I paid no particular attention to good ventilation, and the containment system was, frankly, terrible. However, it is a real challenge to produce long-lived chemical contamination that is easily spread.

Not really. Dioxins are made as a byproduct of polychlorinated biphenyl production, or when PCBs are used as coolants in electrical transformers for years, or when nitrophenyl compounds are used to make herbicides. Several incidents in which industrial mishaps or fraudulent disposal or waste oils have distributed small quantities of dioxins are on record - in the Seveso mishap, an explosion at the ICMESA plant caused the spread of a few kilograms of dioxin in the basin between Milan and Lake Como, killing 3,000 pets and farm animals and causing 193 cases of chloracne (which is, according to a prominent toxicologist, what is wrong with Ukranian President Vitaly Yurchenko). Another chemical plant explosion, this one in the Netherlands, released less than a kilogram and made a couple dozen people ill.

Quantities of radioactive material are best measured in Becquerels, not in grams; using this measure, David Hahn's accumulation was certainly much greater than a jewelry counter (since one of the many ways he accumulated radioactive materials was by scraping them off (many) gunsights). More importantly, in a jewelry counter, the radioactive material is nicely encapsulated and tied down; David Hahn was grinding, scraping, and chemically purifying the stuff, which got it all over the place.

Finally, of course, there is the true fact in your argument: people are unjustifiably afraid of radiation. Even if you accept the hotly debated linear no-threshold model of radiation hazard, people are worried way out of proportion to the actual danger. This is made worse by the fact that tiny levels of radioactive contamination are readily detected, while much more dangerous levels of chemical contamination are often undetectable. Compare, for example, the Chernobyl accident and the Bhopal disaster. --Andrew 23:24, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

Bullshit. The Chernobyl area (Pripjaty city and beyond) will be uninhabitable for many generations. Children suffer cancer hunders of miles away. Chemical pollution is possible to eradicate afterwards, because any molecule can be broken down with sufficient effort. In contrast radioactivity comes from the elements (isotopes) and so you cannot do anything about it. Even if you take the radwaste away and hide it under granite mountains, it will keep radiating massively for hundreds or thousands of years.

Americans should not dismiss the severity of Scale 7 Chernobyl disaster, because they are not living here in central-eastern Europe. There is no limit to human stupidity, not just in Chernobyl, but in America an early BWR reactor was blown up by a homicidal-suicidal operator over the wife cheating him.

As for the original poster reciting the ultra-liberal mantra, you shall remember that your freedoms do NOT cover hurting other's freedoms or their right to live. Hahn did hurt his neighbours and I think the wiki article should list him as a terrorist, because what he built was a dirty bomb in effect. Who is going to pay the medical expenses exposed people may incur later in their lives due to his radiactive pollution? Even the lead he used is a very dangerous metal and almost totally banned in Europe already. Not even fishing rod accessories can use it any more.

How is Hahn better than the shoe bomber? You are a terrorist notbecause of your intentions, but because you instill terror in people with your actions. And he did.

Commenting on the above unsigned post submitted from an Hungarian proxy on December 7, 2005, Hahn could hardly be designated as a terrorist unless some intent to intimidate or coerce people by instilling terror has been indicated. I have seen no such accusations in Hahn's case. meco 10:17, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

"Even the lead he used is a very dangerous metal and almost totally banned in Europe already. Not even fishing rod accessories can use it any more."

too much BS

It's been pointed out that the caustic chemicals in batteries (including batteries in smoke detectors) can be used for extracting drugs from over the counter medicines, and that amphetamine abuse often leads to open sores on the skin. Hahn might have had non-radiological uses for the stolen smoke alarms.

Greenlit on Fark

Watch this page guys. It's been greenlit on Fark, it could be a trap. - Hahnchen 00:09, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Merit badge

was an Eagle Scout candidate who had previously earned a merit badge in Atomic Energy after years of basement chemistry tinkering that included small explosions.

This makes it sound like the Atomic Energy merit badge had something to do with the explosions. I earned my Atomic Energy merit badge probably just a few years after this fellow, and it basically involved reading some stuff and talking about it with a merit badge counselor. No chemistry. Someone should invesigate exactly what the requirements were whenever he took it, and clear that sentence up.

I've looked over the requirements for the Atomic Energy merit badge (which, btw, has been superceded by the Nuclear Science badge as of 2005). They can be found here: http://www.orau.org/ptp/collection/medalsmementoes/boyscoutbadge.htm For the most part they seem to involve learning about the history and some of the mechanics involved (like making models of atoms and whatnot). There is a section where you have to do three out of ten projects. Most involve visiting somewhere and explaining what you saw there, though a few are more hands on (using/making a geiger counter, planting irradiated seeds, and, most interestingly, building a model of a nuclear reactor), but none of them nescessitates anything that explodes. I think, however, from summaries of the Ken Silverstein biography, that David did probably blow a few things up, possibly in projects related to the merit badge. The sentence should probably be changed to read something like "was an Eagle Scout candidate who had previously earned a merit badge in Atomic Energy, and had experimented for years in basement chemistry tinkering that included small explosions." However, I'm not totally sure of this, so I plan to wait for someone with more experience (and knowledge of the situation; i.e. someone who read the biography) to second the edit. - BaKanale 17:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

On the topic of sensationalism

The Environmental Protection Agency, having designated Hahn's mother's property as a Superfund hazardous materials cleanup site

Was this site really superfund? I could not find it in the EPA superfund NPL, CERCLIS, or archive database for 1994-1995 or oakland county. Would prefer someone with more experience with EPA second this. - Eekthorp 04:31, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't able to find a superfund site that would match this story, either. The only one in Commerce, MI is for "Venture Rim Products", which is contaminated with "methylene diphenyl disocyanate". Doing a search for radioactive sites in MI doesn't seem to turn up anything close to what was described here. [1] Wyoskier 04:48, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

The book says that Jodi Traub, who was in charge of Superfund then, authorized action. I think the problem here is that Superfund has an emergency response component which came into play, rather than the long-term remedial sites program. I'll modify accordingly. --Dhartung | Talk 01:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

No, wait, here it is: Union Lake Radiation Site, with EPA# MI0001091214. --Dhartung | Talk 02:45, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

City

It is still not understood if David performed this experiment in Clinton Township, MI or Commerce Township, MI. Does anyone have evidence from the book that can be used to substantiate this? There is a Golf Manor in Commerce Township, but it does not have a course at its enterance, it is across the street. 24.180.202.72 06:43, 24 April 2006 (UTC) 4-24-06

The answer seems to be (according to the book) that his father lived in Clinton Township, but his mother lived in Commerce Township, and that's where the potting shed was. His scout troop, school, and much of his collecting activity took place in Clinton, but the bulk of his experiments were in Commerce. --Dhartung | Talk 23:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Not "The" Fermilab

I work at Fermilab, and while it is "The Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory", the abbreviated form is just "Fermilab", not "The Fermilab", nor even "the Fermilab". I'm making the change in the article. 67.187.105.209 21:28, 15 August 2006 (UTC) Jon Wilson

Thanks! (With a change this minor, though, a note in the edit summary (as you did) is usually sufficient.) --Dhartung | Talk 22:37, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Refused to be tested at least 2 times

Anyone know why he refused to be tested? Salad Days 21:11, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious as well

"a breeder reactor was actually successfully (and safely) built by two University of Chicago students"

That sounds like a bit of an exaggeration to me, and the website linked doesn't even claim that they built a breeder reactor. It says they built a plutonium-producing reactor. I'm guessing that they used a neutron source to bombard uranium and produce plutonium (that's how plutonium was first discovered). Saying "breeder reactor" implies a much bigger beast, where a critical mass of nuclear fuel is used for fission and the neutrons that come out from the reaction are used to produce the plutonium. Itub 18:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Inventor?

Nothing in this article constitutes an invention afaik. A Wiki search didnt turn up any claim of him inventing anything, so I'm wondering why this article is tagged 'american inventors' Tabby 08:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

In his mugshot, his face is covered with sores which investigators claim are from exposure to radioactive materials

I read through the linked articles and nowhere does it claim the investigators says the sores are from radiocative materials. Can someone confirm this?

And there is nothing in the Thorium article to indicate it would cause such sores.