Chemical weapons disposal

The remediation of chemical weapons is that complex of procedures to inactivate as much as possible,
these toxic compounds. Over the years' 70, it was decided to sink the drums containing toxic dangerous
(nerve seized by Nazi Germany) in the oceanic trenches, pretending to ignore the water
inevitably corrode containers and that these toxic s'inattiveranno very slowly in water, with the
consequences that can well imagine. The operations that are performed to restore the land, premises,
the towns, the materials and the strategic nodes contaminated by chemical agents are complex,
consuming, and not always perfectly achievable. Their placement is done only for the aggressive and persistent for those semi-evergreen, by physical processes (heat), mechanical (removal or
cover with earth, sand, etc.. contaminated soil), chemical (with substances, ie, that react
chemically with the aggressive, making it inert, such as lime). Nowadays, chemical weapons
have now become too ineffective against an army technologically equipped, and have,
In addition, excessive drawbacks of tactical: they can come back to haunt those who use them (poor selectivity);
also make the soil attached hardly employable in the near future. In short, the use of
chemical weapons is a little too specific, as it seems to present no counter only
as a means of mass extermination in respect of defenseless people (extermination of the Kurds to Halaiba,
Northern Iraq, 1988). In fact, although the majority of chemical weapons in possession of the United
States and the countries belonging to the Soviet Union dissolved, it is believed that there are at least 15 countries
the world (many of which are ruled by ruthless dictators, especially in the Middle East) are currently
engaged in military programs that provide for the 'use of these weapons. Other countries are facing
serious problems due to the presence on their territory of unexploded remnants dating back to the countless wars
this century (it is estimated that in China alone, are dispersed 500000-1000000 chemical munitions) and
many soils impregnated with chemical agents are still unsuitable for crops (even seventy years
distance, as in Verdun, France). The eventual disposal of stockpiles of chemical weapons has
mainly problems of a technical nature. If these weapons can also be implemented with technologies
relatively simple, when any country is endowed with a minimum of chemical industry if they can
easy cater not just as simple technologies are needed to destroy them in
conditions of absolute safety for the operators, for the populations, and the environment. It often has to
dealing with massive quantities of chemical warheads sunk in the depths of the ocean, or placed in non-
unspecified "dumps", which must, first, be localized and, therefore, the retrieved
tested before they are corroded. Nor can recycle for peaceful purposes a chemical warhead, unlike
nuclear energy. One possible method of disposal very expensive, moreover, is that of the "bubble
fire. "It is of an open burning (therefore, still a explosion), in the presence
of excess fuel such as to produce very high temperatures, of the order of 2000 ° C, which
ensure the chemical decomposition of aggressive. This method has been employed in the aftermath
Gulf War of 1991 to destroy the chemical potential of Iraq, but, even if the operation
has run ended quickly and without any incident, it has very limited conditions (what
it was possible to do in the desert is not remotely feasible in countries with high population density and under
the effective control of an attentive public; indeed it is often not easy even the only transport
of these materials in places unfit for their destruction). Also, keep in mind the perennial problem
Sword of Damocles, or the release of their lethal contents. The destruction, then, can not,
of course, take place by simple explosion, as is the headboard affiliated.