Supply Risk Learnings From the Litvinenko Radiation Poisoning
The fallout -- no pun intended -- from the Polonium poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko serves as a great proof point for the supply chain calamities we might face if there is an act of terrorism involving more than a tiny dosage of radiation targeted at a single individual. According to one report tracking the aftermath of the incident no one is taking anything for granted when it comes to public safety: "Following the announcement by British Airways (BA) that small radioactive traces had been found on two of its Boeing 767 aircraft, Britain's national carrier said it would contact more than 33,000 passengers in a radiation alert ... A third Boeing 767, grounded in Moscow after BA cancelled its return flight to London Wednesday, would remain at the Russian capital's airport until the position is clearer."
As I write, there are now 12 sites which are considered contaminated (including now a fourth airplane, according to CNN) due to the radiation poisoning. One wonders in a far greater catastrophe involving a nuclear terrorist attack (even a small "dumb" bomb that just locally spreads radioactive material) how much of our global supply chain will come to a screeching halt in the aftermath and investigation. And now that terrorist groups know the economic and political impact that even a small, targeted attack on a single person can bring, one wonders if they will be emboldened to deploy similar tactics sooner rather than later.
- Jason Busch
Tweet
TweetBacks
Not to make light of this nasty situation, especially when so little is known about what was done and by whom, but your thoughts bring to mind a presentation I saw some years ago by our old friend, Steve Rogers. Steve described in detail all of the safe guards and redundant systems in place at a P&G facility to overcome supply chain risks and failures so that, short of nuclear holocaust, the production lines would continue to churn out Pringles.
I was duly impressed, as any Pringle lover would be, by P&G’s mastery of its supply chain. (I’m not sure what exactly goes into Pringles, but given the amazing efficiency of P&G, I assume Pringles contains the same ingredients as Folgers and Huggies). But I could not help thinking, “what if they made the Pringles but couldn’t deliver them to the store?”
Some time later I immersed myself in RFID technology, drawn by its promise in enabling effective, efficient and, most importantly, secure supply chains. At that time, nearly all of the RFID development in the US was driven by WalMart. So it was that after attending conferences, reading reports and following the news daily, I came to the conclusion that WalMart is pushing millions of dollars in RFID technology development for one purpose only: to find the Pringles. Their logistics system reports that the Pringles were shipped from P&G, their warehouse system reports that the Pringles were shipped from the distribution center and their point of sale system says that the Pringles are in the back store room. But the stock clerks can’t find the Pringles, shelves are getting thin and hordes of shoppers are cornering the manager demanding more Pringles.
Related to supply chain security is interesting news this week of work being done by RFID vendor, Savi Technology for Metro, Germany’s uber-retailer. Containers are fitted with RFID tags as they leave Chinese manufacturers. They are tracked through the port of Hong Kong to the port of Amsterdam and then tracked overland as they are trucked into Metro’s distribution centers. These are active tags (they contain their own power supply) which report the containers’ identity and location. However, it’s a short step to connect sensors to the tag that can report any number of events, such as atmospheric changes, electrical charges, vibration, etc.