RBC Shield: The Dangers, The Patent, The Markets
•
1 like•226 views
A summary of the radiological, biological & chemical threats from terrorist attacks or industrial accidents; how the RBC Shield, LLC patented product works to protect homeowners, businesses, governement agencies, schools, medical facilities and others at risk; plus details of the patent licensing offer.
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (14)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
RBC Shield: The Dangers, The Patent, The Markets
- 1. "...unless the world community acts decisively and with great urgency, it is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used in a terrorist attack somewhere in the world by the end of 2013.“ Congressional Report: The World At Risk, December 3, 2008 Patent Licensing of Protective Technologies
- 2. 2 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 3. 3 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 4. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G 4
- 5. 5 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 6. 6 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 7. “The two most important issues for survivors of a nuclear detonation are shelter and decontam- ination. The importance of sheltering-in-place, preferably inside a sealed room, for at least the first 48 hours after a nuclear detonation cannot be overemphasized.” Current statement on U.S. State Department’s web site EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 8. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G 8
- 9. 9 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 10. Dr. Tara O’Toole, physician and director of the Center for Biosecurity, University of Pittsburg Medical Center, July 31, 2006 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 11. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G 11
- 12. 12 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 13. 13 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 14. A survey of 80 experts surveyed in June, 2006 predicted that the chance of an attack upon the U.S. with a radiological, biological, or chemical weapon is 50% in the next 5 years and 70% in the next decade. CNN.com EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 15. 15 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 16. INADEQUATE AND DANGEROUS EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 17. Protection From Today’s Threats EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G 17
- 18. 18 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 19. 19 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 20. 20 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 21. 21 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 22. 22 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 23. Select to view diagram EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 24. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 25. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 26. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 27. Select to view diagram EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 28. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 29. Select to view diagram EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 30. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 31. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 32. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING 32
- 33. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 34. 34 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 35. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G 35
- 36. 36 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 37. Reactor Distance Number of Cities Population Within 10 Miles: 629 4,877,588 Within 50 Miles: 15,326 166,324,885 37 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 38. White dots = Nuclear Power Plants 38 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 39. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 40. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING 40
- 41. 41 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 42. 42 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 43. 43 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 44. 44 EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING G
- 45. (In millions) EXEC EXEC THREATS THREATS PROBS PROBS PATENT PATENT MARKETS MARKETS LICENSE LICENSE CLOSING CLOSING 45
- 46. EXEC THREATS PROBS PATENT MARKETS LICENSE CLOSING 46
Editor's Notes
- A copy of my background and experience is in your folder.
- SECURITY AT U.S. NUCLEAR PLANTS : Increased vulnerability to attack and subsequent release of radiation due to inadequate design & security Design: Regulations do not require protection against attacks by aircraft, boat, or trucks Design: Not designed to withstand attack by large airliner loaded with fuel Half the “Force-on-force” (EXPLAIN) exercises conducted in 2000 & 2001 resulted in failures; New force-on-force testing procedures put in place in 2004, but critics contend Major weakness: Company that guards the plants conducts the tests & only tested once every 3 yearsCLICK: Guard asleep (Photos of 20 over 3 months in 2007)9/11 Commission Report: Nuclear power plants on al-Qaeda planner Kahlid Sheik Mohamed’s original target list.CLICK: RISK OF DIRTY BOMB USE INCREASED BY AVAILABLITY OF MATERIALS TO MAKE THEMMaterials from former Soviet block countries poorly securedForeign plants & research facilities significantly less secure than those in U..S. (Linton Brooks, Director National Nuclear Security Administration: 1/3 of reactors outside U.S. Lack security upgrades needed to prevent theft of materials that terrorists could use to build RDD [March 23, 2006]Medical equipment, industrial gauges, well-loggingCLICK: ONCE MATERIALS ARE OBTAINED, GETTING THEM INMTO THE U.S. IS NOT A PROBLEM481 cases of nuclear and radiological materials smuggled abroad 2005: GAO smuggled material for 2 dirty bombs past Customs at 2 US land border crossings (Cesium-137)U.S. & Canada border extremely porous (45 seconds average time to examine entrant)60% of U.S. ports don’t have radiation detectorsCLICK: NUCLEAR FACILITIES ARE NOT AS SAFE AS WE WOULD LIKE TO THINKIn 1973 alone, 861 “abnormal events” in the country’S 42 power plants; 12 involved release of radioactivity above permissible levels (THERE ARE NOW 103 IN u.s.; 303 outside U.S.)Aging facilities around the world; plant life-span:Chernobyl, 3-mile Island, Severesk (SEE LIST IN FOLDER)And THEN---(PAUSE)CLICK:
- And THEN– let’s not forget about the nuclear reactors in earthquake zones: 12 in zones that are rated High to Probable risk for earthquakesCLICK—Look at California!
- This is a current statement on the State Department’s web-site. Please read it carefully.CLICK[Activate highlight of “sheltering in place”]—There is a critical fact that is seldom discussed, particularly within the government -- The ABSOLUTE necessity of being able to shelter-in-place. Whether the risk from radiation exposure comes from a terrorist incident, an accident, or an earthquakeIf it was talked about, the government might be forced to acknowledge the complete inadequacy of a shelter-in-place option for the vast majority of the U.S. population – and it’s no different around the world. And if they did talk about it, it might create pressure to do something about it..And the same concept applies to biological & chemical hazards – does anyone here have a shelter-in-place capability? For what hazards?CLICK to go to next slide
- The interview with Dr. O’Toole was published in the Washington PostSo now let’s take a look at the threats posed by toxic chemicals, whether they are those used in industry, or those intended a toxic warfare agents
- POINT ONEThere are approximately 1,5000 facilities in the U.S. alone that produce, use or store hazardous chemicalsThese 15,000 facilities produce more than the “threshold amounts” of chemicals;The chemicals in these 15,000 locations have been identified by EPA as posing a significant risk to human health & the environment if accidently released.DHS 3,400 facilitiesOf the 15,000 DHS has identified 3,400 that pose the greatest hazard to human life & healthDHS Authority April 2007: Congress gave DHS the authority to regulate “covered” high-risk chemical facilities (produce over certain amounts of “chemicals of interest”)-published Nov 07 Facilities must prepare Security Vulnerability Assessments (SVA) & Develop & implement Site Security Plans (SSP) that satisfy the identified risk-based performance standardsDHS will inspect each covered facility.. SVA & SSP must be approved by DHSFocus is preventing terrorist attack—NOT preventing an accident
- Participants in the survey included: Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf Former Defense Secretaries William Cohen & Frank Carlucci Former CIA Director James Woosley Former National Security Advisor Richard Allen Former Iraq chief weapons inspector Richard Butler Former Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot David Kay, who led the hunt for WMD in Iraq after fall of Saddam Hussein
- INTEGRATED SOLUTION: Some attempts, very expensive. Certainly won’t work in may situations.CLICKClick 2 times to see two examples
- Whether it’s radiological, biological, or chemical risk, the security and safety measures are full of holes and generally weak.And the protective measures available to the public thus far have been two:CLICK (for pictures) Plastic sheeting/duct tape OR EvacuationCLICK: (STOP & Inadequate & Dangerous)Now, for the first time, there is a realistic and affordable solution. The RBC Shield patent provides it.CLICK to go to next slide.
- So how can RBC Shield’s patent provide protection from so many dangerous or even lethal threats. We are going to take a look at how the potential product is made, what it’s unique features are, what it does.
- USE PROTOTYPES TO DEMONSTRATE POINTS
- USE PROTOTYPES TO DEMONSTRATE POINTS
- DISCUSS NEED FOR MOLDING & THE FEATURES
- DISCUSS NEED FOR MOLDING & THE FEATURES
- CLICK: To start tiles moving togetherCLICK: To start caulking sequence
- DISCUSS NEED FOR MOLDING & THE FEATURES
- DISCUSS NEED FOR MOLDING & THE FEATURES
- When installed properly the tiles will provide calculatable, measurable protection from radiation exposure and allow sheltering-in-place for extended periods of time. Based upon an inverse-square formula, you see two examples of the protective capabilities of the patented tiles. The difference between the two is based upon the intensity of the radioactive substance. In addition, when installed properly with caulking, the tiles will allow indefinite sheltering-in-place during chemical or biological incidents. Caveats (DISCUSS)
- EASY TO INSTALLPeel-off adhesive backing or VelcroMinimal tools needed only if doing a ceiling installMODULAR SCALABILITYTiles can be constructed in any manageable size. Examples:One foot square2 foot square2 ft X 4 ftLead thickness can be reduced or increased to accommodate distances away from nuclear power plants or from likely targets around major metropolitan areas.REMOVABLE OR PERMANENT CONSTRUCTION -- DISCUSSNO RADIATION LEAKAGENo radiation leakage since seams of tiles overlap & no anchoring holes for fastenersINTEGRATED PROTECTIONOne system does it all—Complete Radiological, Biological & Chemical risk protection in one simple package
- These are the most obvious world-wide targets:Corporate & government offices, particularly those in high-profile locationsU.S.: Washington, D.C., New York, San FranciscoOverseas: Tel Aviv, London, Paris, Rome, CairoNEW: Possible retrofit mobile command centers for first respondersStatic military or intelligence locations HomeownersDevelopersAn attractive option for new home buyers
- Two primary target populations to which marketing the radiological protective features can be directed:Populations of Major metropolitan areas who are are potential targets of “dirty bomb” or a RDD Inhabitants of Emergency Planning Zones DISCUSS EPZ – DEFINEMARKET STATISTICSMajor metropolitan areas : Top 19 = 91.2 million EPZ ZonesCLICK: 10 MILE ZONESCLICK: 50-MILE ZONES
- As we’ve noted before, there are 103 nuclear reactors in the U.S. But there are another 303 Reactors outside the U.S. Each of the white dots represents a nuclear reactor. I don’t know how many would be in “EPZ” zones.BUT: Consider this:CLICKThe population of the European Union alone is 490 million. These people reside in an area that is approximately half the size of the U.S.AND THEY REMEMBER CHERNOBYL!
- This is a depiction of the population distribution within the U.S. The major metropolitan areas area shown, any of which would be likely targets of a biological weapons attack.And of course, once the next incident happens, there will be a clamor from other areas for protection.91.2 million targets JUST IN THE U.S. How many world-wide? I haven’t calculated that yet.CLICK [to advance to next slide] : Let’s talk about chemical risk market.
- This might be the biggest market yet.This map graphically shows where the highest number of chemical plants are that are located near communities of at least 1 million people.
- As mentioned previously, there are 15,000 plants in the U.S. alone that produce, use, or store hazardous chemicals. Of these 1/3 have an “area of vulnerability” surrounding them which could put more than 10,000 people at risk. (50 million minimum at risk) 700 of them have an area of vulnerability in which each could effect more than 100,000. 70 million 123 plants where there at least 1,000,000 people in each that could be at riskObviously, many of these zones overlap. Nonetheless, by any calculation the potential market is huge.An that is just in the U.S. alone. Does anyone remember Bhopal, India?