You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #62: Yeah and they said that about Hanford....N/T yourself. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
abqmufc Donating Member (590 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-11-11 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #39
62. Yeah and they said that about Hanford....N/T yourself.
Edited on Fri Mar-11-11 11:08 PM by abqmufc
Here a site for the data of Hanford releases......yeah all those people left for dead with cancer had NOTHING to worry about?

Please....
"Two grim facts underlie all the sobering information about the actual and potential harm Hanford poses to the environment.

Radioactive and chemical contamination has not and will not stay inside Hanford's boundaries.
Contamination will remain for hundreds of thousands of years beyond any memory of a place called Hanford.
What are the present threats?
1) Water Contamination
At least one third of Hanford's 177 huge high-level nuclear waste tanks, many as big as the capitol dome in Olympia, have leaked. In some areas technology from the 1950s is still being used to detect leaks, probably underestimating the extent of contamination. Almost all of the single-shell tanks are well beyond their design life, so more leaks are likely. Radioactive contaminants have reached the groundwater 200 feet below the surface and are on their way or have already reached the Columbia River (see map). In the last free-flowing US stretch of the Columbia flowing through Hanford, now the Hanford Reach National Monument, 70% of the fall chinook spawn each year. Over 300 miles of the Columbia River downstream from Hanford are threatened by the leaking tanks. The WA Department of Ecology notes that "aside from the environmental damage and health risk, the perception of the river being contaminated could devastate the market for northwest agricultural products."1

2) Atmospheric Contamination
Newspaper headlines in 1999, "Nuclear Blob Grows at Hanford,2 described a bulge in the radioactive crust on one of the huge waste tanks caused by a buildup of dangerously explosive hydrogen. While this threat was resolved, it is one of a variety of safety issues that have plagued Hanford tanks. These include flammable gasses, nuclear materials, and explosive chemicals. In 1957 in Siberia a high-level waste tank exploded, spreading a radioactive plume of 20 million curies 180 miles long, giving people estimated doses of .7 to 80 REM, and necessitating the relocation of well over 10,000 people.3 Collapsing tank domes or tank explosions that could spread radioactivity far beyond Hanford remain a genuine threat.

Fires at Hanford pose another real danger. In August 1984 and July 2000 raging sagebrush fires burned three-fifths of the Hanford area. The July 2000 fire burned three radioactive waste sites and stopped just short of some major waste sites.4 Afterwards plutonium was detected in nearby communities.

Earthquakes are an additional concern. Just a quarter mile from the Columbia River, two large swimming pool-like structures, the K-Basins, hold 80% of the DOE's stockpile of spent fuel rods. These storage basins have leaked in the past. If earthquakes cracked these structures, draining off the cooling water, the spent rods could spontaneously ignite, seriously polluting the atmosphere."

http://www.psr.org/chapters/washington/hanford /

When you consider tests on impacts where based on a white persons lifestyle and NOT the lifestyle of the 15 Tribes who used the Hanford Reach (and still today) as traditional hunting and fishing grounds, as well as gathering of herbs and medicine. Fish consumption tests were done on the average of a white person's consumption of fish....5 to 10 times less than that of a Tribal diet. Thus even the health impacts listed only look at the lower threshold and NOT the impact of Tribal peoples.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC