Hanford, WA Tests Find Plutonium In Fish, Mulberry Trees

[abqmufc]

"SEATTLE (ENS), JUNE 15, 2005, - Radioactive contamination in public areas surrounding the Hanford Nuclear Site in Richland, Washington is higher and more geographically widespread than previously thought, according to a report today from a government watchdog group and a chemical data firm.

The Government Accountability Project (GAP) and Boston Chemical Data Corporation issued a study that includes the first reports of plutonium in clams and fish in the Columbia River.

The report includes evidence that radiation levels in mulberry trees are higher than previously reported, and that strontium-90 has entered the ecosystem in high levels.

"This is hard evidence that points to past Department of Energy reports as being inadequate to protect the people of southwest Washington and northern Oregon," said Tom Carpenter, GAP Nuclear Oversight Campaign Director."

<SNIP>

"The 586 square mile Hanford Site is located along the Columbia River in southeastern Washington state. A plutonium production complex with nine nuclear reactors and processing facilities, Hanford played a pivotal role in the nation's defense for more than 40 years, beginning in the 1940s with the Manhattan Project.

Today, under the direction of the U.S. Department of Energy, Hanford is engaged in the world's largest environmental cleanup project, "with a number of overlapping technical, political, regulatory, financial and cultural issues," the Hanford Office of River Protection states.

The Hanford Site includes more than 50 million gallons of high-level liquid waste in 177 underground storage tanks, 2,300 tons of spent nuclear fuel, 12 tons of plutonium in various forms, about 25 million cubic feet of buried or stored solid waste, and about 270 billion gallons of groundwater contaminated above drinking water standards, spread out over about 80 square miles, more than 1,700 waste sites, and about 500 contaminated facilities, according to Hanford officials."



http://www.rense.com/general66/dms.htm

[xchrom]

1. recommend

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. Plutonium which is in no way associated to the current events in Japan

(From the timing, people might get the mistaken impression that it's fallout from Japan.)

[abqmufc]

5. WRONG - MOX fuel is a mix of Uranium and Plutonium

Also look at the report, it talks of elements that are found in Japan like cesium.

[OKIsItJustMe]

6. Right, the same elements

However, how did they get to where they were found? Did they float there from Japan?

With all of the irrational fears on the West Coast of the US regarding fallout from the events in Japan, posting this story (in my opinion) is simply irresponsible fear-mongering.

These elements are a serious problem, which we in the US caused.

[abqmufc]

8. My point in bringing this to the attention of people is show there are risks in the USA despite....

the media claims of there is no risk in the USA from our nuclear industry...or if there is/was it was Three Mile Island. Unfortunately that is innacrruate.

I am not making an link to Japan, nor I am I attempting to have a 'pissing contest' of which is worse. My attempt is to educate people on the impacts of the nuclear era in the boundaries of the United States of America. It is not limited to Three Mile Island and any possible impact of what we are seeing in Japan. See it how you want, but ignorance to the reality of our nuclear era does not allow us to make informed decisions. This may show "we've lasted 50 years with all the waste and thousands are not dying (just hundreds)." Take it how you'd like.

[OKIsItJustMe]

9. Then, may I suggest making your aims clear?

Given the timing, the headline, “Hanford, WA Tests Find Plutonium In Fish, Mulberry Trees,” rather implies that plutonium has wafted its way to the US from Japan, and is landing in trees and the water.

Perhaps, something like, “Hanford, WA Tests Find Plutonium (from US Nuclear activities) In Fish, Mulberry Trees.”

[abqmufc]

10. The rule of D-Now is to give the title of the article.....

so yes, your point is valid. However when I've altered a headline before in the subject line, the D-now moderators have stated it must be change......not sure what to do, I expect folks to read an article. Maybe I expect too much for the human race...maybe the human race needs to step up to the plate and begin using their brains and reading the info and not just headlines. If anyone opens the article they'll see the date June 15, 2005. The article, study was also put into a subject category (Environment/Energy) and NOT in the Recent Events for that very reason, it is an old study which shows US impacts that already existed AND gives answers as to 'what are the (longterm) impacts of a nuclear accident.'

I see your point, not sure what to do though....

[OKIsItJustMe]

11. I've never had a problem with the moderators when I add parenthetical annotations to a headline

Especially to lend clarity (you'll notice them in a number of my postings.)

[AtheistCrusader]

12. All Uranium reactors of this type contain plutonium.

It is a byproduct of the fission process in these reactors, and it accumulates in small amounts over time as the Uranium fuel is expended.

Part of the reason countries that want to build nuclear weapons, first build reactors. For plutonium production. PU is heavier and more unstable than Uranium. It does not naturally exist, like Uranium.

(In fact, U is the heaviest natural element. Everything heavier on the periodic table is man made in some form of laboratory, like a collider, or reactor, etc. Some briefly exist in a supernova, but not for long, because they are so heavy and unstable.)

[loudsue]

3. Our entire ecosystem is so full of chemicals and deadly toxins

Is it any wonder that people keep getting so sick? What have we done to our beautiful earth?

[david_vincent]

4. "than previously thought" by WHOM?

As a former resident of WA, everyone I knew out there was keenly aware that the situation at Hanford was very, very serious. I would venture to suggest that this comes as news only to ostriches.

[abqmufc]

7. What you know and what is proven unfortunately is different

I worked for the Nez Perce Tribe for some years on this issue. I agree with you, most are aware in the area. However being aware and having the evidence to support it has always been the issue. DOE and other federal agencies have denied such problems exist or they have belittled the impact of Hanford on the ecosystem.

One big issue we dealt with was fish consumption. For years the DOE and others refused to take into account the fish consumption of the Tribes around Hanford. Fish sample studies were based on non-Tribal consumption which is 10 to 50 times less than that of Tribal peoples.