HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » New Leak at Hanford Nucle...

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 11:49 AM

 

New Leak at Hanford Nuclear Waste Site is 'Catastrophic,' Worker Warns

'This is probably the biggest event ever to happen in tank farm history.'
by
Nadia Prupis, staff writer

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/04/19/new-leak-hanford-nuclear-waste-site-catastrophic-worker-warns

A leak at the Hanford nuclear site in Washington state has prompted warnings of "catastrophic" consequences, as workers attempt to clean up more than eight inches of toxic waste from one of 28 underground tanks holding radioactive materials leftover from plutonium production.

Alarms on the site began sounding on Sunday, leading workers to discover 8.4 inches of toxic waste in between the inner and outer walls of tank AY-102, which has been slowly leaking since 2011 but has never accumulated that amount of waste before.

<snip>

Environmental groups also issued words of caution. Columbia Riverkeepers, an Oregon-based advocacy organization, said in a statement that the leak is "another reminder of the cost of nuclear waste, and the unexpected outcomes of handling radioactive material."

The AY-102 tank "holds some of the most dangerous nuclear waste on Earth," said the group's executive director Brett VandenHeuvel. "These tanks were not designed to hold waste for decades. It's past time to get the waste out of the unsafe tanks."

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The long lived toxic waste from nuclear industry is the big problem that does not go away. Give this short article a very thoughtful read.

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/04/19/new-leak-hanford-nuclear-waste-site-catastrophic-worker-warns

62 replies, 7612 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 62 replies Author Time Post
Reply New Leak at Hanford Nuclear Waste Site is 'Catastrophic,' Worker Warns (Original post)
JEB Apr 2016 OP
flor-de-jasmim Apr 2016 #1
jonno99 Apr 2016 #2
JEB Apr 2016 #3
jonno99 Apr 2016 #4
vkkv Apr 2016 #5
ZombetteZar Apr 2016 #21
LiberalEsto Apr 2016 #6
SCantiGOP Apr 2016 #14
MisterP Apr 2016 #7
valerief Apr 2016 #17
Takket Apr 2016 #8
ZombetteZar Apr 2016 #24
bvar22 Apr 2016 #26
Yallow Apr 2016 #32
2naSalit Apr 2016 #51
ZombetteZar Apr 2016 #56
chwaliszewski Apr 2016 #9
bbgrunt Apr 2016 #10
JDPriestly Apr 2016 #11
Dustlawyer Apr 2016 #39
JDPriestly Apr 2016 #40
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #12
mopinko Apr 2016 #16
Delver Rootnose Apr 2016 #41
JimDandy Apr 2016 #18
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #19
JimDandy Apr 2016 #23
bvar22 Apr 2016 #25
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #31
bvar22 Apr 2016 #33
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #35
bvar22 Apr 2016 #36
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #45
bvar22 Apr 2016 #52
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #53
bvar22 Apr 2016 #54
NickB79 Apr 2016 #58
bvar22 Apr 2016 #59
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #61
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #60
NickB79 Apr 2016 #57
Angel Martin Apr 2016 #55
FighttheFuture Apr 2016 #20
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #22
bvar22 Apr 2016 #29
AtheistCrusader Apr 2016 #46
hunter Apr 2016 #49
saidsimplesimon Apr 2016 #13
JEB Apr 2016 #15
Octafish Apr 2016 #27
jtuck004 Apr 2016 #28
ErikJ Apr 2016 #30
bvar22 Apr 2016 #34
navarth Apr 2016 #37
hunter Apr 2016 #38
cynzke Apr 2016 #42
Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #43
LadyHawkAZ Apr 2016 #50
JohnyCanuck Apr 2016 #44
JEB Apr 2016 #48
Matt_R Apr 2016 #62
redruddyred Apr 2016 #47

Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 11:54 AM

1. Yikes!

I was born in Kadlac Hospital in the 50s. When I was about 40 I received a package of info from the US Govt warning about the possibility of thyroid cancer. So far, so good. But this can be so much worse.

My sympathies to all in Richland and the surrounding areas.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 11:57 AM

2. Ok - 8 inches sounds bad, but not if it's in a 50 gallon drum. A better estimate of the actual

amount of waste would be helpful...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jonno99 (Reply #2)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:03 PM

3. Try 20,000 gallons containing some of the worst waste in existence.

 

http://www.geekwire.com/2016/leak-inside-nuclear-waste-tank-storage-triggers-alarm-hanford/

from the link:
Washington River Protection Solutions began pumping out the contents of AY-102 last month. About 20,000 gallons remain in the tank, and the suspicion is that the pumping activity may have disturbed the tank’s contents in a way that exacerbated the leak into the annulus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Reply #3)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:09 PM

4. Ah - I missed that link - thanks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:29 PM

5. Nuclear energy never was "cheap" for taxpayers, only profitable for nuke builders.. ~eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vkkv (Reply #5)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:50 PM

21. The waste is not from Nuclear Power

While there is an operating nuclear reactor in Richland, it is not the cause for the waste in the Tanks. This is old waste from the cold war weapon program. Our reactor has been very safe and has had no major issues. The problem has been with the government coming up with a solution for cleaning up their mess left over from the Manhattan project and the 30 years of nuclear weapon proliferation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:33 PM

6. "Clean" energy my ass

 

Utility companies have been pushing nuclear energy for decades, claiming it's "clean and safe" There are many aging reactors around the world and I fear the cleanup is going to be a nightmare.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalEsto (Reply #6)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 01:40 PM

14. The only legitimate point they can raise

Is that coal fired plants kill thousands every year through air pollution, and are major contributors to climate change.
That alone is not justification for nuclear energy plants, but the thousands who die from breathing in the air full of pollutants and mercury from coal-fired power plants are based on statistical modeling, whereas a nuclear incident is very easy to pinpoint as far as its dramatic negative health effects.
Germany and Scandinavia have about half the sunlight on any given day that we have in the central US, yet they produce a much higher percentage of their power from solar. It is simply a matter of political will and acceptance of the science behind climate change.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:35 PM

7. I mean, it's perfectly safe, bananas are more dangerous, why do you hate science?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MisterP (Reply #7)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:11 PM

17. And genetically modified atoms are just as safe as geneticially modified tomatoes. Besides, Jesus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:42 PM

8. so the leak is not in the ground, its still contained in the tank right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Takket (Reply #8)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:41 PM

24. Leak is still within the tank

The tanks are designed with an inner wall and an outer wall. There is space between the two walls in case of a breech of the inner wall. The leak occurred from the inner wall and the outer wall contained it. Nothing has escaped into the ground.

The workers are in the process of moving the contents of this tank to another tank. That work was halted to move the leak back into the main tank so the space between the inner and outer walls are empty in case of an additional leak.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ZombetteZar (Reply #24)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:03 PM

26. And, of course, the last wall (The Alamo Wall) will never fail....ever!

"However, the new leak at the site poses several problems, King-TV reporter Susannah Frame writes:

"The outer shell of AY-102 [the tank] does not have the exhaust or filtration system needed to keep the dangerous gases created by the waste in check. Workers have been ordered to wear full respiratory safety gear in the area, but the risk remains.

“The hazards to workers just went up by a factor of 10,” said Geffre.

In addition, the breakdown calls into question the viability of three other double-shell tanks at Hanford that have the exact design of AY-102."

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/04/19/new-leak-hanford-nuclear-waste-site-catastrophic-worker-warns


Your post reminds me of all the posts after Fukushima proclaiming:
"Relax. They are just venting a little steam.
Nothing to worry about. These new plants have redundant back-up systems.
Believe me. I know Science!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #26)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:30 PM

32. The Outer Tank Constructed By Same Contractor Who Built New Orleans Levees - Relax

 

No problem here.

Bribe paid.

Work done.

EOM.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #26)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 12:04 PM

51. +10000000000000

Thank you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #26)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 04:03 PM

56. I was just stating facts...

I didn't say this wasn't a concern, but the leak hasn't reach the actual ground. Which was the question I was answering. I also including information that they weren't ignoring the leak.

This tank has been an issue for a long time. This is why they are in the process of moving the contents to another tank. The AY-102 tank was put in service in 1971 and in 2012 there were 857,000 gallons of sludge and supernatant. As of March of this year, they had moved an estimated 650,000 gallons of liquid from that tank. As of Sunday, before the leak was found, they had the sludge down to 14 inches deep which was approximately 46,000 gallons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:49 PM

9. Yikes!

I live near Vancouver, WA, which is down river from Hanford.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:52 PM

10. K and R!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 12:53 PM

11. Go solar.

We invested in nuclear research in WWII.

We need to invest in solar, wind and research on other possible, SAFE energy sources now.

It's a matter of public will. We have to do this.

It should be our first priority.

We can do this if we put our best scientists to work solving our energy problem.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #11)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 10:54 PM

39. Before that can happen in any serious way we need to stop the states and power companies that have

put up huge roadblocks to solar energy. They are raising fees to be connected to the grid to sell excess power, paying way way below wholesale rates for the excess energy produced. Solar City just pulled out of one of the Western states because they made it unprofitable there overnight! With that type of uncertainty who in their right mind would invest now? I have been looking at starting a solar retail and installation company, only to put it on hold until the climate (pardon the pun) improved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #39)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 11:25 PM

40. One of the reasons I support Bernie is that he is not so enmeshed in the political machinations

of corporate America and can understand the real issues that are hazed over by the corporations. We need to move quickly to alternative energy, and those now making profits from fossil fuels need to help pay the way.

Thanks for your post.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 01:23 PM

12. I don't know why everyone in this thread seems determined to call this 'nuclear power' as if it was

about anything other than flattening the fuck out of two Japanese cities in WWII, and building the largest stockpile of strategic nuclear warheads on the planet through the sixties.

This wasn't about keeping the lights on. A lot of the shit in that tank is not produced by commercial nuclear power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 01:58 PM

16. ^^^^this^^^^

and this additional cost will come out of the already bloated pentagon budget, i am assuming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mopinko (Reply #16)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 03:27 AM

41. Probably not....

..I would bet this is part of the department of energy's budget.
There are far more military industrial complex costs than just the pentagon's budget.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:27 PM

18. At this point, it's original use is not a factor in what to do about it now.

The fact to take away from this is that, even if a specific pile of nuclear waste originally wasn't part of a process designed to initially take lives, it always ends up being part of a process that puts people in danger of their life.

FWIW, live north of there near Spokane.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JimDandy (Reply #18)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:48 PM

19. It is relevenant, for two reasons.

One, the nuclides that need to be dealt with are totally different. Some are the same, some are simply not produced by commercial reactor power.

The second reason, as a military industrial concern, is the cavalier manner in which it was stored, and people were exposed to it. When people think of human beings and the environment as military assets, shit gets messy quick.

So, please don't lose sight of that. The fact this started as a military project, is of extreme relevance to the current danger to the public.

If the Y-12 building at Oak Ridge caught fire, we should all be shitting our pants for the same sorts of reasons; military byproducts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #19)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:14 PM

23. I agree with everything you posted

but those nuances (please forgive me for condensing to one word), in light of the sheer danger that the current product poses to everyone in my regional area, must be dealt with separately (on a parallel track perhaps) in order to concentrate on the immediate life-threatening problems of high level nuclear waste.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #19)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 03:56 PM

25. Oh...so the Nuclear Waste produced by today's Nuke Power Plants is safe?

This waste is not dangerous to every living thing?

Just because the waste from the military projects is MORE dangerous is NOT a good reason to feel any safer about the waste from current power plants.

"Relax. They are just venting a little steam.
Nothing to worry about. These new plants are safe because they have redundant back-up systems. They are so safe that we can build them on known Fault Lines and Tsunami Zones."


The Lesson from Fukushima:
As long as we are using Nuke Plants,
Fukushima, and WORSE, will happen again,
and again,
and again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #25)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:21 PM

31. Usually when someone starts a sentence with 'so' a massive, ridiculous strawman follows.

Just an observation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #31)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 06:30 PM

33. That is generally correct, BUT...

..the question that followed the "So" that you FAILED to answer "the Nuclear Waste produced by today's Nuke Power Plants is safe?" is NO Strawman.
That question IS THE question from which you are running.

Are you willing to answer that question, or play more Dodge Ball?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #33)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 06:39 PM

35. Never suggested it was safe.

However, commercial reactor waste stored in dry casks is a fuckton safer than that military industrial unregulated who the fuck knows what swill in that containment unit at Hanford.

The people running the place aren't even sure what's in there. The people running Columbia Generating station near Hanford know what the hell is in the spent fuel rods they are responsible for.

Knowing what it is and how to handle it doesn't mean you want to give a fuel rod a hug, but it's a hell of a lot less dangerous than a leaking tank full of shit partially derived from classified nuclear weapons production from as far back as the 30's, without any regulatory oversight.

Do you seriously not see a delta between the two propositions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #35)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 06:48 PM

36. Not really....NO.

Easier to handle?...maybe.
Knowing more about what is in it?...Certainly.
Controlling a massive leak into the Colombia River?....still a major, MAJOR deadly catastrophe.

Can YOU see where your waffling and attempts to make Radioactive Waste seem more palatable is nothing more than Industry Propaganda to give the illusion that modern Radioactive Waste is somehow "safer"?

Would you rather be bitten by a Mojave Rattlesnake, or a Coral Snake?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #36)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:05 AM

45. How do dry casks of commercial rods 'leak into the columbia river'?

If you can't even solidly answer the 'easier to handle' question, there's no point talking to you because you're not serious.



Those are dry casks. Those are CLEARLY easier to handle than the muck of unknown quantities and types, leaking in LIQUID form from a tank that was holding hundreds of thousands of gallons of said unknown radioactive shit.

Those dry casks are pretty safe. Something would have to tear them apart to cause problems with the fuel inside, and even then, it would be solid chunks of spent fuel, not a liquid slurry of radioactive shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #45)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 01:45 PM

52. How is the deadly radioactive waste removed from the power plant

....and put into these casks?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #52)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 01:57 PM

53. They are moved to a cooling pool until the decay heat is within spec for the cask.

Still not a 'leakage' hazard like the Hanford mess.

From a 'how do things go wrong' standpoint, the pools at fukushima dai-ichi were in critical danger, because of the state of the industrial disaster at the site. Filling the pools would have been trivial, except there was radioactive shit everywhere after the explosions, no power, and the placement of the pools is questionable from a seismic standpoint. That is not universally true of all reactor designs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #53)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 02:20 PM

54. "not a leakage hazard like the Hanford mess"

Not as bad as Hanford?
That is not very reassuring.
In fact, it IS an admission that there is a potential for leaks into the environment while handling this "modern" radioactive waste, dry casks or not.

Thank You, finally, for the honest answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #54)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 04:11 PM

58. How do solid metal rods "leak" when their casks are pierced?

Because nuclear reactors operate with solid fuel rods.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NickB79 (Reply #58)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 04:46 PM

59. What about the water in the "cooling ponds"?

Would you drink it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #59)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:53 PM

61. I believe that's actually safe.

I can find out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #54)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:49 PM

60. I suppose the casks could get hit with a meteor or something, sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #52)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 04:10 PM

57. The solid fuel rods are lifted out with a crane



Note the key word: solid.

The crap in the OP's article is liquid, and therefore much harder to contain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #35)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 02:47 PM

55. agree completely

the focus on the earthquake risk for CGS is misplaced

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/hanford-nuke-plantrsquos-earthquake-risk-underestimated-group-says/


CGS gets all the media attention but the real vulnerability is those old containment tanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #12)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:49 PM

20. A lot of shit is, however. Fukishima!! This article's consequences, apply to the nuclear

 

industry in general. Even if this specific leak is form the byproduct of militaty uses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FighttheFuture (Reply #20)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 02:51 PM

22. Some percentage overlaps, but Fukushima Dai-ichi has no relevance to this issue.

Not in any meaningful sense, other than 'contamination can be borne through groundwater'.

(Nothing is getting out of the second hull of the tank in Hanford... yet.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #22)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:17 PM

29. Oh PLEASE! Nuclear Waste being released into our environment is extremely relevant,

whether it comes from a Military source or a civilian source. Simply because the outer shell of the containment tank hasn't started leaking yet is what has no relevance.
The failure of the inner shell demonstrates how UNSAFE our system of containment is,
and should be highlighted in the discussion of this issue and in our population's awareness.

The new leak poses problems on several fronts. The outer shell of AY-102 does not have the exhaust or filtration system needed to keep the dangerous gases created by the waste in check. Workers have been ordered to wear full respiratory safety gear in the area, but the risk remains.

“The hazards to workers just went up by a factor of 10,” said Geffre.

In addition, the breakdown calls into question the viability of three other double-shell tanks at Hanford that have the exact design of AY-102.

“The primary tanks weren't designed to stage waste like this for so many years,” said a current worker. “There’s always the question, ‘Are the outer shells compromised’”?

The accumulation of waste in the outer shell also means the deadliest substance on earth is that much closer to the ground surrounding the tank. And currently there is no viable plan in place to take care of it.

http://www.king5.com/news/local/investigations/catastrophic-event-at-hanford-prompts-emergency-response/



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bvar22 (Reply #29)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:06 AM

46. "The failure of the inner shell demonstrates how UNSAFE our system of containment is"

That 'system of containment' is not used for commercial nuclear fuel.

But you know that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #12)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:27 AM

49. What began as a reasonable concern has turned into a religious cult.

Radioactive toxins are the devil, with many black magical properties.

Much worse non-radioactive toxins that we are all exposed to in our daily lives are unremarkable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 01:28 PM

13. I voted for Jimmy Carter.

He is a nuclear scientist, with a bias.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:08 PM

27. Thank you, JEB! You're doing what the Mainstream Media Monopoly doesn't do: Report the Truth.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:08 PM

28. Call Japan. They have lots of experience in trying to cover nuclear leaks up while people die. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 04:19 PM

30. Map of site. Right upstream from Tri-Cities and Portland.

 

Last edited Tue Apr 19, 2016, 07:00 PM - Edit history (1)

RIght on the Columbia River.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ErikJ (Reply #30)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 06:36 PM

34. I LOVE the Colombia River, especially The Gorge.

If (or should I say "when" this poison gets out, say goodbye to one of the most beautiful places in America.
All those wonderful towns along the Gorge will become like Centralia, Pennsylvania...uninhabitable ghost towns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 07:21 PM

37. "which has been slowly leaking since 2011" WTF??

Um, so now it's time to do something? Somebody tell me why they wait until it's fucking leaking before they do something about it.

No, on second thought, don't tell me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Tue Apr 19, 2016, 09:06 PM

38. In the former Soviet Union they were in such a hurry to build bombs...

... they sometimes didn't put the stuff in tanks. Yep, they simply dug a hole and poured it in.

China has similar sites. Of course, they've got places even worse, contaminated with toxins that have a "half life" of FOREVER.




We reached the shore, and looked across the lake. I’d seen some photos before I left for Inner Mongolia, but nothing prepared me for the sight. It’s a truly alien environment, dystopian and horrifying. The thought that it is man-made depressed and terrified me, as did the realisation that this was the byproduct not just of the consumer electronics in my pocket, but also green technologies like wind turbines and electric cars that we get so smugly excited about in the West. Unsure of quite how to react, I take photos and shoot video on my cerium polished iPhone.

You can see the lake on Google Maps, and that hints at the scale. Zoom in far enough and you can make out the dozens of pipes that line the shore. Unknown Fields’ Liam Young collected some samples of the waste and took it back to the UK to be tested. “The clay we collected from the toxic lake tested at around three times background radiation,” he later tells me.

http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150402-the-worst-place-on-earth


Three times background radiation really isn't the worst of it. It's the stuff that doesn't reveal itself to the radiation counter that will kill you.

The horrors of our high energy industrial society are all around us. There may be one parked in your driveway. Ordinary gasoline and used motor oil are carcinogens. So are the microscopic particles that lodge in your lungs, spewed out of your car's exhaust pipe or shed by your car's brakes and tires.

I don't know anyone who has been killed by radioactive waste, but I've known many people killed by automobiles, and I've known many natural landscapes destroyed by highways, roads, parking lots, and other automobile enabled "economic development."

Hanford is an expensive mess to clean up, but it's nowhere near the worst place in the world, which is, I think, commuting in stop-and-go traffic on California's 405 freeway or driving anywhere in Mexico City at any time for any reason. But that's just my personal experience. I'm certain there are worse automobile hells, just as there are worse radioactive hells than Hanford.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 05:15 AM

42. MEANWHILE....THE MEDIA AND NATION ARGUE/OBSESS OVER BERNIE SANDERS AND THE POPE!

CRAZY!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 06:08 AM

43. Well, that's comforting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #43)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:31 AM

50. We just left the Tri-Cities on Saturday

Been there a month, never even knew the site was there. Yikes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 07:26 AM

44. Chernobyl on the Hudson

And on the other side of the country there is "Chernobyl on the Hudson," the Indian Point nuclear plant.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnyCanuck (Reply #44)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:21 AM

48. Thanks for the informative video.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JohnyCanuck (Reply #44)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:07 PM

62. Is there news out there besides from CT sites?

Google only pulls up CT sites, and anti nuke sites. Is there any real info out there?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JEB (Original post)

Wed Apr 20, 2016, 10:07 AM

47. here's a solution

 

let's educate our kids to engineer our way out of this lesser of evils energy scheme
you know, like, actually educate, not like "this group studies and this group works at kmart and pretends to study"

1) yes
2) no

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread