Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Los Alamos Fire: EPA Testing for Radiation

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 » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
IScreamSundays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 09:46 AM
Original message
Los Alamos Fire: EPA Testing for Radiation
Source: ABC News

The wildfire that surrounds the nuclear lab in Los Alamos, New Mexico, has grown to at least 61,000 acres amid mounting concerns about what might be in the smoke that's visible from space.

Such fear has prompted the Environmental Protection Agency to bring in air monitors, along with a special airplane that checks for radiation levels. So far officials have not been able to find anything.

"Our facilities and nuclear material are protected and safe," Laboratory Director Dr. Charles McMillan told ABC News.

The Los Alamos facility -- the birthplace of the atomic bomb -- was shrouded in secrecy long before it was surrounded by smoke after the Las Conchas fire began Sunday.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/US/los-alamos-fire-epa-testing-radiation/story?id=13953953
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
1. It's highly unlikely that the fire will burn the Los Alamos
Edited on Wed Jun-29-11 10:14 AM by MineralMan
installation. People really do understand the need to keep fire away from such places. You can look at satellite images of the lab and its location on Google Maps and see what I'm saying. Forest fires burn in forests. There's no forest on the lab's property.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chervilant Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. hmm...
Is it even remotely likely that the heat from the fire could cause the 'storage containers' to reach high enough temperatures to spew radioactive steam into the environment? Are the feds monitoring radiation levels so that they can further delude the hoi polloi? If there's nothing to burn at or near Los Alamos, what IS fueling this massive fire?

Sadly, I must pose these questions here in DU because of the astonishing dearth of information from the M$M.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sabriel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. It's highly unlikely we'll ever get the straight story
If there's one thing the Fukushima event showed me, it's that I'm pretty much on my own in terms of info gathering.

I can't even get my own federal or state authorities to provide needed information.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oldhippydude Donating Member (446 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. i remember
the fire 11 years ago that got on to lab property.. there was concern, from historical recollection i wouldn't worry about it.. the other contributors are right, these guys are on the ball..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caseymoz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. The heat from the blaze could be high enough to combust other things.

I don't know how hot it is from how far away, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
2. I wondered about that - that is old testing grounds. The facility is not
the problem. The soil is probably still holding radiation from those long ago tests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TalkingDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. What jwirr said.
Plants uptake radiation at various levels. Updrafts carry contaminated soil.

While there is probably little cause for alarm, I've always been a proponent of 'better safe than sorry'. (especially with radioactivity)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thereismore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-29-11 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Exactly right. I lived there. There are places, canyons, still off-limits because of radioactive
dumps of the past. i think that's what they are worried about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 08:01 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News 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