Hanford Nuclear Site. / General Chatting / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: General Chatting

« Previous topic | Next topic »

Hanford Nuclear Site.

Move Thread

LAN_403

Patrick

Sat Feb 23 2013, 07:48AM

Registered Member #2431 Joined: Tue Oct 13 2009, 09:47PM
Location: Chico, CA. USA
Posts: 5639

Is everyone else watching the recent leak news?
This is an enviromental tragedy, ive been following since the mid 90's when i was 14. I have mixed feelings on the matter.

First, there are 170+ large mostly fluid filled tanks, some of which "boil" on a semi regular basis, due to unknown or poorly understood side reactions.

Second, though this is a tragedy, it should also be noted, that we Americans and Russians bore the brunt of Peace and war for early 60 years. so that other nations would'nt have too. sites like Hanford and Mayak are part of that legacy, unfortunately.

Third, other nations (Irans' civilian population) would be wise to learn from our (Russian and American) mistakes.

Fourth, i have no moral objection to the use of nuclear weapons to maintain peace, and/or impliment war.

Fifth, i believe the "vitrificaton" efforts are the wisest course of action for both Russian and Ameriacen remediatiation efforts.

sixth, India shoud be careful not to out-smart themselves with the thorium/uranium-233 process, significant weapon and civilian power ineffciencies, hazourdous conditions and cosequences exist, as proven by Hanford, Savannha river, and Mayak projects in the US and Soviet block states, as well as the "EASY" shot of 1955.

Seventh, lets not forget Windscale, chernobyle, Fukushima, and all the African nations that benefited from uranium supply to the west and east.

Eighth, natural gas and OIL from foriegn and doemstic sources dont seem so bad....

Carbon_Rod

Sat Feb 23 2013, 08:58AM

Registered Member #65 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 06:43AM
Location:
Posts: 1155

Unfortunately, this place is located in an area that is frequently contaminated by "forgotten" projects.
46Â°38â€²51â€³N 119Â°35â€²55â€³W

I assumed elevated counts in the area were from contaminated Fukushima drift.

Formally ask the US government when they will fully secure this specific toxic legacy:

Credible confirmation prior to international disclosure is required by news people.

Patrick

Sat Feb 23 2013, 09:13AM

Registered Member #2431 Joined: Tue Oct 13 2009, 09:47PM
Location: Chico, CA. USA
Posts: 5639

Carbon_Rod wrote ...

... confirmation prior to international disclosure is required...

I refuse.

American and UN politicians can F themselves... R, D's and UN's too... I feel morally obligated to make the preceeding comment,
though i know Carbon Rod is a good guy. I refuse to be "used" by the Bush/Obama administrations.

(I mean no anger, hostile or uncivil tone, for the above comments torward anyone, but as humans; we have a responsibility, for what we do on this earth.)

I hope i have'nt - overstepped my bounds here on the forum, i don't mean to be disagreable.

Carbon_Rod wrote ...

Unfortunately, this place is located in an area that is frequently contaminated by "forgotten" projects.
46Â°38â€²51â€³N 119Â°35â€²55â€³W

Carbon Rod, is this in Alabama?

Steve Conner

Sat Feb 23 2013, 06:57PM

Registered Member #30 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 10:52AM
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 6706

The Hanford leak even made BBC news in the UK.

We have our own problems, in particular a massive stock of reprocessed plutonium that's almost reactor grade but not quite. Every year the Govt. doesn't do something about it, it gets less reactor-grade and more dangerous as decay products build up in it.

Carbon_Rod

Sun Feb 24 2013, 08:16AM

Registered Member #65 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 06:43AM
Location:
Posts: 1155

@Patric
International embarrassment for Third-World Science does apply, but must not simply be rhetoric as it detracts from active politicians containing the situation.

The position of the facility was posted:

We have some relatives living down-wind from the facility, and partisan politics don't enter into the equation. The risks must be carefully defined in order to mitigate the active problem.

Individuals generally have short attention spans, and will forget the situation again with enough time. Unless one can mobilize political cooperation the problem will persist.

Pinky's Brain

Sun Feb 24 2013, 07:49PM

Registered Member #2901 Joined: Thu Jun 03 2010, 01:25PM
Location:
Posts: 837

Steve Conner wrote ...

The Hanford leak even made BBC news in the UK.

We have our own problems, in particular a massive stock of reprocessed plutonium that's almost reactor grade but not quite. Every year the Govt. doesn't do something about it, it gets less reactor-grade and more dangerous as decay products build up in it.

So dilute it ... then it's just as dangerous as MOX fuel waste from a non-fast reactor (ie. pretty much all of them).

Dr. Drone

Tue Feb 26 2013, 04:41AM

Registered Member #290 Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 08:24PM
Location:
Posts: 1673

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob