Nuclear Plant Radioactive Leaks

horse

Jedi
angelburst29 said:
... I would like to keep tract of any reports that might pin point major problems, so we might be able to get a clearer picture of what we're really up against? I understand, all Nuclear Power Plants leak as a matter of operation but that data is surpressed on high readings. Collecting more reports on incidences would help in determining higher danger zones of radioactivity.

Angelburst29, keeping track of the nuke industry is a daunting task. Here's a couple more resources posted on Enenews that might prove useful to you.

The Radiation Information Network at Idaho State College has a comprehensive chronology of nuclear events. http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/chrono4.htm

Nucnews lists links to current articles from many sources. http://www.nucnews.com/whatsnew.php

Hanford Challenge - tank waste. http://www.hanfordchallenge.org/the-big-issues/tank-waste/

World Nuclear Association provides nuke industry's outlook. http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-G-N/Japan/

Activist watchdog. http://www.scoop.it/t/nuke-free-world
 

angelburst29

The Living Force
horse said:
Hanford Challenge - tank waste. http://www.hanfordchallenge.org/the-big-issues/tank-waste/

Checking more into the Link above, discovered Hanford, Washington is a SuperFund site due to leaking drums of radioactive waste.

Seems, Hanford is experiencing another problem:

Washington: "Bizarre" Cluster of Sever Birth Defects haunts health officals
http://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/bizarre-cluster-severe-birth-defects-haunts-health-experts-n24986

Feb. 17, 2014 - A mysterious cluster of severe birth defects in rural Washington state is confounding health experts, who say they can find no cause, even as reports of new cases continue to climb.

Federal and state officials won’t say how many women in a three-county area near Yakima, Wash., have had babies with anencephaly, a heart-breaking condition in which they’re born missing parts of the brain or skull. And they admit they haven’t interviewed any of the women in question, or told the mothers there’s a potentially widespread problem.

But as of January 2013, officials with the Washington state health department and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had counted nearly two dozen cases in three years, a rate four times the national average.

Since then, one local genetic counselor, Susie Ball of the Central Washington Genetics Program at Yakima Valley Memorial Hospital, says she has reported “eight or nine” additional cases of anencephaly and spina bifida, another birth defect in which the neural tube, which forms the brain and spine, fails to close properly.

The agencies released a report last summer detailing an investigation of 27 women with pregnancies that resulted in neural tube defects in Yakima, Franklin and Benton counties between 2010 and 2013. That included 23 cases of anencephaly, a rate of 8.4 per 10,000 live births, far higher than the national rate of 2.1 cases per 10,000. There were three cases of spina bifida and one with encephalocele, a sac-like protrusion of the brain through the front or back of the skull.

“Any time you see a geographic cluster of a pretty severe birth defect, it does make you wonder if there is a common exposure contributing,” said Allison Ashley-Koch, a professor at the Duke University Medical Center for Human Genetics, whose focus is anencephaly. “If there were resources, it really would be wonderful to go back to the families to conduct more intensive interviews regarding common environmental exposures."

That's been true in high-profile clusters, including one in Texas in April 1991, in which three babies with anencephaly were born in a Brownsville hospital within 36 hours. It sparked years of surveillance and research that found that the problem could be traced in part to the lack of folic acid in the diets of the mostly Hispanic women who lived on the Texas-Mexico border. Obesity and diabetes appeared to be factors, as did exposure to fumonisins, or grain molds.

Research has shown that there are potential links between anencephaly and exposure to molds and to pesticides, Ashley-Koch said. Central Washington is a prime agricultural area that produces crops from apples and cherries to potatoes and wheat, which may require pesticides that contain nitrates.

CDC and state officials refused to tell NBC News how many new cases they’d received in 2013, saying they plan a full report later this spring. Stahre had previously said they’d received “a few more cases” after the original investigation.

Susie Ball, the genetic counselor who has reported additional cases, said she's "not convinced — yet" that there's a problem in the area and that it may take more time to tell. She wouldn't want to scare people, she said. Still, she said the situation should be more widely publicized to let local women of child-bearing age know the risk — and to help them take action to prevent birth defects.

“Make sure that everyone who could become pregnant knows they should be taking folic acid,” Ball said, referring to the B vitamin that can help prevent spina bifida. “Look at this unexplained spike here in the valley. Take your folic acid.”

***(Comment) I can reason that molds, pesticides and nitrates could be a contributing factor to birth defects but nowhere in this article professing professionals in Human Genetics, do they even mention or consider local radioactive waste containment fields, maybe contaminating the environment, producing clusters of birth defects? Instead, they advise woman " Take your folic acid” which places the blame on the victims? Ridicious when you consider, during pregnancy, the Doctor places the patient on Pre-natal vitamins with occasional blood testing.

Article says three counties. Hanford is located in neighbouring Benton:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Superfund_sites_in_Washington_%28state%29

Yakima — America’s “most contaminated nuclear site”:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/.....44974.html
 

horse

Jedi
Reporting on the WIPP facility radiation leak in Carlsbad. N.M. at Enenews.
http://enenews.com/ap-plutonium-detected-in-air-away-from-troubled-u-s-nuclear-facility-levels-are-highest-ever-detected-around-site-appears-radiation-event-occurred-leading-to-a-release

"AP, Feb. 19, 2014: [...] radiation [is] in the air a half-mile from the site [...] radioactive isotopes americium and plutonium [...] [Hardy] says the levels are the highest ever detected at or around the site but are far below those deemed unsafe by the Environmental Protection Agency. The readings came after a radiation alert over the weekend from an underground sensor at the site. Hardy says readings will be completed next week on filters collected from that underground sensor and an air monitor closer to the plant." http://www.kob.com/article/stories/S3332019.shtml?cat=500#.UwVmkPyUNlZ


The EPA makes industry safe from public outrage at the increase in sickness and death that inhaling plutonium will cause.
 

angelburst29

The Living Force
More on the Hanford Washington Nuclear site: published Feb. 20, 2014

2nd Nuclear site Whistleblower fired within 4 months - after complaining about Safety Conditions
_http://rt.com/usa/busche-nuclear-whistleblower-fired-772/

The termination of a safety manager from a Washington state nuclear facility this week marks the second time in four months that a whistleblower was fired from there after speaking out.

Donna Busche, 50, was fired Tuesday morning by URS Corp, a federal subcontractor hired by the United States government to build a $12.3 billion plant that will make glass from the waste being held at the old Department of Energy-owned Hanford Nuclear Reservation in the southeastern part of the state. Construction of the plant is currently on hold because of safety concerns, and the facility has been previously referred to as the most-polluted nuclear weapons production site in the US.
Busche’s termination this week comes nearly five years after she first started working at the plant. Most recently she was employed there as a manager of environmental and nuclear safety at the facility’s construction site, and directed a staff of 140 engineers, scientists and technicians, according to the Los Angeles Times, often raising concerns about safety issues at Hanford during her half-decade tenure. Now she says her willingness to speak honestly about her work there is what got her into trouble.

URS says they had cause to terminate Busche, and told her it was due to “unprofessional conduct.” She is already speaking out about the matter, though, and says she lost her job because her employer wanted to retaliate in response to comments she made publically about the plant in the past.

Busche has been vocal for years about conditions at Hanford. In October 2010 she testified before the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board, an independent federal agency, and made remarks about Hanford contrary to those offered by her superiors at the Department of Energy. She later said she was “openly admonished by former DOE Assistant Secretary Inés Triay for her testimony,” and the following year filed a complaint of discrimination with the Department of Labor alleging her employer retaliated against her for reporting problems at Hanford. The Labor Department is currently considering that complaint, while the Department of Energy has been tasked with investigating the safety claims made by Busche before her termination.

Walter Tamosaitis, a colleague of Busche’s who also raised safety concerns about the plant, was fired last October from URS after 44 years of employment. On Tuesday, Busche told the Associated Pressthat she has expected for a month now that she would be the next to go.

“We raised technical issues and have received harassment, retaliation. The fact that he was terminated, it sent a resounding message to me, right? And heightened my sense of awareness that I was probably next,” she told CBS News last year after her co-worker was removed from the job.

Right now I will take a deep breath, file for unemployment and start another lawsuit for wrongful termination,” she added this week to the AP.

According to URS, however, they were in the right to fire Busche this week. “We do not agree with her assertions that she suffered retaliation or was otherwise treated unfairly,” the company said in a statement to the AP, adding Busche was terminated for reasons unrelated to the safety concerns. “Ms. Busche’s allegations will not withstand scrutiny,” the company said.

“URS gave me no reason for my termination other than ‘unprofessional conduct.’ They gave me no documentation. They gave me no explanation,” Busche told CBS News.

Now she says the contractor’s actions are causing a chilling effect among other URS workers who are worried about speaking up.

“One of my previous subordinates says that they’re actually afraid of getting fired for doing their job,” Busche told CBS.

When CBS covered a waste leak at Hanford last year, they reported that the federal government spends around $2 billion annually on cleaning up the nuclear site — or about one-third of what the country spends on its entire nuclear cleanup operations.
 

horse

Jedi
angelburst29 said:
horse said:
Hanford Challenge - tank waste. http://www.hanfordchallenge.org/the-big-issues/tank-waste/
***(Comment) I can reason that molds, pesticides and nitrates could be a contributing factor to birth defects but nowhere in this article professing professionals in Human Genetics, do they even mention or consider local radioactive waste containment fields, maybe contaminating the environment, producing clusters of birth defects?

Isn't that a good example of cognitive dissonance, sacrifice the truth to keep their salaries coming. It is an amazing effort that has turned a once known danger into 'its all safe, no immediate danger, nothing to see here'. Remember that the military is behind the nuke industry, so they lie. Any whistle blowers are silenced or discredited. The danger can be measured by the silence, misinformation, and constant reassurance the media produces. Spread the word, there is an unseen danger we need to know about.
 

angelburst29

The Living Force
You bring up a good point, Horse, that the Military are behind the Nuke industry, on one level or another. Which might explain why seasoned and educated employees, dedicated to their field of interest and have a moral conscious find themselves being labled Whistleblowers, harassed and terminated for pointing out technical irregularities in safety concerns.

Another related issue in this Hanford location that doesn't add up, even with Superfund status considered, it's allocated around "2 Billion annually" in operational expenses for the cleanup? And this is only one site/location. I'm not certain, as to how long Hanford has been in operation as a Superfund and the allocation of funds per year, for I need to look deeper into the situation but just on the surface, 2 Billion in one year should logically see some improvement on the site. Retaliating against seasoned employees, qualified in their fields - gives the outer impression, the money is being siphoned off "for other projects" and not being used for it's intended purpose?

angelburst29 said:
........ filed a complaint of discrimination with the Department of Labor alleging her employer retaliated against her for reporting problems at Hanford. The Labor Department is currently considering that complaint, while the Department of Energy has been tasked with investigating the safety claims made by Busche before her termination.

Walter Tamosaitis, a colleague of Busche’s who also raised safety concerns about the plant, was fired last October from URS after 44 years of employment. On Tuesday, Busche told the Associated Pressthat she has expected for a month now that she would be the next to go.

“We raised technical issues and have received harassment, retaliation. The fact that he was terminated, it sent a resounding message to me, right? And heightened my sense of awareness that I was probably next,” she told CBS News last year after her co-worker was removed from the job.


When CBS covered a waste leak at Hanford last year, they reported that the federal government spends around $2 billion annually on cleaning up the nuclear site — or about one-third of what the country spends on its entire nuclear cleanup operations.

Awhile back, there was "a rumor" that the location of Nuclear Power Plants were not positioned erratically but strategy placed to serve the Military Industrial Complex. As to, in what capacity was only alluded to in speculation? For the Nuclear Plant to operate, it needed to be located near a large body of water. If you check the locations and history of each of our Nuclear Power Plants in the U.S. - each have been sited by the Energy Comminsion (EPA) for violations in contamination, in both soil and water mishaps.

Water is vital and sacred to every living thing. It should be treated with reverence and protected by every way and means to assure it's pristine purity. Instead, it seems our current civilization is attracted to water like a magnet, needing to transport chemicals, fuel and garbage and polluting with same, drilling for oil and gas and locating industries on it's borders which furthers the contamination of the water ways. We're going to find ourselves - with water every where - but not a drop to drink, if we don't get a handle on what we're doing to ourselves and the World around us.
 

horse

Jedi
angelburst29 said:
Another related issue in this Hanford location that doesn't add up, even with Superfund status considered, it's allocated around "2 Billion annually" in operational expenses for the cleanup? And this is only one site/location. I'm not certain, as to how long Hanford has been in operation as a Superfund and the allocation of funds per year, for I need to look deeper into the situation but just on the surface, 2 Billion in one year should logically see some improvement on the site. Retaliating against seasoned employees, qualified in their fields - gives the outer impression, the money is being siphoned off "for other projects" and not being used for it's intended purpose?

Following the money trail, Hanford subcontractor, Bechtel, built the vitrification plant that had cost overruns and didn't work as planned. It was to solidify the liquid waste into a glasslike solid for safer storage. See:
https://www.google.com/search?q=vitrification+of+nuclear+waste&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-US:IE-SearchBox&ie=&oe=
http://www.bechtel.com/hanford_waste_treatment.html
 

angelburst29

The Living Force
Vitrification Plant? This is the first time that I have come across this information on the Hanford Plant and Thanks for pointing it out, Horse. Guess that explains where all the "SuperFund Megabucks" are going?
"Construction began in October 2001, and in August 2011, the plant was 60 percent complete."

When you figure in the costs to build a Nuclear Power Plant (without considering all the other variables in land and amount of acreage, materials & personnel) and it's radioactive by-products and expense in containment, the energy gained for consummers comes with a heavy price tag. It's hard to phantom how it's considered "energy efficient" and a benefit to the public in the long term?


Hanford Vitrification Plant - New plant to treat hazardous waste at former nuclear site.
_http://www.bechtel.com/hanford_waste_treatment.html

In southeastern Washington state, Bechtel is designing, constructing, and commissioning the world’s largest radioactive-waste treatment plant for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). When complete, the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant will process and stabilize 53 million gallons (200 million liters) of radioactive and chemical waste currently stored at the Hanford Site.

The waste, a byproduct of plutonium-production during World War II and the Cold War era, is in 177 aging underground tanks. More than one-third of them have leaked, contaminating the subsurface and threatening the nearby Columbia River.

The $12.2 billion project will use vitrification technology, blending the waste with glass-forming materials and heating it to 2,100 degrees Fahrenheit (1,149 degrees Celsius). The mixture is then poured into stainless steel canisters to cool and solidify. In this glass form, the waste is stable and impervious to the environment and safe for long-term storage.

The project is the largest undertaking of its kind ever and one of DOE’s most technically challenging cleanup projects—equivalent to building two nuclear power plants. Its construction site spans 65 acres (26 hectares) and includes facilities for pretreatment, low-activity waste vitrification, and high-level waste vitrification, as well as an analytical laboratory.

Construction began in October 2001, and in August 2011, the plant was 60 percent complete.
 

horse

Jedi
angelburst29 said:
When you figure in the costs to build a Nuclear Power Plant (without considering all the other variables in land and amount of acreage, materials & personnel) and it's radioactive by-products and expense in containment, the energy gained for consummers comes with a heavy price tag. It's hard to phantom how it's considered "energy efficient" and a benefit to the public in the long term?

"The world’s energy problems are real but nuclear is not a sustainable way forward. First, nuclear power is extraordinarily costly and government subsidies required to finance and insure nuclear are market distorting. We see that in the US decision to offer $8.3 billion in subsidies to Southern Co. Vogtle nuclear plant in Georgia, despite cost-overruns and delays.

The problems of spent fuel storage and nuclear waste more generally has not been resolved and already we see that the contamination caused by 20th century nuclear disasters - from war, atmospheric testing, and nuclear plant accidents – remains unmitigated, causing incalculable costs to the environmental resources and human health.

Our genome itself is at risk by nuclear. Nuclear is the ultimate betrayer, promising godhood while destroying the fabric of life itself, our somatic, genetic being"
http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2014/02/contaminated-water-at-fukushima-daiichi.html


Nuclear power production creates plutonium. That is the only reason they are allowed to boil water with NPPs. The emissions being released is the same as if we were playing global thermonuclear war, a sad game that no one wins. Aside from a small amount of plutonium that is used to power space exploration probes and satellites, the only use man has for creating so much plutonium is a bigger bomb.

There is much suffering in learning. The Romans didn't know the lead they used in plumbing and food was toxic to their children. We're smart enough today to prevent lead poisoning. Unseen radioactive isotopes being released are threatening our children and our children's children. We need to educate ourselves to stop the assault on our health and genome. The military hides the real cost of nuclear technology because we would never knowingly allow it to continue for a few more bombs.
 

SeekinTruth

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I'd have to agree that if it wasn't for the Military Industrial Complex and Pathocracy in general, there would be no way to justify starting a nuclear reaction to boil water. There are solar heating and electricity generating systems that could be used and MUCH better in every way, including economically. The costs to society and the planet would be so much lower in every way, that it would be implemented already for many years if we lived in a sane world. But, as we know, we don't live in a sane world.

By the way, I'm not sure the lead claims about the Romans are accurate. I'm not positive, but I think that's just a whole lot of speculation without much evidence, and is useful in covering up what really brought down the Roman Empire. Or so I think.
 

horse

Jedi
SeekinTruth said:
I'd have to agree that if it wasn't for the Military Industrial Complex and Pathocracy in general, there would be no way to justify starting a nuclear reaction to boil water. There are solar heating and electricity generating systems that could be used and MUCH better in every way, including economically. The costs to society and the planet would be so much lower in every way, that it would be implemented already for many years if we lived in a sane world. But, as we know, we don't live in a sane world.
You are very wise. The Pathocracy of Nazi Germany moved their bomb making to the American Empire. The Pathocracy is now mainstream and a sane voice can barely be heard.

SeekinTruth said:
By the way, I'm not sure the lead claims about the Romans are accurate. I'm not positive, but I think that's just a whole lot of speculation without much evidence, and is useful in covering up what really brought down the Roman Empire. Or so I think.
The lead shows up in their bones and shows up again in the Middle Ages. I didn’t mean to imply that lead brought down the Roman Empire, but that no connection between the lead and sickness had been made. If a connection was ever made the lead industry would have covered it up, too. Radioactive isotopes cause disease. Sadly enough, the appeal to the economics usually beats an appeal to saving the genome.
 

SeekinTruth

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
horse said:
SeekinTruth said:
I'd have to agree that if it wasn't for the Military Industrial Complex and Pathocracy in general, there would be no way to justify starting a nuclear reaction to boil water. There are solar heating and electricity generating systems that could be used and MUCH better in every way, including economically. The costs to society and the planet would be so much lower in every way, that it would be implemented already for many years if we lived in a sane world. But, as we know, we don't live in a sane world.
You are very wise. The Pathocracy of Nazi Germany moved their bomb making to the American Empire. The Pathocracy is now mainstream and a sane voice can barely be heard.

The other thing is that I don't think the general public is quite aware that nuclear power plants, after all the technical and dangerous processes, are just used to boil water (or are aware of the huge potential in the form of solar energy either).

horse said:
SeekinTruth said:
By the way, I'm not sure the lead claims about the Romans are accurate. I'm not positive, but I think that's just a whole lot of speculation without much evidence, and is useful in covering up what really brought down the Roman Empire. Or so I think.
The lead shows up in their bones and shows up again in the Middle Ages. I didn’t mean to imply that lead brought down the Roman Empire, but that no connection between the lead and sickness had been made. If a connection was ever made the lead industry would have covered it up, too. Radioactive isotopes cause disease. Sadly enough, the appeal to the economics usually beats an appeal to saving the genome.

OK, but I'd read many years ago about speculation that lead plumbing was a major cause of the decline of Ancient Rome. I've never come across any real evidence for that, and I'm not even sure that the Romans actually utilized lead to pipe water for their normal use. That was what I meant, but I could be wrong. The lead in their bones COULD be caused by some other, unidentified, source. Or so I think.
 

horse

Jedi
SeekinTruth said:
The other thing is that I don't think the general public is quite aware that nuclear power plants, after all the technical and dangerous processes, are just used to boil water (or are aware of the huge potential in the form of solar energy either).

Japan might have gone to geothermal or innovated something else, but interesting things happened… (link to japan war criminal turned media mogul) http://www.economist.com/news/christmas/21568589-media-mogul-whose-extraordinary-life-still-shapes-his-country-good-and-ill-japans

Solar energy has developed and should be a part of the mix. Solar doesn’t make people sick like nuclear energy or have the waste problems. The cost to put solar on every roof would be how many NPPs? More to the point, decentralized sources should be developed.

SeekinTruth said:
OK, but I'd read many years ago about speculation that lead plumbing was a major cause of the decline of Ancient Rome. I've never come across any real evidence for that, and I'm not even sure that the Romans actually utilized lead to pipe water for their normal use. That was what I meant, but I could be wrong. The lead in their bones COULD be caused by some other, unidentified, source. Or so I think.

Years back I’d read about the use of lead in Ancient Rome. The metal was easy to work with the technology of the time and it does have a sweet taste. Rome’s decline had many causes; finances, immigration, questionable leadership. Lead poisoning might be considered a contributing factor in dumbing down both populace and leaders. Would they have stopped using lead if they knew the dangers but had no alternatives? Can we stop using nuclear power if it causes health and genome problems? I will rework that analogy; it didn’t get the thought across.
 

horse

Jedi
Back on topic. Update on the WIPP facility radiation readings in Carlsbad. N.M. at Enenews.
http://enenews.com/just-in-new-tests-show-elevated-radiation-near-u-s-nuclear-site-more-airborne-radiation-detected-around-wipp-govt-issues-press-release-on-radiological-event-map

"U.S. Department of Energy Press Release, Feb 24, 2014: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today reported new environmental monitoring data [...] Results indicate slightly elevated levels of airborne radioactive concentrations, which are consistent with the waste disposed of at WIPP. The samples taken demonstrate these concentrations remain well below a level of public or environmental hazard. The samples were collected by WIPP radiological and environmental monitoring personnel February 17-18 [...] the release data showed a potential dose of less than one millirem at each of the environmental sampling locations. [...] WIPP is continuously monitoring the environment, and the latest air monitoring results ranged from 1.3 to 4.4 DPM [disintegrations per minute] based on preliminary analyses. [...] Numerous air, soil and water samples have been collected on and around the WIPP site since the radiological event on February 14 [...]" http://www.newswest9.com/story/24807209/new-results-indicate-elevated-levels-of-radioactive-concentrations-at-wipp-plant-in-carlsbad-new-mexico

Sounds okay when they give external dose readings. Breathe in particles of plutonium and the internal dose leads to cancer in 10 to 15 years. WIPP was designed for low level waste, not plutonium liquids. EPA made a late change to allow high level waste, that should not have been made. Industry has no safe place to store high level waste.
 
Top Bottom