6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby seemslikeadream » Sun Feb 24, 2013 12:07 pm

Six tanks now said to be leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

The leaking of radioactive liquids at the Hanford, Wash., Nuclear Reservation is more extensive than previously reported. NBC's Lester Holt reports.
By M. Alex Johnson, staff writer, NBC News
The leaking of radioactive liquids at the Hanford, Wash., Nuclear Reservation is more extensive than previously reported, with six storage tanks affected, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee said Friday.

In a conference call with reporters Friday after a meeting with Energy Secretary Steven Chu, Inslee disclosed that six of the 177 tanks were leaking at the nuclear facility in Richland, in eastern Washington about 50 miles southeast of Yakima.
Inslee said Chu told him that evaluation system of the tank levels wasn't used correctly, raising the prospect that there may be even more leaks. But he said he was told that there was no immediate threat, a point the Energy Department reiterated in a statement Friday evening.

Hanford — which houses millions of gallons of radioactive waste left over from plutonium production for nuclear weapons — is already considered one of the most contaminated sites on Earth, the U.S. government says.
Last week, the U.S. Energy Department said that only one tank was leaking at Hanford.
"We need to get to the bottom of this," Inslee said. He called the disclosure "very disturbing news" and contended that the Energy Department needed a new plan to remove liquid from tanks that can't be repaired.
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and an outspoken critic of containment efforts at Hanford, toured the site this week — before Friday's announcement — and judged conditions there "an unacceptable threat to the Pacific Northwest for everybody," NBC station KING of Seattle reported. The Associated Press quoted Tom Towslee, a Wyden spokesman, as saying the senator will be asking the Government Accountability Office to investigate Hanford's tank monitoring and maintenance program.
An estimated 1 million gallons of waste has seeped out of the underground tanks and reached groundwater that will eventually reach the Columbia River, scientists say. The U.S. plans to build a plant to turn the waste into low-level radioactive glass for safe storage, but that facility is years behind schedule for its projected opening in 2019.
In a statement Friday evening, Inslee warned that the federal budget impasse — which could lead to a "sequestration," or cuts, of $1.2 trillion in federal spending over 10 years — made the Hanford predicament even more alarming.
"Frankly, the state Department of Ecology is not convinced that current storage is adequate to meet legal and regulatory requirements," Inslee said.
"With potential sequestration and federal budget cuts looming, we need to be sure the federal government maintains its commitment and legal obligation to the cleanup of Hanford," he said. "To see Hanford workers furloughed at the exact moment we have additional leakers out there is completely unacceptable."
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: 6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby General Patton » Sun Feb 24, 2013 1:14 pm

Mostly leftovers from making Nuclear weapons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanford_Site
The Hanford Site is a mostly decommissioned nuclear production complex on the Columbia River in the U.S. state of Washington, operated by the United States federal government. The site has been known by many names, including Hanford Project, Hanford Works, Hanford Engineer Works or HEW and Hanford Nuclear Reservation or HNR. Established in 1943 as part of the Manhattan Project in the town of Hanford in south-central Washington, the site was home to the B Reactor, the first full-scale plutonium production reactor in the world.[1] Plutonium manufactured at the site was used in the first nuclear bomb, tested at the Trinity site, and in Fat Man, the bomb detonated over Nagasaki, Japan.
During the Cold War, the project was expanded to include nine nuclear reactors and five large plutonium processing complexes, which produced plutonium for most of the 60,000 weapons in the U.S. nuclear arsenal.[2][3] Nuclear technology developed rapidly during this period, and Hanford scientists produced many notable technological achievements. Many of the early safety procedures and waste disposal practices were inadequate, and government documents have since confirmed that Hanford's operations released significant amounts of radioactive materials into the air and the Columbia River, which threatened the health of residents and ecosystems.[4]
The weapons production reactors were decommissioned at the end of the Cold War, but the decades of manufacturing left behind 53 million US gallons (200,000 m3) of high-level radioactive waste,[5] an additional 25 million cubic feet (710,000 m3) of solid radioactive waste, 200 square miles (520 km2) of contaminated groundwater beneath the site[6] and occasional discoveries of undocumented contaminations that slow the pace and raise the cost of cleanup.[7]
The Hanford site represents two-thirds of the nation's high-level radioactive waste by volume.[8] Today, Hanford is the most contaminated nuclear site in the United States[9][10] and is the focus of the nation's largest environmental cleanup.[2]


In May 2007, state and federal officials began closed-door negotiations about the possibility of extending legal cleanup deadlines for waste vitrification in exchange for shifting the focus of the cleanup to urgent priorities, such as groundwater remediation. Those talks stalled in October. In early 2008, a $600 million cut to the Hanford cleanup budget was proposed. Washington state officials expressed concern about the budget cuts, as well as missed deadlines and recent safety lapses at the site, and threatened to file a lawsuit alleging that the Department of Energy is in violation of environmental laws.[62] They appeared to step back from that threat in April after another meeting of federal and state officials resulted in progress toward a tentative agreement.[70]


http://www.spokesmanreview.com/news-sto ... ID=s948891
Washington Attorney General Christine Gregoire is threatening to sue over deep budget cuts proposed this week by the Bush administration that could slow Hanford's nuclear cleanup.

"The administration's budget is very troublesome to me," Gregoire said in an interview Tuesday.

The White House's 2002 budget calls for axing $458 million from Hanford cleanup, including $57 million for Hanford's worst environmental mess -- leaking high-level nuclear waste tanks that threaten the Columbia River.



http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2012/04/2 ... nford.html
The Senate is proposing increasing the Hanford budget for next year from the amount requested by the Obama administration, but the House is proposing a reduced budget.

The early Senate version of the budget proposes a $12 million increase and the early House version proposes a $27 million cut focused on the tank farms and the Plutonium Finishing Plant.

The report included with the House version also suggests that some legal agreements for environmental cleanup with states across the nation may not be realistic and will need to be renegotiated. The Senate report is not available yet.

Subcommittees for the Senate and House Appropriations committees have completed initial markups of the administration's budget request for fiscal 2013, which was close to the $2.2 billion being spent this year at Hanford. Markup totals for Hanford do not include security and safety costs, which are included elsewhere in the budget.



Long history of cutbacks.

http://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/HanfordCleanup
For more than forty years, reactors located at Hanford produced plutonium for America’s defense program. The process of making plutonium is extremely “inefficient” in that a massive amount of liquid and solid waste is generated while only a small amount of plutonium is produced. Additionally, all of the facilities and structures that were associated with Hanford’s defense mission must also be deactivated, decommissioned, decontaminated, and demolished. That environmental cleanup project is the work that approximately 11,000 Hanford employees are involved with today.
штрафбат вперед
User avatar
General Patton
 
Posts: 959
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 11:57 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby 82_28 » Sun Feb 24, 2013 1:54 pm

But one cannot deny all of this effort kept us safe. Just gotta take the blows. It was all for protection from "threats".

Jesus.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby FourthBase » Sun Feb 24, 2013 2:15 pm

82_28 wrote:But one cannot deny all of this effort kept us safe. Just gotta take the blows. It was all for protection from "threats".

Jesus.


Yep.

Atrocious math, for the most part.
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 7057
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby Project Willow » Sun Feb 24, 2013 9:09 pm

Thanks for the heads-up. Hanford has always been once massive quagmire of fuck-ups.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4798
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: 6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby wintler2 » Mon Feb 25, 2013 1:43 am

82_28 wrote:But one cannot deny all of this effort kept us safe. Just gotta take the blows. It was all for protection from "threats".
Jesus.


Ha ha, safe from what? not from deadly air & groundwater or fascist War State dictatorship, anyway.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby Iamwhomiam » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:26 am

This isn't news, really. It's been known they have been leaking for years.

And the West Valley, NY radioactive underground water plume is threatening to contaminate the Great Lakes.
More on W.Valley:
Wiki

NYS Department of Environmental Corruption

Citizens' Environmental Coalition

The Era of the Mad Scientists and their Failed Experiments will remain forever, glowing brightly as a memorial to their madness
User avatar
Iamwhomiam
 
Posts: 6572
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2007 2:47 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 6 tanks leaking at contaminated Hanford nuclear site

Postby 82_28 » Mon Feb 25, 2013 6:42 am

wintler2 wrote:
82_28 wrote:But one cannot deny all of this effort kept us safe. Just gotta take the blows. It was all for protection from "threats".
Jesus.


Ha ha, safe from what? not from deadly air & groundwater or fascist War State dictatorship, anyway.


Wintler, I can't tell if you're out-sarcastic-ing me or what. I'm gonna roll with the "did not get it". All those words up there, besides "Jesus" were not meant literally at all and in no uncertain terms. Though there obviously was some uncertainty. So, just clarifying.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
User avatar
82_28
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:34 am
Location: North of Queen Anne
Blog: View Blog (0)


Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 180 guests