Latest Breaking News

Omaha Steve

(99,635 posts) Wed Jun 17, 2015, 10:15 AM Jun 2015

Cleanup of Ohio uranium plant expected to take decades more

Source: AP

PIKETON, Ohio (AP) — The U.S. Department of Energy says the cleanup of a Cold War-era uranium plant in southern Ohio is expected to take another three decades or more.

U.S. Sen. Rob Portman had asked whether the administration was committed to the earlier goal of finishing the cleanup at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant in Piketon by 2024. In a response that was shared Tuesday by Portman, the department says that isn't an achievable goal. It says its target range for finishing the decommissioning and decontamination work is now between 2044 and 2052.

The cleanup employs more than 1,800 people and provides some of the best-paying jobs in a pocket of high unemployment. Last year, hundreds of layoffs were threatened until Congress provided a last-minute infusion of funding.

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/38109f5175614a81b4702ec6416f96f4/cleanup-ohio-uranium-plant-expected-take-decades-more

5 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Cleanup of Ohio uranium plant expected to take decades more (Original Post) Omaha Steve Jun 2015 OP

It will take longer to clean up the plant then it was in operation Botany Jun 2015 #1

Sounds like their model is the Hanford 'clean-up' pscot Jun 2015 #2

How about this? Nuke energy as a "climate-friendly option"? Peace Patriot Jun 2015 #3

But but nuclear is sooo cheap! If you don't count the decades and billions in clean-up costs on point Jun 2015 #4

"Let's not add to it with any new nuclear plants" - tell it to Lindsey Graham wordpix Jun 2015 #5

Botany

(70,504 posts)

1. It will take longer to clean up the plant then it was in operation

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 10:47 AM

Jun 2015

It produced both bomb grade and reactor grade uranium along w/tons
of toxins.

pscot

(21,024 posts)

2. Sounds like their model is the Hanford 'clean-up'

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 11:00 AM

Jun 2015

Sixty years of cost+ contracts and billions and billions of dollars in profit.

Peace Patriot

(24,010 posts)

3. How about this? Nuke energy as a "climate-friendly option"?

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 11:26 AM

Jun 2015

Clean Energy Groups Launch International Campaign to Keep Nuclear Power Out of Global Climate Talks
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141119792#post11

More Chernobyls, Fukushimas, Ohios and Hanfords in our future...as the "solution" to predatory capitalism's destruction of Planet Earth?

Insanity! And it tells just how insane predatory, unregulated capitalism is, that we, who are stuck with the un-cleanups of nuke pollution, that we, who have been stuck with all the costs of these horrors, from start to limitless toxicity, are now letting the profiteers use their profits from us, to LOBBY for more of the same, using the death of Planet Earth as their OPPORTUNITY.

It boggles the mind!

on point

(2,506 posts)

4. But but nuclear is sooo cheap! If you don't count the decades and billions in clean-up costs

Reply to Omaha Steve (Original post)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 12:24 PM

Jun 2015

Not to mention the centuries of protecting the 'waste'.

We are already leaving future generations with the disaster of climate change and the existing nuclear waste, not to mention those nuclear plants with accidents!

Let's not add to it with any new nuclear plants!!!

wordpix

(18,652 posts)

5. "Let's not add to it with any new nuclear plants" - tell it to Lindsey Graham

Reply to on point (Reply #4)

Wed Jun 17, 2015, 01:56 PM

Jun 2015

He got two new nukes' approval in SC. He should be hounded on this subject throughout the campaign until he shrivels to nothingness

Reply to this discussion