Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: New Leak at Hanford Nuclear Waste Site is 'Catastrophic,' Worker Warns [View all]ZombetteZar
(3 posts)56. I was just stating facts...
I didn't say this wasn't a concern, but the leak hasn't reach the actual ground. Which was the question I was answering. I also including information that they weren't ignoring the leak.
This tank has been an issue for a long time. This is why they are in the process of moving the contents to another tank. The AY-102 tank was put in service in 1971 and in 2012 there were 857,000 gallons of sludge and supernatant. As of March of this year, they had moved an estimated 650,000 gallons of liquid from that tank. As of Sunday, before the leak was found, they had the sludge down to 14 inches deep which was approximately 46,000 gallons.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
62 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Ok - 8 inches sounds bad, but not if it's in a 50 gallon drum. A better estimate of the actual
jonno99
Apr 2016
#2
Nuclear energy never was "cheap" for taxpayers, only profitable for nuke builders.. ~eom
vkkv
Apr 2016
#5
I mean, it's perfectly safe, bananas are more dangerous, why do you hate science?!
MisterP
Apr 2016
#7
And genetically modified atoms are just as safe as geneticially modified tomatoes. Besides, Jesus.
valerief
Apr 2016
#17
The Outer Tank Constructed By Same Contractor Who Built New Orleans Levees - Relax
Yallow
Apr 2016
#32
Before that can happen in any serious way we need to stop the states and power companies that have
Dustlawyer
Apr 2016
#39
One of the reasons I support Bernie is that he is not so enmeshed in the political machinations
JDPriestly
Apr 2016
#40
I don't know why everyone in this thread seems determined to call this 'nuclear power' as if it was
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2016
#12
Usually when someone starts a sentence with 'so' a massive, ridiculous strawman follows.
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2016
#31
They are moved to a cooling pool until the decay heat is within spec for the cask.
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2016
#53
A lot of shit is, however. Fukishima!! This article's consequences, apply to the nuclear
FighttheFuture
Apr 2016
#20
Some percentage overlaps, but Fukushima Dai-ichi has no relevance to this issue.
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2016
#22
Oh PLEASE! Nuclear Waste being released into our environment is extremely relevant,
bvar22
Apr 2016
#29
"The failure of the inner shell demonstrates how UNSAFE our system of containment is"
AtheistCrusader
Apr 2016
#46
Thank you, JEB! You're doing what the Mainstream Media Monopoly doesn't do: Report the Truth.
Octafish
Apr 2016
#27
Call Japan. They have lots of experience in trying to cover nuclear leaks up while people die. n/t
jtuck004
Apr 2016
#28
MEANWHILE....THE MEDIA AND NATION ARGUE/OBSESS OVER BERNIE SANDERS AND THE POPE!
cynzke
Apr 2016
#42