I thought radiation containment containers couldn't be punctured?

ensho

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:24 AM
Original message

I thought radiation containment containers couldn't be punctured?

http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/index.php?smp=&lang=eng

Calif.

Authorities say a hazardous materials response team was called when an air cargo container holding radioactive material was punctured at a remote freight facility near Los Angeles International Airport. Brian Humphrey of the Los Angeles Fire Department says no one was injured or evacuated in the incident Saturday evening on Imperial Highway in El Segundo. Humphrey says the parcel was isolated and contained by a city fire hazmat team. He says it wasn't immediately clear why the container broke open or what exactly was inside.)
-----------------------

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

gristy

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:28 AM
Response to Original message

1. Anything can be punctured

"Puncturability" (is there such a word?) would have to be balanced against other important container design goals, such as weight (in this case).

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tikki

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:31 AM
Response to Original message

2. This is why you want...

your nuclear waste shipped all over the United States
from one contaminated place to another to contaminate...
like some frickin' ponzi game. :sarcasm:

angry Tikki :grr:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ensho

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #2

3. and they say no one was hurt - like it takes awhile for cancer to show itself

leukemia creeps up on silent feet

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Tikki

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:36 AM
Response to Reply #3

4. What you say is true.....

sadly....too very true.

Tikki

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

madokie

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #2

5. Just think what would happen if they were to add a few more hundred to go with the 106 we have now

how much more of the hazardout radioactive material would be on our hiways and byways. If we had only spent a smidgen of the money thats been wasted on subsidies for the nuclear power industry toward alternate forms of energy we would have gotten a much better return on the billions spent. Spending more money on nuclear energy at this point is only throwing good money after bad, yes its a waste actually.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

pitohui

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #5

7. it could be medical waste

Edited on Sun May-11-08 11:53 AM by pitohui

the energy industry isn't the only source of radioactive material unfortunately

altho i agree with everything you say about the wicked waste of billions spent on subsidizing/developing nuclear energy, which has proven to be such a dangerous disappointment -- we really knew by the 70s that this industry was a terrible idea and we could have taken an alternate path then with some of these funds

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

madokie

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #7

9. I sometime forget that there is some good uses for radioactive materials

Generating electricity on a large scale is not one of them though

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

pitohui

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:49 AM
Response to Original message

6. why would you think that? anything can be punctured

if you believe something contrary to common sense and science merely because it makes it easier to sleep at night...one day your sweet dreams are going to get punctured, that's for sure!

we have many examples of radiation containment vessels being punctured and leaking down thru the years

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

ensho

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #6

8. I think it because the govt. said they could be in accidents and not bust open

that they wouldn't puncture or crack.

that shipping these containers was not a hazard.

that's why.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bperci108

(969 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun May-11-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message

10. Read closer:

"...air cargo container holding radioactive material..."

And think about it; they're not talking about high-level waste. The shielding required to transport that material can only be hauled by truck or rail car.

More than likely it was medical in nature, i.e. low-level materials like radioisotopes used in cancer treatment, or nuclear physics research samples or something similar. That's the only type of "radioactive" placarded haz-mat stuff that flies.

Sometimes freight handlers poke a hole in a container with the fork truck forks. Because it's a haz-mat placarded container, haz-mat emergency response is called to be on the cautious side.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sat May 04th 2024, 10:26 AM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.