141–150 of 254 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sounds like the same story as Rocky Flats west of Denver. Same thing, after "Cleanup" it's a (still radioactive) nature preserve and housing development now.
Do you have evidence of this? I’ve looked into Rocky Flats specifically because I live in the area, and I can’t find any evidence that radiation levels are dangerous.
> ... tested to see if they remain safe and reliable for use in the nuclear stockpile. Note here this expression " safe and reliable ", taken from the DoE's founding legislation, is officially re-interpreted to be very, very different from what a normal person would conclude. Most particularly, "safety" doesn't mean anything about risks to the public or to people handling equipment and materials. It does not mean any…
Always explode when we desire it/Never explode when we don't desire it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you have evidence of this? I’ve looked into Rocky Flats specifically because I live in the area, and I can’t find any evidence that radiation levels are dangerous.
I was about to mention Rocky Flats. It’s very easy to find the published evidence. This is from the EPA and mentions what was not cleaned up (of course that says it is safe): https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fus... But I would not believe that’s full disclosure. The EPA has a vested interest in finalizing superfund cleanups successfully. As far as I know, there is no oversight or third party a…
https://semspub.epa.gov/work/08/1985514.pdf
discusses the surface and groundwater monitoring of the downgradient plume samples and flowcharts the technical evaluation process without (that I saw on a cursory glance through) providing the raw data.
You should be able to request the raw data (Government data, freedom of infomation, etc) and chase up what it means or ask around your nearest university | friend in radiology | medicine, etc.
Not all 'radiation' is harmful, it has to be either ingested (and strong enough | toxic enough to cause health issues) or rise in concentration (outgassing of radon | other gases into enclosed basement spaces.
Currently they are monitoring the traces in downstream groundwater and staing that radiological isotopes are present (as expected) but ever downgrading (as they do).
Judgement of personal risk in that area should be made on the basis of degree of exposure to the area groundwater and its current state as time goes on.
My favorite nuclear disaster! Criticality events. I lived in Los Alamos for a while. I looked into renting a studio space. I became curious about the property across the street from my prospective rental which was surrounded by a chain link fence with green canvas. I researched and learned it was the site of an original Manhattan site waste dump which had, a few years prior, been enclosed with a negative pressure ten…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And the article said that after those criticality events, those in charge of the facility and safety of personnel just had people keep working instead of evacuating. And how exactly did they convince those employees to keep working? The employees are not making extra for not following rules, do people really just not care about their lives? (I don't for a second believe someone working in a nuclear lab would be una…
There is a very gung ho culture in labs about safety. It slows you down to do things right and when it comes to reviews the cowboys (and girls) who do things wrong but fast get better reviews because they get more done. Nuclear labs kill the people inside them at worst. Bio labs ... Well there's a reason why I think covid was the worst lab accident in human history.
And that reason likely has to do more with the fact that you're not a virologist nor someone who has a deep understanding of virus evolution and how Sars-CoV2 does what it does.
When I last looked into this–having been surprised to see the tour buses at Livermore bearing LLC identifiers, government sites don't usually have those--there was something about the lost plutonium having been an accounting issue versus physical misplacement. I don't see that on Wikipedia anymore, so not sure.
[1] https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/LOS-ALAMOS-Plutonium-...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Livermore_National_La...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was about to mention Rocky Flats. It’s very easy to find the published evidence. This is from the EPA and mentions what was not cleaned up (of course that says it is safe): https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/SiteProfiles/index.cfm?fus... But I would not believe that’s full disclosure. The EPA has a vested interest in finalizing superfund cleanups successfully. As far as I know, there is no oversight or third party a…
You can always self audit or ask a friend ... the 2022 Technical Report (400 pages) linked from your link https://semspub.epa.gov/work/08/1985514.pdf discusses the surface and groundwater monitoring of the downgradient plume samples and flowcharts the technical evaluation process without (that I saw on a cursory glance through) providing the raw data. You should be able to request the raw data (Government data, freed…
"The area is an industrial nuclear waste site, not a nature preserve. If you want to learn about prairies and wildlife, there are plenty of other non-contaminated areas in Colorado to visit and learn."
My opinion is that they are intentionally deceiving the unwitting public when they call a place like this a nature preserve and put trails on it. If it was called so and so former nuclear waste site people would make the decision to hike elsewhere. Just call it what it is, fence it off from the public, and move on. Same with the neighborhood.
My favorite nuclear disaster! Criticality events. I lived in Los Alamos for a while. I looked into renting a studio space. I became curious about the property across the street from my prospective rental which was surrounded by a chain link fence with green canvas. I researched and learned it was the site of an original Manhattan site waste dump which had, a few years prior, been enclosed with a negative pressure ten…
Fun fact, if you ever want to locate sketchy sites, the keyword is "Wildlife Management Area". Odds are pretty good it's going to be some former superfund, government, chemical, or industrial cleanup site. They do their best to clean up what they can and then declare it a nature preserve. E.g. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quehanna_Wild_Area
"The area is an industrial nuclear waste site, not a nature preserve. If you want to learn about prairies and wildlife, there are plenty of other non-contaminated areas in Colorado to visit and learn."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can always self audit or ask a friend ... the 2022 Technical Report (400 pages) linked from your link https://semspub.epa.gov/work/08/1985514.pdf discusses the surface and groundwater monitoring of the downgradient plume samples and flowcharts the technical evaluation process without (that I saw on a cursory glance through) providing the raw data. You should be able to request the raw data (Government data, freed…
My issue with it is captured in this quote from the website candelisglows.com: "The area is an industrial nuclear waste site, not a nature preserve. If you want to learn about prairies and wildlife, there are plenty of other non-contaminated areas in Colorado to visit and learn." My opinion is that they are intentionally deceiving the unwitting public when they call a place like this a nature preserve and put trails…
The surface layers down for a few feet are highly unlikely to have any waste (assuming the US can do a rehab properly) and the actual radiation risk is likely to be far far less than hiking in totally "natural" granite ridges where radon gases pool daily until breezes clear them out.