U.S. Nuclear Cleanup Carries Major Risks 522
Roland Piquepaille writes "New Scientist reports in this pretty alarming article that there is a 50-50 chance of a major radiation or chemical accident during the cleanup of the dirtiest nuclear site in the U.S. There are indeed lots of things to clean at the Hanford complex in Washington state: 67 tons of plutonium and 190 million liters of liquid radioactive waste stored in underground tanks. A third of them, dating from the Cold War, have already leaked 4 million liters in the environment, contaminating the groundwater and a river. Meanwhile, officials at the DOE, who'll spend $50 billion between now and 2035 on this cleanup, seem less worried than the different specialists interviewed by New Scientist. Please read this overview for selected quotes from the article and from the Hanford site. You'll also find a slide from the DOE showing the timeframe for the cleanup."
Do we really need Washington state? (Score:0, Funny)
I live downstream... (Score:3, Funny)
I live downstream. Would you like to shake any of my three hands?
Cheap vacation! (Score:2, Funny)
Plus glow in the dark showers!!
Book me now!
There is a silver lining. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:To the sun! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:67 tons of Pu... (Score:5, Funny)
Ahh, come on. Nuclear waste ain't all that bad. (Score:1, Funny)
Wouldn't that be cool?
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
Is this complex near Redmond? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:So don't drink the water (Score:3, Funny)
Really! You asked"What could be better for wildlife and the environment?"
I'm not really anit-nuke but I thought the answer was pretty obvious;)