Tree Hugger Thread

[Vrede too]

Groups File for Injunction to
KEEP LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE OFF OUR HIGHWAYS

Prepared Remarks by Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear, re: proposed highly radioactive liquid waste shipments

[rstrong]

Groups File for Injunction to
KEEP LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE OFF OUR HIGHWAYS

They'd prefer shipping by air?

BTW, this isn't waste from nuclear weapon production or even nuclear power. It's left over from the production of medical isotopes.

[Vrede too]

On-site, retrievable, dry cask storage is safer than Mobile Chernobyls.

"Chalk River has been solidifying exactly the same kind of liquid waste for over ten years already. In 2011 Chalk River promised to handle all this material on site."

WNC should not be subsidizing Ontario and SC with our health and safety. Plus, Chalk River Laboratories does more than just "production of medical isotopes".

[O Really]

Just curious, but with 90-something percent of Canadians living within 100 miles of the US border, and all that empty space up there with the moose, they couldn't have come up with somewhere better than South Carolina to dump the waste? Not that a lot of SC isn't waste too, but still.

[JTA]

Just curious, but with 90-something percent of Canadians living within 100 miles of the US border, and all that empty space up there with the moose, they couldn't have come up with somewhere better than South Carolina to dump the waste? Not that a lot of SC isn't waste too, but still.

The dregs of humanity couldn't go any further due to an ocean being in the way, so they decided to stop walking and claim a parcel of land theirs. This land became known as South Carolina.

[Seth Milner]

Groups File for Injunction to
KEEP LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE OFF OUR HIGHWAYS

They'd prefer shipping by air?
That is a dumb action; totally not thought through. Perhaps they should con the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, or a latter-day Flying Nun . . .


BTW, this isn't waste from nuclear weapon production or even nuclear power. It's left over from the production of medical isotopes.
Now that right there is a great big 'ol opps!
"For every action, there is an opposite and opposing reaction", meaning in this case, man produces something that is good and beneficial, but it in turn produces something that is detrimental.

[Boatrocker]

Groups File for Injunction to
KEEP LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE OFF OUR HIGHWAYS

They'd prefer shipping by air?
That is a dumb action; totally not thought through. Perhaps they should con the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, or a latter-day Flying Nun . . .


BTW, this isn't waste from nuclear weapon production or even nuclear power. It's left over from the production of medical isotopes.
Now that right there is a great big 'ol opps!
"For every action, there is an opposite and opposing reaction", meaning in this case, man produces something that is good and beneficial, but it in turn produces something that is detrimental.

Perhaps you miss the point, methinks . . . again.

Groups File for Injunction to
KEEP LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE OFF OUR HIGHWAYS

. . . and on Canadian highways.

[Vrede too]

Groups File for Injunction to
KEEP LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE OFF OUR HIGHWAYS

. . . and on Canadian highways.

Nope. The plaintiffs include Canadians, without a Canadian dump the Mobile Chernobyl waste won't be on Canadian highways, either, and the safer on-site, retrievable, dry cask storage doesn't put it on any highways.

... “Shipping highly radioactive liquid waste to South Carolina is wildly inappropriate," said Dr. Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility. "Chalk River has been solidifying exactly the same kind of liquid waste for over ten years already. In 2011 Chalk River promised to handle all this material on site." He added, "It was recently learned that Indonesia is going to be down-blending its high-level liquid waste on site, rather than sending it to the Savannah River Site, and Canada can do the same thing, making the high-risk transport of this material over public roads completely unnecessary.” ...

[rstrong]

On-site, retrievable, dry cask storage is safer than Mobile Chernobyls.

Storage at one site is safer than two. Especially when the second site is being abandoned in place.

Chalk River is in the middle of being shut down altogether. I'd rather trust the continued funding and security of a facility that's still operating.

The plan to move the waste to the US came from Canada's commitment at a 2012 global nuclear security summit to return highly enriched uranium (HEU) inventories to the United States to lessen the risk of nuclear terrorism. (The HEU used to make the medical isotopes came

At Savannah River, the waste will be down-blended in to low-enriched uranium fuel for U.S. reactors. So at least its being recycled, rather than more being produced.

Chalk River Laboratories does more than just "production of medical isotopes".

It did a lot more in the 50 years ago, but not so much recently. It would likely have been shut down many years earlier if not for the medical isotope production. There was a big panic when it was *temporarily* shut down in the 2000's - at the time it supplied about one-third of the world's medical isotopes, and about half of the North American supply.

Even the press release from the protesters - which makes a few dishonest claims - describes the waste as "left over from the production of medical isotopes."

[Vrede too]

On-site, retrievable, dry cask storage is safer than Mobile Chernobyls.

Storage at one site is safer than two. Especially when the second site is being abandoned in place.

There's zero evidence for that, and you're ignoring the transportation risks.

Chalk River is in the middle of being shut down altogether. I'd rather trust the continued funding and security of a facility that's still operating.

Now you're just making things up. All else equal do you trust US security, stability and responsibility more than Canada's?

The NRU reactor licence will expire in 2016, the license has been extended to March 2018 and reactor will go into decommission after that. NRU Decommissioning operations will continue for many years into the future within the scope of future operating and/or decommissioning licences issued by the CNSC.

"many years". Plus, decommissioning, which can take decades, doesn't mean that there won't still be the need for on-site monitoring and security for decades after that.

The plan to move the waste to the US came from Canada's commitment at a 2012 global nuclear security summit to return highly enriched uranium (HEU) inventories to the United States to lessen the risk of nuclear terrorism. (The HEU used to make the medical isotopes came

At Savannah River, the waste will be down-blended in to low-enriched uranium fuel for U.S. reactors. So at least its being recycled, rather than more being produced.

Reprocessing has it's own problems, and thanks to worldwide disfavor with nuclear there is no shortage of fuel.

Nuclear reprocessing

... The reprocessed uranium, which constitutes the bulk of the spent fuel material, can in principle also be re-used as fuel, but that is only economical when uranium prices are high....

Nuclear reprocessing reduces the volume of high-level waste, but by itself does not reduce radioactivity or heat generation and therefore does not eliminate the need for a geological waste repository. Reprocessing has been politically controversial because of the potential to contribute to nuclear proliferation, the potential vulnerability to nuclear terrorism, the political challenges of repository siting (a problem that applies equally to direct disposal of spent fuel), and because of its high cost compared to the once-through fuel cycle. In the United States, the Obama administration stepped back from President Bush's plans for commercial-scale reprocessing and reverted to a program focused on reprocessing-related scientific research.

... Site preparation at the Savannah River Site (South Carolina) began in October 2005. In 2011 the New York Times reported "...11 years after the government awarded a construction contract, the cost of the project has soared to nearly $5 billion. The vast concrete and steel structure is a half-finished hulk, and the government has yet to find a single customer, despite offers of lucrative subsidies." ...

Opps.

... Even the press release from the protesters - which makes a few dishonest claims

Such as?

- describes the waste as "left over from the production of medical isotopes."

"medical isotopes" doesn't make the waste any less dangerous to those along the routes.

[Seth Milner]

(....)

Now you're just making things up.

Oh shit! . . . . :violent:

Does this mean you won't be dancing hand-in-hand anymore?

[Seth Milner]

[rstrong]

On-site, retrievable, dry cask storage is safer than Mobile Chernobyls.

Storage at one site is safer than two. Especially when the second site is being abandoned in place.

There's zero evidence for that, and you're ignoring the transportation risks.

Bullshit.

It's simple common sense: An operating site is funded, maintained and secured. An abandoned site, even with a security guard, much less so. You can trust the future funding of a site providing many jobs far more than you can an abandoned site.

Two hazardous waste sites are by definition less safe than one.

You can trust the future of HEU when the plan is to immediately downgrade it for use in reactors, than you can when the plan is to simply store it indefinitely.

And given that the big storage tank in Deep River has already leaked, yes, I trust those mobile casks and their with military escorts more.

All else equal do you trust US security, stability and responsibility more than Canada's?

I doubt there's any difference. But everything above applies to both countries.

thanks to worldwide disfavor with nuclear there is no shortage of fuel.

Not true. Existing reactors still need to be refueled periodically. The number of new reactors under construction still outnumbers those being decommissioned. There's as much a market as there ever was.

What HAS made a difference in the last couple decades is the US and Russia downsizing their nuclear weapons stockpiles and downgrading several hundred tons of HEU and plutonium for use in reactors. That agreement ended a couple years ago.

... Even the press release from the protesters - which makes a few dishonest claims

Such as?

Such as the press conference link claim "A spill into Lake Ontario could ruin the drinking water supply for nine million people in the U.S., Canada, and a large number of Native American First Nations downstream. "

Sure, you don't want it. But there's such a thing as dilution. Even if a cask breaks open, we're only talking about a small amount of material.

Think of the radiation coming across from Japan a few years ago. Yes, it was detectable in North America. There were entirely accurate illustrations of the contamination plume extending over North America. But the increase in radiation was less than the increase observed in a typical, normal rain shower.

Again you don't want it. But the press conference link claim is a wildly dishonest. And there are worse things going into the water supply, and in larger amounts.

[Seth Milner]

...There's zero evidence for that, and you're ignoring the transportation risks . . . .
...thanks to worldwide disfavor with nuclear there is no shortage of fuel . . . .
... Even the press release from the protesters - which makes a few dishonest claims . . . .

...Bullshit . . . .
...Not true . . . .
...such as? . . .

Do I hear the distant sounds of thunder . . . ? Is the dance coming to an end . . .?

[rstrong]

Do I hear the distant sounds of thunder . . . ? Is the dance coming to an end . . .?

Vrede and I regularly disagree. This has been pointed out to you several times. It's just that one of the few things we can agree on is that you're a bigoted, homophobic, racist, misogynistic dumpster fire of a human being.

You still don't get it because you're also a moron. This hasn't been pointed out to you as often as perhaps it should, because you do so with most every post.

Hope This Helps!

[Vrede too]

To be fair to Seth Milner, he's not smart or mature enough to be able to understand or participate in the topics we disagree on. That's why he whines so that we're twinning when we routinely agree on his simplistic nonsense and bigotry.

Bullshit.

It's simple common sense: An operating site is funded, maintained and secured. An abandoned site, even with a security guard, much less so. You can trust the future funding of a site providing many jobs far more than you can an abandoned site.

Two hazardous waste sites are by definition less safe than one.

You can trust the future of HEU when the plan is to immediately downgrade it for use in reactors, than you can when the plan is to simply store it indefinitely.

And given that the big storage tank in Deep River has already leaked, yes, I trust those mobile casks and their with military escorts more.

Bullshit.

It would never be "abandoned" with just "a security guard" unless Canadians are idiots, and active site work from continuing operations and decommissioning is going to take many, many years.

"leaked"? What part of DRY cask storage as Chalk River is already doing was unclear to you?

"the plan" has failed, as I posted:

... Site preparation at the Savannah River Site (South Carolina) began in October 2005. In 2011 the New York Times reported "...11 years after the government awarded a construction contract, the cost of the project has soared to nearly $5 billion. The vast concrete and steel structure is a half-finished hulk, and the government has yet to find a single customer, despite offers of lucrative subsidies." ...

You're still ignoring the transportation risks in your unfounded 'one site is better than two' calculus. Plus, it's not even ever going to be one site. Savannah River is not taking ALL of Chalk River's waste. It will need monitoring and security for thousands of years unless some other dump/solution is come up with.

Not true. Existing reactors still need to be refueled periodically. The number of new reactors under construction still outnumbers those being decommissioned. There's as much a market as there ever was....

You're trying to make a logical argument without making the effort to see if it has any foundation in reality.

Uranium Price Falls to 11-Year Low

... the ramp-up of nuclear power plants was much slower than anticipated and at the same time stockpiles of the commodity remained high.

... there is little incentive for new production. In fact, many companies have slashed production as weak pricing has impacted the economics of uranium mining. On Monday, according to Ux Consulting, uranium prices fell to an 11-year low. Uranium is also finding new competition for an energy source thanks to the increase in availability and decrease in the price of natural gas....

Such as the press conference link claim "A spill into Lake Ontario could ruin the drinking water supply for nine million people in the U.S., Canada, and a large number of Native American First Nations downstream. "

Sure, you don't want it. But there's such a thing as dilution. Even if a cask breaks open, we're only talking about a small amount of material.

There is no safe level of radiation.

Think of the radiation coming across from Japan a few years ago. Yes, it was detectable in North America. There were entirely accurate illustrations of the contamination plume extending over North America. But the increase in radiation was less than the increase observed in a typical, normal rain shower.

You're comparing Lake Ontario to the Pacific Ocean? My guess is that you haven't even looked up what projections are out there for spills into Lake Ontario. If you had, as good a researcher as you are, you would have backed up your claim.

Again you don't want it. But the press conference link claim is a wildly dishonest.

Your one example failed. You're just repeating yourself.

And there are worse things going into the water supply, and in larger amounts.

"small", "worse" and "larger" are vague, and since when does existing pollution justify more pollution?

[Seth Milner]

Vrede and I regularly disagree. This has been pointed out to you several times.
Oh, I'm well aware of that fact. It's just that when two of the universe's greatest know-it-all's (legends in their own minds) bump heads, it's a real hoot to watch who tries to out-best the other, and who actually comes out on top.

It's just that one of the few things we can agree on is that you're a bigoted, homophobic, racist, misogynistic dumpster fire of a human being.
That's because you two, in addition to being legends in your own minds, are the bigger idiots.
I can live with that, because you two are doing a swell job at being what you are. (dumpster fire. . .? :-0?> )

You still don't get it because you're also a moron. This hasn't been pointed out to you as often as perhaps it should, because you do so with most every post. Hope This Helps!
Could that be because the others would see you as pots calling the kettle black? That should help you.

To be fair to Seth Milner, he's not smart or mature enough to be able to understand or participate in the topics we disagree on.
To be fair, there's no point in anybody, dumb or smart, seriously participating in any topics in these forums, because of the likes of you and rstrong.
You know it all, and if someone does err in a remark or the posting of a supposed fact or opinion; you don't know how to simply disagree with them; you go to extreme lengths to run them in the ground to prove them wrong, call them 'stupid' or some asinine name. Who in hell wants to engage in an "intelligent" discussion with you? "Debate" . . . there's your bullshit! I've gone back and read many of your past posts with individuals who were "on your side" that you pissed off with your superior attitude. There's your "smarts and maturity" in disagreeing with others. And, you know I'm just as "bigoted, homophobic, racist, & misogynistic" as either of you.

Keep your arguments with each other on-going, I'll still make fun of you. Neither of you are capable of taking what you dish out.
Piss on both of you.

That's why he whines so that we're twinning when we routinely agree on his simplistic nonsense and bigotry.
Whining . . . ? Hardly. I think you two are pathetic, immature, morons who argue about which of you are the biggest of said description.

[rstrong]

...

You asked a simple question, and I gave you a simple, honest and helpful answer. What more do you want?

Sheesh.

[Seth Milner]

...

You asked a simple question, and I gave you a simple, honest and helpful answer. What more do you want?
Sheesh.

Yeah, I know. You and I are plain and simple; I'm plain, and you're simple . . . .

[Vrede too]

A video including this real pic got me to Thomas P. Peschak's website:



Yikes. Found tons of amazing pics. I've done this in HI, way cool if you ever get the chance: