 |
|
|
| | | published Friday, January 29, 2010 | 1638 Views :: 1 Comments |
By Patrick Oppmann, CNN
January 29, 2010 8:02 a.m. EST
Hanford Nuclear Site, Washington (CNN) -- The federal government has set aside nearly $2 billion in stimulus funds to clean up Washington State's decommissioned Hanford nuclear site, once the center of the country's Cold War plutonium production.
That is more stimulus funding than some entire states have received, which has triggered a debate as to whether the money is being properly spent.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, October 20, 2009 | 1891 Views :: 8 Comments |
NUCLEAR SCARS: TOXIC LEGACY OF THE COLD WAR
Los Angeles Times -- October 20, 2009
By Ralph Vartabedian
Reporting from Fernald Preserve, Ohio
Amid the family farms and rolling terrain of southern Ohio, one hill
stands out for its precise geometry.
The 65-foot-high mound stretching more than half a mile dominates a
tract of northern hardwoods, prairie grasses and swampy ponds, known as
the Fernald Preserve.
Contrary to appearances, there is nothing natural here. The high ground
is filled with radioactive debris, scooped from the soil around a former
uranium foundry that produced crucial parts for the nation's nuclear
weapons program.
Originally published by the Los Angeles Times at http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-radiation-fernald20-2009oct20,0,2659447.story
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Friday, June 26, 2009 | 2582 Views :: 11 Comments |
Sante Fe Reporter: Toxic Potpourri with Joni Arends
By: Corey Pein 06/24/2009
This month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released the final draft of a 558-page report 10 years in the making, the Los Alamos Historical Document Retrieval and Assessment Project. It found dangerous “airborne releases” from Los Alamos National Laboratory “were significantly greater than has been officially reported,” and that “exposure rates in public areas from the world’s first nuclear explosion”—the 1945 Trinity test—“were measured at levels 10,000 times higher than currently allowed.” SFR spoke to Joni Arends, executive director of Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety—which watchdogs the environmental and health effects of the work done at LANL—about the report. The CDC will hold a public meeting on the report at 5 pm Thursday, June 25 at the Hilton at Buffalo Thunder.
|
| read more.. |
|
| |
2009 Fact Sheet Global Nuclear Energy Parnership: Environomental and Security Risks | |
| | published Monday, February 23, 2009 | 433 Views :: 0 Comments |
In 2003 the Bush Administration launched the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), which it also called the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative. GNEP is designed to revive the practice of reprocessing irradiated nuclear fuel to separate out the plutonium. At the same time, however, it would endanger the environment, encourage nuclear bomb-making, squander U.S. taxpayer and ratepayer dollars, and deepen the nuclear waste problem.
Download 2009 Fact Sheet: GNEP4 final.pdf
|
|
| | | published Monday, December 01, 2008 | 5948 Views :: 1 Comments |
Federal Plan to Double Nuclear Power Relies on Dumping More Highly Radioactive Waste at Hanford Energy Department Hearings This Week Exclude Seattle, Portland and Spokane – only NW hearings to be in Tri-Cities (Monday) and Hood River (Tuesday)
Download pdf: Heart of America Northwest Press Release 08.11.17.pdf
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, October 20, 2008 | 3 Views :: 0 Comments |
Judith Mohling,
Friday, October 17, 2008
Is a revival of nuclear power an answer? No, for many reasons. Here are two of them.
Nuclear power is not democratic. The entire nuclear cycle, from uranium mining, to nuclear power or weapons production damages the health of communities. It's all lethal.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, February 19, 2008 | 3433 Views :: 0 Comments |
Estimated future environmental liability costs for the Pantex Plant top
$400 million, according to government figures obtained by a New Mexico
environmental group, but a Pantex official said the estimates are a few
years old and that such costs are expected to drop over time.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, April 12, 2007 | 2 Views :: 0 Comments |
Nearly 2,000 nuclear weapons tests have been conducted worldwide. The U.S. alone conducted 217 above-ground tests, about half of them at the Department of Energy’s Nevada Test Site (NTS), from the early 1950s to the early 1960s. Atmospheric fallout from these tests, and from the 30 underground tests known to have “vented” significant radiation, contained harmful radionuclides and was carried thousands of miles from the test site. At the time, the U.S. government assured the American public that testing was safe and necessary to protect them.
Download PDF: Health FS 2007.pdf
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Wednesday, April 12, 2006 | 2 Views :: 0 Comments |
Nearly 2,000 nuclear weapons tests have been conducted worldwide. The U.S. alone conducted 217 aboveground tests. About half of them were exploded at the Department of Energy’s Nevada Test Site from the early 1950s to the early 1960s. Atmospheric fallout from the aboveground tests, and the thirty underground tests known to have “vented” significant radiation contained harmful radionuclides and was carried thousands of miles from the Test Site. The government assured the public that testing was a safe and necessary part of protecting America.
In 1983 Congress directed the National Cancer Institute
(NCI) to study the health impacts of U.S.
nuclear testing fallout, in particular radioactive iodine,
I-131. After more than a decade and much pressure
from public interest groups and Congress, the
study was released in 1997.
Download PDF: Health2006.pdf
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Wednesday, April 12, 2006 | 2 Views :: 0 Comments |
The Department of Energy (DOE) has produced radioactive materials for nuclear bombs; designed, built, and tested nuclear weapons; and developed reactor and other technologies with little concern for the environmental harm those activities cause. The inevitable result is that all DOE sites are polluted. Nevertheless, DOE remains far more interested
in protecting its pollution-causing activities than in correcting the harm they have already done.
Download PDF: Cleanup2006.pdf
|
| read more.. |
|
|
 |
|