Guest Taoist_Saint Posted March 25, 2005 Report Share Posted March 25, 2005 Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Mar 25 2005, 01:30 PM Tao,The intermountain West makes better sense for nuclear waste storage because it's more sparsely populated and because it's drier, which cuts down on potential water-intrusion problems. (The Gulf-region salt mines look pretty good, too, as was pointed out). A better place would be an even less populated area...how about the middle of the desert?And again, if this nuclear waste is so safe...and its containers so secure...why choose a sparsely populated area? Why not just store it where it was produced?The only reason I'd be skeptical of storing the waste at the proposed Utah site is that it might take the pressure of the Yucca Mountain site, which has been studied and restuded and has had gazillions of dollars invested in it and has me convinced that it's as good a site as any.From what I have heard, there was some falsified research at Yucca Mountain that was discovered, which has put the safety of that location into question. That is why Utah is a little concerned that this Utah site might not be "Temporary" at all.As to the politics of Utah---I doubt any state would lobby for the priviledge--tends to lower property values!'Course, Dugway, Utah doesn't exactly top the list of real estate hot-spots. Could property values there possibly go any lower? B)Do Utah Politicians have any say in this at all? I thought it was up to the "sovereign" Goshute "Indian" nation that agreed to accept money in return for storing the waste on their land. You think they would have learned about making deals with the white man a long time ago.I'm sure they were paid a real fair price for the use of their land Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheProudDuck Posted March 25, 2005 Report Share Posted March 25, 2005 A better place would be an even less populated area...how about the middle of the desert?Skull Valley pretty much is in the middle of the desert. Although I suppose you could probably find some place in darkest Nevada even farther upwind from any populated area.And again, if this nuclear waste is so safe...and its containers so secure...why choose a sparsely populated area? Why not just store it where it was produced?Redundancy. Put the waste in ludicrously overengineered containers so nothing can get out, and then put it in the middle of nowhere so if it does get out, it won't be close enough to anything to bother anyone.From what I have heard, there was some falsified research at Yucca Mountain that was discovered, which has put the safety of that location into question.Nevada doesn't want nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, no matter how safe it's proven to be. Environmentalists don't want nuclear waste stored anywhere; they figure if they can tie up the disposal question in litigation for decades, the lack of any place to put the waste will eventually force nuclear power plants to shut down. (And be replaced by coal plants, which produce vastly more pollution, and produce radioactive waste of their own, and contribute to global warming, and which have killed thousands of people compared to *zero* people killed by nuclear power in the United States. Great thinking, that.) So every "i" and "t" that arguably isn't dotted or crossed right in with the endless reams of paper documenting Yucca Mountain becomes a wedge for another round of delaying litigation. Winning the litigation isn't the goal; the litigation itself is the strategy. It is literally designed to go on forever. Sometimes I really hate my job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Taoist_Saint Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 Ok, that is the information you have... But read the article I posted above which shows that we have two stories that contradict each other. Which is correct? Who can you really trust? How would you know this for certain that your information is correct, without being a nuclear scientist? Not being a nuclear scientist, is it better to be extra-cautious and just move away from SLC, or is it better to just trust the NRC's story with your family's lives? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DisRuptive1 Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 We have yet to deal with a nuclear accident that is so phenomenal to take action to prevent it in the future. Just relax, and let come what may. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Taoist_Saint Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Mar 25 2005, 05:07 PM We have yet to deal with a nuclear accident that is so phenomenal to take action to prevent it in the future. Just relax, and let come what may. I guess that is what I plan to do. I just find it sad (and scary) that it is all I can do.I think my daughter deserves better than for me to just do nothing and hope for the best. That is why I opened this topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheProudDuck Posted March 26, 2005 Report Share Posted March 26, 2005 How would you know this for certain that your information is correct, without being a nuclear scientist?You don't need to become a nuclear scientist. You just need a little basic background information, which you could probably get out of a halfway decent encyclopedia or physics textbook at the library.What, exactly, is the nightmare scenario you're worried about? I mean the worst-case scenario, the one that would have you considering moving away from Salt Lake to avoid. Let me take a shot at a few scenarios:First, assume that the containers of waste are collected at Skull Valley and just sit there. What are the risks from that? Basically, none. U-238 (spent nuclear fuel) can't go boom like U-235, no matter what you do with it. My understanding is that spent fuel rods, when they're disposed of, are so depleted, and then diluted with inert material, that they can't even sustain a low-level fission reaction (like what happens inside nuclear reactors.) Basically, all the fuel does is decay, giving off radiation that diminishes over time. While you don't want to be standing right next to an open pile of spent fuel because of the radiation from decay, that problem is easily solved if you move a hundred yards or so away. And the Goshute disposal site is what, 100 miles from Salt Lake? It might as well be in China for all the effect it would have.Next, assume that the containers at the site got breached in some way or another. I think it's unlikely that a gang of terrorists with RPGs would manage to sneak undetected into the US and approach a heavily-guarded site close enough to blow a hole in a container, but let's say Abdul and Achmed get lucky and blow an eight-inch hole in a container like the salesman in the article you posted supposedly did. The result? A few pounds of material spills onto the ground and sits there unshielded. Again, walk a hundred yards away and there'll be no detectable increase in radiation.Next, assume Abdul and Achmed get really, really lucky and not only breach a bunch of containers, but set off a gigantic bomb and blast some debris up into the air during a strong west wind. Some radioactive dust would get carried along (I'm assuming a really, really big bomb -- in the neighborhood of 2000 pounds, enough to get dust up high enough that it doesn't come right down.) Again, remember that we're dealing with U-238, not U-235; it's nowhere near as nasty as fallout from a nuclear explosion. Skull Valley is miles and miles away from Salt Lake, with mountains intervening. Very little dust would wind up anywhere near Salt Lake, and by the time it got there, it would be so diluted that the increase in radiation a person would be exposed to would be minimal. Nobody's terribly comfortable with accepting even a minimal amount of radiation, but keep in mind that you get plenty of radiation flying in an airplane, or living next to a coal mine (let alone working in one!) or living in a place with high natural background radiation, like Denver. The dose makes the poison. Just as you wouldn't drink a bottle of arsenic but probably wouldn't have a problem drinking a glass of spring water (which has some natural arsenic in it), there comes a point where the risk is insignificant. Same goes for Abdul and Achmed stealing a container or two, grinding it up, and pouring it into a reservoir. As Cal pointed out, by the time it got sent through a municipal water supply, it would be so diluted that it might as well not even exist.Basically, it looks like your main worry is what terrorists might do to the waste. If a terrorist thoguht an attack on a nuclear waste storage facility were a good idea, he'd probably have already tried to mount one on the waste stored next to reactors around the country, which are a lot closer to population centers and would therefore have a lot greater effect (although still a puny one). In answer to the question of why, if transporting and storing waste is so safe, why it shouldn't just be kept where it is, I think the desert West is just a better place for this stuff. It adds one more layer of redundancy, which engineers and lawyers always like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha_female Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 Originally posted by Taoist_Saint+Mar 24 2005, 05:16 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Taoist_Saint @ Mar 24 2005, 05:16 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--DisRuptive1@Mar 24 2005, 04:11 PM The government isn't going to knowingly radiate the populace. Relax buddy. The key word is "knowingly".Are we confident the government never makes mistakes?What about when they tested the Atomic Bomb? I read that this caused cancer and other problems for lots of little Nevada and Utah kids.Read this:http://www.deseretnews.com/dn/sview/1,3329...50010204,00.htmIt is written in The Lord's newspaper so it must be true. My ex-husband's dad lived for a time in Nevada, and eventually died of pancreatic cancer. The ex believes that the cancer was probably caused because he was one of those downwinders. Scary stuff, it makes me glad I live where I do in Southern California. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedomansam Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Mar 24 2005, 05:35 PM because nuclear waste is stored at San O hehe, i always love surfing in front of the nuclear plant.the only valid fear about nuclear waste is the transportation situation. that's where the risk is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DisRuptive1 Posted March 27, 2005 Report Share Posted March 27, 2005 I think TS is just an attention whore. He thinks that his nuclear waste is so much better than everybody elses and that it's going to be the stuff that's targeted by terrorist bombs compared to other nuclear storage facilities around the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Taoist_Saint Posted March 28, 2005 Report Share Posted March 28, 2005 I've learned alot from those that responded...and I recently talked to a physicist about this, who told me basically the same thing you guys did. So I feel better about this today. But to be honest I am a bit disappointed. I thought I was going to have a legitimate reason to move my family out of Utah, and now that dream is shattered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheProudDuck Posted March 28, 2005 Report Share Posted March 28, 2005 Originally posted by Taoist_Saint@Mar 28 2005, 04:41 PM I've learned alot from those that responded...and I recently talked to a physicist about this, who told me basically the same thing you guys did. So I feel better about this today. But to be honest I am a bit disappointed. I thought I was going to have a legitimate reason to move my family out of Utah, and now that dream is shattered. Now, I probably would have moved out of Dugway, near where the storage site is set to be -- but I wouldn't be caught dead in Dugway anyway, as it is (1) right next to a chemical-weapons storage and disposal site which is a whole lot more dangerous than the nuclear-waste storage would ever be, and (2) it's in the middle of a desolate nowhere bleaker than the armpit of Pluto. Although I did go out to a movie once with a Miss Tooele County from Dugway, and she was nice enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenifer Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Mar 25 2005, 07:58 PM I think the desert West is just a better place for this stuff. It adds one more layer of redundancy, which engineers and lawyers always like. I agree, although I think that the Southern California desert would be a much better place to store nuclear waste. It's only a matter of time until that s***hole falls into the ocean anyways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pushka Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by Taoist_Saint@Mar 28 2005, 04:41 PM But to be honest I am a bit disappointed. I thought I was going to have a legitimate reason to move my family out of Utah, and now that dream is shattered. Do you have to have a legitimate reason to move out...if you wanna move anyway, just do it...:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JRodan Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by Jenifer@Mar 31 2005, 12:49 AM It's only a matter of time until that s***hole falls into the ocean anyways. Does Jenifer let you kiss her with that dirty mouth of yours? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Taoist_Saint Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by pushka@Mar 31 2005, 08:17 AM Do you have to have a legitimate reason to move out...if you wanna move anyway, just do it...:) Utah is not the best place for an inactive Mormon to live. But for family reasons, we have to stay here...for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DisRuptive1 Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Something about a whole lot of heat and wind makes me think that the california deserts aren't the best place for nuclear waste. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheProudDuck Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by DisRuptive1@Mar 31 2005, 01:21 PM Something about a whole lot of heat and wind makes me think that the california deserts aren't the best place for nuclear waste. Park the stuff out at Fort Irwin. It's a gazillion miles from nowhere, dry as dust, and has enough guys wearing green shirts hanging around to give even a really virgin-hungry terrorist second thoughts.Or there's plenty of places in Utah, Nevada, and eastern Oregon that would do fine, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pushka Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by Taoist_Saint+Mar 31 2005, 10:18 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Taoist_Saint @ Mar 31 2005, 10:18 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--pushka@Mar 31 2005, 08:17 AM Do you have to have a legitimate reason to move out...if you wanna move anyway, just do it...:) Utah is not the best place for an inactive Mormon to live. But for family reasons, we have to stay here...for now. Sorry to hear that Tao...hope your situation improves so that it is not too uncomfortable for you whilst you still have to live there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Taoist_Saint Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 Originally posted by pushka@Mar 31 2005, 03:36 PM Sorry to hear that Tao...hope your situation improves so that it is not too uncomfortable for you whilst you still have to live there. Its not so bad...just a little inconvenient at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DisRuptive1 Posted March 31, 2005 Report Share Posted March 31, 2005 At least you get a nice supply of new missionaries coming to your house every so often. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.