Tweet
According to the Tri-City Herald, one of the double-walled containment tanks at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation appears to be rapidly developing a leak or potential leak. It is underground, so the observation mechanisms are subject to limitations:
More evidence was discovered this week that might indicate that one of Hanford’s double-shell tanks is deteriorating.
In early August, radioactive material was found between the inner and outer walls of an underground tank at Hanford for the first time, raising concerns that waste may be leaking out of the inner shell of the tank.
This week, more unusual material was found when a video camera inspected another part of the area between the inner and outer walls of Tank AY-102.
It was the first additional area of the tank checked as an investigation was launched.
A photo of the same area between the two shells of the tank in 2006 showed it was clean six years ago.
“We just have got to think it’s not encouraging to find another spot that clearly was not there in 2006,” said Cheryl Whalen, cleanup section manager for the Department of Ecology’s Nuclear Waste Program.
The state is the regulator of the tank waste, which includes 56 million gallons left from the past production of weapons plutonium and stored in underground tanks at Hanford.
The potential for disastrous leaks at the Hanford site are manifold:
Waste is being emptied from 149 single shell tanks, many of which have leaked waste into the soil in the past, into 28 newer double-shell tanks. The waste is intended to be held there until the last of it can be treated for disposal about 40 years from now.
How confident are you that a Mitt Romney or Barack Obama administration is capable of dealing with cleanups of Hanford, the scores of overloaded spent fuel pools at nuclear reactors around the USA, and helping states around the world forced into disaster capitalism modalities deal with their decaying and collapsing nuclear power plants and storage dumps?
I’m not.
Unless we reevaluate how we deal with nuclear waste, it is “Goodbye, Portland!” by 2030.
Look at some the recent headlines over the past few days at the Tri-City Herald I copied into a screenshot from early Sunday morning
22 Comments
Let’s not forget what’s still lurking at Fukushima either, ET…! 8-(
Geee Eeee, we bring good
thingsprofit to life and death to life.Recommended, Thanks for the continual focus and updates.
Indeed! ET has been performing yeoman’s work on this subject, as well as shining a bright light on other insults to our planet, such as arctic drilling. Unfortunately, ET’s posts make me realize two things; how incredibly irresponsible the PTB are, and the legacy we will leave our children.
I selfishly thank the higher powers that I am an old man, who will not have deal with the consequences of the polluted shitpile that we leave to them. I realize what we have lost, both our humanity and the wonderful ecosystem which we, as a species, have thoughtlessly trashed.
It’s difficult to imagine the consequences if the Columbia river becomes radioactive.
To be totally cynical and negative…what does it matter? Fukushima may wind up being an extinction event anyway. Portland and the rest of the USA could be a lost cause if the building housing the spent fuel pool collapses, as seems very possible.
Anyway, thanks for the news. Nuclear has got to stop.
Recommended! For a good summary of other reasons to stop investing in nuclear at the expense of safe renewables, as if ET did not provide enough reasons, see http://my.firedoglake.com/gregglevine/2012/09/02/end-of-summer-news-puts-nuclear-renaissance-on-permanent-vacation/#comment-231968
Nuclear power/weapons manufacturing and their VERY long lasting waste are the biggest danger to our planet even including all the other major stupidities occurring under the rule of corporations. I’ve been fighting this for over 35 years now.
it seems the apologist argument is that Fukushima only happened because the Japanese were involved, and that they are somehow culturally inferior where nuclear operations and disposal are concerned.
“That would NEVER happen in the USA!” Uh-huh …
What kind of energy do you believe in that will be adequate to meet the needs of modern society and which will not cause people’s energy bills to skyrocket?
tweeted and recommended with thanks et — i’m living in the portland metro area and i’d not heard a word about this
Hanford has been called the most polluted place on the planet. I spent a lot of time there from 1988 through 1998, as my best friend was a nuclear activist who lived in or near Richland. DOE spends billions trying to remediate the damage and leakage, but they are falling further and further behind.
I have a lot of family who live downriver too, and my son is moving to Bend.
I’m not sure what you are getting at. The nuclear industry is deeply under-regulated. A high percentage of active reactors are not only running longer than they had been designed to perform, their maintenance gets deferred routinely.
We should not build any new reactors until an aggressive plan to entomb spent fuel is not only in place, but moving on a timeline that looks at catching up within a decade. Short of that, more accidents similar to Fukushima are inevitable every five to ten years.
A mix of energy saving solutions and intense implementation of hydro, wind, solar and wave-driven energy might alleviate the perceived need for coal and nuclear.
H E M P
Check this out:
ET,
I lived in the tri-cities for 6 months while working for GM in 1984.
Natives used to joke about glowing green from Hanford of which I found not a laughing matter indeed.
Erm, “hot rains in southern Brazil“?
Please turn yourself the right way up. What kind of “energy needs” should a modern society have?
As long as everyone thinks “modern society” equates to a right to burn up resources at 100 times the sustainable rate, we’ll never overcome our addiction and we’re doomed to end up in the gutter. So the solution involves changing what we consume, not how we justify whatever ruinous means we use to feed our insatiable appetite. Furthermore, radioactive shit can’t be composted, it’s poison FOREVER.
Back in the 70s my sister dated the man in charge of nuclear waste management at Hanford. He pointed out the holes where the cylinders are buried, and told me their life span was short. At one time there was this idea of locking the stuff up in a glassy compound. The sagebrush in the desert there was radioactive.
H/t @CorbettReport: