It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


SCI/TECH: Data on Yucca Nuclear Waste Site Falsified

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 04:25 PM
Scientists from the US Geological Survey agency may have provided false data in an effort to achieve a permit from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This admission is causing a complete investigation into the science behind the reports.
Yucca mountain is to be the proposed site for the storage of the nations nuclear waste materials. It is located approximately 90 miles north of Las Vegas.
WASHINGTON - Government scientists may have falsified documents related to the $58 billion Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project in Nevada, the Energy Department revealed Wednesday. The development could jeopardize the controversial project, which is still being built and is the only repository for the nation's waste from commercial nuclear reactors.

E-mails from scientists involved in the project raise serious questions about the review process of scientific studies done six years ago, the energy department said.

The department said that during preparation for a license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission a number of e-mails were discovered, dating back to 1998 and 2000, in which an employee of the U.S. Geological Survey "indicated that he had fabricated documentation of his work."

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.

The big question in my mind, is was the falsification intentional, or inadvertent? Was there pressure on the scientists to submit the false reports? Was teh pressure from administrators within the USGS, or from a much higher source.

I don't believe that this will stop the Yucca mountain project. It will most likely cause a massive redesign, and cost millions of dollars more.

posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 04:38 PM
I think its funny how you can have a "proposed" site such as Yucca Mountain and yet be half way done building it before its approved. Makes me wonder. Its like the Gov't says, "Just get the publics ok after we build it so they cant stop us." My guess is that there just going to say, "well we have already spent 58 billion dollars on it so we might as well use it."

Does anyone else think this?

[edit on 16-3-2005 by Event Horizon]

posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:02 PM
It's interesting that it mentions only one person who may have falsified data. Until there are some specifics, this is nothing but conjecture. And it depends on what data was tainted.

This doesn't sound like a USGS issue-if there was some conspiracy I guarantee it came down from somewhere else.

What sucks is that the US continues to fall behind in nuclear utilization thanks to cockups by the NRC, and other energy concerns. Of course,as long as the environmental allows itself to be used as a tool against Nuclear power by fossil fuel folks, nothing will be done.

No other country has this much problem dealing with nuclear waste. Japan seems to get it handled somehow, so does Germany and France. No one complains about their disposal methods.

We've got to address this long term storage issue and fast, and get useed to utilizing advanced fission techniques instead of being mindlessly afraid of the atom and relying on coal, gas and oil plants for power.

posted on Mar, 16 2005 @ 05:03 PM
Soficrow recently had a post thread that told of "censorship" of government agencys and scientists in regards to environmental reports...

essentially... it said that anything that would restrict financial interested parties, that wanted to do anything in regards to the environment, would be censored... how nice...
you know... the stuff they censor out, is very much the stuff we want to know...
And before people go off on the protection of the screaming horned caterpiller, I am talking about the big things...
The alarming frequent occurance of mutant frogs in water resevoirs, the

falsified data regarding the erosion factor involved with deforesting an old growth forest that would make a good golf course...

falsified siesmic/geologic data for an area that will soon be a huge nuclear dump...

these are the things that matter in the short AND long run... and there are no "Gores" to give a damn...

thanks papa bush... nice to know you care so much about the country that we are leaving to our children.

the whole yucca mountain thing is a scam... it wont work, cant work and shouldn't work... it is also in the same range as Area 51, so i suspect there is another reason for the decision of the location...

anyone ever consider that the main point at which radioactive waste is dangerous is when it is being transported... and presently, it is transported far less distance...
nuclear energy seems like a great thing... but the more we learn, the more we understand the dangers that exist far outside the human species life span...
we can't even design a warning sign that will be around long enough to warn people to stay away... so who is going to stick around the next million years to keep people/reptoids/roachmen away?
sorry for my rant... i obviously love nuclear waste...with mushroom gravy...yumm

new topics

top topics

log in