Environmental Devistation Coverup

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:59 AM
link   
These guys can't get anything right

May 9, 2005
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
"On April 19, operators were lowering the level in the reactor coolant system in preparation for lifting the reactor vessel head to begin refueling. Because operators failed to open valves for air to enter the reactor coolant system as the water level was lowered, vapor bubbles formed. The bubbles were pushed through the shutdown cooling system, causing flow to fluctuate."


So how are you so quick to think they had it under control. In the amount of time they had from the warning of the increased winds from Katrina, they would not have had enough time to start moving spent fuel around.

The govt. let a town be built up around nuclear and toxic waste, so how can we think it would be any different in letting people head back in?

~ lol maybe the angels are talking to me
~


[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]

[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]




posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Just found this, there are 3 units at the Waterford station, that is the main reactor area, I believe there are other sites throughout NO. It's just a matter of finding out what and where.

"The 1,911 MW Waterford station is located in Taft in St. Charles Parish, about 30 miles west of New Orleans. There are three units at the Waterford station including two 411 MW natural gas and oil-fired units 1 and 2, and the 1,089 MW nuclear unit 3."



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Hundreds of thousands of tons of solid nuclear waste and millions of gallons of liquid nuclear waste are stored in open storage facilities across the United States.

Spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste are currently stored in temporary facilities at 129 sites in 39 states. These storage sites are located in cities, suburbs, and rural areas. Most are located near large bodies of water.

An estimated 161 million people reside within 75 miles of temporarily stored nuclear waste."
www.spacedaily.com...



[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 10:28 AM
link   



www.nirs.org... Strikes Down Environmental

Justice Claims and Bid for Licensing Hearing to Site New Reactor Unit at Grand Gulf


PORT GIBSON, Miss. - In a blow to environmental justice principles, a federal licensing board of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has denied four environmental, public interest and civil rights organizations entrance into a licensing hearing on Entergy's application to site a new nuclear reactor in Mississippi under the agency's new streamlined licensing proceedings.

The licensing board denied all of the groups' criticisms, or "contentions," about an Entergy Nuclear application for a permit to site at least one new nuclear reactor near its existing Grand Gulf Unit 1 reactor in Port Gibson, Mississippi. The proposed reactor would be located in Claiborne County, with an 84% African American population and 32% of its residents living at or below the poverty line.




This kind of brings me back to my very first thought about the plants. From the start I've felt that we had a plant leveled somewhere but I can't for the life of me figure out where. I was posting about this on myspace and my original posts I felt that there was something wrong with a nuclear plant. In searching for answers I came to the flooding issue and such. My first orig. thought was that we had a plant leveled in MS because of Jeb Bush putting FL on the light issue. I still cannot figure out WHAT it is or WHY and I'm searching but I know there is a problem somewhere. I feel it with everything I have. Call me crazy I go with my gut instict though.



"As part of the NuStart Energy Development consortium, Entergy announced last week it is applying for $400 million from the government to help prepare a combined construction and operating license for a future nuclear reactor. "



With everything this research has brought up it's quite clear this company and the govt. don't give a squat about the people so I don't believe if there was a problem we would know. I'm gonna find it though mark my words


[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 10:46 AM
link   
I mean look at these people, spent fuel goes missing?

"FURTHER ENTERGY NUCLEAR MISADVENTURES

Missing Fuel Rods, New Nukes, More Oldies Relicensing

New Orleans-based Entergy Corporation’s name has appeared in a series of nuclear misadventures recently.

"On April 21 the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced that two pieces of a nuclear fuel rod at Entergy’s Vermont Yankee (VY) nuclear plant had gone missing. The NRC’s Neil Sheehan described the missing highly radioactive material as “fatal to anyone who came into contact with it without being properly shielded.”

neworleans.indymedia.org...
"



Now add to that the fact they were having a storage problem since 98, it leads me to believe they have spent fuel somewhere stored offsite at one of the 47 locations within Waterford III plant...or even at an independent storage site.

I'm going to keep looking something is not right I know I sound paranoid but I can feel it. It's just a matter of finding it. Anyone that wants to help go through Entergy news articles and such to get to the bottom of it with me, any help would be great but I'm sure you're all thinking "looney tunes" haha and that is alright. If I find something out that we aren't supposed to know, you better bet I'm going to blow it up all over the media. If they let people go in there with radiation contamination, then it is just one more injustice done.

Being that the communities there have fought for 20 years to clean up that mess, the least I can do is try to figure out what's going on. I hope I'm wrong but I feel it. I've always had a few weird "senses" or whatever you might want to call them


LOL now THAT is looney tunes


[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]

[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Getting more interesting



Entergy was to begin moving spent fuel around in July 05
www.recordonline.com...

www.nrc.gov...



The casks are meant to hold the fuel until a permanent repository for the nation's nuclear waste opens at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. But that's years away at a minimum.

Typical Dry Cask Storage System
At some nuclear reactors across the country, spent fuel is kept on site, above ground, in systems basically similar to the ones shown here. Once the spent fuel has cooled, it is loaded into special canisters. Each canister is designed to hold approximately 2-6 dozen spent fuel assemblies, depending on the type of assembly. Water and air are removed. The canister is filled with inert gas, and sealed (welded or bolted shut).Some canisters are designed to be placed vertically in robust above-ground concrete or steel structures.Some canisters are designed to be stored horizontally in above-ground concrete bunkers, each of which is about the size of a one-car garage.




posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 11:39 AM
link   
MUCH BETTER now I'm on a better track ..... "Louisiana Energy Services (LES)" is an independent storage company for Entergy that got the ok from the NRC to store uranium.



The following is a list compiled from www.toxmap.nlm.nih.gov for the Lake Pontchartrain area.

1. CYTEC INDUSTRIES INC FORTIER PLANT
2. SHELL NORCO CHEMICAL PLANT EAST SITE
3. MONSANTO LULING
4. CROMPTON CORP POLYMER ADDITIVES DIV
5. OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORP
6. CHALMETTE REFINING LLC
7. CROMPTON CORP.
8. DUPONT PONTCHARTRAIN WORKS
9. UNION CARBON CORP TAFT/STAR MANUFACTURING PLANT
10. CHEVRON ORONITE CO LLC
11. IMC PHOSPHATES MP INC. TAFT PLANT
12. SHELL NORCO CHEMICAL PLANT WEST SITE
13. NORTHROP GRUMMAN SHIP SYSTEMS INC AVONDALE OPERATIONS MAINYARD
14. AIR PRODUCTS & CHEMICALS INC (NEW ORLEANS LA FACILITY)
15. MURPHY OIL USA INC MERAUX REFINERY
16. DUPONT DOW ELASTOMERS LLC - PONTCHARTRAIN SITE
17. BUNGE NORTH AMERICA INC
18. KNIGHT-CELOTEX LLC MARRERO
19. MOTIVA ENTERPRISES LLC NORCO REFINERY
20. EVANS HARVEY CORP
21. NASA MICHOUD ASSEMBLY FACILITY LOCKHEED MARTIN
22. ATLAS STEEL & WIRE DIV. OF AMERISTEEL
23. UNION CARBIDE CORP CYPRESS POLYPROPYLENE PLANT
24. TAYLORTEC INC
25. VALERO REFINING NEW ORLEANS LLC
26. CP LOUISIANA INC.
27. GULF WIRE CORP.
28. SIGMA COATINGS USA B.V.
29. NORTH STAR STEEL CO.
30. SIGMA COATINGS
31. EVANS HARVEY INC
32. NASA MICHOUD ASSEMBLY FACILITY
33. BAYOU STEEL CORP
34. EQUITABLE/HALTER
35. SPECTRUM CONTROL TECHNOLOGY INC
36. BOC GASES
37. RESOLUTION PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS LLC
38. ENTERGY WATERFORD 1-3 COMPLEX
39. TRINITY MARINE PRODUCTS INC
40. AMAX METALS RECOVERY INC
41. VARCO L.P. TUBOSCOPE DIV. HARVEY COATING PLANT
42. BOLLINGER GRETNA LLC
43. DIXIE PRODUCE & PACKAGING INC.
44. JEFFERSON FIBERGLASS CO INC
45. MILPARK DRILLING FLUIDS NEW ORLEANS BARITE GRNDING. FAC.
46. PELLERIN MILNOR CORP.
47. CMP COATINGS INC
48. CROMPTON CORP.
49. ATLAS STEEL & WIRE CORP.AMERISTEEL DIV.
50. AVONDALE IND. INC. OFFSHORE DIV.
51. X-CHEM INC.
52. AVONDALE IND. INC. ALGIERS DIV.
53. SOLUTIA INC. LULING
54. SHELL CHEMICAL L.PST ROSE FACILITY
55. SOUTHERN COATINGS INC.
56. ELEVATING BOATS INC.
57. OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORP. TAFT AMMONIA TERMINAL
58. M-I DRILLING FLUIDS CO. NEW ORLEANS
59. MADISONVILLE WOOD PRESERVING, CO. INC.
60. JOTUN PAINTS INC.
61. U.S. MARINE INC.
62. POLYCHEMIE (PEARL RIVER PLANT)
63. GULF STATE MARBLE INC
64. TEXTRON MARINE SYS. SHIPYARD OPS.
65. BAROID DRILLING FLUIDS INC.
66. NEW ORLEANS SHIPYARD
67. BOLLINGER QUICK REPAIR LLC
68. WALLE CORP.
69. MARBLE QUARRY INC
70. BOLLINGER GULF REPAIR LLC
71. AVONDALE IND. INC.
72. KENNER TERMINAL
73. CHEMCENTRAL/NEW ORLEANS
74. ORLEANS MARBLE INC
75. DELUXE CHECK PRINTERS INC.
76. MAGNOLIA CHEMICALS LLC
77. NORCO FRACTIONATION PLANT
78. HAY WILK GALVANIZING INC
79. PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC
80. AIR LIQUIDE AMERICA CORP
81. SHELL CHEMICAL TAFT PLANT
82. UNION CARBIDE CORP CYPRESS CATALYST PLANT
83. CHEMRICH INC.
84. HOBSON GALVANIZING INC.
85. NEW MALTER INC.
86. CHEMCOM INC. OF THE SOUTH
87. BORDEN INC. DAIRY DIV.
88. SUNBELT CHEMICALS INC.
89. KIK (LOUSIANA) INC
90. CHEVRONTEXACO USED OIL RECYCLING PLANT
91. SHELL OIL PRODUCTS US
92. CHEMCAT CORP.
93. NEXEN CHEMICAL USA
94. TATE & LYLE NORTH AMERICAN SUGARS INC.
95. BREDERO PRICE HARVEY PLANT
96. SPARKLETTS WATER SYS. AQUA VEND
97. DELTA PETROLEUM CO INC
98. GULF STATES ASPHALT CO. INC.
99. KENCOIL INC
100. LONE STAR INDS. INC.
101. DELTA PETROLEUM CO INC
102. AVONDALE IND. INC. SERVICE FNDY.
103. BARRIERE CONSTRUCTION BOUTTE PLANT 625
104. LOUISIANA COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO. LTD.
105. US GYPSUM CO
106. HILL-BEHAN LUMBER CO.
107. U.S. NAVY NAVAL AIR STATION JOINT RESERVE BASE NEW ORLEANS
108. NEW NGC INC
109. BOLLINGER ALGIERS L.L.C.
110. ENTERGY MICHOUD PLANT
111. AVONDALE IND. INC. GAS FREE PLANT
112. BARTLETT CHEMICALS INC.
113. BOC GASES
114. CAPITOL STEEL-SLIDELL
115. COCA-COLA USA
116. CREWBOATS INC.
117. DIXIE BREWING CO. INC.
118. GREEN-WALKER GALVANIZING CO., INC.
119. LOUISIANA COCA-COLA BOTTLING CO.
120. SALATHE OIL CO.
121. SAZERAC CO. INC.
122. SIEMENS ENERGY & AUTOMATION INC. ***************************uranium storage*************
123. SLIDELL MARBLE CO.
124. TRANS GULF IND. INC.
125. WECHEM INC




Now if Entergy has had an ongoing spent fuel storage issue, why not think it's offsite.

The fact they were the only ones allowed to respond to fires makes me believe there was 100% something wrong.

[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   
ENTERGY MICHOUD PLANT ? wow I missed that one brb



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Oh man I wish I could curse here.

This is a weird and scary/ funny concidence for me because my issue that has been on going for over a year is the depleted uranium issue in our weapons used in Iraq.

Something I was constantly discussing and in debate about all over the place...this concidence pretty much figures.

Guess where the military stores and keeps the depleted uranium for our weapons we use in Iraq?

You guessed it. Maybe I shouldn't have started digging...

[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Well there is one for the list Michoud Assembly Facility history of ground uranium contamination, was flooded and got some structure damage. Let's see how many more we can find.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

The facility, located 24 kilometres east of New Orleans' French Quarter, "minor damage"

AP - Hurricane damage to NASA space shuttle facilities has further clouded the future of the Hubble Space Telescope. Katrina damaged the Michoud Assembly Facility in New Orleans, where the shuttle's fuel tanks are built, and the Mississippi-based Stennis Space Center, where shuttle engines are tested, NASA officials said.

news.yahoo.com.../ap/20050915/ap_on_sc/katrina_hubble


The current GAO study provides detailed descriptions of contamination and cleanup at three facilities: the John F. Kennedy Space Center at Cape Canaveral, Florida; the Michoud Assembly Facility near New Orleans, Louisiana; and the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, northwest of Los Angeles, California.

fter reviewing NASA's current cleanup program, GAO made four recommendations: establish facility-based implementation schedules for completing cleanup of contaminated sites;



"Michoud plant in New Orleans, owned by Entergy New Orleans, which is capable of generating 918 million kWh using natural gas (with an oil alternative). "


So I guess Entergy owns a stake in this mostly past govt/military/nasa/assembly plant interesting.


I wonder how many spent fuel pools were located there.

[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Michoud Plant Wildlife Inspection (Entergy New Orleans)

In March 2004, agents of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service conducted an inspection of Entergy New Orleans' Michoud power plant and found a number of dead brown pelicans near the facility's water intake structure and fish-return trough.

sec.edgar-online.com...



I believe this here shows more information about the Entergy Michoud Plant which looks to be where the problem may be. If you look here you will see there were dead endangered brown pelicans which shows just
how contaminated the area around their plants may be. Once you have flooding, and if the Michoud facility was flooded, then you have nuclear
contamination. I've been looking for a facility to pin point where there
could be a problem and here is the plant I've been searching for. It brings
up other contamination issues as well but it was flooded and damaged in numerous places. Although you could say it withstood overall, that doesn't mean anything really.

In this there seem to be a whole lot of other issues, companies, and places that come into question. My main focus is Entergy but I am going to look for a blog somewhere and figure out a better way to present all the findings. Does anyone know a good blog place to use? A website might be
easier, are there any free environmental type of websites that offer hosting?

Beyond just Entergy Corp. I guess I'm going to do research on any past uranium contaminated land, as well as facilities such as the Michoud facility that has quiet a history in itself.

There 1000% is nuclear contamination throughout this city I believe. The nuclear power plants being my main concern for the spent fuel pools and the ultimate mistrust I have for this company Entergy now. However that means overall that the public isn't being made aware of it and that brings about whole other issues in itself.

I won't be posting anymore info here, if I can figure out how to blog this or put it on a website for further research or anyone that wants to get involved, please just send me one of those private message things.

Thanks for reading...



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 01:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by XGovGirl

There actually seems to be two different restricted airspace (aka nuclear) areas, at two different locations for the Waterford III plant.

That one in the photo above is located far off from the flooded/seriously damaged area near Lake Ponchartrain. The picture of the reactor above is the main location closer to Baton Rouge protected by acres and acres of land.

If you look at the airspace maps for the Waterford III plant there seem to be two different restricted airspace locations for Waterford III.






Site I - This is where the main reactor is located from the photo posted above. The main reactor (only reactor?) is located here which is a good distance from the majority of the flooded area near the superdome.






WTF?

That is a map of Tennesee. In fact the TFR appears to be centered over the Watts Bar Dam.








Site II - Interested in this restricted airspace for Waterford III plant near the populated city & majority of damage/flooding. Could this be where the spent fuel is located off-site?





That is the Waterford 3 nuclear generator site.



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 05:10 PM
link   
WHAT??? That picture came from nuke workers under the waterford 3 plant pictures section!!!!!!!!!!!! Looking at that map and the satellite images that would explain why the Waterford III plant didn't look that far away. I thought that was a map of the distance between Baton Rouge and the flooded area of New Orleans. GRRRRRRRR I spent hours trying to figure out why there were differences in the maps I was pulling up and why there would be two seperate restricted flight areas, wtf was that doing with the Waterford 3 pictures.





[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 05:25 PM
link   
Grr alright I see what happened now, the way the site pulls up other maps below the Waterford Map caused the confusion. Here is the other airspace map this is the link where the confusion took place

www.nukeworker.com...



[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 06:53 PM
link   
I'll try
to redeem myself from that big mistake above soon.

I'm gathering some good info on my side ....it will take a bit but I think I'll be able to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that somethings being covered up here.

I know I've been all over the place but I'm on the right track now, I'll wait to post anything more until I have it all together. I tend to be ADD when it comes to research and end up all over the place when I'm onto something.

Once it's all together and I can prove it, I'll post it up to a blog/website and put a link here for everything gathered.

Until then learn how Hurricane Katrina was good for Entergy Corp. and Bush in this article below.

I still don't buy it and I'll prove there was damage /contamination by water or air (or both) from uranium/spent fuel somewhere. From either the main Waterford 3 site or from one of their 47 other off location sites around NO.

I can feel it in my bones and maybe I've been jumping around a bit but something is up, I can smell a lie a mile away


Interesting new article below although the date is weird (9/26/05), how Hurricane Katrina was good for Bush & Entergy Corp and they will be starting up a bunch of new reactors soon. How convenient. This kind of gives you a sense as to why something would be covered up along with so many bits of information posted in this thread.

I can feel it and .......I WILL find it. I always do
Until then sorry if I jumped around so much, ATS seems like a cool place once I finally get this all down. Once I do I wont be such a sloppy poster




How Hurricane Katrina was good for Bush & Entergy Corp. from USNEWS

www.usnews.com...



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:37 PM
link   

************Breaking News **********

Look what I found...............

TOO CLOSE FOR COMFORT????


Fire on August 31st



I will update this in just a moment with all info., links, etc.



#6 & #10 on the Chemical Map are the NORCO SHELL company.
I have a lot of data here, but it looks like they may have been storing
Waterfords Spent Fuel there. They have history of spent fuel storage.

Am I good or am I good?


Excuse my poor photoshop drawing skills, I was trying to draw attention to the locations.


EBASCO SERVICES INC. WATERFORD IS THE REACTOR IN ST. CHARLES PARISH







correction*******put a 3 in front of August 1st because I put a type-o
there********Map is from August 31st







[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]

[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]

[edit on 17-9-2005 by XGovGirl]



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:43 PM
link   
I wish to say something that will wind you longgggg-posters. Suggest you not try to write a book when you post your important thread and the thoughts you explain to Members.

Make it clear and why and as short as reasonably possibly.

-- Why?, cause not many will read the whole thing before posting their comments. Or, no comment at all.

Please correct me people if you really feel long post's are read by most..

Dallas



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 09:53 PM
link   
grrr I accidently put "august 1" place a 3 in front of that one I'm horrible at photoshop



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Ok,

If I'm following this properly, wer'e concerned that the Waterford3 plant and/or any containment facilities in NO were flooded and that if they were, the contaminated waters mixing with the rest of the flood waters would render everyone who's been exposed to the flood waters, exposed to radioactivity at some level, right? Unless I'm missing something, none of these maps or photos have shown flooded powerplant or containment facilities. It's entirely possible that they are flooded and Entergy is covering that fact, but do we have anything concrete to show that this has happened?



posted on Sep, 17 2005 @ 11:17 PM
link   
Dallas,

I am generally inclined to agree with you. Not now. There's a lot of info, linking takes time, when there are several different ones, it becomes harder to follow the opinions that go with them.

I am new to this blog. My thoughts were very mixed until I got to this topic. This is my kind of blogging. If you can be short and to the point, absolutely. When there is so much stuff that that average reader would not have in their knowledge base, I'm fine with going by the stuff I happen to know.

My ex is a USAF brat, and an environmental engineer. The toxic potential in that city is beyond calculation at this point - before you get to nuclear contamination. This topic was linked from Val's story about Falls Creek - which is how I found the site.
And after reading thru this, I think the person linking it had a good point. The location and isolation of some evacuees could well be related to the possibility of nuclear poisoning.

My first reaction to XGovGirl had to do with the lack of military response and coordination. It was totally
on target and hasn't been addressed by anything I've seen in all the time I've spent on this for almost 3 weeks. FEMA doesn't have the manpower or equipment - just authority and responsibilty to use what is available. The military is all about moving people and equipment FAST. Why the delay?

WTF was all that legal wrangling about? How to avoid lawsuits? ( One Phila MD that got down to the NO airport was told to STOP CPR on a victim on the tarmac - because he wasnt authorized to be there. He even explained the Good Samaritan Law that protects anyone from lawsuits). How to keep the public from panic over the potential radiation issue?

Talk about worse than a terrorist attack... I discovered the DU tipped weapons issue XGG has been studying, during the campaign last fall. BTW, XGG, if you have links, I would like to get back on it. You can send by U2U.

The scientists that worked on the Manhattan Project first warned against the use of depleted Uranium because, in their words, it targeted human DNA with catastrophic results. Being something of a fanatic about wording, this struck me as a ludicrous and dangerous statement. What they should have said is that human DNA is EXTREMELY susceptible to DU. It comes under the international ban against any weapon that can continue to inflict harm AFTER the conflict is over. I believe it has a half life of 4 billion years. ( Most of my sources on this got lost in a computer glitch that I, stupidly, didn't take precautions for) To my knowledge, we have put an unbelievable amount of DU in the Fertile Crescent.

People who have been exposed to enough radiation can be a threat to others. Nurses who work with radiation implant patients have an abnormally high level of conception problems - even when their radiation badges indicated "safe" levels of exposure.

I wish the traffic on ATS was on this topic instead of Val's. XGG, keep going, get it organized and keep looking for the right place to post it. It will be interesting to see it it goes into the same sinkhole all the DU stuff has disappeared in. Then again, if radiation sickness starts to surface among those who were in the water - including the rescuers, maybe it will finally get out in the open.

Also, I would expect the air contamination to be low, are there any water reports- besides ecoli ?

This is way over the top XGG, some questions may be refuted, overall my bets are on your intuition and knowledge. Been there, done that with anticipating stuff that came about. And I am ADD





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join