Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory, page 2

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times

reply posted on 13-10-2003 @ 08:22 PM by kukla

Nice findy energywave. It looks like photodeactivation is still at the laboratory scale but any advancement at this point, we'll take.

Specifically, the emission of a neutron would reduce the half-life of the isotope, but I wouldn't think by much. I could see this being used a preparation method for long-term storage.

unbalanced,

I think the whitehouse website has a picture of the tunneling machine used by Air Force Space Corps. And you're right, contamination clean-up is big business, hence pork-barrel.

reply posted on 16-10-2003 @ 09:09 AM by ImAlreadyPsycho

One thing to keep in mind with any ISO certification, is that, even though they get the cert, they really only pass a test once, then have (depending on the ISO level) 2 - 5 years before another test to keep the cert. (I am not sure on the 14000, it may be annual) So technically, they could get certified, then slack off until it is nearly time to get "renewed".

In the world of nuke waste, this is bad. It should be on going. One lapse in qualification should revoke the cert until they can comply for a 6 month ongoing period. They should have weekly inspections to keep the cert up to date.

reply posted on 29-10-2003 @ 10:46 AM by kukla

Some good news came out of INEEL last week.

A clean up project at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL) is complete, three months ahead of schedule.

Spent nuclear fuel has now been removed from all five of the INEEL's older underwater storage pools. Draining, decontamination, and dismantlement processes are underway.

The INEEL says moving the spent nuclear fuel into dry storage protects the environment and reduces risks to the Snake River plain aquifer.

As of today, 92 percent of all spent nuclear fuel at the INEEL has been consolidated to dry storage, in preparation for shipment out of Idaho.

www.kpvi.com...

reply posted on 29-10-2003 @ 11:01 AM by ImAlreadyPsycho

I find it hard to believe they are shipping it out of Idaho, seeing as Idaho is a destination for much of the countries spent fuel. Yucca mountain is about the same case. So, I figure they will be "trading fuels" but making it seem as though Idaho is sending it out.

The other thing I find fishy, is that the amount of "cleanup" is 92% done????? That seems like an exageration (sp?) to me. I have seen INEEL many times (from driving by, and from small planes) and the place seems very large to clean up 92% that fast.

Guess it's time to research again.

[Edited on 29-10-2003 by ImAlreadyPsycho]

reply posted on 29-10-2003 @ 11:11 AM by kukla

Considering that Bechtel is in charge, I would be supcsicious of their progress report too..

Although any improvement is still an improvement..

[Edited on 29-10-2003 by kukla]

reply posted on 29-10-2003 @ 12:06 PM by elevatedone

I say that we load it "waste" up on planes and drop it on Afghanastan and Iraq... France, and anyone else who doesn't wanna play nice with the USA !

But I've been known to be pretty harsh and outspoken at times, I'll go back to work now...

sorry !

reply posted on 29-10-2003 @ 12:34 PM by ImAlreadyPsycho

Bechtel is a joke. However, I do agree with you that any improvement in good, I just can't help but think it's too little too late.

reply posted on 30-10-2003 @ 10:14 AM by ImAlreadyPsycho

Article Here

Aquifer monitoring results show one contaminant higher than expected at the Idaho Nuclear Technology and Engineering Center, while other contaminants are decreasing

Here is a good article, published on the INEEL site about contaminant levels. If they are admitting one, how many others are really rising as well????

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^