It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

One of the biggest nuclear accidents in Australian history ,at the Ranger uranium mine in Kakadu Nat

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 11:30 AM
link   
I quit.
How do I collect my shill check ?
Do they do direct deposit or do I have to give them my address ?




posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by AutumnWitch657
 


This is naturally occurring radiation not radioactive decay.


When industrial activity puts a whole lot of radioactive waste into great big giant barrels, concentrated like would never happen "in nature," it's different. And a whole lot more dangerous because it's concentrated. Not that dispersion will fix the problem.



posted on Dec, 10 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by AutumnWitch657
 


For the life of me I cannot understand why this is an issue, other than that of the proper issues of it being both dangerious to the people working there and the invironment.

Surely you are able to see that being bigger focus and not the semantics of doting the I's and crossing the T's.

edit on 10-12-2013 by Pinkorchid because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-12-2013 by Pinkorchid because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Pinkorchid
 


when it rains it pours



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 05:33 PM
link   

soficrow
Not that dispersion will fix the problem.



Of course dispersion would fix it.
It was "dispersed" in the first place.

Dirt taken out of the ground, then put back.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by AutumnWitch657
 


Fair chance the uranium wasn't enriched
how ever the slurry release is of acidic/leeched uranium which in itself is very bad if left flow into river systems. Acid can be neutralized and the uranium would precipitate out and them be collected so if Rio does the "righty" it should mostly all be contained.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Acid can be neutralized and the uranium would precipitate out and them be collected so if Rio does the "righty" it should mostly all be contained.
So... why was it in those large tanks then if the acid can be nutralised and the uranium can be precipitated out?

Surely, there cannot be any or very little uranium left since that is what they are mining and extracting. If there was, then the process would be inefficient and at 1% uranium in the mined earth any uranium they can find is probably worth extracting. To precipitate out uranium would need other chemicals to cause the precipitation. If you mean solids settling out of the liquid, well yes I agree.

Dont you think they would have nutralised the acid before they placed it into large tanks if they could due to the costs of acid-resistant materials and the cost to make these large tanks. What does placing it in large tanks achieve? Maybe the sludge settles to the bottom and then they can remove(dump) it leaving the acidic liquid waste behind for 'further processing' (dumping) somewhere?



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 08:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Pinkorchid
 


Wow, planet is getting warmer and they keep blaming us.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 11:28 PM
link   
I had forgotten they were doing uranium mining in Kakadu....

Sigh....

When will the madness stop???

The idiots that let people mine in places like these astound me...

Also, I don't know which came first but there are cane toad's there as well as this crap going on. So now we'll have gigantic radioactive killer cane toads jumping around and killing us.




new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join