• Thank you for visiting the Cafe Rad Lab Forum
  • We present & discuss radiation health, science & news
  • To keep you informed about vital nuke information.
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Official & Watchers
#1
Official

Watchers
Pia
just pm me if needed.
 
Reply
#2
Radionuclide Concentrations in Air on the Hanford Site
A Ten-Year Trend Report
PNNL-13909
1991 Through 2000
http://www.pnl.gov/main/publications/ext...-13909.pdf
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#3
Here are a few reports on Hanford that are worth perusing

http://whistleblower.org/sites/default/f...ortFAQ.pdf
http://whistleblower.org/sites/default/f...clides.pdf
http://www.environmental-defense-institu...0Rev.2.pdf
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/news/business/alvarez.pdf
"All models are flawed, some are useful."
George E. P. Box
 
Reply
#4
Nov 29 2016, 7:30 am ET
Welcome to 'the Most Toxic Place in America'
by Ronan Farrow and Rich McHugh
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/welc...ca-n689141
Quote:Seventy years ago, the Hanford Site produced plutonium for America's nuclear arsenal. Today, it's run by the Department of Energy through its contractor, Washington River Protection Solutions. The contractor is managing a $110 billion cleanup of 56 million gallons of chemical and nuclear waste, stored in 177 underground tanks — a task that's expected to last the next 50 years.

But the tanks are leaking, and the vapors they emit contain toxic and radioactive chemicals known to cause cancer as well as brain and lung damage. Just this year, 61 workers have been exposed, and some nuclear experts have called Hanford "the most toxic place in America" and "an underground Chernobyl waiting to happen."

Local neuropsychologist Brian Campbell says he has evaluated 29 people at Hanford with both respiratory and cognitive symptoms, including "some of the worst cases of dementia that I've seen in young people, which we do not anticipate."

Dr. Campbell said the DOE doesn't want to acknowledge the injuries. "More likely than not," said Campbell, "I think it's caused by the exposure they had at Hanford."

Several told us they were discouraged from seeking safety equipment, and threatened with losing work if they insisted.

"Our lives don't matter," said Seth Ellingsworth. "Our health does not matter. We are simply a business decision. It costs more money to protect us than to fight us, to deal with us being sick."

Radiation risks are always downplayed.  Vapor clouds dissipate; spreading downwind.  Radiation detection measurements are not conveying the hazards that people are facing.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
#5
Quote:Six Hanford workers were taken to medical clinics Wednesday morning today after getting exposed to suspected, unknown chemical toxins on the job

http://www.king5.com/news/local/more-han.../359858225

For years scientists have found a link between exposure to chemical vapors and adverse health effects, including occupational asthma, nerve damage, toxic encephalopathy (dementia), and lung damage. The US Department of Energy, which runs Hanford, and its contractor WRPS deny proof exists to show a connection between vapors and serious illnesses. Both are currently under extreme scrutiny about the lack of protection for workers as more media bring the issue to light and as a lawsuit gets closer to trial.

One of the demands by the plaintiffs is to expand zones where it would be mandatory for workers to don supplied air tanks for full respiratory protection. Wednesday’s incident happened near a tent where workers change clothing. Currently respiratory protection is not required in this area.

Vapor clouds don't just vanish into thin air.
"The map is not the territory that it is a map of ... the word is not the thing being referred to."
 
Reply
  


Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)