Nuclear waste tunnel collapsed in Hnford

VARG IS RIGHT NUCLEAR DISASTERS KEEP HAPPENING ITS NOT FUCKING SAFE NUCLEAR ENERGY IS NOT FUCKING SAFE

...

Imagine all the liberals it could kill.

Aren't those tunnels shored up and lined with reinforced concrete? 'Collapse' doesn't sound right, like they're doing the Great Escape or something with hand tools and wooden carts.

There was some roadwork nearby. The vibration may have caused the collapse according to the stream. And yes, it was a cave in.

When has Varg ever been wrong?

If AGW were real, accidents like this would be a small price to pay to stop emitting CO2. But ff course no environmentalist group will support Nuclear.

I think that says a lot.

No one is going to ask for the race rate?

I'm disapointed

They've been pretending to think of ways to dispose of this shit since WW2. But, as with most people on the government teat, it was more profitable to deliberately fail and ask for more funding next year.

It's fucking horrible how many things either started out as this or turned into it.

...

THORIUM
H
O
R
I
U
M

1- Is not safe
2- Doesn't really matter, peak uranium already happened

Hanford has had bigger problems than this that you've never heard about. This seems minor tbh.

This is really going to interfere with Kushner's plan to have the Chinese prop up west coast real estate prices.

Varg is always right

...

DEHUMANIZE YOURSELF AND FACE TO BLOODSHED

So a wetback road crew that no hables ingles was digging where they weren't supposed to be?

Time to get /comfy/

Radioactivity is not a death beam.
Long term radioactive waste has such a long half life that it produces relatively few disintegrations per second, and unless you powder and sniff it it won't harm you. The stuff is chemically more toxic than it is radiologically.
And then, even if there was a release, how bad could it be? Chernobyl, which has caused something like 70 deaths and a very dubious amount of cancer only warranted a what, 30 mile seclusion zone? And that was not long term radioactive waste, that was actual fission products fresh from the furnace being spewed into the air.
There's so much poison being dumped onto everything thanks to Bayer/Monsanto, so much plastic matter just floating around in every river, every sea, every ocean that a few transuranics are the very least of our concerns.
Think about it, what's going to do more harm to aquatic and terrestrial life, a metal oxide insoluble in water that gives off a few charged particles or molecules that have been designed to alter DNA, to mutate, to kill?

It appears this is the designated shitposting thread.

How stupid do you have to be to store radiactive waste in a tunnel that has even the remotest possibility of collapse, when its collapse would mean an emergency?

If you can find me an "Uncollapsable Tunnel" I've got a bridge in the Sahara to sell you, it's a good deal, trust me.

That's the point of sequestering it in a tunnel. But the fact that it collapsed indicates bad engineering and communication with groundwater. If they just leave it there chances are good it will leech into the water table at some point. Forget the radiation. Uranium is insanely poisonous.

There are plenty. Retard.

I'm sure with enough force you could break all of them.

You can engineer tunnels such that there's little to no expectation of collapse for over a century. During planning and construction you should also have a clear understanding of the tunnel's service life and plan to either rebuild or replace it.

This structure should have never been built near a river. Washington has granite mountains, and that's where you should build a nuclear fuel processing facility. Rocky Flats being one example.

Nuclear power could be very safe in an incorrupt nationalist society. In our system everything is corrupt, and when people cut corners in nuclear energy the consequences are very dramatic.

No one worries about naval nuclear accidents because the navy spares no expense and the reactor designs are passively safe. This COULD be the design philosophy of all nuclear energy facilities. But it's less profitable.

Fun Fact: Nuclear power plants are insured by the government because no private insurer will take that risk. They make the money and we assume the risk. Just like high finance.

moron.

It is safe, almost all modern reactors are impossible to melt down.
wouldnt it be nice if there was another fuel source, like if we could use the waste from other reactors? i bet there'd be enough fuel for hundreds of years.

All the beaners in walla walla.

Uranium is deadly in very low concentrations, and carcinogenic in extremely low concentrations. This is a potential death sentence for everyone in the flood plain if not fixed immediately.

Alright, that's a more sensible response.

PNWfag here. I'm not the least bit surprised by this. Hanford is one of the EPA's superfund sites. It's been nothing but a sheckel sink for decades now. Expect cries of "we need more money for dem programs" from the (((usual suspects)))

ah haha. I need to see if we've got a thread about that. I'd love to discuss. That fucking kike needs to GTFO of the white house.

Dubs checked.

The issue of nuclear power is way too emotionally charged. Both sides have good arguments. Conventional nuclear power could free us from all the very real problems of fossil fuels ocean acidifiction is real, even if global warming is not but it has to be handled as a large infrastructure system built to benefit a people. Not as regionalized profit/product schemes for the elite.

Nuclear accidents are the perfect refutation of lolbertarian free marketeers who are only interested in individuals, and feel no kinship with the people of their nation.

So, if it does irradiate the Columbia river, Portland is dead, and half of the country's supply of Salmon goes with it. Mixed feels on this one. It would also cause this year's rainbow gathering to relocate to Colorado.

The diffusion rate is likely to be so slow that no one will see an immediate catastrophe. Cancer rates will just climb year after year, and the first decade or two may not even see a notable increase.

Frogs boiling, essentially.

Let's assume the most likely cause of the collapse: groundwater. Now that the soil is in contact with the fuel the water will have the chance to corrode it and allow it to leech into the water table. That will eventually carry some to the river as it diffuses into the flood plain.

The stored fuel should be packaged in some kind of vessels. Let's assume the vessels are undamaged. In this case a timely excavation will prevent any potential problems.

If the vessels are damaged, which is likely, some fuel will be leached into the water table and excavation will be more difficult, meaning it will have longer to leech out. Rapid excavation will still prevent the problem from becoming serious. This isn't exactly a spill or an explosion. But it can't be ignored.

I mean this thread:

Just a way for jews to push more (((green energy))).

The tunnel was only eight feet deep, and there's no groundwater to speak of at that depth in that part of the country.

There's also no reports that fuel was being stored in the tunnel, which is corroborated by the fact that we have pictures and video of the collapse area. If anything containing plutonium or uranium was there, especially anything weapons-grade, we'd never see the site due to the security. The wording suggests that the tunnel was being used to store "contaminated material", which probably means things like tools used to work on nuclear equipment that got contaminated and are now being stored until they're needed again.

None, because liberals don't live on the east side of the state. Washington is red basically everywhere.

Forgot link:
archive.is/3zVAX

The tunnel was used to transfer waste from the plant producing plutonium to the tank farms. They wanted to keep as much as they could under control so that spies couldn't see the process or get their hands on anything.

Nothing happens out there anymore other than clean up. Russians come out every year to ensure nothing is being made as not to violate the treaty.

This is being blown out of proportion because its on a nuclear site and fuels further anti-nuclear opinions so we can push big oil, coal, and (((green energy))).

←
I can't believe Sanford collapsed. It really happened this time.

Thank you. Now I don't have to post that.

Whew waking up to this in my own backyard was the greatest news. A sign. When the Last Great War comes my fate will be sealed to the East and the floods from the quakes to the West. The volcano's all around us will finally cleanse this place and my soul.

My body is ready. Let the reaping begin.

The national news made this statement yesterday:
The implication is that Seattle is the only place that matters in WA.
Seatac just so happens to be the liberal hub of the state.

This is basic pre-programming. Refocus the danger so that it seems closer to those easily swayed, then push forth ever expanding rules and regulations.

Washington is only one state away from California, and Washington has much more lax gun laws. We Californians need to band together and campaign for stricter gun control in Washington! We cannot let those dangerous assault weapons into our state.

So this turned out to be a whole bunch of not habbening. Too bad, would love to see Seattle covered in radioactive slag from 200 miles away.

Bump. No fly zone if effect

tfr.faa.gov/save_page /detail_7_2375.html

reminder to all Holla Forumsacks that disinformation surrounding nuclear technology is VERY REAL. If the West were to suddenly start using nuclear power on a wide scale, it would.

1) result in no carbon emissions so (((carbon taxes))) could not be enacted, also rejewable energy would be even more humiliatingly pointless than it is currently
2) result in energy independence so we would not need (((the petrodollar))) any more
3) make electricity insanely cheap so (((utilities))) did not get their "fair share" of US consumer revenue
4) make all sorts of bullshit obselete like US involvement in the Middle East and strip mining coal

Also, there would be a general return to a philosophy of innovation to cure society's problems instead of the misanthropic nihilism of the current environMENTAL movement.

If we just built on the developments we made before nuclear got CUCKED in the 60s and 70s, we would easily be able to design a vessel to get to Mars, power remote outposts, harden the grid against EMP attacks and coronal mass ejections, tear down all the steel pylons carrying electricity across the country, make indoor farming financially feasible, etc.

fam, there is literally nothing holding back humanity from the stars but its own (((imposed restrictions))). The man currently in the bottom right of your screen APPROVES of this message.

WA user here.

Don't get excited bros, Hanford is something like four hours driving from Seattle. Also, that entire part of the state is red and voted for Trump; you don't want them to get irradiated.

Hanford is actually pretty cool; especially the reactor. You can go there on tours (or could before today, at least) and see the old facility.

Jewish Media wouldn't release that information basically

this

Fucking nuke shills everywhere on this board. e.g.

Nukes are kike race killing bullshit and you faggots lap it up.
An entire country in the south pacific know this.
So, you're either ignorant faggots who read too much kikeular science or newfags.
All nukes leak 24/7. Go read the fucking law they abide by and stop trying to be knowitall faggots.

This
GE owns large amounts of kikemedia and wrapped up Fukushima tight, because three of their BWR reactors, which are also throughout USA in similar implementations, failed.

Faggots arguing for nukes are degenerate shills.
It's a net energy loss after refining it for use and then storing the waste.
So fuck off with your nuke paradise bullcrap.
Just one little particle lodged in you and you're cancer cancer. External dose means shit e.g. 'banana' 'flight' 'xray' is all jew bullshit shill tactics to make you think it's safe.

youtube.com/watch?v=HVznJNzfv9s&feature=youtu.be&t=48m40s

That picture looks like a pretty comfy place.

The "country in the south pacific" is the best justification for having nukes. If you don't wanna be nuked, own a bunch of nukes. Same logic for why gun control is a retarded concept.

Nukes are militarily obsolete due to Scalar Electromagnetic weaponry. But the peasants are not allowed to know about quantum tech of that level. So, they [nukes] are only for cold war-era normie sabre rattling and keeping people scared.

how are 4th generation nuclear power plants not safe, you blue pilled faggot?

This board gives me a fucking aneurysm with people that say "huehue thorium is meme" or unsubstantiated bullshit with ZERO evidence like "thorium is not safe."

The amount of radioactivity coming out of a nuclear power plant during normal activity (99.999999% of the time) is equivalent to a few bananas a day.
There is an order of magnitude more radioactivity coming out of a coal plant because of the heavy elements found in coal deposits. All of this radioactivity is from heavy water, so there are no "particles" to ingest like this shill says.

Wow, that is so fucking rich. You're saying that in the course of mining, refining and storing the uranium fuel there is more energy used than produced? Like you mean there is more than 10,000 MEGAWATTS of energy that goes into the mining and refining of nuclear fuel in the USA? They need to hire some smarter shills.
All costs involved with decommissioning a plant and storing waste are factored in to the utility price of the electricity, if that answers your puzzlingly retarded assertion. also, pic related

Ignoring the obvious potential of nuclear power is part of their rejewable energy Communist revolution. Nuclear answers all the complaints about carbon emissions amd fuel availability we currently have and the technology has been around for over 50 years, in which time it has improved substantially.

Suppressing nuclear power is among the highest orders of the Protocols of Zion. for why

What about how nuclear power can cause an EMP that will take down the entire power grid? didn't really think your shilling through did you?

nuclear WEAPONS can cause EMP when detonated in a certain way.

Modular nuclear reactors, or smaller units located more locally, will help to harden the grid against EMP and CME by making it LESS interconnected.
I am reaching out of my realm of expertise on this issue, but having more wires stringing across the country means there is more area for the energy released in an EMP/CME to build up and fry the transformers and electronics of the grid.

>oy vey don't talk about the dilution factors, goy

Thorium is not viable due to tellurium embrittlement and other factors including high temperature operation.

Nuke is old shit, Trump needs to get Scalar EM into mainstream research and get us to the stars.

The more nuclear power plants on the grid the more meltdowns when the EMP hits

this
people don't realize they require synchronised grid power to run subsystems…
otherwise they're on backup generators, aka one big flood and you're fucked, aka Fukushima.
Guess where most are located… by the sea/river.

Let alone earthquake damage irreparably damaging cooling systems, leading to LOC and melt-through.

Well the radioactivity pumped into the ionosphere directly causes earthquakes. They knew this in the 60s but kept building reactors anyway.

what the fuck are you talking about. Seriously the ionosphere has nothing to do with generating power from atomic decay heat.

I like how the guy streaming jumps in at times to say stuff like "Yeah there's contamination everywhere". Not surprised the media will be like "Nothing's wrong, goyim!"

that's a clever meme for disqualifying the only meaningful units to help most people understand what kind of miniscule amounts of radiation they are being scared by when people use becquerels and microsieverts oh no!

particles are not "internal" unless you ingest them or breath them in, genius, and
there are zero radioactive particles released from regular operation of a nuclear plan
in history there have been 3 major accidents, only 2 of which resulted in any significant amount of radiation being released and only 1 of which will ever actually result in deaths from radiation (Chernobyl)
fucking pillock

I'm sure if I asked you, you'd be able to explain to me what "tellurium embrittlement" means and how it poses a challenge to engineers of future thorium plants. But I think I'll just wait 10 years for the Chinese to successfully deploy working thorium molton salt reactors and find out what they are using to surmount that minor issue.

You're a hollywood-cock-gobbling kike cuck. Thanks for being a foil for me to btfo.

That's why gen 3.5 and gen 4 reactors have passive cooling systems. A neutron bomb could have gone off and all personnel died and backup coolant systems are offline and the systems of these reactors would have no choice but eventually shut down operation.

I also advocate replacing the old reactors because, while extremely safe, they are not insanely safe. Gen 4 answers every objective that we get from fusion power with CURRENT TECHNOLOGY, hence the title "everything fusion ever wanted to be."

I wish someone capped that post about the EPA and the river of waste

Then why does it produce FREE ENERGY

Ever hear of wave-particle duality? As a wave it can penetrate you then get stuck inside you as a particle causing cancer.

foil is the only way you can protect yourself

Kek is coming

Kill yourself, retard.

what a fucking moron

yeah, whata moron.

It's not like when carbon dioxide gets dissolved in water it forms carbonic acid lowering the pH.
go back to reddit you moron.

1.) It doesn't.
2.) Tesla's tower wasn't even supposed to do that. It was for wireless power transmission. Not power generation.

What's saddest is that we certainly could have had safe, clean, superabundant thorium reactors by now.

We chose uranium technology because it also makes fissile material for nukes.