Nuclear waste history(2)
In 1943, in order to store the most dangerous waste, Hanford's engineers built 170 gigantic concrete tanks, each large enough to contain a building. These were then buried to reduce risk. It was supposed to be temporary storage. Sadly, engineers discovered in the 1980s that 60 of the tanks were leaking, contaminating the groundwater. Today there remain 200 million litres of highly radioactive gunge that must be rapidly neutralised. Camera inside the tanks allow us to see it. The task is a huge technological challenge. A factory that will trap the waste in glass is being built. Meanwhile under the tanks, radioactive conamination continues.
Even though we're living in the desert and there's only 15 cm of rainfall per year, So for hundreds and thousands of years, the ground water near the site will remain toxic. There are chemical products from the reactors running into the river. Primary chromium. This will affect salmon breeding grounds. They lay their eggs on the bed, the chromium comes up and surrounds the eggs before mixing into the water. And this is toxic to the baby fish. Alan Boldt's rears are far from imaginary.
In 2002 an official report for the US Department of Energy confirmed the presense of radioactive strontium-90 in Columbia river fish. 13 out of 15 fish caught are contaminated. Eating them regularly raises the chances of cancer. We want a scientific report onthe river pollution. With us is Bruno Chareyron, a nuclear physicist. He works for CRIIRAD, an independent lab for research and information on radioactivity. Also with us is American scientist Norm Buske. He had already studied vegetal contamination in Hanford. This is the most contaminated place in the Western Hemisphere. And as you can see, there is no problem. As you say, Tom, they've changed the bank here. They've done some landfill here.The last time Norm came to take samples, the US Department of Energy was far from happy. He was arrested by security guars. The contaminated trees were cut down. The bank was covered with stones. In fact everything is hidden. We're not measuring anything abnormal. The counter is measuring the stones.
Bruno finds a spot where it's still possible to take a soil sample. At the CRIIRAD lab, the scientists analyse the soil and water of the Columbia river. What did they find on the Hanford site in the USA? The 2 samples of the 300 zone show two things. One, tritium contamination of the Columbia river. 13 Eq per liter, where as higher up, it's less than than 2.5 Bq per littre. And two unnaturally high uranium contamination. There's four times more uranium than radium, which is abnormal. So this uranium is tied to the site's operation. And europium-152, an artificial element. The Hanford site admits that the tritium contamination exceeds the fit for drinking limits by an underground water surface of 121 km2. In other words this site continues to permanently leak, to drag radioactive elements in those waters that slowly migrate to the Columbia River. Because for some elements, iodine-129 and technetium-99, there is no working decontamination method.
From 1945, to keep up with the Americans in the arms race, the Soviet Union built a dozen atomic sites. For over 30 years, zero information crossed the Iron Curtain. In 1976, Soviet dissident Jaures Medvedev revealed a past nuclear accident in Urals, a Chernobyl before its time. In 1957, one of the nuclear waste storage tanks exploded. The same as those at Hanford. For 20 years, silence was kept. When Mededev told the story, Western scientists didn't believe him. Why do you think people refuse to believe you? Oh because in 1976, all the countries in the West were faced with the choice to develop nuclear energy. And suddenly we exposed this problem of nuclear waste, explosions and contamination. To answer what we had said, they decided to call it a KGB plot hatched to scare the people of the West. The head of the UK nuclear industry state that our claims were impossible. The CIA knew it was true but it a secret. Probably for the same reason they didn't want to cause problems for the nuclear industry. They'd been advised to say nothing that could harm nuclear power. But the nuclear waste problem still exists. In Japan, in the UK, France, America, Russia, and a few more countries. And how they deal with thier waste, we don't know.
We head to Russia. The 1957 happened in the region of Chelybinsk in the Urals. Details about the explosion are rare, and for good reason. Hidden by the CIA, the Russians and the whole nuclear industry, the accident showed that radioactive waste was not only a pollutants but also explosive. Since 1946, the nuclear site of Mayak has made Russian atomic bombs. It could be Hanford's twin. The town is prohinited to foreigners. For a long time, it was off the map and was given various code names. The tank that exploded in 1957 was close to this secret town. Today it remains inaccessible. To understand the consequences of the disaster, we go to Tatarskaia, a village hit heavily by radioactive fallout. Gulshara Ismagilova was 12 on the day of the accident. On that 29 September 1957, 1500 school children were in the fields helping the workers of the kolkhoz. What were you told at the time? On the 29th the wholw school was in the fields. All of a sudden, around 4 p.m., we heard an explosion. All the old folk who had survived the war thought a new war had started, so much the ground shook. Then near the village of Karabolka, the sky turned black, as if it were dirty. And this blackness covered the entire sky.
The villagers had no idea that a tank of highly radioactive nuclear waste had just exploded due to the failure of a cooling unit. The explosion was the equivalent to that of 75 tons of TNT. Radio-elements were projected 1 km into the sky, contaminating close to 15,000 km, 200 people were killed by the blast and 270,000 were exposed to radiation. This nuclear accident was the worst ever before Chernobyl, yet it remained a secret. Two day later, the workers brought the children to harvest the field again. They made us line up and told us the Kolkhoz needed us for the harvest. They even asked the first graders to join us. When we arrived, we saw that tractors had dug up ditches. The peasants in charge of the pupils told us, "See that pile of potatoes? Throw the lot in the ditches." And that was it. Our teachers asked why we had buried the harvest. They were told it couldn't be eaten: it was contaminated. But by what no one said. We are unable to find a detailed report on the disaster. Studies exist, but nothing proves their reliability, and there is no public cancer register to show the impact on health. The region is marked by the event. 800 km of contaminated land is closed off.The Mayak site and its activities remain a secret.
Here's some footage filmed by some reporters in the 1990s. The transparency of perestroika gained them access to the site. what they discovered was apocalyptic. Since opening, the plutonium plants of this huge military complex have dumped waste in the lake, transformed into a vast open-air reservior. Lake Karachay is now so dangerous, the authorities decided to fill it ina trick task with commentary by a reporter from ITN. We're taking a load of rocks down to the dump at Lake Karachay. The windows roof and sides of this truck are shielded with 5 tons of lead. Despite this, we've been told that to get to the lake and unload, we only have 12 minutes, because the radiation is so high. Lake Karachay is one of the planet's most radioactive locations. When the crew approaches the liquid, radiation is so strong they must take no more than 3 minutes to unload. Hope we don't break down! Today, Lake Karachay has been filled. To store waste still produced by the complex, engineers have dug even deeper lakes. These are still open-air radioactive reserviors but more diluted.
Female Body Fitness
There is a big difference between men and women when they work out. Men ofcus on developing the size of their muscles, woman focus on maintaining their feminine beauty while developing their muscular beauty at the same time. Such differences can be satisfiled by different ranges of motion. For men, short motion ranges are more effective in making muscle size bigger. And women should use long motion ranges to keep their muscles beautiful and develop them further. Also speed is an important difference. Fast workout is helpful to make muscles bigger, while slow workout is good for women. In body fitness competitions, the waist is the key in winning game. This is because women's body beauty cannot be made with a thick waist, so making big and clear abs without making the waist thicker is important.
Success as a professional body fitness athlete can be accomplished by maximizing the feminine beauty while developing their muscles. Many people pointed out lower body and if your lower body are a bit thick. This is due to genetic factors and also because you did belly dance for a long time so your hip joint were abused. Because of those abused joints You couldn't work out your lower body intensively as a result, at the competition your upper and lower body were not well balanced. Developing your lower body will be important issue to you in the future. If your waist are long, so don't think that is a disadvantage. Instead you will keep the waist thin and develop clear abs. This will be a unique beauty. And you should make more efforts to seperate general body muscles.
If your hip and legs are definitely disadvantages. You need intensive and significant work out. But later it can be a big advantage. This is because, generally women have wide and thin pelvis but you has a narrow and thick pelvis, It's so unique, so this can be your advantage in the long run. Because if an athlete has a thick pelvis, side and back posing which are weak points for most of athletes can be their strengths. It is a very big challenge for you to make current disadvantage into a future advantage. And still believe it can be done.
Nuclear waste history(1)
Nuclear waste history(3)
Nuclear waste history(4)
Nuclear waste history(5)
Nuclear waste history(6)
Nuclear waste history(7)
homeowners insurance Claim
home insurance Claim
state farm car insurance Claim
comprehensive insurance Claim
commercial insurance Claim
cheap auto insurance Claim
cheap health insurance Claim
indemnity Claim
car insurance companies Claim
progressive quote Claim
usaa car insurance Claim
insurance near me Claim
term life insurance Claim
auto insurance near me Claim
state farm car insurance Claim
comprehensive insurance Claim
progressive home insurance Claim
house insurance Claim
progressive renters insurance Claim
state farm insurance quote Claim
metlife auto insurance Claim
best insurance companies Claim
progressive auto insurance quote Claim
cheap car insurance quotes Claim
allstate car insurance Claim
rental car insurance Claim
car insurance online Claim
liberty mutual car insurance Claim
cheap car insurance near me Claim
best auto insurance Claim
home insurance companies Claim
usaa home insurance Claim
list of car insurance companies Claim
full coverage insurance Claim
allstate insurance near me Claim
cheap insurance quotes Claim
national insurance Claim
progressive home insurance Claim
house insurance Claim
health insurance quotes Claim
ameritas dental Claim
state farm renters insurance Claim
medicare supplement plans Claim
progressive renters insurance Claim
aetna providers Claim
title insurance Claim
sr22 insurance Claim
medicare advantage plans Claim
aetna health insurance Claim
ambetter insurance Claim
umr insurance Claim
massmutual 401k Claim
private health insurance Claim
assurant renters insurance Claim
assurant insurance Claim
dental insurance plans Claim
state farm insurance quote Claim
health insurance plans Claim
workers compensation insurance Claim
geha dental Claim
metlife auto insurance Claim
boat insurance Claim
aarp insurance Claim
costco insurance Claim
flood insurance Claim
best insurance companies Claim
cheap car insurance quotes Claim
best travel insurance Claim
insurance agents near me Claim
car insurance Claim
car insurance quotes Claim
auto insurance Claim
auto insurance quotes Claim
long term care insurance Claim
auto insurance companies Claim
home insurance quotes Claim
cheap car insurance quotes Claim
affordable car insurance Claim
professional liability insurance Claim
cheap car insurance near me Claim
small business insurance Claim
vehicle insurance Claim
best auto insurance Claim
full coverage insurance Claim
motorcycle insurance quote Claim
homeowners insurance quote Claim
errors and omissions insurance Claim
general liability insurance Claim
best renters insurance Claim
cheap home insurance Claim
cheap insurance near me Claim
cheap full coverage insurance Claim
cheap life insurance Claim
[Nuclear waste history] (1)
Nuclear waste history(1)
Since its birth the nuclear industry seems to have swum in troubled waters. Effort to explain barely reassure the world's population. A recent EU survey shows that 75% of Europeans distrust the nuclear industry. The root of this distrust: the fear of radioactive waste. So let's talk about it. Part of the seabed are littered with gutted radioactive barrels. What exactly did they contain? The most dangerous waste is inside nuclear reactors. To feed a power plant, cells of uranium, a radioactive mineral, are placed in the reactor core. Uranium is the plant's fuel. Inside the cells, the uranium reacts resulting in nuclear fission. Uranium atoms project particles called neutrons which hit other atoms and break them, releasing extremely high energy. The uranium cells heat up, the reactor boils water and the turbines produce electricity. After a few years, the cells are spent and must be changed. They are removed and placed in pools where they cool down over time. They have become nuclear waste. Inside the cells, new elements appear, like gases and metals, which have strange names: plutonium, caesium, americium, krypton, among others. Their life-cycle lasts from milliseconds to millions of years.Radioactive waste is dangerous and must be isolated. All that enters into contact with it is contaminated. The uranium cell are waste but so is all that touches them: water, liquids, buildings and worker's clothing.
We set off on a world wide quest to find out how the military and industry manage nuclear waste and if it's a risk for people everywhere. It's at the HQ of Greenpeace, the world's biggest anti-nuclear group, that our investigation begins. It was they who filmed the gutted barrels on the seabed. They let us into their treasure trove: the video archive. Mike tomsley is a veteran of every campaign against radioactive waste at sea. We went to a very deep part of the channel called the Casquets Trench, near the Channel Islands, in a fishery and near beaches. Rusty old barrels of nuclear waste. Empty waste barrels! In the empty barrels, marine wildlife had taken up residence. The question is: what happened to the radioactive waste? It's gone into the environment. So you can see what happens. It's hasn't disappeared into a black hole in the seabed. It pollutes the sea, gets into the food chain, and that could bring it back to your dinner plate.
Are the radioactive particles that enter the food chain dangerous? Radioactivity is radiation that can enter the body. Man is constantly exposed to weak, natural radioactivity, for example when taking a plane or walking in granitic areas. Man is more exposed after an atom bomb blast or by standing close to a radioactive source:irradiation. But he could also taken in radioactive food, water, gasses and dust. The irradiating particles become attached to the organs: contamination. Radioactive radiation is like an electron bombardment. They enter the body and break DNA strings. If the radiation is weak, the body can sometimes repair its DNA. But after strong radiation, it cannot. The broken molecules can cause digesttive or cardiovascular diseases, or more seriously cancer and genetic anomalies.
All dumping of radioactive particles in the environment can harm us. Was it common practice? Everybody did it : British, French, Americans, Russians, Japanese...The whole nuclear industry pumped its discharge into the sea. It was a time when everybody had no regard. The sea was thought of as the world's biggest dustbin. Figures from the International Atomic Energy Agency: in under 50 years, nuclear-capacity countries have dumped over 100,000 tons of waste into the seas. Britain alone accounts for 80% of the total. And landlocked Switzerland is second on the list. Faced with radioactive pollution, many nations oppose duping at sea, thus backing environmental groups. The impact helped us win an important battle. But it took another 10 years foe us to win the war. We managed to stop the dumping of radioactive waste at sea from ships.
In 1993, a UN treaty finally put and end to the submerging of nuclear waste. France was the last country to sign the treaty. It was a victory for the protection of the environment. But many grey areas still exist in nuclear waste management. Nuclear was developed by the military and little is known about their waste. Much information is protected by offcial secrets acts. We heard to the first ever nuclear site in search of the first ever nuclear waste. In 1942, during World War 2, the Roosevelt government chose Hanford as its nuclear weapons site and the Manhattan Project. Built deep in the desert, Hanford became a city of barracks and caravans inhibited by 51,000 people. Nine nuclear reactors and five plutonium plants were hastily built. Today historical Hanford is like a wasteland surrounded by barriers. The fuel elements caused a lot of contamination to come into this river. Were local inhabitants aware of this? Of course not. It was a secret covered by the Manhattan Project and by the US Army operation. The bed of the Columbia river contains radioactive sediment that no one knows how to remove as it keeps contaminating the water.
But even more shocking is this people. Those in charge of the Hanford site allowed families to enjoy the river without informing them of the dangers. Alan Boldt lives in Richmond a few kilometers from the site. He was a nuclear engineer. He said "I came to Hanford in 1963. I was 21 and had just graduated college. I was young, believed in my superiors. Then I found out, that after following orders for about twenty years, what they had told me wasn't entirely the truth. Hanford was very not a good site because waste was expelled into the environment. I was rather shocked by the high level of chemical products. In 20 years, they built it and made a mess."
Nuclear waste history(2)
Nuclear waste history(3)
Nuclear waste history(4)
Nuclear waste history(5)
Nuclear waste history(6)
Nuclear waste history(7)
Since its birth the nuclear industry seems to have swum in troubled waters. Effort to explain barely reassure the world's population. A recent EU survey shows that 75% of Europeans distrust the nuclear industry. The root of this distrust: the fear of radioactive waste. So let's talk about it. Part of the seabed are littered with gutted radioactive barrels. What exactly did they contain? The most dangerous waste is inside nuclear reactors. To feed a power plant, cells of uranium, a radioactive mineral, are placed in the reactor core. Uranium is the plant's fuel. Inside the cells, the uranium reacts resulting in nuclear fission. Uranium atoms project particles called neutrons which hit other atoms and break them, releasing extremely high energy. The uranium cells heat up, the reactor boils water and the turbines produce electricity. After a few years, the cells are spent and must be changed. They are removed and placed in pools where they cool down over time. They have become nuclear waste. Inside the cells, new elements appear, like gases and metals, which have strange names: plutonium, caesium, americium, krypton, among others. Their life-cycle lasts from milliseconds to millions of years.Radioactive waste is dangerous and must be isolated. All that enters into contact with it is contaminated. The uranium cell are waste but so is all that touches them: water, liquids, buildings and worker's clothing.
We set off on a world wide quest to find out how the military and industry manage nuclear waste and if it's a risk for people everywhere. It's at the HQ of Greenpeace, the world's biggest anti-nuclear group, that our investigation begins. It was they who filmed the gutted barrels on the seabed. They let us into their treasure trove: the video archive. Mike tomsley is a veteran of every campaign against radioactive waste at sea. We went to a very deep part of the channel called the Casquets Trench, near the Channel Islands, in a fishery and near beaches. Rusty old barrels of nuclear waste. Empty waste barrels! In the empty barrels, marine wildlife had taken up residence. The question is: what happened to the radioactive waste? It's gone into the environment. So you can see what happens. It's hasn't disappeared into a black hole in the seabed. It pollutes the sea, gets into the food chain, and that could bring it back to your dinner plate.
Are the radioactive particles that enter the food chain dangerous? Radioactivity is radiation that can enter the body. Man is constantly exposed to weak, natural radioactivity, for example when taking a plane or walking in granitic areas. Man is more exposed after an atom bomb blast or by standing close to a radioactive source:irradiation. But he could also taken in radioactive food, water, gasses and dust. The irradiating particles become attached to the organs: contamination. Radioactive radiation is like an electron bombardment. They enter the body and break DNA strings. If the radiation is weak, the body can sometimes repair its DNA. But after strong radiation, it cannot. The broken molecules can cause digesttive or cardiovascular diseases, or more seriously cancer and genetic anomalies.
All dumping of radioactive particles in the environment can harm us. Was it common practice? Everybody did it : British, French, Americans, Russians, Japanese...The whole nuclear industry pumped its discharge into the sea. It was a time when everybody had no regard. The sea was thought of as the world's biggest dustbin. Figures from the International Atomic Energy Agency: in under 50 years, nuclear-capacity countries have dumped over 100,000 tons of waste into the seas. Britain alone accounts for 80% of the total. And landlocked Switzerland is second on the list. Faced with radioactive pollution, many nations oppose duping at sea, thus backing environmental groups. The impact helped us win an important battle. But it took another 10 years foe us to win the war. We managed to stop the dumping of radioactive waste at sea from ships.
In 1993, a UN treaty finally put and end to the submerging of nuclear waste. France was the last country to sign the treaty. It was a victory for the protection of the environment. But many grey areas still exist in nuclear waste management. Nuclear was developed by the military and little is known about their waste. Much information is protected by offcial secrets acts. We heard to the first ever nuclear site in search of the first ever nuclear waste. In 1942, during World War 2, the Roosevelt government chose Hanford as its nuclear weapons site and the Manhattan Project. Built deep in the desert, Hanford became a city of barracks and caravans inhibited by 51,000 people. Nine nuclear reactors and five plutonium plants were hastily built. Today historical Hanford is like a wasteland surrounded by barriers. The fuel elements caused a lot of contamination to come into this river. Were local inhabitants aware of this? Of course not. It was a secret covered by the Manhattan Project and by the US Army operation. The bed of the Columbia river contains radioactive sediment that no one knows how to remove as it keeps contaminating the water.
But even more shocking is this people. Those in charge of the Hanford site allowed families to enjoy the river without informing them of the dangers. Alan Boldt lives in Richmond a few kilometers from the site. He was a nuclear engineer. He said "I came to Hanford in 1963. I was 21 and had just graduated college. I was young, believed in my superiors. Then I found out, that after following orders for about twenty years, what they had told me wasn't entirely the truth. Hanford was very not a good site because waste was expelled into the environment. I was rather shocked by the high level of chemical products. In 20 years, they built it and made a mess."
Nuclear waste history(2)
Nuclear waste history(3)
Nuclear waste history(4)
Nuclear waste history(5)
Nuclear waste history(6)
Nuclear waste history(7)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)