Wolf writes: "... profit motives are driving the push to develop lands that, according to scientists, can never be inhabited safely again. And profit motives are driving an even more demented plan on a state-by-state level, astoundingly, to ship American schoolchildren into these no-go areas."
Rocky Flats nuclear facility workers in a plutonium storage area, 1988. (photo: US Dept of Energy)
This Nuclear Folly
22 February 12
n March 2011, novelist Kristen Iversen's memoir, Full Body Burden: Growing Up in the Nuclear Shadow of Rocky Flats, was waiting sedately among piles of other manuscripts at various publishing houses. Then, Japan was hit by a tsunami, and the cooling systems of the Fukushima nuclear reactor were overwhelmed, giving the world apocalyptic images of toxic floods and floating cars, of whole provinces made uninhabitable.
Immediately, Iversen's book was auctioned, and the timing of its publication, in June, could not be better - since, incredibly, in the shadow of the Fukushima disaster, and even as Japan and other nations see movements against the use of nuclear power ever again - President Obama is planning more investment in nuclear energy. The US is soon to start construction on several new reactors for the first time in three decades.
Iversen, a softspoken woman with a laid-back western vibe, wearing jeans and lavender scarf, seems an unlikely prophet of nuclear catastrophe. But her message is searing. She grew up in a small town near Rocky Flats, Colorado, where a secret nuclear weapons plant built over 70,000 plutonium "triggers" for nuclear bombs.
Iversen spoke with me this week about her research in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico, where we were at a writer's conference. She explained that "triggers" was a euphemism: the plant, which, throughout her childhood, was so secret that her mother believed they made cleaning supplies, was actually producing plutonium "buttons". In other words, these were the nuclear bombs themselves; they needed only a casing of explosives to be activated.
"They made Nagasaki bombs in my backyard," she explains.
Unknown to the families living in the shadow of the classified facility, deadly plutonium particles were seeded among the stunning beauty of the mountain landscape. As Iversen grew up, she became aware of the growing incidence of bizarre cancers being diagnosed in local children. Iversen's reporting, extensive interviews, and review of FBI and EPA documents, shows how classifying a toxic nuclear site led to the ruin of hundreds of lives - and continues to pose ever-escalating threats as the legacy of what we know about such nuclear contamination is being swept under the rug by developers, energy lobbyists and government agencies colluding with them, at the risk of exposing more of us, more severely.
The nature of the cover-up is incredible: in 1989, the FBI joined forces with the EPA to raid on the plant. The plant, in turn, was owned by the Department of Energy.
"It's the only time in the history of our country that, to my knowledge, two government agencies have raided another," notes Iversen. A grand jury investigation followed the raid, and jurors called for indictments against Rockwell, the manufacturer, and Department of Energy officials. In spite of this, not one indictment was ever issued. The jurors, furious, actually wrote their own report on the contamination and the suppression of the facts - which, astoundingly, still remains under seal.
But cancer rates are telling the tale: they remain elevated in neighborhoods around Rocky Flats 30 years on (plutonium has a half-life of 24,000 years). Recent tests confirm earlier findings: there is still contamination in the soil.
Although there is a scientific consensus that no exposure is safe, no matter how brief, Iversen reports:
"There's a big push in Denver right now to build a highway, the Jefferson Parkway, on the contaminated area. This is all prime real estate and many developers and city politicians are pushing to develop the area and pretend that Rocky Flats never existed."
So, profit motives are driving the push to develop lands that, according to scientists, can never be inhabited safely again. And profit motives are driving an even more demented plan on a state-by-state level, astoundingly, to ship American schoolchildren into these no-go areas.
Clean-up of nuclear contamination is expensive, and laws allow an area to remain as is, with high levels of contaminants in the soil, so long as they are designated "wildlife refuges". To save money and effort, the US government, as well as individual state governments around the country, are now pushing to turn former nuclear weapons sites around the nation into wildlife refuges, which schoolchildren would be taken to visit on class trips.
Nuclear scientists Iversen interviewed are horrified by these plans, arguing that these areas should be permanently closed off to the public and declared "National Sacrifice Zones". And as if enough damage had not been done, a new nuclear pit production facility is planned for Los Alamos, Texas, with the capability of producing up to 450 plutonium triggers per year.
Although the accident at Fukushima raised global awareness about the lasting, overwhelming dangers to human beings of radioactive contamination, the money that the energy lobby sees in building more nuclear facilities is just too good to rein in, catastrophe or no catastrophe. US energy policy, driven by industry lobbyists, remains committed to developing nuclear power, even as nations around the world are canceling their own nuclear plans: last month alone, Germany spent $2.15tn to abandon nuclear power, a decision taken after witnessing Japan's 2011 nuclear disaster.
"At a time when the world is supposed to be decreasing the nuclear arsenal, our government is talking about producing nuclear triggers again. We need to pay attention," warns Iversen.
While the rest of the world, especially countries whose legislatures are less dominated by special interests, do the sane thing regarding nuclear power and the threat of catastrophe, the US scampers merrily in the direction of madness. President Obama recently announced - as if this were a good thing - that the Department of Energy has given the green light to an $8bn loan guarantee program to build two, brand new nuclear power plants in Georgia. This, in spite of scientific warnings about dangers posed by those plants' risk to local residents by nuclear waste disposal issues.
There have been numerous nuclear disasters or near-disasters, besides Fukushima, in recent decades: they include the Mayak facility in Russia, as well as spills and contamination at other former nuclear weapons sites around the United States such as Hanford and Fernald.
Iversen, who has family members who've experienced tumors and other cancer scares, worries about her own health. For her, the time to sound the alarm about America's plans for a new generation of nuclear facilities is now.
"One fact is for sure: there is no safe level of exposure to plutonium. One millionth of a gram, particularly if it is inhaled into the lungs, can cause cancer.
"Rocky Flats happened in my backyard. [This will be] happening in everyone's backyard."
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |











Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
It is a failed society that does not turn such a government back.
around nuclear plants. Even in Grand Junction, CO
subdivisions were built on top of uranium tailings.
Then I will move on. They will not and I would love to hear why...so where are these writers here not asking those questions. I have given invites accross the USA...no takers
I do not remember God or Jesus ever saying the Earth belonged to man buy our borrowing it. However, the Bible writers left out that it was to be kept as it was not destroyed by anyone. God also has a commandment about Thou Shalt Not Kill as does other Holy Books but it gets under published.
Again let us see these Politicians and their families live on top of these poisons, drink the water, eat the food. Be our examples or leave the Country once and for all Traitors
"The nature of the cover-up is incredible: in 1989, the FBI joined forces with the EPA to raid on the [Rocky Flats] plant. The plant, in turn, was owned by the Department of Energy."
And the IAEA knew about this one, inspected it, approved it, got full access to it too, right? The Report on this one is just an internets page away, right?
So now they're also building a facility at the Savanna River "national sacrifice zone" in SC to convert tons of excess bomb plutonium into power plant fuel, though of course we still have no clue how to dispose of the radioactive spent fuel (which likely will still contain plutonium). The stupidity never ceases....
Of course we are killing children now with corn crap, GMO's we can thank General Mills, StoneyField and so many more
Puts a whole new text on mmmmgoood...parents do not care
Of course we don't ask for international approval, we rule the Universe!!!
One hopes that your grasp and reporting on nuclear physics is superior to your reporting on U.S. Geography.
When you inform us that a "new nuclear pit production facility is planned for Los Alamos, Texas ....." A couple of facts come to mind.
1. A Bing search shows the existence of no such place as "Los Alamos, Texas".
2. There *is* a Los Alamos National Labratory (LANL) known to design, and previously to have built, nuclear weapons, located in Los Alamos, New Mexico. LANL is *already* a nuclear pit production facility. Nothing "new" about it.
Aside from the geographical errors, it seems that you might know that nuclear weapons triggers are not made of plutonium. Triggers are made of conventional explosives. Plutonium is used only for the "payload".
If Rocky Flats was indeed producing weapons, those weapons were levels of magnitude larger than the "baby bomb" released on Nagasaki.
The Hiroshima bomb was .89 of one megaton. Compare that to the massive nuclear yields of weaponry today.
This is an important story. This breathless and slip-shod lack of fact checking and the nebulous and inaccurate description of the subject matter at hand is inexcusable. It leads readers to take less seriously a matter that could not *be* more serious. If you are going to take on a subject of this gravity, please take also the time to do it justice.
(and no, none of this is classified info at this point.) God knows why we would need any more of them at this point!
And there is another nuke weapons facility in Texas, though in Amarillo - likely another "national sacrifice zone" in the making. This may be what the author was thinking of. So other than the Los Alamos slip, the author appears to have a better grasp on the subject than you.
My basic point is, that with the kind of convoluted writing demonstrated in this article, there is no way of *knowing* what the author *actually* means. This problem used to be overcome by the use of copy readers and editors.
The reader is left to "guess and interpret" as you and I are caught up doing, with no possible way of settling the question of what the author "may be ..... thinking of". Only clear and concise writing can prevent that problem arising from a "reporter". Otherwise the reader is forced to "interpret" every last thing they read which is simply weak guessing.
Re: your description of triggers, you are correct that two fissionable masses, (both less than critical mass), are kept separate in a warhead. When the warhead is triggered, the wall separating these two fissionable masses is destroyed by means of a conventional explosive. This *initiates* the "slamming" together of the two units of plutonium, creating the required critical mass and provoking the process that you describe.
However, I am not playing a game of "compare the nuclear knowledge", I am simply calling for authors, copy readers and editors to perform their traditional functions so that readers are not left with more QuestionsQuesti ons about what the author coulda-woulda-shoulda meant than answers which the reader cannot, by definition, provide.
Seems like power-seeking and greed = hatred of life and disregard for our delicate balance and our good fortune to live in a tiny "Goldilocks Zone" of even the possibility for the evolution of "intelligent life" as we know it -and I use the latter parentheses deliberately.
Of course there's always the "Rapture" to come, what!?
http://www.petitions24.com/demand_testing_for_plutonium_dust_at_rocky_flats
Where are all the Plutonium Plants? I know we have Uranium mined in NorthEast, it has been on the road for decades passing thru everywhere. North east is also the larger shipper of Nuke Waste from Canada and downward to Landfill that is not doing so good anymore.
Cancer on the rise, kids not as healthy, wow what a dream Democracy.
The article also errs in saying that "a new nuclear pit production facility is planned… with the capability of producing up to 450 plutonium triggers per year." Those plans were defeated by citizen activism and its lack of clear need in the mid-2000's. Since then, the Department of Energy successively floated options for producing 250, then 125, then up to 80 pits per year. These were similarly defeated, most dramatically resulting just last week in the Obama Administration indefinitely postponing a ~$5 billion plutonium “Nuclear Facility” that would have directly supported expanded production. At this point in time, the Los Alamos Lab remains officially limited to a production level of not more than 20 pits per year, while in reality there are none currently scheduled for the foreseeable future.
(continued)
Jay Coghlan
Nuclear Watch New Mexico
www.nukewatch.org
Progress Energy with a demonstrated incompetence that boggle even the most senile mind... now is attempting to have insurance cover their penny pinching myopic management plan to repair a deteriorating reactor that went awry as predicted... By BOTH Internal and External Consultants. In addition, we have written confirmation from Congressman Richard Nugent that there are stored at Crystal River over 1,300 spent fuel rod assemblies... each "assembly" composed of 176 fuel rods!
The potential for MEGA-DISASTER IN Florida is right here and shows no sign of being made safe anytime soon given the very short-sighted energy policy out of Washington fomented by corporate lobbyist influence. JR http://www.johnrussellforcongress.com
We need to guard against this because: 1) of the innate tendency to stray from the tested pedigree of existing nuclear weapons, perhaps raising fears about “reliability,” possibly leading to renewed full-scale testing; and 2) if we are ever to seriously progress toward the Obama’s Administration declared goal of a future nuclear weapons-free world, this nation should focus more on tried and true engineering methods of stockpile maintenance rather than exorbitantly expensive “science” that serves a privileged nuclear weapons priesthood.
Life Extension Programs also block the accelerated dismantlement of 1,000’s of retired nuclear weapons at NNSA assembly/disassembly facilities. Those dismantlements would dramatically improve our own security (including large costs savings), and provide tangible proof of progress toward a future world free of nuclear weapons, the only weapons that can truly threaten our own national survival.
Jay Coghlan
Nuclear Watch New Mexico
www.nukewatch.org
Thank you for the technical clarification on modern trigger design and function.
Thank you as well for outlining your efforts at Nuclear Watch New Mexico.
Kudos on both.
RSS feed for comments to this post.