Sep 04
Italian Waste…Back on the Table?
2009 at 4:47 pm | posted by Rep. Craig Frank 10 comments
Potentially “back on the table” and available to the State of Utah for additional “tax” revenue is a proposal from EnergySolutions. Read Deseret News article HERE.
And, read THIS previous posted statement on this issue on UnderTheDome.com from EnergySolutions. (February 2009)
10 Responses to “Italian Waste…Back on the Table?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
September 4th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
I support this, good way to bring money into the state, and avoid having to cut state services any more then they already have.
September 5th, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Here we go again Frank. Just think of all those political contributions rolling in from Energy Solutions into your campaign coffers. If you dance to their tune just right, there may be a lucrative lobbyist position in it for you when you leave public office. Isn’t this exciting. I’m so happy for you. Things just are going just the way you hoped. I’ll bet you go to sleep each night hearing the roentgens quietly ticking in the geiger counter in your head.
I can see the new state slogan now—UTAH RADIOACTIVITY ELEVATED.
September 6th, 2009 at 10:16 pm
Wow, John…deja vu.
September 7th, 2009 at 7:17 am
Your lame attempt at humor in your response Frank does not address the inherent truths contained in my post. You past and present statements and actions clearly suggest that you are in the pocket of the Energy Solutions Corporation. You are an elected representative of the people of Utah, not the Energy Solutions company. Rather than a another flippant response, how about a denial in writing that you 1) benefit from that company’s largess, and 2) will seek or accept a paid position from that company at any time in the future.
September 7th, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Radiation is a part of life here in Utah, Their is naturally occurring uranium in southern Utah soil, very high amounts of radon gas in northern Utah. 3% of the potassium you eat is radioactive. You are exposed to radiation everyday of your life so lets get serious here.
You will be exposed to more radiation from the yellow bricks in your elementary school then through the direct handling of most LLW they are talking about here, which is soil from around the power plant building, used rad suits, and some parts of the outer building of nuclear power plants.
If Italy really wants to pay us a huge wad of cash to store this stuff I say let um.
September 7th, 2009 at 7:07 pm
If as you say Ronald that most of the the waste has less radiation than the yellow bricks in my elementary school, then why pray tell do they need to go to the expense of shipping it all the way from Italy and store it in a special waste facility? Your argument is silly to the say the least.
September 7th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
Because people like you spell nuclear with a big K(nuklear). Because people are very poorly educated about what radiation is and isn’t. It’s always been hard to explain things that can’t be directly seen. And their is the whole NIMBY thing that runs rampent everywhere.
The grand majority of LLW(greater then 99%) is safe to put back into the environment or dispose of in cheaper ways. the last less then 1% needs simply to be put in dry storage for a few years to let the trace amounts of the nastier isotopes decay. And just a few years 10-15 is likely enough for this to happen.
Utah has vast wasteland deserts that are to alkaline and saline to be useful for anything other then waste storage and the occasional super car test its the perfect place.
If we had the same crazy regulations/fear dictating the storage of say coal ash(which also contains trace amounts of radioactive materials) we would put that industry our of business. The Magna coal plant here in Utah produces around 115,000 tons of coal ash per year fyi.
September 8th, 2009 at 8:40 am
People like you spell the word “rampant” rampent, and use the word “their” when the proper word is “there”.
Again Ronald, if the nuclear waste from Italy is so benign as you say and is safe to put back into the environment, why don’t the Italians just put it back into THEIR environment and save the shipping cost to Utah?
Jump in here Frank, if you like. I know you have studied this issue extensively.
September 8th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
I said most of it is harmless not all, their is a huge difference in those to statements.
99% of the stuff is perfectly fine, the trick is know which parts are which. Which radiation suits accidentally had a little reactor water spilled on them which didn’t, which bits of the outer building picked up a few stray particles.
Most of the material is stored to prevent animal and human ingestion through the decay cycle of the nastier stuff.
Italy doesn’t really have a good place to store much anything, they ship a lot of difference waste products to other nations. Because the waste we are talken about is LLW and has the big bad wolf of radiation labeled on it, it limits the places they can ship the stuff to, they can’t send the waste to africa/middle east/south america/etc/etc/etc.
And again Utah has vast wasteland deserts that are to alkaline and saline to be useful for anything other then waste storage and the occasional super car test its the perfect place.
September 8th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
10 C.F.R. § 20.2002, the NRC reserves the right to grant a free release of radioactive waste. The overall activity of such a disposal cannot exceed 1 mrem/yr and the NRC regards requests on a case-by-case basis. Low-level waste passing such strict regulations is then disposed of in a landfill with other garbage. Items allowed to be diposed of in this way are: glow-in-the-dark watches (radium) and smoke detectors (americium) among other things.
Ever owned a glow in the dark watch or a smoke detector? These are both LLW.