FOX Seattle: Nuclear waste leaks at Hanford are far worse than we thought (VIDEO)

Published: February 23rd, 2013 at 4:52 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
60 comments


Follow-up to: TV on U.S. Nuclear Waste Leak: Feds "just trying to figure out exactly what’s going on here" -- "This has a lot of people saying, 'What is going on out at Hanford?'" (VIDEOS)

FOX 13 News: “This raises the prospect we have leakage in additional tanks beyond the six,” [Washington Governor Jay] Inslee said. “There are six leakers; there may be more.” Inslee said Chu assured him that “there is no imminent health threat connected to these leaks,” but agreed action has to be taken to prevent the radioactive waste from leaking into the state’s ground and groundwater. [...] Attorney General Bob Ferguson released a statement that said the U.S. Department of Energy has failed to “adequately resolve the significant threat posed by the nuclear waste at Hanford.” [...]

“Nuclear waste leaks at Hanford are far worse than we thought.”

Watch the video here

Published: February 23rd, 2013 at 4:52 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
60 comments

Related Posts

  1. TV: Leaking nuclear material at Hanford was white, “now yellow or light green” — Amount has increased ‘measurably’ — Expert: This waste actually gets worse as time goes on (VIDEO) April 23, 2013
  2. Governor: Leaks can’t be stopped at U.S. nuclear site — Will take years to begin removing radioactive sludge from leaking Hanford tanks (VIDEO) March 7, 2013
  3. Governor: Nuclear waste leaking at an estimated 1,000 gallons a year — “No available technology to plug the leaks” at Hanford February 27, 2013
  4. Official: “This stands out from the string of recent bad news” about leaking U.S. nuclear site… “It really does complicate cleanup further” — “No clear plan for responding quickly to leaking nuclear waste” #Hanford June 24, 2013
  5. “Something did not go right”: Plutonium found outside of nuclear waste shipment — Traveled on public roads — “Unusual… radiation was in a place it shouldn’t be” (VIDEO) #Hanford June 27, 2013

60 comments to FOX Seattle: Nuclear waste leaks at Hanford are far worse than we thought (VIDEO)

  • Flapdoodle Flapdoodle

    Why is everything to do with nukes always worse than thought?


    Report comment

    • kintaman kintaman

      No problem…you are making a fuss about nothing. No "immediate" health impact.


      Report comment

      • Sickputer

        Fifth grade teacher for nucleocrats:

        "Today we will study three adjectives: immediate, imminent, and impending.

        Please feel free to use these intellectual words in any discussions with those alarmist environmentalists. Make sure you preface the words with the adverb "not".

        You may use the word "not" jocularly as a postpositive interjection to indicate that a previous statement is untrue: That's a spent fuel pond on fire! Not!

        "Tomorrow we will study the appropriate way to assign blame for an action to a completely different entity. Example: "That man who died of a heart attack working at Hanford Site was a smoker. That bad habit was also quite likely the cause for his deformed children. Smoking is very bad for humans. Nuclear energy is very good for humans."


        Report comment

    • AGreenRoad AGreenRoad

      It is MUCH worse than they say; 50 + tanks leaking, not just 1 or 6. This has been known for MANY Years.

      Hanford; Lethal And Leaking; A Race To Armageddon? via A Green Road http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/hanford-lethal-and-leaking-race-to.html


      Report comment

  • timemachine2020 timemachine2020

    They have the same EXACT problems at the Savannah River Site. I have a sister and her entire family that live in Columbia South Carolina and ALL have been suffering all kinds of sicknesses along with neighbors suddenly dying off of cancers and a whole slew of radiation related diseases from the leaking and open evaporation ponds and storage tanks. Our country and others like russia have killed and sickened as many of our own people from the manufacturing of nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants than we would have lost in a war with them. They had it all figured out except for what to do with the waste. Sure the nuclear investors got a quick buck up front but they gambled the fate of humanity whie they were at it and lost. Northern Japan is now a toxic wasteland with zombies hanging on to life by a thread. Next earthquake and tsunami in japan will cause a dominoe effect of meltdowns and sfp fires that will be the end of the game for all of us. Radiation and Methane are in a race to destroy life as we know it. Mabey we can hitch a ride on an asteriod until we can find another planet to screw up. What have we done to our childrens future? Einstine said it when he first split he atom "this should never be used". Man what an understatement. Think I'll go get drunk now. Have a nice day :)


    Report comment

  • Beyond Zero Point

    TM2020
    If my resources are correct the head waters for the Florida aquifer are under the savanna area. I live in west central Fl. and this is not good news. So, I am looking at a methane explosion from the gulf, one maybe two tsunamis, Isotopes from savannah in our water, it just does not get any better than this. Bless you and yours with Love and healing. And, I think I have bottle of wine somewhere in this house that I am going to find!


    Report comment

  • EX-pose-the-fakes

    To each their own but c'mon everyone. It aint over till the fat lady is singing(I have no idea what thats supposed to mean). Im sure hidden in DAARPA's warehouses or wherever it would take five minutes tops to completely clear up these affairs. The Nucleo-world of criminals is way too smart to not have the ultimate fix it on hand. Maybe we just need to get out of our boxes and start demanding a genuine fix. Something that will reveal the fact the the technologies the commoners use is out dated compared to stuff that elite hide away. Why be defeated we're not trying to literally eat each other yet, until that time comes save your beer and wine…and grow some food 'cause resource scarcity is the next bullshit on the agenda list after we probably have another crazy quake next month. At least save the booze until WWXXXIII kicks off. This is the last year to do what you want like its been, get drunk when you cant afford food or something. Its finally a nice day in the PNW.


    Report comment

    • Time Is Short Time Is Short

      The fat lady's singing in Tokyo, EPTF. The question is how soon will she start singing in the US. Many here would say she started singing here about two weeks after 3/11.

      You're right about resource scarcity. Under the best of environmental conditions, our economy is coming to a halt. Food will be hard to get, and expensive.


      Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      They've had 70 years and the reason there is no solution yet is because there is no solution. Radiation causes a decrease in intellect. So there is no hope for a solution to nuclear waste. We need to decommission every reactor and build no more new reactors to give our children the best possible future. Use real science, not fake science. The real scientists and physicians know how lethal radiation is, and that there will never be a solution to nuclear waste. To continually increase the amount of nuclear waste is both premeditated murder and genocide.


      Report comment

  • Beyond Zero Point

    EX-pose-the-fakes
    Thank you for your dissertation on the proper application of distilled spirits.


    Report comment

  • Max1 Max1

    How do you like your Pacific Salmon, Johnny?
    I like mine fully enriched with Atoms for Peace!


    Report comment

  • Beyond Zero Point

    Time Is Short;
    In the very future Water will become the reserve currency of the world!


    Report comment

    • razzz razzz

      Hanford lives on, no matter what they say, they haven't run out of area there to pollute with radioactivity. I'm pretty sure the sole NPP running there is supported with research buildings for the DOE. Probably operates under the veil of national security.

      "The Columbia Generating Station, is a nuclear power station located on the United States Department of Energy Hanford Site, 12 miles (19 km) NW of Richland, Washington. Its site covers 1,089 acres (441 ha) of Benton County, Washington…

      …Of the five commercial reactors originally planned by WPPSS for the State of Washington, this reactor was the only one completed (WNP-1 may yet be completed but WNP-4, WNP-3 and WNP-5 were abandoned).

      The reactor provides Washington with approximately 4% of the state's electrical generation capacity…"

      From…
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_Generating_Station

      Remember nuke war heads degrade and the launch fuel has to be maintained along with the electronics, an ongoing maintenance procedure. DOE calls it upgrading…

      http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/USNuclearModernization


      Report comment

  • enoughalready45 enoughalready45

    I keep thinking something is missing in this latest Hanford crisis. Maybe I found it at Nuclear Crimes website.
    Look at the right side bar colum for article on DOD"MONITORING DESIGNED TO FAIL – U.S. DOE DELIBERATELY DESIGNED MONITORING AT HANFORD TO N-O-T KNOW EXTENT OF LEAKING WASTE PROBLEM"
    http://nuclearcrimes.org/index.php

    Nuclear Crimes also provides link to this 2006 report "Recent Leaks From Hanford’s High-
    Level Nuclear Waste Tanks:
    USDOE’s Failure to Monitor, Report or Characterize Tank Leaks" at bottom of their article:
    http://nonukes.org/library/Recent_Leaks_from_Hanford%60s_High-Level_Nuclear_Waste_Tanks.pdf


    Report comment

  • VanneV anne

    Plutonium production created extensive amounts of waste
    “…The WTP is scheduled to begin start-up operations in 2019 and reach full operations by 2022. It will then take 25 years to vitrify all of Hanford's tank waste….”
    http://www.oregon.gov/energy/NUCSAF/docs/hanford_high_level_tank_waste.pdf


    Report comment

  • VanneV anne

    A New Approach to Military Nuclear Waste
    “The United States has many pressing nuclear waste problems, but the worst may be the leftovers from the manufacturing of nuclear weapons. Unlike the wastes from civilian reactors, the military wastes are liquids and sludges stored in underground tanks in environmentally sensitive areas. Scores of tanks have leaked some of the material into the dirt. And there is no debate about how the wastes might be repurposed; they have already been scavenged for useful materials like uranium and plutonium.
    “So for decades, the goal has been to solidify them by mixing them with glass, a process called vitrification, so the material can eventually be buried in a repository. With great difficulty and delay, the Energy Department opened a factory to do just that in 1996 at its Savannah River nuclear reservation near Aiken, S.C.
    “In 1989, the Energy Department signed an agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency and Washington State to start work on solidification at the Hanford nuclear reservation on the Columbia River. The process was to begin by 1999, but the pact has repeatedly been rewritten as deadlines were missed.
    “Savannah River had been built and operated by DuPont, a chemical company, and its wastes were simpler and easier to handle there. Hanford had been run by many different contractors, and its wastes had many components that had to be removed before the remainder could go to the glass factory.


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      “The federal government has drafted plans for a new glass plant at Hanford several times but dropped them because of technical problems. A plant under construction now, described as being more than 60 percent complete, was originally supposed to cost $5.6 billion but its price tag is now put at over $12 billion, not counting operating costs. It is supposed to run for decades, with the start date now estimated at 2019.
      “But given the extraordinary delays and cost increases, a start-up, Kurion of Irvine, Calif., sees an opening. Kurion has already done nuclear work at Fukushima Daiichi in Japan, where it built a system to filter cesium out of contaminated water at the plant’s stricken reactors. So far it has not convinced the Energy Department to hire it at Hanford, however.

      “In the vitrification process, the wastes and glass are typically heated to melting temperature by giant electrodes submerged in the mixture. But the electrodes will eventually wear out — a problem if the plant has to run for decades and is so radioactive that the maintenance work has to be done by remote control, noted Richard Keenan, Kurion’s vice president for engineering.
      “So Kurion uses inductive heating, in which an object that can conduct electricity is put in a chamber surrounded by coils. This create a fluctuating magnetic field that generates heat without physical contact.


      Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      ‘If there is no contact with electrodes, there are no corrosivity concerns,’’ Mr. Keenan said.The technique could be used for tank wastes and for soil contaminated by tank leaks.
      “Another twist is meant to address the nature of the tanks at Hanford. They accepted waste that was strongly acidic, but the tanks are made of ordinary carbon steel, which could not tolerate the acidity.
      “So workers added a neutralizing agent that led the wastes to divide: a heavy sludge falls out of the mixture and lines the bottom, and a liquid fills the top. Kurion is trying to convince the Energy Department that the liquid should be filtered with materials like the ones it used at Fukushima because when those have captured much of the radioactive materials, they are easy to melt into glass.
      “The company is also suggesting glass mixtures that are tailored to the waste. The goal is to make glass that will not leach its radioactive contents in millenniums to come. With careful attention to glass chemistry, Mr. Keenan said, technicians can get more radioactive material into each batch without spoiling the glass.
      “So far, the Energy Department seems resolved to complete the main vitrification plant. But a spokeswoman, Lori M. Gamache, said, ‘At the appropriate time we will evaluate whether their technologies represent cost-effective methods of vitrifying waste.’' She said the department planned to submit a report on bulk vitrification, the technology for handling contaminated dirt, in two…


      Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      [cont.]
      in two years.
      “At the end of the vitrification process, the molten glass cools in stainless steel containers that are then welded shut. What happens to those is still an open question. “
      http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/06/a-new-approach-to-military-nuclear-waste/


      Report comment

  • yogda yogda

    Thanks for the great read anne.

    This technology is interesting.
    http://zapnuclearwaste.com/1-strange-gas-brown-s-gas/


    Report comment

    • VanneV anne

      Sickputer
      January 24, 2013 at 10:43 pm

      SP: The only Brown's gas that is useful is a fart from a cesium-contaminated person. >;-> Might get some poison out of the body.
      As for our long dead former Nazi naval officer and Bulgarian Yull Brown he has been pretty much debunked for claims made for Brown's gas.
      For a better explanation I will defer to a former longtime poster who hasn't been around for about 3 months:
      Andrew Spagnoli: "This is not real. Brown’s Gas (as many snake-oil salesmen call it) is just oxyhydrogen… the same gas that welders used to use, the same gas that was once used in jewelry-making to melt platinum. It has no ability to eliminate, alter, or otherwise purify radioactivity. It ALSO does not allow you to run a car on water (the other false claim being hyped online about oxyhydrogen).
      I suppose you COULD burn material hot enough with it so that the radioactive material vaporized into the jet stream… but that is what they do now only at lower temps. The higher temperatures achieved with a brown’s gas flame would only help spread the pollution more easily to the U.S…. it would do NOTHING to reduce the dangers to us, and would actually increase the amount of pollution here by more efficiently getting the poison into the air."
      http://enenews.com/forum-about-japan-burning-radioactive-debris/comment-page-1
      SP: Thanks Andrew…hope you are still alive and kicking.
      http://enenews


      Report comment

  • markww markww

    WORD OF ENCOURAGEMENT THERE IS ALWAYS A ANSWER TO THE UNKNOWN JUST TAKES A FEW MORE MINUTES TO FIGURE THE ANSWER OUT.

    Never loose your hope no matter how dark it seems the next day always shines a little Brighter

    Markww


    Report comment

  • dave14139

    What is taking so long at Hanford? Gov cleaned up the West Valley, NY site using the waste to glass log process and emptied a lot of leaking underground tanks. Seems like a proven process.


    Report comment

  • Force them to clean up.

    By forcing them (aka us) to cleanup, the true cost of nuke will come out.

    Even if Vogtle comes in on budget, it still will only produce a 1.666% annual rate of return on investment, with near term and long term risks. What kind of an investment is that?

    Instead, renewables have a 10% to 30% annual rate of return. Facts Here

    its worth a click

    http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/p/renewable-and-energy-efficiency.html


    Report comment

  • TheBigPicture TheBigPicture

    Hanford is ruining such a beautiful state, thanks to nuclear.


    Report comment

  • missannie

    I have lived within 10 miles of Hanford for most of my life. Nuclear power is safe and economical. The leaking tanks have been leaking a bit for many years and no we don't have a high rate of cancer here. If you've ever worked with or for the government you know they define "red tape".

    Where do you think the power you've got your computer plugged into comes from? If you can come up with a more economical and safer way to generate power, go for it. Solar, wind, and dams are about all else there are.

    So until you totally understand the true problems here, actually work here, and participate in the cleanup process, be quiet. You ignorance is shinning through.


    Report comment

    • Jebus Jebus

      "and no we don't have a high rate of cancer here"
      You provide nothing but opinion…
      Here's just the workers…

      Study: Higher cancer rates for Hanford workers

      Former construction workers at the Hanford nuclear reservation have an increased risk of certain cancers, according to a new study.

      http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2009793896_apwahanfordcancerstudy1stldwritethru.html

      "You ignorance is shinning through."
      Perfectly said…

      Don't go anywhere, missannie, I no done wit u yet…


      Report comment

    • Jebus Jebus

      "So until you totally understand the true problems here, actually work here, and participate in the cleanup process, be quiet. You ignorance is shinning through."

      I think that everyone understands the problem, even those who are protecting their planet killing nuclear jobs.

      Despite billions spent on cleanup, Hanford won't be clean for thousands of years

      Some radioactive contaminants at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will threaten the Columbia River for thousands of years, a new analysis projects, despite the multibillion-dollar cleanup efforts by the federal government.

      http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/despite_billions_spent_on_clea.html

      What makes you so special that you are defending this multibillion dollar scam of a cleanup?

      I am participating in the cleanup, along with every other taxpayer…


      Report comment

    • Jebus Jebus

      "Nuclear power is safe and economical"

      "You ignorance is shinning through"

      Dirty, Dangerous and Expensive: The Truth About Nuclear Power

      The nuclear industry seeks to revitalize itself by manipulating the public’s concerns about global warming and energy insecurity to promote nuclear power as a clean and safe way to curb emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce dependence on foreign energy resources. Despite these claims by industry proponents, a thorough examination of the full life-cycle of nuclear power generation reveals nuclear power to be a dirty, dangerous and expensive form of energy that poses serious risks to human health, national security and U.S. taxpayers.

      http://www.psr.org/resources/nuclear-power-factsheet.html

      Any questions?


      Report comment

      • missannie

        Seems you know it all by just reading reports on the internet. Good job.

        So what's your answer to our national energy needs?


        Report comment

        • Jebus Jebus

          "Seems you know it all by just reading reports on the internet. Good job."

          Thanks,
          It's better than applying my opinion against well established fact.

          The answer?
          There isn't any one answer. There are many.
          But one thing is certain, the answer is not nuclear.
          If you can not see that, you will never see any other option…


          Report comment

          • Jebus Jebus

            BTW, where do you get your facts, from the evening news?


            Report comment

            • Sickputer

              Helen Caldicott had the energy answer for missannie in the wrapup speech today in New York:

              Loosely transcribed from memory:

              "The US has enough wind energy just west of the Mississippi River to provide three times the annual electricity needs."

              Where is the president like FDR to create in 9 months a total switchover to non-carbon, non-nuclear energy? Put solar panels on every person's rooftop in America.

              But it won't be Obama…he is a captive of the corporations."


              Report comment

  • missannie

    When I did say we don't have high cancer rates around here I was referring to the general population. You are correct regards the high cancer rate of Hanford workers. My neighbor passed away a couple of years ago from cancer from working out on site.

    At times when I write on line I'm thinking I'm saying one thing and it's interpreted another way, my bad.

    But nuclear energy isn't as bad as some make it out to be. With each new generation there are brilliant minds attending colleges and universities and coming up with new ways to cure diseases and yes, to clean up nuclear waste. Until something better is discovered and supported by big money the nuclear will still be the way to go, in our opinion.

    There are some problems with all types of energy and until people and governments around the world come together we will continue to struggle.

    One thing that we must be careful of is not to be too judgmental regards to how nuclear waste was handled back in the day as they didn't know the long term affects at that time. We've discovered a lot more in the field of nuclear power since those days. Personally I'd rather deal with nuclear waste than chemical, it's safer due to the fact you can detect it.

    I don't ever watch the evening news. It's trash.


    Report comment

    • Jebus Jebus

      The cancer rates have skyrocketed all over this planet, because of not only nuclear's filth, but also from pollution thinning our atmosphere allowing more ex planet radiation in.
      Our habits have to change and nuclear only entertain's those bad habits.
      Who is detecting the alpha radionuclides in your backyard?
      Nuclear filth is not only radioactive, it is some of the most dangerous chemical toxins made by man.
      The nuclear fuel cycle is not a green energy.
      The nuclear fuel cycle is not sustainable.
      The nuclear fuel cycle heats up our waterways and kills fish.
      The nuclear fuel cycle supports nuclear weapons, always has.
      The nuclear fuel cycle benefits a select few.
      Nuclear is less than 15% of our energy mix.
      We can conserve that much easily.
      Nuclear waste, spent fuel, has no destination.
      We are handing our decendents this mess.
      Just to boil water…


      Report comment

    • Johnny Blade

      Who is "our"(opinion)?? Maybe the people who sponsored your visit to this site can use some of their expertise at curing my wifes advanced cancer and can dispute the head Oncolgist report showing specific "markers" that are consistent with RADIOLOGICAL environmental pollution??!! I can provide those bright minds with the specific markers and even send them one of the seven lymph nodes to biopsy for themselves? I'd rather you provided more details on all those scientific miracle advances ESPECIALLY this new discovery in nuclear decontamination since the best YOUR people got is another announcement of a delay in decommissioning Fukushima by flushing it into the sea and what appears to be intentionally allowing coolant levels to drop to "burn off" whatever they cant "flush" into the Pacific and "wait until radiation levels subside"and that's in addition to the 40 year timeline given!! So why not use this alleged breakthrough to expedite the decommissioning operation then??!! When you live sandwiched between 11 spewing,venting,leaking "over the hill" nuke plants and a year after you've been downwind of those along with the 2nd largest mega-NPP in the world suffering multiple meltdowns/outs,explosions with ejection of MOX fuel,etc. your spouse develops cancer that progresses to stage 3B three months from a DOCUMENTED surge in background radiation and has their breast & 7 lymph nodes removed & intense chemo/radiotherapy treatments & watched the cancer care…


      Report comment

      • Johnny Blade

        center/oncolgy dept. become overwhelmed with new cancer patients including many previously "rare" and aggressive typesw that suddenly have become commonplace?! When you can answer any of the questions and a few more I haven't set out because I don't expect anything remotely likely to hold any answers except that we must be doing pretty good if they pay people to come out here so often to try to contradict us! (? ) Nukes suck-period!! :) ~**


        Report comment

      • J.

        It would be useful to many readers here to learn what the oncological "markers" of radiation exposure are. This is something one almost never hears about.

        Everyone should be informed about such markers, and ideally, every cancer diagnosis should include a search for any such marker.

        Can you give details about this very painful topic? Can ordinary biopsies reveal these markers?

        Some years ago a feisty newspaper — New York Post if memory serves me — spent some big coins to pay for an expensive medical test for a US serviceman with "Gulf War Syndrome" problems. The VA refused to test the serviceman for uranium.

        The result: the soldier clearly had been exposed to DU and was almost certainly ill from that.

        Could similar ignore-ance exist in the civilian medical system?


        Report comment

        • Johnny Blade

          I don't have the program or unsure how to open the CD disc that holds my wife's entire medical history including all of the Oncology tests results but I do remember "P21 and P or D25"-"showed marked abnormal cell mutation inconsistent with hereditary IBC" highlighted in her file I spied on the PC monitor in the exam room following whole body CTscans and bone density tests follow-up appointments and I saw enough there and had to "squeeze" more details and keep naming off the possible triggers for her aggressive,rare form of cancer that has recently made MSM headlines re;"Mysterious huge spike in advanced metastatic breast cancer cases suddenly seen in 13-39 yr. old girls & women"-my wife was 39 on Feb.20,2012 when she was diagnosed only one letter-grade away from 100% fatality rating!! She was stage 3B while stage4 is considered fatal! As it is she has only a 31% chance of surviving the next 5 yrs(4 now)and also developed a seizure disorder determined to have evolved from some sort of thyroid problem that began on April 23,2011… I don't believe in "coincidences"! Not when I'd had nightmares of loved ones sickened & dying from what I knew in my gut would happen as the news of the 2nd largest nuke plant suffering multiple meltdowns & explosions & then seeing it come true! I believe what I see and watching a cancer care hospital virtually explode with new patients that bewildered even long-time staff members scrambling to handle the new caseload(?)!I've seen…


          Report comment

  • Sickputer

    Dreamboat annie writes: "Personally I'd rather deal with nuclear waste than chemical, it's safer due to the fact you can detect it."

    SP: :-) . Hang around the Fukushima forums a while and you won't be singing that tune. Come back and repost when you have read a few hundred more articles about nuclear waste.


    Report comment

    • Johnny Blade

      I've got a combination Geiger counter/chemical pollution detector-monitoring device and the numbers displayed are almost always levels of concern or very near "alert" status. I also know how to use USN chemical test kits and most other NBC warfare equipment & tools, but I would much rather deal with chemicals ANY day than try to dodge sources of radioactivity!! If chemical pollutants wreaked havoc on my wife's immune system and caused "other" health issues then radiation from NUMEROUS sources pushed even higher by the ongoing Fukushima slow-motion ELE that overwhelmed her body's defenses and triggered her cancer!! My mind will not be swayed by anyone still enthusiastically throwing away good money to still learn to be a nuclear reactor operator and cheerleading for the elite POS's who poison for profit to justify their poor choice of a field of study UNLESS they apply it to learning how to SHUT THEM ALL DOWN AND CLEAN UP THE MESS!! I'd really like to hear exactly how your heroes will suck their filth through their felching straw out of the Pacific Ocean and from the western USA to Europe & all the "hotspots" in between?!! I wish Lady Judges Troll Patrol and cheerleading squad would explain the "fabulous,exciting,breakthroughs,etc." and how they would add such into the FUBAR FUKuD up deal their melon-headed,sub-species of humanoids already brought to our once pristine planet since they can't even provide any answers for the obstacles their old crap poses?! :| ~**


      Report comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.