TV: Leaking tank at U.S. nuclear site may be in far worse condition than previously known — Workers shocked by new findings #Hanford

Published: June 21st, 2013 at 9:23 am ET


Title: Worst Hanford tank may be leaking into soil
Source: KING 5 News
Date: June 21, 2013 at 8:52a ET

The first ever double-shell tank to have leaked at Hanford may be in far worse condition than anyone imagined. Hanford workers conducting routine maintenance on the tank Thursday were shocked to find readings of radioactivity from material outside the tank. Until now leaked nuclear sludge had only been detected in what’s known as the tank’s annulus – the hollow safety space between the tank’s two walls.

The tank, known as AY-102, has been at the center of a KING 5 investigation for months. […]

The U.S. Department of Energy, in a unique move, issued an email late Thursday night about the turn of events.[…]

Now that the tank’s condition may be far worse than previously known, state and federal officials are on the fast track to find solutions. […]

U.S. Department of Energy email excerpts

  • On Thursday, June 20, 2013, workers detected an increased level of contamination during a routine removal of water and survey of (AY-102’s) leak detection pit…The source of contamination is not yet verified, but may be an indication of a leak from the AY-102 tank’s secondary containment.
  • ORP has notified the Washington state Department of Ecology and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and convened an engineering analysis team to conduct additional sampling and video inspection to further assess the elevated radiation levels and determine the source of the contamination.

See also: [intlink id=”tv-leak-at-u-s-nuclear-site-has-grown-substantially-the-worst-of-the-worst-on-planet-much-more-bright-green-liquid-than-before” type=”post”]{{empty}}[/intlink]

Published: June 21st, 2013 at 9:23 am ET


Related Posts

  1. 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
  2. TV: Leaking Strontium-90 is “boiling the material around it” at U.S. nuclear site — Eating through tank liners (VIDEO) May 12, 2013
  3. TV: “It appears the worst case scenario has happened” at U.S. nuclear site — Most dangerous material on earth “out of control”? — A whopping 800,000 dpm measured outside tank (VIDEO) #Hanford June 22, 2013
  4. 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
  5. TV: Alarm over “Catastrophic Leak” at US nuclear site — “Emergency response underway” — Surge in radioactive leakage after “essentially blowing a hole” in massive tank containing “deadliest substance on earth” — Former Worker: “I was very shocked to hear it breached that significantly” (VIDEOS) April 20, 2016

17 comments to TV: Leaking tank at U.S. nuclear site may be in far worse condition than previously known — Workers shocked by new findings #Hanford

  • nedlifromvermont

    Great … the government scientists and engineers are in overdrive … … …. this means either nothing will really get done or, more likely, really nothing will get done, but the companies hired will get paid double and the workers will be irradiated and …

    what a f***ing sh**show …

    ain't nuclear physics just so wonderful??

    Brilliant, Enrico!!

  • Sickputer

    "Now that the tank’s condition may be far worse than previously known, state and federal officials are on the fast track to find solutions."

    SP: Fast track indeed! Anyone who believes that after 70 years they are going to speed up containment issues is sadly mistaken. The government has three speeds: slow, slower, and slowest.

  • jec jec

    NO MENTION OF RADIATION LEVELS. It is bad folks. And we do not see "no immediate danger" in any of the statements. Its what is NOT said that concerns in this email. And of course, the email went out LATE AT NIGHT. Do you think the government expected it to be overlooked or ignored? And why LATE AT NIGHT? Again the situation is not good folks…an understatement.

  • I was just reading a quote from Winston Churchill:

    "When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand, we apply the remedies which then might have effected a cure.

    "There is nothing new in the story. It falls into that long dismal catalogue of the fruitlessness of experience and the CONFIRMED UNTEACHABILITY OF MANKIND.

    "Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong – these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history."


    While Churchill was talking about the world's passivity as Hitler militarized Germany, demanded and was handed over part of Czechoslovakia, and then simply took over the rest of Europe – that quote can also be applied to our inaction regarding Hanford and other man-made environmental threats from the nuclear and chemical industries, and from sheer human greed. The natural world is dying around us, and our governments tell us to wait for yet another study.

  • m a x l i

    Don't worry, nedli and Sickputer! We will use triple-shell tanks next time, and nuclear power will be safe and prosperous again until the end of time. (Or at least "pros-porous".)

  • Sol Man

    The smartest engineers in the land didn't see this potential, but assured, problem?
    That once the wall is compromised it will more quickly enlarge and insure greater leakage. The liquid within is vastly corrosive.

  • The tanks had a twenty year life span according to

    They were wild west frontier days for nuclear. It was a war effort too. The original workers didn't know they were working on a nuclear reactor. The original "B" reactor is a national historic monument. They found a chunk of plutonium buried in a safe. Perhaps the oldest known produced plutonium. They did this

    Then there was the cold war. Every day they ran these plutonium producing reactors they were using Columbia river water for cooling and released terebequerols of radiation into that river every day for decades and didn't tell anybody. So evil. Now still a big mess and I wonder if the radiation found in tuna off the Cali coast is from Fukushima or Hanford?

  • Another interesting fact is that over the years, the site was run by DuPont, GE and others so it was a for profit company that made the decision to install the tanks for a price but since that decision went south it seems like traditional nuclear practice that tax payers clean up business mis-calculations. As is happening in Japan.

  • WorseThanChernobyl

    I live about 8 miles from Hanford, and I have a geiger counter. It regularly spikes up above 100 cpm, even in the house. I can't prove it is from Hanford, and there is also a nuke plant next door to Hanford that is going through refueling right now.

    • I live much farther away, on Vancouver Island on Canada's west coat, but I still worry about a "worse than Chernobyl" situation.

      Would you mind telling us how your neighbors feel about it? Is there a real sense of alarm, or perhaps the hope that it can all be contained somehow? Are there any evacuation plans in case an emergency situation comes up?

      Here in the west coast we also have to worry about the Big One – an earthquake that could also cause all kinds of unanticipated disasters.

  • WorseThanChernobyl

    Well, the people around here regularly die of cancer. One of my neighbors passed away from cancer just a year ago, and we didn't even know he had it. No one can mention the nuke situation around here and talk about it frankly without being ostracized. It is all hush hush and no one is allowed to wonder whether or not their cancer or other mysterious illness is from exposure to those toxins or not. I know so many people around here suffering and children suffering from many health problems, some totally unexplained. I also know quite a few people, including a couple children with cancer. It is totally bizarre, since I really didn't know anyone with cancer until we moved here ten years ago. Just about everyone has at least one child with major health issues too. Very sad. We are moving come hell or high water. I hope someone will buy our house!

    • Thank you for the information. The area health problems are alarming, but something you referred to is also disturbing. You said:

      "No one can mention the nuke situation around here and talk about it frankly without being ostracized. It is all hush hush"

      Would you please elaborate? Is it the employers who want to avoid panic, or neighbors fearing they won't be able to sell their homes? I suppose the local media follows the official script. All this censorship in itself is a story within a story.

      I hope you and your family can leave as soon as possible. The greatest wealth anyone can have is his health. Nothing else compares to that.

      By the way, it has been known for some time that nuclear plants contaminate their surroundings, but the industry keeps denying this, and the government keeps raising what is considered "safe" radiation levels.

    • WorseThenChernobyl. Sorry for your fortune and best of luck moving away. I would imagine the people around where you live don't want to talk about the poison for various reasons. The town seems to run on money invested into Hanford. Its human nature, just like smokers don't like talking about lung cancer. For all you posters putting down the Japanese for putting up with Fuku poison and kids living with high background radiation please note its happening in USA. I'm sure when you sell your house, WorseThenChernobyl, you won't be telling potential buyers your real reason for selling. I don't blame you I would do the same thing. Its a matter of survival especially if you have kids of your own. Most people are asleep at the wheel anyway. You would do well to get out of that area. Good Luck and God Bless, WorseThenChernobyl

  • alreadyconsidereddead alreadyconsidereddead

    Anyone that might still believe these are mere accidents and miscalculations is mentally ill.
    go read and understand the psychopaths that are in "control" of these events, there are no accidents or miscalculations.

  • yogda yogda


    I've been saying the same for years.

  • Former Congressman Newt Gingrich is still trying to alert Congress about the country's unpreparedness for an EMP event. He has been at this for years.

    Addressing the Electromagnetic Pulse Caucus he said:

    “The reason I began focusing on this a decade ago is there are very few events you can’t recover from. You can recover from 9/11, you can recover from Pearl Harbor. This is really different. This creates such a collapse of our fundamental productive capacity that you could literally see a civilization crash and tear itself apart fighting … internally.”

    Read more:

  • Heart of the Rose Heart of the Rose

    "The new assessment of the seismic data suggested two probable gas sources for the methane in a shallow aquifer under Bayou Corne. The sources could hold as much as 60 million cubic feet of gas.

    These sources could act as kind of deeper reservoirs, feeding more gas into the shallower aquifer above, continuing the potential risk of explosions to the houses in the community.

    Three other zones with less likely pathways to the surface could hold another 150 million cubic feet of gas, Marlin said.

    These findings contradict Texas Brine’s interpretation of the same data earlier this year, which found that the deep sources of gas had been played out and only gas in the shallower aquifer had to be dealt with.

    Experts estimate 45 million cubic feet of gas is in the shallow aquifer."

    July 17 2013

    Residents continue to be frustrated over sinkhole

    "John Boudreaux, director of the parish Office of Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness, told residents that at current rates of gas removal, it would take five years just to remove the gas in the aquifer"

    Pfft..As if the geological conditions are going to hold up for 5 years..