Environment

4121 readers

62 users here now

Environmental and ecological discussion, particularly of things like weather and other natural phenomena (especially if they're not breaking news).

See also our Nature and Gardening community for discussion centered around things like hiking, animals in their natural habitat, and gardening (urban or rural).

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Sellafield scandal shows nuclear is not safe or green (socialistworker.co.uk)

submitted 1 day ago by sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al to c/environment@beehaw.org

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Geodad@beehaw.org 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It leaches enough radioactive water into the ground to fill an Olympic sized swimming pool every three years

That's actually not bad. That's a slow leak that has plenty of time to dilute with the ground water.

Dilution is the solution to pollution.

This is a fearmongering, sensationalist, click baity style article.

[–] solo@fedia.io 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

From UK Parliament Committees:

Sellafield’s race against time: nuclear waste clean-up not going quickly enough, PAC warns

Report highlights latest picture on delays and cost rises in c.£136bn 100-year nuclear decommissioning project.

The PAC’s report finds that Sellafield Ltd has missed most of its annual targets for retrieving waste from several buildings on the site, [...] Sellafield Ltd’s underperformance will likely remain extremely hazardous for longer.

Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “The intolerable risks presented by Sellafield’s ageing infrastructure are truly world-class. When visiting the site, it is impossible not to be struck by the fact that one can be standing in what is surely one of the most hazardous places in the world. This is why we expect Sellafield’s management of its assets, and the delivery of the project to decommission it, to be similarly world-class. Unfortunately, our latest report is interleaved with a number of examples of failure, cost overruns, and continuing safety concerns. Given the tens of billions at stake and the dangers onsite to both the environment and human life, this is simply not good enough.

Edit: Since in the report they say the witnesses told us that the radioactive particles are “contained” in the soil and do not pose a risk to the public I thought it would be appropriate to say that at least they used brackets. The degradation of soil and groundwater needs to be taken into consideration as well. And let's not forget the impacts on local biodiversity.

[–] Geodad@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, that's really fearmongery.

Most of the water that leaks out will be cooling water, which means deuterium mixed with normal water. There may be small amounts of tritium in it, but that's not too worrying either.

[–] solo@fedia.io 3 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

And what would be the gain for the UK Parliament to use fearmongering tactics for something like that?

[–] Geodad@beehaw.org 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Probably the same thing that has American congress doing it. Ties to fossil fuel companies.

[–] solo@fedia.io 1 points 3 hours ago

I doubt it's what you say.

All countries have ties to fossil fuel. There is even a shared history of oil and nuclear energy

Apart from that, currently Britain prepares to go all-in on nuclear power — after years of dither and Keir Starmer expected to confirm result of 15-year search for investment at UK-France summit next month. For me, this would be a reason not to spread fearmongering on this matter.

So, any other reason you can think of to back your argument?