Social Links

Run of Site Leaderboard

6 responsesSubscribe to comments

  1. Read the Orwelliian words of Larry Smith carefully and you’ll feel the soothing tone he’s trying to convey.

    “The sampling result is not unexpected…” “Not unexpected” are two words he has used in the past to convey the feeling of “it’s all right”, but the fact is that it was all unexpected.

    The radiation that is now in the ground under and around the plant came from pipes that Entergy officials testified, under oath, did not exit. If the pipes did not exist then every action and test is unexpected.

    Also note that immediately after the opener of this press release come the words “No threat to Public or Safety”. You are not too worry as everything at this leaking, aged plant is just fine.

    We can only wonder what Mr. Smith would have said if he were the spokesperson for TEPCO. “Plant Explodes – No Threat to Public or Safety. Exploding plant was not unexpected”.

  2. How much is 1,230 picocuries of something anyway? The article said that the limit for drinking water is 20,000 picocuries/liter, so it is less than 7% of what is allowed to come out of your faucet. There are just about 1,600 picocuries of potassium-40 in a pound of bananas, or about 25,000,000 picocuries of tritium in you wristwatch with a glow-in-the-dark face.

    So, it’s fair and reasonable to compare this to one of the largest disasters (and not just the nuclear part) the world has seen. We should close VY and build a coal plant. Or replace it with a biomass plant like Vermont’s only other power plant, J.C. McNeil, which burns 30 cords of wood an hour… to make 50 MWe. VY makes 650 MWe, so, we should burn 390 cord of wood an hour to replace VY. How about a solar plant? SEGS in California’s Mojave Desert makes about 75 MWe and covers 1,600 acres. So clear out 13,800 acres to replace VY with solar (it will have to be someplace that rarely has overcast). Wind power sounds good. The Roscoe wind farm in the Texas Panhandle, the largest in the US, makes a little less than 300 MWe. And, it’s only 627 wind turbines and only covers about 100,000 acres. Natural gas isn’t as bad as coal, right? But, it still make about 65% of the green house gases that a coal plant does for the same amount of energy produced.

    Nuclear power may not be perfect, but what is? I think it’s one of the best sources of power available to us today, with a very large domestic fuel source. With the growing energy demand, it could be one way we prevent greenhouse gases for being pumped into the atmosphere. I’m not saying that solar, wind, and natural gas are bad, I’m just saying that they also have their drawbacks. Just because Greenpeace wants you to part ways with your hard earned dollars so they can make money, doesn’t mean you should always listen to their scare tactics.

  3. Ah, the return of the banana argument.

    We should be asking what’s so good about radiation unknowingly being released into our groundwater and our air. Perhaps Mr. Esslin can answer what’s so good about 37 out of 104 nuclear plants leaking radiation into our groundwater. Why is this a good thing for unwitting people? Why is it a good thing to trivialize?

  4. Bob,
    An adult human body contains nuclides equivalent of about 7,000 Bq x 27 pCi/Bq = 189,000 pCi
    Tritium is the least radioactive of all nuclides; tissue paper or human skin stops the radiation.
    EXIT SIGNS AND WRISTWATCHES
    - A luminous EXIT sign (1970s) contains about 1,000,000 million Bq (1 TBq), or 27 Curies of tritium. They often end up in landfills causing the leacheate to contain up to 250,000 pCi/liter, which may be similar to some nuclear plant tritium leaks.
    - NRC limit for a wristwatch = 25 mCi of tritium/watch = 25,000,000 pCi of tritium/watch = 925,000 Bq
    http://theenergycollective.com/willem-post/53939/radiation-exposure

    Trivial people take up trivial issues. They are people who purposely make mountains out of mole hills.

  5. So Willem, how many exit signs or wrist watches have you eaten lately?

  6. John,

    How much water “contaminated” with tritium have you been drinking from the Connecticut River?

    Scare-mongering is going on.

    Willem

Leave a Reply

Comment policy

VTD requires that all commenters identify themselves by first and last name. You may wonder why we don't accept anonymous comments. The short answer is: We want to keep the discourse civil.

You might rightly ask, since most online newspapers accept anonymous posts from readers, what makes VTD so special?

The long answer is: Anonymous comments don't support our mission. We are a nonprofit news organization dedicated to enhancing democracy through in-depth journalism. Our role is to foster a civil online discourse, and one very simple and effective way to do that is to require commenters to identify themselves. This isn't a new idea, of course. This is the way newspapers have treated letters to the editor since time immemorial.

As a result of our comment policy, VTD has created a safe zone for readers who want to engage in a thoughtful discussion on a range of subjects. We hope you join the conversation.

Privacy policy

VTDigger.org does not share specific information about our readers with other entities. Email addresses we collect through our subscription list and comment submissions are kept private.

We use Google analytics to generate aggregated data regarding the size and geographic distribution of our readership. This information helps us gauge how many readers come to the website and what towns they live in. It does not include addresses or other identifying characteristics about our readers.

Donate Today

We're an independent nonprofit organization, your donation helps fund the digging, and, it's tax deductible.

Thanks for reporting an error with the story, "Trace amount of tritium found in water sample in Connecticut River ne..."