UK Lab Traces Polonium To Russian Nuclear Plant

reporter writes "British authorities had identified polonium 210 to be the radioactive poison that killed Alexander Litvinenko, the former Russian spy who defected to Great Britain. Now, according to a disturbing report, the authorities have identified the source of the poison to be Russia. Bloomberg ominously reports, 'Scientists at the U.K.'s Atomic Weapons Establishment in Aldermaston, west of London, have traced the polonium 210 found in London to a nuclear power plant in Russia, the capital's Evening Standard newspaper reported today. Officials at the establishment didn't return calls.' A cold chill just fell on relations between Russia and the West." In another twist to this developing story, the shadowy Italian security consultant who dined with Litvinenko has also fallen ill with radiation poisoning.

Comments

Re:More like...

[Catbeller]

Better that, than the ingnorami that Americans are so proudly becoming. I swear, so many apathetic male libertarians who think history is about the military, free markets, WW II and the defeat of communism. South Park Republicans. They have proudly marched to their standard bearer's beat, the ultimate fake educated man, George W. Bush.

His degree was in... history?

Re:Bad for nuclear energy

[rossifer]

Seeing as new nuclear plants take so long to build, then shouldn't the priority be on energy sources which can make a difference more immediately, like wind and solar?

The only reason nuke plants take so long to build is NIMBY attitude. Wind and solar are no panacea. Wind plants are only economical in a few locations in the US, most of which already have wind generators running. Solar takes an enormous initial investment and has it's own problems given how remote the most economical locations are.

We can also cut consumption, which is by far the easiest way to manage our energy demands.

Easy, huh? Ever tried to change an industrial culture to consume less power? When gas prices rose dramatically this past year, people drove less, but we didn't do anything else less. If anything, overall consumption went up. Changing people's behaviors is infinitely harder than simply building twenty new nuclear plants, as long as there is political willpower is behind it (i.e. exemption from frivolous lawsuits).

Nuclear power is where this country's future is. Lots of nuclear power. If we don't decide to do that, there won't be nearly as much of a future. Maybe you think that's okay. I haven't made up my mind on that subject yet.

Regards,
Ross