Nuclear Waste Accident Costs Los Alamos Contractor $57 Million

HughPickens.com writes The LA Times reports that Los Alamos National Security, the contractor managing the nuclear weapons laboratory at Los Alamos, NM has been slapped with a $57-million reduction in its fees for 2014, largely due to a costly nuclear waste accident in which a 55-gallon drum packaged with plutonium waste from bomb production erupted after being placed in a 2,150-foot underground dump in the eastern New Mexico desert. Casks filled with 3.2 million cubic feet of deadly radioactive wastes remain buried at the crippled plant and the huge facility was rendered useless. The exact causes of the chemical reaction are still under investigation, but Energy Department officials say a packaging error at Los Alamos caused a reaction inside the drum. The radioactive material went airborne, contaminating a ventilation shaft that went to the surface giving low-level doses of radiation to 21 workers. According to a DOE report, the disaster at WIPP is rooted in careless contractors and lack of DOE oversight (PDF). "The accident was a horrific comedy of errors," says James Conca, a scientific advisor and expert on the WIPP. "This was the flagship of the Energy Department, the most successful program it had. The ramifications of this are going to be huge. Heads will roll."

The accident is likely to cause at least an 18-month shutdown and possibly a closure that could last several years. Waste shipments have already backed up at nuclear cleanup projects across the country, which even before the accident were years behind schedule. According to the Times, the cost of the accident, including likely delays in cleanup projects across the nation, will approach $1 billion. But some nuclear weapons scientists say the fine is an overreaction. "It was a mistake by an individual — a terrible mistake — and Washington now wants to punish a lot of people," says Conca. "The amount of radiation that was released was trivial. As long as you don't lick the walls, you can't get any radiation down there. Why are we treating this like Fukushima?"

Comments

Clarification

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not entirely clear in the summary, but the accident didn't happen at Los Alamos, it happened at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, the $19b pilot plant that is at least in part a replacement for the Yucca Mountain plans.

Also, the original mistake that caused the chemical reaction? They used the wrong kind of cat litter to package the plutonium!

This is surprising to me, as I recall reading about plans for Canadian underground storage of nuclear waste back in the 90s. The plans then were to vitrify it - process it into a glass crystal - so that (a) Terrists couldn't get at it, and (b) it would be inert. I'm kind of amazed that they the DOE is happy with using steel drums and cat litter on their plutonium, though if it works (assuming you get the right kitty litter) then there's no reason to stop using it, I suppose.

Not just an individual

[MrL0G1C]

"It was a mistake by an individual"

And the individual's supervisor and the person who trained the individual and the person who devised the individual's test after the training and the person who checked that the test was suitable and the person that did the risk assessment for the work the individual was doing and the person who checked the risk assessment for the work.

There are methods for making sure accidents don't happen, if those methods aren't followed then a lot of people are responsible.

You'd think they could get this stuff right after half a century of dealing with waste.

Could be worse... The Mafia's Deadly Garbage: Italy's Growing Toxic Waste Scandal

Re:Why the overreaction?

[Chas]

Ah, the omnipresent "Nookyoolur = BOMZ!!!!" canard.

Steel can be used in construction. Or it can be used to coat bullets. Or make all sorts of implements of death and destruction. Or it can be made into a scalpel to cut out cancer.

The technology for nuclear power, by itself is neither good nor evil. It's all about intent in use.

Also, as noted, the rare earths being mined to make your "renewable" power? Basically being done by China in the cheapest, dirtiest manner possible. Because the US has been so constipated by the "nuclear issue" that nobody wants to invest in rare earths here because the regulations are not just completely overboard and crazed like Chuck Manson on a bad acid trip, but they're actively hostile towards any development of the technology whatsoever, no matter HOW cleanly it can be done.

Why? Nuke-ninnies like yourself.

And sure, China's rare earths are cheap right now. Until they aren't anymore. Then what?

And what about the vast environmental damage China's doing with their dirty mining procedures? Because you know their digs aren't regulated like they would be in the US.
And the equipment they use sure as fuck doesn't run on pixie dust, unicorn piss and fairy farts.

So don't pretend that your pie-in-the-sky renewable daydream is anything but.

Also, you're still dependent on fossil fuels for when the renewables can't handle the load.

On top of that, the only thing that will make truly widespread implementation of renewables anything CLOSE to viable is a MASSIVE improvement in storage technologies.

Even then, it's NEVER going to be able to be ramped up to a level where it can truly account for both base load AND peak load. You'd have to carpet the entire country in solar cells and windmills. Regardless of whether the location of implementation is truly viable or not. Let's not even talk about worldwide.

THEN you're locked into a continual "buy new ones now that these have worn out" cycle.

That basically makes us, permanently, an economic vassal-state to a hostile foreign power.

The biggest problem with nuclear power today is the fact that there's BEEN little to no new implementation for the last 20-ish years. The last completed reactor was Watts Barr 1 in Tennessee in 1996. This year, Watts Barr 2 is due to come online.

ONE new nuclear power plant in 19 years. And the median age of reactors in the US is 33 years.

Reactors are normally slated to run for 40 years, with the ability to apply for a 20 year extension.

So we have a bunch of reactors coming due for their extension. Old, crude reactors based on 50-60 year old technology.

We have the ability TODAY, to build reactors with new technology that are clean, safe and self-contained. You dig a hole in the ground, drop a concrete slab, drop the reactor in, and cover it in more concrete and bury. At the end of its lifespan, you dig it out and send it back to the factory for reprocessing and drop a new/refurbished one in.

Reactors where the facility isn't 10% reactor and 90% Rube-Goldberg safety systems. Reactors that are 100% reactor which are engineered FROM THE GET GO to be inherently safe. Where a failure doesn't result in a meltdown. Where a failure results in the reactor shutting itself off and keeping the unspent fuel contained and cool, away from the reaction mass.

On top of that, you could jump-start the US rare earths industry again. Because, rather than worrying about all that "radioactive crap" that comes up with the rare earths? That "radioactive crap" becomes "fuel" for reactors. And while costs MIGHT be a bit higher than the dirty Chinese market, they'll be making money at BOTH ends of the spectrum. Both from the rare earths and the rest of the stuff as fuel. Hell, the tailings from ONE modest-sized mine for a year could conceivably satisfy the entirety of the US power appetite for that same period PLUS.

But no. Nuclear = EEEEEEVIL and just waking up in the morning becomes a proliferation risk.

Also, how long as the US been relying on nuclear power? How many lives has that reliance saved?