Tests Show Workers At Hanford Nuclear Facility Inhaled Radioactive Plutonium (king5.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from King 5, a local news station for Seattle, Washington: On June 8 approximately 350 Hanford workers were ordered to "take cover" after alarms designed to detect elevated levels of airborne radioactive contamination went off. It was quickly determined that radioactive particles had been swept out of a containment zone at the plutonium finishing plant (PFP) demolition site. The work is considered the most hazardous demolition project on the entire nuclear reservation. At the time Hanford officials called the safety measure "precautionary." Officials from the U.S. Dept. of Energy, which owns Hanford, and the contractor in charge of the demolition, CH2M Hill, downplayed the seriousness of the event with statements including, it appeared "workers were not at risk", "(the alarm went off) in an area where contamination is expected" and there was "no evidence radioactive particles had been inhaled" by anyone.

The KING 5 Investigators have discovered those statements are incorrect. An internal CH2M Hill email sent to their employees on July 21 was obtained by KING. It states that 301 (test kits) have been issued to employees and of the first 65 workers tested, a "small number of employees" showed positive results for "internal exposures" (by radioactive plutonium). Sources tell KING the "small number of employees" is twelve. Twelve people out of 65 is 20 percent. Still outstanding are 236 tests. A communication specialist with CH2M Hill sent a statement that more positive results are expected. "We expect additional positive results because analytical tests like a bioassay can detect radiological contamination at levels far lower than what field monitoring can detect," said Destry Henderson of CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company.

Comments

I bet

[meglon]

I bet these workers are so incredibly glad nuclear power is such a clean source of energy.

Re:I bet

[Anonymous Coward]

They took one for the team. I wonder if your grandchildren will thank them 50 years from now when sea levels haven't risen quite as much as they otherwise would have? I'm guessing... nope.

Re:I bet

[Chas]

How many people died because of Three Mile Island?

None.

As for contamination. You DO realize exactly how much Thorium and Uranium are present in the ground beneath your feet right? Where do you think radon gas comes from?

Done SAFELY, nuclear is essentially carbon-free.

And the problems with current nuclear can be solved by moving to a different reactor model. One that's inherently safe and runs no risk of steam explosions.
Unlike the solid fuel reactors, it burns ALL of it's fuel, so you're not pulling fuel that's only 10-15% spent.
And while the byproducts which aren't medically or scientifically useful are VERY radioactive, they're only this way for short periods of time.

And even if it was megaton quantities (like the waste from solid fuel reactors from the past 60 years), it's still a drop in the bucket compared to what's gone up the flues of coal-fired plants.

Re:I bet

[danbert8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Fukushima: "None of the workers at the Fukushima Daiichi site have died from acute radiation poisoning,[17] though six workers died due to various reasons, including cardiovascular disease, during the containment efforts or work to stabilize the earthquake and tsunami damage to the site.[17]" "Although it was the largest nuclear disaster since the Chernobyl disaster of 1986,[10] and the radiation released exceeded official safety guidelines, there were no casualties caused by radiation exposure, but 34 people died as a result of the evacuation.[4]"

Chernobyl: "56 direct deaths (47 accident workers and nine children with thyroid cancer) resulted from the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, and it is estimated that there may eventually be 4,000 extra cancer deaths among the approximately 600,000 most highly exposed people.[2][3][4]"

Nuclear is pretty clean. Fukushima is an accident, but to call it a disaster is an insult to the earthquake and tsunami that were the ACTUAL disaster:
"On 10 March 2015, a Japanese National Police Agency report confirmed 15,894 deaths,[37] 6,152 injured,[38] and 2,562 people missing[39] across twenty prefectures, as well as 228,863 people living away from their home in either temporary housing or due to permanent relocation.[40]"

Nuclear is like anything else, it can be very dangerous when in the wrong hands. When used for power generation it might kill approximately ZERO people. When made into a bomb: "According to figures published in 1945, 66,000 people were killed as a direct result of the Hiroshima blast, and 69,000 were injured to varying degrees.[32] "

"an anonymous reader"?

[Anonymous Coward]

How likely is it that this anonymous reader is mdsolar?

Re:It's not the radioactivity...

[angel'o'sphere]

The problem with Plutonium is, it wanders into the bone marrow.
That means even very small amounts are deadly. Per kg weight the deadly dose is about 0.32mg.
Of course it is unlikely the workers inhaled that much. OTOH, a lower dose might be deadly, too. If you have bad luck.