Slashdot Mirror


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.

6 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. "an anonymous reader"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How likely is it that this anonymous reader is mdsolar?

  2. Re:It's not the radioactivity... by Namarrgon · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's true that Plutonium is highly toxic, but an airborne particle is probably not enough to cause significant health effects from that (the toxology profile suggests the level for that is 10 ppm) - depending on how many are inhaled of course.

    But the radiation is indeed the bigger hazard. Plutonium's long half-life means it's not as dangerously radioactive as some other elements - so long as exposure is relatively brief or distant (inverse square law applies). When it gets inside you though, it sticks in there for decades, and at that extremely close range the radiation is a lot more powerful, so your chances of cancer go up significantly.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
  3. Re:It's not the radioactivity... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  4. Re: I bet by Trax3001BBS · · Score: 4, Informative

    Wasn't Hanford intended for nuclear weapons development?

    Yep, the unheard of twin, the plutonium used in the second bomb on Japan was produce at Hanford. Production continued till Chernobyl blew up (steam explosion). They were a carbon moderated reactor as was the last operating nuclear production reactor at Hanford.

  5. Re:Level of Exposure? by Fallen+Kell · · Score: 4, Informative

    Except you failed at physics of how the different types of radiation work. We are dealing with an internal alpha source, not an external alpha source. Alpha sources are 1000 times more dangerous when inhaled or ingested (1000 times is not a made up number, this has been experimentally shown, see "Effect of Dose Rate on the Induction of Experimental Lung Cancer in Hamsters by Alpha Radiation" 1985 study).

    The reason is quite simple, alpha radiation has extremely poor penetration capability (2-3 layers of paper is enough to stop it, which is less than the layers of dead skin cells we have on top of our actual skin). As a result, external alpha sources are not very dangerous. But put that source inside the body, where it is past the dead skin that protects you, and suddenly, you have a cancer generator sitting right next to cells that it can reach.

    Given that this was Hanford, it was most likely Pu-239 that we are dealing with, which has a half-life of 24,100 years. The only way it will exit the body once ingested or inhaled is if it manages to be coughed up (unlikely), or absorbed into the blood stream/lymphic system and manage to travel out as excrement without getting trapped in say the liver, kidneys, lymph nodes, or any of the other pathways within the body (at which point it will then most likely cause enough DNA damage to surrounding cells to create cancer).

    --
    We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
  6. Re:I bet by danbert8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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] "

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?