3 ms·
> > Is Hanford a disaster or not? > Unquestionably. Hanford is a disaster... But just Hanford. Upstream and downstream are both fine. It's a few dozen square
by DuskStar 6y ago
> > Is Hanford a disaster or not?
> Unquestionably.
Hanford is a disaster... But just Hanford. Upstream and downstream are both fine. It's a few dozen square miles of contamination that affects people more than it does nature. (Look at the Chernobyl exclusion zone)
Compare to something like ocean acidification, caused by burning coal and oil, which is killing all the coral reefs, worldwide.
- Klinky 6y agoHanford is just $6 - $10 billion per year, with cost estimates up to $667 billion total over its "lifespan", but we know some of the nuclear waste will be with us for thousands of years, so this number will only get bigger. There is no end in sight. WIPP also had a leak issue with cost estimates of up to $1.4 billion to fix. There are also dozens of sites orphaned and essentially the problem for the DOE to figure out. The cost of nuclear waste has been heavily socialized. The problem won't be going away anytime soon.