Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks for all the background. I'm new to IF and only knew part of the story behind the nuclear waste. I've met lots of former employees of the INL. My next door neighbor works for Fluor. By the way, I thought INL stood for Idaho National (not Nuclear) Laboratory.
Thanks for all the background. I'm new to IF and only knew part of the story behind the nuclear waste. I've met lots of former employees of the INL. My next door neighbor works for Fluor. By the way, I thought INL stood for Idaho National (not Nuclear) Laboratory.
Thanks for all the background. I'm new to IF and only knew part of the story behind the nuclear waste. I've met lots of former employees of the INL. My next door neighbor works for Fluor. By the way, I thought INL stood for Idaho National (not Nuclear) Laboratory.
Yes, that's correct. The site has gone through many name changes. Most of them had word nuclear in them, so I made an inadvertent mistake.
The current name is actually the best, too. For a very long time now, other forms of energy besides just nuclear have been included in the site's mission.
Rechargeable batteries, for example, were a leading project at the site back in the early 90s, and the site research produced the first batteries that were designed for use in electric cars.
The batteries are only one example. due to its unique location, the site has also researched geothermal energy and solar and wind energies extensively. Those are all partly due to the sites, sunny and windy conditions and it's close proximity to the huge source of geothermal energy that lies under nearby Yellowstone Park.
The Park's geothermal potential lies far beyond the park's boundaries only. Natural hot springs are abundant in SE Idaho, so there are closer places for the hot water, but the Parks geothermal activities are the most closely recorded in the hemisphere. And the site has all that stuff available to it.
Waste has also become a more major mission for the site as well.
Yes, that's correct. The site has gone through many name changes. Most of them had word nuclear in them, so I made an inadvertent mistake.
The current name is actually the best, too. For a very long time now, other forms of energy besides just nuclear have been included in the site's mission.
Rechargeable batteries, for example, were a leading project at the site back in the early 90s, and the site research produced the first batteries that were designed for use in electric cars.
The batteries are only one example. due to its unique location, the site has also researched geothermal energy and solar and wind energies extensively. Those are all partly due to the sites, sunny and windy conditions and it's close proximity to the huge source of geothermal energy that lies under nearby Yellowstone Park.
The Park's geothermal potential lies far beyond the park's boundaries only. Natural hot springs are abundant in SE Idaho, so there are closer places for the hot water, but the Parks geothermal activities are the most closely recorded in the hemisphere. And the site has all that stuff available to it.
Waste has also become a more major mission for the site as well.
"INL stood for Idaho National (not Nuclear) Laboratory".
I can't rate your post positively Mike until I "spread some reputation around" but your above post about nuclear waste and INL was much appreciated and useful. Kudos!!
I was around 7 when the INL was established here, so it's been around almost my entire life.
As I mentioned earlier, the folks who live here, especially the old-timers like me, don't worry about the fact that there are nuclear materials there. We know the folks who work there, hear about all the stuff that goes on there, good or bad, and so there's more understanding of the dangers and benefits of nuclear power here than there is in other places.
That's not to say we are casual about any of it; we definitely are not. If something happens out there, we are always the first to know, so we always pay attention to the INL happenings. It is a major presence here and like any big industry, it presents hazards, but it's also a major reason why Idaho Falls has thrived and grown.
I was around 7 when the INL was established here, so it's been around almost my entire life.
As I mentioned earlier, the folks who live here, especially the old-timers like me, don't worry about the fact that there are nuclear materials there. We know the folks who work there, hear about all the stuff that goes on there, good or bad, and so there's more understanding of the dangers and benefits of nuclear power here than there is in other places.
That's not to say we are casual about any of it; we definitely are not. If something happens out there, we are always the first to know, so we always pay attention to the INL happenings. It is a major presence here and like any big industry, it presents hazards, but it's also a major reason why Idaho Falls has thrived and grown.
Seems like the question of importance is 'what' HAS happened 'out there' at INL that is of any consequence to living in the area from this time forward?
Seems like the question of importance is 'what' HAS happened 'out there' at INL that is of any consequence to living in the area from this time forward?
Accidents have happened for sure. But so far, none have presented a danger to the surrounding area that I know of.
The real difference is the INL was never used for weapons production. That's where the real nuclear contamination dangers existed. It's a problem of quantity over everything else.
Idaho's largest and most potentially dangerous contamination comes from the existence of so much phosphate here. There are massive phosphate deposits throughout the entire state and the stuff can be very dangerous to health in the concentration it's found in many places here.
It's like hazard like radon; of all radioactive contamination in the west, radon is the worst of all because there's so much of it to be found here. It's a naturally occurring gas that's found in mountainous country, and radon is as much a part of life here as our mountains are.
Both are a part of life in Idaho. There's no risk-free places to live anywhere in the U.S. when it comes to natural substances that can harm humanity.
Personally, radioactivity doesn't scare me nearly as much as the presence of sulfuric acid does. Or the presence of arsenic, another natural material that's found abundantly throughout the west. Wherever there's some 'good' metal, like gold, silver, tin, copper, or others, there will be arsenic and sulfuric acid present.
It's the quantity that always creates the greatest danger.
Radon.....
And my latest test still shows 2.1. What, me worry? Nope!
And not worrying about INL, the Caldera, Coronovirus. etc. Only worry about tourists when I drive to Cody via Yellowstone.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
