Sunday, May 12, 2013
Plutonium Shots on NIF.
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population.
Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They want to pursue ignition, let them do their stupid ignition experiments. Atleast the community is safe. We all saw from the LANL release that mistakes happen. NNSA needs to manage its risk taking into consideration THE HUGE POPULATION nearby the lab. We can't tolerate this kind of stupidity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
155 comments:
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 2:41 PM
HeHe. As if Tri-Valley Cares could stop it. What "LANL release" are you referring to? Even Argonne does Pu EoS experiments, and APS doesn't seem to have a problem with it.
Reply
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM
How convenient then we don't need to do them in NIF. If APS already has all the security plan in place and also they are not in a high population urban center , just have that work done by them. Thanks for the suggestion!
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 2:57 PM
Tri-valley cares just needs help on the technical arguments against Pu experiments specifically on NIF. The point is not just any EoS measurements, but rather very high pressure isentropic compression experiments. Ones that destroy the sample holder and splatter all over the chamber. NIF is putting the cart before the horse if they claim to have containment worked out. That is a lie. Again putting the local population at risk.
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 4:35 PM
May 11, 2013 at 2:57 PM
If NIF does a single Pu shot ever that entire facility will never get much done again. It will be crapped up forever and you will not be entering the target chamber again. So go ahead and just fire one Pu shot and NIF will be out of business unless the want to operate under the same guidelines as the Pu facility. Pu is not something you want to play games with. I just hope if they have a release the wind is blowing hard towards the San Francisco and never changes directions. I guess that's one means of population control and assure SS will never go bankrupt and TCP-1 stays funded.
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 5:14 PM
Get the Pu oxide particles airborne and lodged into people's lungs or have that just contaminate the agriculture from the Central Valley. Just say NO.
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 6:22 PM
Golly now the blog has a plutonium expert. How quaint.
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 6:42 PM
Just say NO to comments in the topic suggestion in-box.
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 7:12 PM
Blog has more plutonium experts than the LLNL laser EoS team has EoS experts. Pu on NIF is a valid topic worthy of a stickie if only this blog supported it. Ask NNSA administrators about the stupid idea to do Pu experiments on NIF. Tell your politicians to stop them. After all the morons that brought you laser EoS and strength would be in charge of the Pu EoS experiments. To think that after 16 years and counting, they still have the same clowns making the same mistakes and intentional mis-analyses.
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 9:18 PM
I've heard of this think at work they call the Z machine. They say it has extraordinary powers of pressure, temperature and containment. Maybe the NNSA could do their Pu work there? Somebody should tell them about it.
Cached
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 9:49 PM
That machine is just science fiction. Completely imaginary. There is no truth to any of those rumors.
what inceased risk? yOU ARE more a risk of falling up your wifes asshole.
Increased risk from the operations and handling associated with doing Plutonium experiments versus not doing them at all (risk avoidance).
Makes sense, since they want to reach ignition anyways, that is the where the accolades and glory will go towards.
"Blog has more plutonium experts than the LLNL laser EoS team has EoS experts. " May 11, 2013 at 7:12 PM
Ouch that is a kick to the groin.
If Pu shots on NIF is going to get approved by NNSA, this is going to hit the news media complete with academics explaining containment technology and the adverse health effects of plutonium, and why it is a stupid idea to do it on NIF. If needed, the problems with laser EoS at LLNS will be brought up. NNSA is better off doing SNM experiments elsewhere on platforms amenable to containment.
Who's stupid idea is this anyways? Goodwin? Verdon?
NIF can't perform isentropic compression experiments. It rather LLNL scientists are incapable of performing those types of experiments. So they must just be garden variety shock compression experiments. Regardless, it hey would vaporize the target and all the contained plutonium, ending up coating the debris shields and inner surface if the chamber. The chamber IS the containment, meaning that is bad news for the community. Get a JASONs review on the matter instead of leaving this to public mob rule. That will get to the heart of the matter, if NNSA and LLNL are insisting on going forward. The question is whether a containment concept for the NIF chamber geometry is reliable and that the benefits if the experiments outweigh the risks.
Old farts and iPads don't mix. Apologies for the grammar and spelling errors. I hate ipads
Pick Garwin, he is independent and not a douchebag like some.
You can send this to the Jasons if the benefits calculations takes into consideration the capabilities or the lack thereof of the scientists who do the EoS experiments. Why hold the community hostage when Larry curly moe and shemp are producing questionable EoS, put the laser EoS team up for Jasons review. That should really be the first step.
Yes, I agree, the LLNL laser EoS team needs a full external review before any Ideas of Pu experiments on NIF should be considered. Lets see how much the group's new young leadership understands experimental EoS. I hope he has been spending his time learning about experimental design and analytical techniques for isentropic compression experiments.
Will see if "made at MIT" really means something
Pu experiments and containment on NIF? That is a laughable proposition. They must really be desperate a victory of some kind. Though odd they choose measurements for which they are weakest at.
What will happen, if LLNL is allowed to do the experiments on small samples is that the scientists will mis-analyze and "finesse" the raw data so that their data sits within the experimental error bars to existing data from Sandia and LANL. That is what we call "fraud." They will claim "success" while then pushing larger sample experiments because they know their experiment is flawed and they need more certainty by pushing for more experiments. The problem associated with deuterium still hasn't been resolved. 2, perhaps 3 independent LLNL data sets all sitting on top of the wrong data. Can't chalk that up to "luck." Smells like fraud or confirmation bias.
You people are like chicken little crying wa wa wa over how the sky is falling. Plutonium is safe in small quantities. Stop whining. The actinide research community uses plutonium all the time! Nobody is whining about them. Cluck cluck cluck. Chicken little is going to end up a mcnugget if he doesn't stfu.
Vaporizing the target? Maybe they can rig up NIF to become AVLIS II: the spawn of Frankenstein.
May 13, 2013 at 6:28 AM
Lets hope someone with a brain never all NIF to shoot any Pu of any size period. It is my hope tri-valley cares and the EPA put a halt to this BS once and forever. If they want fusion obtain it some other way not by using Pu so they can say, "see I told you we could do it" so they can continue to get funding. The US needs clean energy not small nuclear weapons going off at ten a second inside a crapped up chamber. Again, CLEAN energy, not Nukes even under controlled conditions.
Pu experiments would not be for fusion. Rather they would use the high pressures you could generate with the lasers to compress materials for the purpose of measuring its properties. But regardless of the application, lasers + Pu = uncontained vapor of Pu that will contaminate the chamber and create risks that the residue will find its way out (dust particles, on the clothes or shoes if technicians, etc.).
Tri-valley cares may not be the right advocate for the arguments in this thread if their position is zero-risk (no Pu experiments anywhere) versus minimizing risk (moving the work to more reliable containment platforms). So you would have to go to the Jasons or to the media on this one.
Which scenario poses more adverse risk to their respective community?
(1) A Pu experiment with small nearby population
(2) The exact same Pu experiment (and environment) except with a huge metropolitan population center nearby
LLNL would say that the risks are identical for both scenarios. It tells you something about the malignancy in their thinking.
That's because they only take into account their own employees. They don't take into consideration the surrounding community. How about all that tritium they pumped into the ground water?
Geez. The BS level on this thread is getting really high, even for this blog.
The proposal to conduct experiments at NIF with fissile materials, including plutonium, is detailed in the March 2005 Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement (SWEIS) for Continued Operation of LLNL. The decision was codified in November 2005 in the Record of Decision (ROD), published in the Federal Register. The allowable plutonium experiments in NIF are not limited to Equation of State tests at NIF. The ROD would allow plutonium and D-T fuel (for example) to be in the same experiment on NIF. It is stated that the plutonium would indeed splatter all over in these latter types of experiments. The 2005 SWEIS and ROD propose building a special small target chamber for each of these plutonium experiments that would splatter the plutonium all over. The big target chamber would either have to be cracked open on the horizontal axis or perhaps the "lift" in its bottom that was installed to do nuclear weapons effects tests could be utilized to install the small target chamber into the large one, according to the SWEIS. The SWEIS admits worker exposures, and, if recollection serves, the increase would be three-fold. Then, after only one experiment, that small target chamber would need to be taken out of the larger one and disposed of at the test site in Nevada (more exposures to do this). And, a whole new small target chamber would need to be built for the next experiment that would splatter plutonium, and so on.
Tri-Valley CAREs commented on this plan when it appeared in the draft SWEIS. The group has tracked the plan since that time and has recently put in a Freedom of Information Act request for documents in order to stay on top of it. I cannot tell from the posting here if the use of plutonium in NIF experiments is now immanent - I can tell you that Tri-Valley CAREs is interested in following up on this posting. Anyone with information, an interest in staying apprised of this plan, and/or has technical expertise to help Tri-Valley CAREs interpret documents we receive under the FOIA is welcome to phone Tri-Valley CAREs at 925-443-7148, or contact the group by email at marylia@trivalleycares.org or send postal mail to 2582 Old First Street, Livermore, CA 94550.
This is not a matter of politics, it is a matter of worker and community safety, whether NIF is the right tool for this job, and of the wise or unwise use of taxpayer dollars.
May 13, 2013 at 12:09 PM
I'm amazed how facilities like NIF LLNL and LANL continue to milk the tax payer claiming they need to know more about EoS studies on Pu and other related materials when they already know what we have in the field is good for few more decades, they know how to build them very well and they work. Just how much more do you need to know, or is all this just to assure they have jobs for the next few decades.
This is what makes me skeptical about a chamber-within-a-chamber concept. To let the laser energy in, it would have to have optics ports or large open portals that have reliable ultra-fast closure mechanisms. If my back-of-the-envelope calculations are correct, those optics (if used) on an inner-chamber are going to absorb and ablate (if it's a small diameter inner chamber) nullifying the experiment. A large inner chamber... well how to get that in and out of there? Lots of open portals with ultrafast seals? A reliability engineering nightmare. Even if the optics could survive, it still looks like a reliability engineering nightmare.
Anonymous wrote: This is what makes me skeptical about a chamber-within-a-chamber concept. To let the laser energy in, it would have to have optics ports or large open portals that have reliable ultra-fast closure mechanisms. If my back-of-the-envelope calculations are correct, those optics (if used) on an inner-chamber are going to absorb and ablate (if it's a small diameter inner chamber) nullifying the experiment. A large inner chamber... well how to get that in and out of there? Lots of open portals with ultrafast seals? A reliability engineering nightmare. Even if the optics could survive, it still looks like a reliability engineering nightmare.
AND, I have always wondered about the additional ports in the small inner target chamber that would be needed for the diagnostics. The NIF folks had plenty of trouble fitting all the diagnostics comfortably together in the big, outer target chamber. Color me skeptical about how that would work in the smaller, inner target chamber for plutonium shots. And, if the diagnostics are not in the interior target chamber for the shot, how much could they really "see"... just askin'...
Minute amounts of Pu are in the local environment with immeasurable effects.
Unless you frighten easily.
Calm down ladies.
May 13, 2013 at 2:10 PM
I say shut it down if they even try it and put them out of business once and forever. We do not want your Pu anywhere in the area especially if it's being compressed. Having it just sit there untouched was bad enough. I've always had my doubts about the ability to Pu inside its containment anyway.
tri valley cares needs to get a life - or at least a half life - Ha!
I think Pu experiments on NIF are a great idea! Once the clumsy oafs contaminate the neighborhood,and the dust settles (so to speak), we'll be rid of NIF and the rest of Teller's mile-square funny farm once and for all time.
As a previous commenter pointed out, the level of BS in this thread is incredible, and the level of actual knowledge is miniscule. Yeah, we're going to contaminate your environment and poison your kids, and probably sink your housing value while we're at it. Plutonium is the most dangerous material ever unleashed on this planet. No need to actually have any technical knowledge about the subject, just your baseless, ignorant fear should be enough for everyone to respect your opinion! We have met the wussies, and they are us.
That attitude is what brought about the LANL incident. Treating risks so casually.
The person downplaying the risks associated with Plutonium is not doing LLNL any favors by pushing such poor arguments. I suspect that the individual is a troll pretending to support the lab but is in fact trying to undermine it.
tHE SKY IS FALLING.
BERK BREATHED
You sure you're not referring the Polonium around Uranus experiment?
I saw a Pu molecule the other day in the Sierras. Oh, wait it was beavers.
Keep up the amusing inane uniformed hysteria, it reminds me how intelligent I am and you are not.
We'll apply knowledge and expertise elsewhere while you're chasing your shadow.
NIF is in support of A division. There will never be a plutonium shot done.
Tell Verdon that
Both WCI divisions, A and B division support NIF. Pu EoS and strength supports stockpile stewardship, the domain of WCI. I would be very surprised if LLNL backs off of Pu EoS. After all, these SNM experiments are the only remaining brass rings they could possible grab in the short term using NIF.
The opinions of
May 12, 2013 at 10:29 PM
May 13, 2013 at 8:57 PM
May 13, 2013 at 11:00 PM
are so "out-there" that I am concerned that the deranged poster, if a NIF employee with access, may intentionally cause the release of radiologic material into the food supply, given the opportunity, just to try to prove a point.
To keep downplaying the concerns about Pu is very concerning. Either they are trolling us or they are indeed deranged enough.
Add
May 13, 2013 at 2:10 PM
The opinions of....are so "out-there" that I am concerned that the deranged poster, if a NIF employee with access, may intentionally cause the release of radiologic material into the food supply, given the opportunity, just to try to prove a point.
May 14, 2013 at 9:26 AM
To pretend that there is absolutely nothing that can be done to mitigate the risks in such experiments, or to believe that absolutely no risk is an acceptable one, or to claim that anyone who believes otherwise might purposely contaminate the food supply, is truly "out there." Demonization of people who don't agree with you is a classic liberal tactic.
pot calling the kettle black
The appalling thing is how the individual is dismissive about the health-effects of tritium and plutonium, or the difference in scale between a single atom of plutonium in the environment versus the quantity that would be vaporized in an experiment. If this individual is at the lab, and they actually believe what they are saying (i.e., not trolling), I would say that this is a serious concern.
May 14, 2013 at 10:33 AM
"To pretend that there is absolutely nothing that can be done to mitigate the risks in such experiments, or to believe that absolutely no risk is an acceptable one"
if we actually believed what you say, there would not have been any discussion about containment as it would have been a moot point. In fact, a poster suggested doing the experiment on "a platform more amenable to containment." why you keep going on, however, makes some of wonder if you are an individual with access and opportunity. Your profile certainly indicates something.
I have a different question related to NIF. If they changed part of their mission to be a "user-facility," what kind of performance incentives could they propose that isn't such a low bar. Previous goals included the alpha-heating milestone and ignition. As a user facility, what can they propose? the % uptime > threshold? total number of users > threshold? Shouldn't the tax-payers be insisting on more challenging goals for such a big high-risk project? It occurs to me that the maximum possible management fee possible given the mission change should be reduced due to the NIF change in mission. The other large portion of the management fee from other NNSA work would, of course, remain unaffected.
They still have alot of performance incentive goals they could propose. For example, performing a systems engineering study of a fusion power plant concept based on NIF. Stockpile stewardship experiments like Pu shots on NIF. Alot of basic science that is relevant to planetary physics. They can compress carbon, tantalum, a number of other elements. They can do rayleigh taylor experiments to measure the high pressure strength of these materials, the kind of thing where reliable and accurate data would be greatly useful. They could also develop ways to improve accuracy in these experiments. All of these can generate some part of their management fee.
Personally I hope they never do a Pu shot of any type inside the NIF chamber and if they do the entire crew that does the cleanup needs to walk off the job and spread the word. Then if you get crapped up sue quickly so they'll have to pay off before you die. They will stall payment in hopes you die before they have to pay. problem resolved. It's SOP. Tell them to do their Pu experiments in NV where there is already a facility to do such things.
Who GAF about planetary physics. Planetary physics are code words for doing classified experiments so you can share the information openly, talking around what the physics data actually pertains to or it relevance to a program that could never be discussed in an open forum.
they actually care about science associated with the conditions in the center of jupiter and saturn and such. That stuff gets you high profile Nature and Science papers.
"that stuff gets you high profile Nature and Science papers.
May 14, 2013 at 6:44 PM"
What do Nature and Science "papers" do for the lab? What costumers are there for such papers at the lab? Who pays for this and why?
Good question!
The target is the size of an ant-butt. Most of the exploded ant's butt worth of plutonium will deposit in the chamber, so a picoantbutt worth of Pu may escape one in a while.
A picoantbutt of alpha just ain't gonna do much to injure you. Even you overly sensitive folks who fear radiation more than God Himself, are more likely to fall down your wifes asshole than be injured by barely measureable Pu releases.
Yeah, worry about the unborn girls and boys murdered regularly by a real killer with a pair of scissors in any Philadephia Like abortion mill.
Pu is a red herring. Abortion is the devil's work, carried out by his fiends.
that's about the amount of radioactive material that LANL employees took home, no?
Back to the topic, if Verdon doesn't push those shots, then all of this is moot. Though I can't fathom what he would replace that with? Planetary and astrophysics science experiments? I guess nature and science publications are a good consolation prize and they make the sponsor look good also. Not very programmatic but better than nothing.
Aren't they part of activities at NTS? Or did they fully double down on NIF?
You know, maybe it's time to re-suggest that the blog disallow anonymous posting. Identities could be abbreviated or the ability to post require being added to a white list maintained by scooby.
I recall that LLNL's JASPER facility had an incident involving the release of Pu. I believe that is a gas gun flyer plate type geometry experiment. That doesn't give me any confidence whatsoever that LLNL will reliably contain Pu that is in the form of a hot reactive plasma at the end of a NIF experiment.
May 15, 2013 at 3:16 AM
Yes it did. Could you imagine the same thing happening in Livermore? If they do one shot and never open the target chamber again and scrap it, that'll be fine, but to open it up, go inside, clean it up. only to do another shot. NOT!
"pot calling the kettle black"
No, that was the pot calling the stainless-steel saucepan 'black'
What do Nature and Science "papers" do for the lab? What costumers are there for such papers at the lab? Who pays for this and why?
May 14, 2013 at 9:22 PM
If you do not understand what high profile, prestigious publications do for science and for scientists, then you have no idea how science works. Scientists who don't publish may as well not exist. That is why long ago, scientists working solely on classified weapons projects established their own classified peer-reviewed journals.
The question is why a weapons lab is doing basic science planetary physics experiments that generate basic science publications.
They have built a hammer and they need something to whack. Much of that basic science has no relevance to weapons. They also use the Omega laser in Rochester to do alot of this kind of work. But the lab and NNSA can milk any positive publicity out some of the publications. But some of their publications also expose the wastefulness of funding that goes to the lab, through very poor work found later to be riddled with "mistakes."
Now that NIF is a user-facility, you would expect to see more of these kinds of work. LLNL scientists get their names on many publications by academics that do their experiments on the facility.
Regardless of whether the lab/NNSA has to subsidize the cost of the shot for the user, or whether the user has to pay through their own grant, the tax-payer is most likely the one paying for these experiments.
the tax-payer is most likely the one paying for these experiments.
May 15, 2013 at 9:08 AM
Well, duh. The government is the only source of funds for basic scientific research in the US. Some would argue that big Pharma pays for some drug research, but It is mainly applied and geared towards an eventual profit.
Retiring after 29yrs. at LLNL, approx. 23 in SCIF level WFO's, then the last 3 as a NIF'er, I'm surprised, maybe I shouldn't be, with about half the arguments I've read on this so far. All those folks involved with all classified shots signed a document, along with typical "green" badge accountability rules governing "experimental" shots. The public, much less none "cleared" employees, would know. You have no "need". Now, if one looks at the history of nuclear shots, Teller and "Hoppy" did create fusion..look it up, it was using using a hydrogen bomb as the secondary trigger for a Pu bomb. Again, in NIF, we'd never know.
it was using using a hydrogen bomb as the secondary trigger for a Pu bomb. Again, in NIF, we'd never know.
May 15, 2013 at 11:32 AM
Since you got it completely backwards, I guess you don't know either.
There are a number of private funding sources and endowments that provide funding for basic research in these fields applicable to the national labs.
In reference to May 15, 2013 at 11:32 AM
It does not take a genius to link EOS, NIF and SNM together when NNSA refers to some of the stockpile stewardship experiments on NIF. In fact, it's bloody obvious. Sure there are others. We are just referring to this one.
Is this guy for real? May 14, 2013 at 9:56 PM
You gotta be joking if these guys work at the lab, have security clearances, and potentially have access to nuclear materials.
"Well, duh. The government is the only source of funds for basic scientific research in the US."
That statement is factually incorrect. Even the weak follow-on clarification/example he provided misses the flaw in his statement.
PG&E threw 150m into the LLNL money pit for some of what amounts to basic research. They're not going to see profits from that. PG&E's 150m loss is LLNL's 150m gain.
With 15million customers paying 50 cents per kwh for electricity PGE produces for less than 5 cents per kwh, PGE has money to burn.
JASPER... that thing is still being funded? I guess it's cheap to operate relative to the big toys.
150m expenditure given zero return is absolutely wasteful. I hope they are atleast getting a tax write-off for that one. It's like charitable giving. Screw the poor and impoverished. White collar workers at LLNL are struggling to pay off their maserati car loan or their 200k kitchen remodeling job to be able to keep up with the Jones'. This is what need-based charity has become anyways.
Well, the lab is banking on 1.5 Billion dollars as cited by lab officials. That buys 1/4 of NIF, and a quarter of nothing (no ignition) is still nothing, atleast in my part of the universe.
I suppose a very large conglomerate of venture capitalists can each pitch in a couple thousand bucks to generate 1.5 billion. No creditor would ever finance this project, as the likelihood of default is guaranteed atleast the next 20 years. No bank would finance for a project that only has negative operating cash-flows for that long. I can't see why VCs or private investors would put money into it either, except token amounts just so that they can tell jokes and laugh at cocktail parties, yapping about how they put some chump change into a "fusion energy plant, ha ha ha," (martini glasses clinking)(snide references to Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps).
May 14, 2013 at 9:54 PM
May 14, 2013 at 9:56 PM
^Lab employee
There are a number of private funding sources and endowments that provide funding for basic research in these fields applicable to the national labs.
May 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM
Name one.
"Well, duh. The government is the only source of funds for basic scientific research in the US."
That statement is factually incorrect. Even the weak follow-on clarification/example he provided misses the flaw in his statement.
May 15, 2013 at 1:13 PM
How about some evidence? Oh, don't have any? Yeah, thought so. If you are trying to refute an argument, the burden is on you for proof, sonny boy.
"What do Nature and Science "papers" do for the lab? What costumers are there for such papers at the lab? Who pays for this and why?
May 14, 2013 at 9:22 PM
If you do not understand what high profile, prestigious publications do for science and for scientists, then you have no idea how science works. Scientists who don't publish may as well not exist. That is why long ago, scientists working solely on classified weapons projects established their own classified peer-reviewed journals.
May 15, 2013 at 8:47 AM"
Well excuse me but just in case you forgot we are not a university. Publish all the Science and Nature articles you want but what does that have to do with LLNL? In the universities the students are the costumers and science and nature articles add to the value that costumers will pay to go to a university. At the NNSA labs who is the customer? I doubt that customer wants to pay for Science and Nature articles. If we don't give the customer what he/she wants than the place goes out of business just like everything else in the real world.
We are for a for-profit institution. Science and Nature papers may bring profit to universities but tell me how do they bring profit to the NNSA labs?
Sloan Foundation
Checkmate
Read it and weep, you mediocrity.
The direct customer of the national labs is NNSA or other sponsors that provide funding to get work done by the lab. That work often includes research leading to the publication in scientific journals. The "profit" element comes from the management fee that LLNS earns through meeting whatever goals or objectives they agree to with their sponsor. So profit motive drives the work and performance in the attempt to meet those objectives.
"Well, duh. The government is the only source of funds for basic scientific research in the US."
That statement is not true.
Keck Foundation
Thiel foundation
RCSA
The Kavli Foundation
The Gates Foundation
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
W.K Kellogg Foundation
Ford Foundation
Starr Foundation
David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Rockefeller Foundation
Kresge Foundation
Pew Charitable Trusts
If you include not-for-profit consortiums that fund their own basic and applied research, the list goes on and on. Here are just a few.
EPRI
Sematech
Furthermore a poster's reference to 150m going to LLNL for basic and applied research is also a case of private funding.
AnonymousMay 15, 2013 at 9:00 PM is either a troll or is truly THAT uninformed. Any web search would quickly identify private sources. Considering the extreme misogynistic statements he is also associated with, I would guess that he is just an uninformed right wing malcontent, possibly employed at the lab.
Dammit!
What possible basis do you have for asserting "possibly employed at the lab"? Every miscreant that disagrees with your viewpoint must work at the lab, because nobody who's stupid could possible work anywhere else. Give me a break.
If you include not-for-profit consortiums that fund their own basic and applied research, the list goes on and on.
May 16, 2013 at 10:17 AM
Yes, but the argument is of questionable relevance without a comparison of the money available from those private sources as opposed to the government.
"Well, duh. The government is the only source of funds for basic scientific research in the US."
The above statement was challenged for the use of the word "only." The statement didn't say "likely" or "largest" or any other adjective. It was the previously referred post that made a correct statement (prompting the response included above).
What possible basis do you have for asserting
He hinted at information that only a lab employee or someone very close to the lab (sponsor, subcontractor, consultant) would have known.
Dude asked for ONE example too, and you provided ATLEAST one. That's checkmate right there.
"Well, duh. The government is the only source of funds for basic scientific research in the US."
The statement is still factually incorrect.
Back to topic, NNSA/LLNL not subsidizing the cost of NIF shots for external academic users is a death blow to that program. They can't operate as a user facility without users. The writing must already be on the wall. The NIF program is being slowly wound down.
Ignition and LIFE are still all real possibilities on NIF. There is no guarantee of success. But so long as the funding is there, there is no reason to just stop and give up.
Blinders, confirmation bias, wishful thinking, call it what you want. You are con yourselves but you can't con the rest of the world. Ignition is already a stretch. But don't you think A LIFE program is a bit premature? Funding for all of that should be put all into ignition since that is the major milestone. You can always get systems engineers on board later, and even attract good ones if ignition accomplished. Heck, you could attract good physicists too after ignition. Why nif doesn't have a more coherent and efficient strategy I can't figure out. A smaller core team can get more done if resources are freed up for them by jettisoning stuff like LIFE for the short term.
You NIF guys are nuts!
May 16, 2013 at 7:11 PM
LIFE should not even be talked about until NIG gets ignition and can do it ten times a second. Only then should they consider building a power plant using NIF's technology. Put it to rest until you have proven the concept.
May 16, 2013 at 7:11 PM
Yeah I thought that was odd too. Instead of going all-in, they are timidly going into the swimming pool slowly, one toe at a time. They already made the decision regarding their portfolio. They can't have it both ways. Slowly divesting from other capabilities is just hurting the entire lab. Whether or not the scientists really believe that they have a shot of ignition in the next 2.5 years, they certainly aren't making the essential cuts and sacrifices to improve their chances.
For an inner chamber, you can't use ultrafast mechanical valves/closures because they will cause the chamber and the target assembly to move out of position with respect to the incoming laser. So they must be expecting to either use optics, or to not even use an inner containment vessel and just let Pu splatter over the entire inner surface.
An SNM shot would indeed be a Hail Mary. Failure could be hidden from view while they run around lying and claiming victory. Let's not let this happen since it is too risky for the community and the SF/SJ metropolitan area anyways. That is, the public is paying the price for a lab attempt to dupe the public, and congress.
Why u say dat brah?! Take a hammer and hit anything and u always learn sumping new! Unknown unknowns benefit all of humanity!
The thing is... they can't just cut LIFE, because they will not lay off their buddies up and down that program. There aren't "spots" for all of them. So in effect, they will still have the funding shortfall. On top of that, you cant take a systems engineer and have them do some critical work on hydrodynamics or optics. You can't take impresarios and expect them to do technical work at all. Might as well keep LIFE intact. If the ship is going down, let them all go down together. After all, they are all friends and family, in it together. The lab still does what it is good at - whining and complaining about NNSA, and running around to congress and politicians crying about micromanagement and impacts to national security blah blah blah.
If I were LLNL lab security I would be trying to correlate the timing of certain posts with the source and timing of outgoing traffic from lab computers. For lab employees to not only be using government resources to mess around on blogs but also to spout off misigynistic and extreme right wing hate messages and downplay obvious health risks of nuclear particulate matter is to let a threat run around with potential access and opportunity. They are a liability to the lab and NNSA as well as to all the other labs trying to maintain a security culture. The lab is advised to better monitor the activities of their own employees.
The proposed SNM shot by LLNL is nothing more than "a hail mary pass". One last ditch effort to nail the NIF coffin closed, once and for all.
I suppose if they are doing one final shot, and that shot get splattered all over the inside of the target chamber that is going to be decommissioned anyways, with no plans of anyone to go inside that chamber and disturb any contamination, then.. what the heck... they should knock themselves out.
yeah, they need to knock themselves out with a blunt object. If any of the seals fail on the main target chamber, you have lost containment.
NIF another acronym for "Science Gone Wild".
We should be thankful for having organizations like NRDC and Tri-Valley Cares and many others that are constantly on top of the lab's "problems." Any attempt at a "Hail Mary" in the form of a Pu shot on NIF is going to trigger a shite-storm right back up the bum of lab management trying to push it. We know about your predicament. But we have no sympathy for you and your attempts to save your own arses by putting our community at risk and wasting our tax-payer money!
For lab employees to not only be using government resources to mess around on blogs but also to spout off misigynistic and extreme right wing hate messages
May 17, 2013 at 2:17 PM
Yeah, don't you just hate all those haters? You are such a joke. Personally, I hate people who can't spell "misogynistic" and can't figure out how to set their browsers to tell them when they're about to make fools of themselves.
keep writing... please.
Maybe thise post will trigger a response from him.
I Woman minority disabled obama-voting union-member feinstein supporter, who no good grammar and speling you have advise for me mister angry lab man?
This map can help you locate the hater! hahahahaha
http://blog.sfgate.com/hottopics/2013/05/17/geotagging-shows-where-the-haters-are/
Umm....okay.... Back to the topic. The Perlman article about Feinstein should seal this deal preventing a hail Mary pass, no? A Pu shot would require eating far into existing NIF programs already stretched for funding. They would have to eat further into WCI funding that hasn't yet been reprogrammed for NIF. Ouch! If the ignition people make substantial progress soon, maybe that will put the pressure off of a hail Mary. That's the best wishful outcome I could think of, which is a win-win.
that's about the amount of radioactive material that LANL employees took home, no?
May 15, 2013 at 12:01 AM
Ouch! Come on, that wasn't SNM they were carrying out the gates; it was only gold.
Charlie McMillan
Brutal!
Let's hope this useless and ridiculous thread disappears below the bar tomorrow. Can't happen too soon.
More NIF news coming down the pipeline. it's non-stop NIF! praise the lord!!! But it's true. All the problems with NIF... that is God's message to all you liars, fornicators, and cheaters at the lab.
Oh yeah indeed. Some big ones coming down the pipeline regarding the lab. This blog THRIVES on the news that NIF and LLNL and LANL generate. Copious topics, non-stop. Praise the lord!!!
Oh by the way, have you located your "point" on the hate-map? You're counted on the after-election Obama hate message statistics.
Seriously, are they going to do a Pu Shot? Don't they have to disclose specific intention to perform those experiments? Or are they allowed to do it without any disclosure to the public? I don't want to wake up hearing news about a containment breach at the lab potentially affecting many friends who work there.
I would've guessed the hater to be a LANL guy. Which would be ironic because SNM risks are SO MUCH greater here in Los Alamos, Livermore doesn't really have any significant SNM.
The hater loves for these threads to end up beyond the first page because of all the "checkmates" against him. I am guessing there are 3 or 4 people here to keep making the hater look foolish in future posts. Luckily there are more NIF/LLNL and LANL topics in the pipeline. More opportunities for the hater to make a complete ass of himself. Such fun sport! Game is to get him to respond with his most outrageous outbursts with as many of the following in a single post: (1) misogyny, (2) racism/immigration, (3) hatred of Obama (which is really just racism), (4) anti-gay, (5) anti-union, (6) spelling/grammar nazi.
I think I found the hater. Check out this CNN article about him! I'll bet you that the hater agrees with all of this. I think we found him! A real celebrity indeed!
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2013/05/17/pat-robertson-shrugs-off-adultery-cbn-regrets-the-misunderstanding/?hpt=hp_t3
(CNN) - The Christian Broadcasting Network regrets the misunderstanding. Again.
Pat Robertson, the network's 83-year-old founder, was not condoning adultery when he answered a viewer's quesion on "The 700 Club" this week, the network said.
The viewer said she was having difficulty forgiving her husband for cheating. Robertson said the “secret” was to “stop talking about the cheating. He cheated on you. Well, he’s a man. OK.”
Robertson went on to suggest the woman focus on why she had married her husband and whether he provided for her needs and those of their children, adding, “Is he handsome? Start focusing on these things and essentially fall in love all over again.”
“Males have a tendency to wander a little bit. And what you want to do is make a home so wonderful he doesn’t want to wander.”
CBN spokesman Chris Roslan wrote in a statement that Robertson’s “intent was not to condone infidelity or to cast blame. We regret any misunderstanding."
Robertson off-the-cuff comments over the years have perplexed and angered other Christian leaders. One Christian pastor said his New Year’s resolution was to not comment on Robertson’s gaffes for an entire year.
Here are some of Robertson's most memorable statements:
1. The U.S. should kill Chavez
2. How bad is weed, really?
3. You know who’s to blame for that earthquake in Haiti? Haitians.
4. Gay days = hurricanes and possibly meteors
That's not possible. The hater is NOT Pat Robertson. Pat Robertson is intelligent AND successful... so they can't be the same guy.
All this talk about "the hater" as if hate is always a bad thing. You don't have to look very far to find examples of things that you MUST hate, if you are a compassionate, sympathetic human being. Do you deny that you hate "the hater"? Of course, such nuances of thought escape some people.
Anonymous said...
I think Pu experiments on NIF are a great idea! Once the clumsy oafs contaminate the neighborhood,and the dust settles (so to speak), we'll be rid of NIF and the rest of Teller's mile-square funny farm once and for all time.
May 13, 2013 at 6:57 PM
Amen,Bro!
Don't drag Pat Roberston down with the hate-filled poster. Robertson atleast adds value to society.
We love the hater. Because of the hater, all these topics of EoS, ignition, LLNL, NNSA, LANL, and management, keep alive, well and kicking on this blog.
"Hater" is only a label. He is just doing what he does because his comments spark greater interest, readership and participation in the threads. He is probably the biggest contributor to the success of this blog. Heck, he is probably a liberal environmentalist vegan who would deny such insinuations.
Yes he is a blogger who uses harassing defamatory posts to make his point while also purposefully hoping to be targeted for a lawsuit.
May 19, 2013 at 8:39 PM
Yep, because the clueless tree huggers are so convinced they are right that they will sue and lose big time before they get the message about the First Amendment.
There is a lot of precedence to online defamation lawsuits in the US. You should pay a bit more attention to those and to what you write. Just sayin...
First amendment doesn't give you to right to commit libel. If you don't believe me, ramp up your online defamatory posts. We'll see how well the first amendment protects you from those you defame.
Looks like hater has been schooled.
Hope for your sake that scooby is able to scrub all the threads where you crossed the line. He gets grief too if someone sues.
I think you are confusing hatred with amusement and side-splitting laughter.
First amendment doesn't give you to right to commit libel.
May 19, 2013 at 9:14 PM
Obviously you don't understand the difference between libel and slander. And, neither is possible between posters in an anonymous venue like this blog. Get a clue.
It's defamation when you anonymously defame a specific named person (looks like you have a few still up). Where did slander enter into all of this? we're talking about your writing. you just looking up stuff on law-wiki or something? Dude, read up on case studies. Seriously.
Ha looks like you you stopped your defamatory posts. Good for you! I'm glad you listened to reason. It's for your own good after all. hahaha I'm really glad you visited some of those online defamation law case studies too. Knowledge is power!
The guy is obviously not too intelligent! Dude is so gullible too. Typical of a pea tarty supporter. Tell me again about your first amendment rights to defame people online.
"Obviously you don't understand the difference between libel and slander. "
Did the chode really write that? Because it's obvious the he doesn't know the difference. In sure he thinks its a mute point though. He believes all that stuff on Fox News so that says alot about his intelligence.
Hey post your identity so I can defame you. Then you can sue me for defamation. Hahahaha
In sure he thinks its a mute point though.
May 20, 2013 at 10:39 PM
The word is "moot" not "mute."
Any rationale minded person maybe tempted to correct such commonly confused words. There are a discreet finite number of such word pairs. However its a mute point.
Again, I wish it was.
Figure out that libel is the correct term yet?
What possible basis do you have for asserting
He hinted at information that only a lab employee or someone very close to the lab (sponsor, subcontractor, consultant) would have known.
It's a mute point
This is cool!
Post a Comment