BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Monday, December 15, 2014

Plutonium on NIF

Plutonium on NIF

http://www.advocate-news.com/general-news/20141212/lawrence-livermore-national-lab-to-test-plutonium-using-nif-laser

Funny, I thought the Laser EOS program had been completely discredited with the D2 shock data and phony Ta phase transition.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Deuterium EOS. That brings back fond memories and hearty laughs.

Anonymous said...

Yeah this is unbelievable. To say that there is low risk, but the "stopgap" is the fact that it's "contained" in the chamber. That begs the question, "WTF?" It looks like they first made the decision to "do the experiment at all cost" and then came up with all kinds of screwed up logic to say that it's safe enough to do. Sounds like a completely dishonest and disingenuous safety and risk assessment was performed by LLNL. Some independent scientists need to verify these "claims" made by LLNL regarding the safety.

Also, doesn't this sound just like the Deuterium EoS fiasco? They see some modeling predictions, and then the Laser EoS happens to sit right on those predictions... only to be shown by a bunch of Sandians the correct experimental EoS. Typical behavior. Start with a conclusion arrived at by some stupid groupthink committee or even worse, by one megalomaniac, then try to twist reality and all logic to justify their conclusion (even after being shown to be wrong).

Maybe out in god-forsaken places like New Mexico, such experiments might be acceptable. But in a heavily populated metropolitan area? What are these people thinking? They're just going to fabricate the results and error bars anyways. And the whole RT strength stuff is a complete sham. These people are an embarrassment.

Anonymous said...

It's really not much of a risk.

Tiny, tiny, tiny amounts of stuff easily contained. It's a hypothetical but manageable worker exposure issue when entering the shot chamber. Public risk at the site boundary is inherently very, very low. Practically nonexistent.

You can certainly argue about the technical merits of the experiments. But claims of any significant public risk would be the real dishonest and disingenuous shibboleth here.

Anonymous said...

Sure, and very very small samples of the deadly Ebola virus are carefully and safely secured and isolated at the CDC in Atlanta. Just ask the CDC they will provide all the necessary assurances. CDC high-level containment protocol substances are never transported to lower-level labs, until it happens.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ebola-virus-outbreak/cdc-worker-remains-well-after-possible-ebola-exposure-lab-n275326

Blog Archive