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.
Comments
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
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!
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.
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.
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.
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 6:22 PM
Golly now the blog has a plutonium expert. How quaint.
Anonymous
May 11, 2013 at 6:42 PM
Just say NO to comments in the topic suggestion in-box.
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.
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.
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.
Makes sense, since they want to reach ignition anyways, that is the where the accolades and glory will go towards.
Ouch that is a kick to the groin.
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.
(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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
BERK BREATHED
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.
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.
May 13, 2013 at 2:10 PM
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.
"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.
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?
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.
Pu is a red herring. Abortion is the devil's work, carried out by his fiends.
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!
No, that was the pot calling the stainless-steel saucepan 'black'
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.
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.
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.
May 15, 2013 at 11:32 AM
Since you got it completely backwards, I guess you don't know either.
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.
You gotta be joking if these guys work at the lab, have security clearances, and potentially have access to nuclear materials.
That statement is factually incorrect. Even the weak follow-on clarification/example he provided misses the flaw in his statement.
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 9:56 PM
^Lab employee
May 15, 2013 at 11:46 AM
Name one.
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.
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?
Checkmate
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.
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.
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.
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).
He hinted at information that only a lab employee or someone very close to the lab (sponsor, subcontractor, consultant) would have known.
The statement is still factually incorrect.
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.
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.
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.
http://blog.sfgate.com/hottopics/2013/05/17/geotagging-shows-where-the-haters-are/
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
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
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!
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.
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.
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
May 20, 2013 at 10:39 PM
The word is "moot" not "mute."
He hinted at information that only a lab employee or someone very close to the lab (sponsor, subcontractor, consultant) would have known.