Skip to main content

Plutonium on NIF

Image
By
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.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Deuterium EOS. That brings back fond memories and hearty laughs.
12/16/2014 5:49 AM
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.
12/16/2014 6:01 AM
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.
12/24/2014 10:30 PM
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
12/27/2014 11:31 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
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 wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

Rumor corner

By scooby
LLNS may have excluded the wrong people in last VSSOP? The exclusions were based on outdated job categories and related skills. ULM are now thinking that in the future, job categories and functional areas will have to be re-defined. The next VSSOP/ISP will be based on the new categories and functional areas. The questions I have are: 1) Why didnt they think of that before the transition. It seems like their style is “change things as you go”. Planning is out the window! 2) Who will give input on the new changes? The next RIF apparently is going to be more lucrative than the VSSOP. Depending on the length of employment, a RIFed person, not only gets their 1 week pay per year of service but also from 30 to 120 days notice, essentially 30 to 120 days pay. Please feel free to comment on the rumors or add new ones you actually heard.
92 comments
Read more