Skip to main content

Defense funding bill protects Los Alamos

Image
By scooby
New Mexico’s two U.S. senators have successfully added an amendment to a major defense funding bill to help protect Los Alamos National Laboratory’s role as the nation’s producer of plutonium pits, the triggers for nuclear weapons.
https://www.abqjournal.com/109799/los-alamos.html
  Pits baby, they keepan NM good!

Comments

Anonymous said…
Lets ne honest LANL is really the only viable place to build pits. Even if you spent a huge amount of money to build some new facility you would just end with the same kind of things that go along with pit production. You can bash LANL all you want but it is not going anywhere and most of the criticism is all hype and always has been hype.
11/19/2017 9:11 PM
Anonymous said…
too bad LLNL.
11/21/2017 1:50 PM
Anonymous said…
too bad LLNL.

November 21, 2017 at 1:50 PM

Come on it would be impossible to build pits in LLNL there is simply no way the people in the bay area would allow. There is no room and no capability. What would be the advantage to making new facilities elsewhere which would cost huge amounts of money with no added benefit.
11/21/2017 7:02 PM
Anonymous said…
November 21, 2017 at 7:02 PM

LLNL's Site 300 is 11 square miles size, which gives it an adequate buffer zone. I believe that moving 332 SNM related operations there has been considered in the past.
11/24/2017 2:42 PM
Anonymous said…
2.42pm there is no way in hell people in the Bay Area would ever allow this.
11/25/2017 1:46 PM
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

tcp1 looking good

By scooby
I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...
105 comments
Read more