--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@...> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Buck" <dhamiltony2k5@> wrote: > > > > Like, WTF they doing with all that spent nuke fuel sitting > > there on the river anyway? > > It's not *on* the river, it's a good 30 feet above the > level at which the river is likely to crest. From the > article I linked to earlier (and that you have now read): >
Yeah right. And the battle cry from any Iowan is "Remember Hancher Auditorium!" The 500 year flood that would likely never come? http://www.kcrg.com/epicsurge > "Earlier this week, the river stood at 1,005.6 feet > elevation, Remus said, and has been mostly unchanged since > then. The corps' projections place the river crest this > summer, barring extraordinary rains, between roughly 1,006 > and 1,008 feet. > > "Burke said OPPD's flood barriers would protect the plant > to 1,010 to 1,012 feet elevation. The reactor itself is in a > watertight container and the spent fuel pool is at 1,038.5 > feet elevation." > > Even if we get "extraordinary rains," they aren't going to > raise the river to the level of the spent fuel pool. > > Storage of spent nuclear fuel is problematic all over the > country, and in many cases the stored fuel is in a lot > more precarious a situation than it is at Fort Calhoun. > > People need to educate themselves as to what the real > dangers of nuclear power are and what can be done about > them. Running around like decapitated chickens screaming > about ignorant (and sometimes even malicious) scare stories > only makes it easier for the nuclear industry and the > government to dismiss the opposition as crackpots. > > > > > > They pretty effectively are threatening the whole Nation's > > food supply, even if they don't respect the lives of Iowans. > > Seems we've got our own would-be Islamic terrorists, and > > they's Nebraskans. >
