[ RadSafe ] Cold Fusion

[JPreisig at aol.com]

Hmmmmm,

       This is from:    jpreisig at aol.com    .

        Hi Radsafers,

              Recent RADSAFE messages indicate that some cold fusion
        researchers are mixing up their Lithium Iodide and BF3 detectors.
        Oh my --- why can't researchers get something so fundamental
         correct???  The detector responses of these types of detectors
        are different, right???  Perhaps some verbal abuse (or worse) is in
        order.  What was more important than getting the experiment's
        detectors correct???  I would recommend re-analyzing the data
        with only one type of detector present (drop out the other detector's
        data).  See what happens.  Then rerun the whole experiment with
        only one type of detector used.  Of course, send erratum messages
        to any journal's involved with these articles.

               My guess is that the experiment's results will improve once 
only a
        single type of detector is used.

               On to other matters.  Some RADSAFE participants have a clear
        dislike for this ROKKE person.  Hope they are not confusing him with
        the Al Roker weather person out of New York City.

               And now, on to Hanford.  Most of the storage tanks there have 
had
        their fluids removed, leaving mostly fairly solid waste, right???  
Also some
        of the waste is being moved to double walled storage tanks.  And 
efforts
        to vitrify the waste are continuing, right???  Also, isn't the 
Hanford area
        fairly arid (and doesn't receive much rainfall each year)???

              So, what are Hanford's radioactive waste plumes and how far from
        the storage tank farm have they gotten?  Some radionuclides move
        very slowly with respect to groundwater, and others move right along
        with the groundwater (i.e. at the same velocity).  The Groundwater
        Hydrogeology book by Freeze and Cherry describes what is going on
        at an undergraduate/graduate level.

              So, I guess Hanford should continue to replace old, leaking, 
storage
        tanks with double-walled storage tanks.  And I guess, Hanford should
        continue along with its waste vitrification efforts.  The old leaking 
storage
        tanks that need repair more quickly are those that have radionuclides
        that transport quickly in the gound.  The actual physical form of the 
waste
        is important also.  I'm guessing that no-one is now using Hanford
        aquifers for drinking water???

              One computer code for doing groundwater (radionuclide) transport
        is Femwater/BLT, which, I think is available from the Radiation 
Shielding
        Information Center (RSICC) at Oak Ridge.  I think a PC friendly 
version
        of Femwater/BLT exists now.  Other computer codes like MODFLOW,
        Lewater/Lewaste, etc. are available also.

               The interesting part in all this is that if radionuclide waste 
plumes actually
        reach the Columbia River (or whatever rivers are nearby), the sheer
        volume of the water in that River would dilute the radionuclides
        considerably.  Still, I guess leaky storage tanks should be replaced 
and
        the waste in them should eventually be vitrified.

              Was the Hanford show on 60 minutes up to date, or was it a
        rebroadcast of an earlier show???

              Hope your day is going well.

         Regards,     Joseph R. (Joe) Preisig,  Ph.D.