Dump it in Nevada!

Lesson:

Whenever we start a government program that program continues to drain resources from the poor in this country.

It is not just Republicans. We have many poor and dispossessed in my area who are forever doomed because Democrats have drained the local economy to support government workers.

Same problem with Homeland Security.

Dems do this as much as Republicans.

Zachary Roth has no reason to complain because when his favorite group is funded by taxes on the poor, he will tell us that it is for the good of us all.

The Washington Post reported over the weekend that plans for a new nuclear weapons program will continue, despite the finding that existing stockpiles will remain reliable for almost the next century.

Nonsense Kevin. We need to have a larger nuclear stockpile because we can never enough nukes. Suppose there was a surprise attack by the terrorists Al-Qaeda or Hezbollah which knocked out 95% of our nuclear weapons. We need to be sure those 5% are still working. With only 200 nuclear weapons, a 95% nuclear knock-out would only leave us with 10 nuclear weapons to attack our enemies, which is hardly anything. But if we had 20000 nuclear weapons, a 95% nuclear knock-out would still leave us with 1000 nuclear weapons which is more than enough to use to retaliate against the terrorists who attacked us.

..there may be an opportunity to rationalize our weapons *complex*..

in every sense of the word..

Trouble is that if we cut the funding for these programs and kick the nuclear physicists to the curb, they may have to look for opportunities abroad...

To be fair, the weapons labs have been and still are some of the few places still doing government-funded basic scientific research. And with industry cutting back (Bell labs, Xerox Parc, SRI, ...), and universities increasingly beholden to industry, it might be better to repurpose them rather than shutting them down.

extraneous programs that serve as little more than federal jobs projects for red states

Should read: federal jobs projects for large wealthy corporatons. Noam Chomsky has written quite a bit about this, but because he is anti-war he is ignored by centrists.

"...rationalize our weapons complex..."

Oxymoronic.

When Carter was president, the budget of Los Alamos was 75% on renewable energy

ZRoth, these are good ideas, but look more closely at what you are suggesting. There has already been substantial re-programming of mission at Los Alamos and Livermore. Also, the second-most Weapons Lab (Livermore) is in a blue state (Calif). If there are sacred cows to gore, the little blue state of Connecticut has a big sub base that is protected each year by its senators.

New Mexico is the purplest of all states. Split senators, 1 dem congressman, 2 republican congress people, but one who won with less than 900 votes. Dem Governor.

Bingaman will also be pushing hard for more Sandi and Los Alamos cash.

A big part of the issue is that when you stop funding for a weapon system, the industries around that weapon system shrivel. Then when you need new weapon systems, there are no domestic makers left. This is true in all industries, but especially in weapons where almost all demand is created by government.

Sandia has done a lot of alternative energy in past (read:democratic) times, and still has some of that in place. Also a lot of communications, robotics, AI, computer security and other high tech, cutting-edge research, a lot of which has little to do with the military. It could become a core of alternative energy research very easily - it is a great location for wind and solar technologies, and already has the infrastructure in place for high energy/plasma/fusion research. For instance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_machine

There are a lot of projects that are crap in the US, and more nuclear weapons are a bad idea and a waste of resources. But nearly all of the national labs are great ideas that do serve important purposes, and should be supported. The New Mexico labs are great locations, and the effort should be to direct them towards useful goals, not cut them off.

"There are a lot of [government] projects that are crap in the US, and more [fill in the blank] are a bad idea and a waste of resources. But nearly all of the [fill in the blank] are great ideas that do serve important purposes, and should be supported [by taxing the poor and dispossessed]. "

Of course the real result will be a return to Republicans when we find out that "pay as you go" was a lie. It won't take the Dems long, Harry Reid has already forgot pay as you go and should be voted out of office. It is not even mentioned in Pelosi's platform.

Look at the Dems. Which one has mentioned pay-as-you-go recently? None of them.

Won't Bingaman (N.M.'s other senator) be replacing Domenici as chair of the Energy Committee? That means the labs would still be protected...

You may not have to renew the existing
weapons but you do have to renew the
knowledge of the weapons designers every
generation. It might be a good thing for
the US to forget how to build nuclear
weapons but I don't thing the US is willing
to do that yet. The weapons "make work" at
the labs is primarily intended to maintain
a cadre of trained weapon designers as
a hedge against future events.

CA, you're right. Jeff Bingaman is the other senator from NM, and he'll be taking over the Senate Energy Committee from Domenici.

You can bet that money will keep going to Sandia Labs and Los Alamos. They're huge employers in a poor state. Any senator who didn't support them would get booted in a minute.

As mysticdog and CA Pol Junkie point out, Bingaman (D-NM) will be replacing Domenici (R-NM) as chair of the energy committee, so there may be less change than one would hope. But Bingaman was recently come out against one piece of pork for Los Alamos, so maybe it's not as bad as one might assume.

Bingaman questions need for new weapons programs

(AP) - US Senator Jeff Bingaman says he doesn’t believe Los Alamos National Laboratory is the best place for a facility to make the plutonium triggers for the nation’s nuclear weapons. . . . [http://www.kobtv.com/index.cfm?viewer=storyviewer&id=29102&cat=NMTOPSTORIES]

Hard to tell much from that snippet of a story from an Albuquerque TV station. For all I know, he's saying Los Alamos is the wrong place (but Sandia is the right place).

The U.S has been using a significant amount of radioactive waste to produce munitions that we shoot at people we don't like. It's called depleted uranium and it promises to be an environmental hazard in places like Iraq and Bosnia for thousands of years. The public is also never told that nuclear power plants are only economically viable with billions of dollars in govt. subsidies. They are a hideous boondoggle and are the most egregious form of corporate welfare for companies like Bechtel. I suggest building a massive nuclear waste site outside Crawford, Texas, near the Bush ranch. Then we'll see how much support there is for new nucear power plants.

There is always something for scientists to do. The money spent yearly on them does not mean they are now sitting around wondering what to do.

For example, and directly related to radiation killing, is the need to develop methods for reversing the toxicity of radiation. It is well-known that METHODS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT CAN REVERSE A LETHAL DOSE OF GAMMA RADIATION -- as late as two days after the lethal exposure to radiation.

What is not known, and should be tested, is whether the method established for reversing lethal exposure to gamma radiation would suffice for reversing lethal exposures of alpha radiation like that induced by Polonium-210. Scientists at National Laboratories have the expertise and the funds available to work this out.

There was this guy who owned a store.

Once a month, a few young, tough guys would come around and knock stuff off the shelves, scare the customers and stuff. He had a talk with a local businessman who ran a "security" company. The understanding was, as long as he paid a monthly fee, the young tough guys would not come into his store and mess things up. He paid the money, and magically, the tough guys stopped coming around.

It is well-known that METHODS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED THAT CAN REVERSE A LETHAL DOSE OF GAMMA RADIATION -- as late as two days after the lethal exposure to radiation.
Posted by: Jack von Borstel on December 4, 2006 at 1:46 PM | PERMALINK

You are abusing the word "reverse".

It's possible to save a person's life, in some cases. There are also ways to treat people for exposure to alpha emitters, in some cases, saving their lives. There are also cases where ingesting alpha emitters are going to fucking kill you no matter what any doctor tries to do. Same for exposure to gamma.

Spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year is not going to measurably improve this situation.

I agree that it's generally a good idea to provide some kind of maintenance to specialized employees with skillsets that are crucial to our national defense. But when the bulk of that money is not going to pay the salaries of engineers, but instead, is going into bonuses for worthless executives and stock dividends, then you have to question whether this funding is happening in good faith, and whether it is a benefit for the American people.

The earlier examples of renewable energy research is probably the best idea I've heard of for this kind of effort. The only reason we aren't doing this, of course, is because it cuts the used-car salesmen and war-profiteers out of the pork trough.

Funny thing is....the first post here reflect my beliefs although I didnt post it. I live in Nevada. Nevada should ask for $$$ every year to take it off the hands of the US and use the money to improve our state infrastructure and education system. Pragmatically, the waste has to go somewhere, it cannot stay at all the different individual nuclear facilities forever. So why not volunteer and get paid? I have been to Yucca Mt and there is nothing there outside. I mean it really is in the middle of nowhere far from any significant human habitation. The waste is far more of a danger to our citizenry where it is currently than it will be in Yucca Mt regardless.

"and should be supported [by taxing the poor and dispossessed]. "

LOL, you don't really believe that, do you? The vast majority of federal taxes that are available for these projects are paid by the middle and upper classes. The poor pay very little, and most get far more back.

That isn't to say they shouldn't get more back, or that the wealthy shouldn't pay more, but your argument against federal research because it takes money from the poor is ridiculous and embarassing for you.

Al: Suppose there was a surprise attack by the terrorists Al-Qaeda or Hezbollah which knocked out 95% of our nuclear weapons. ... But if we had 20000 nuclear weapons, a 95% nuclear knock-out would still leave us with 1000 nuclear weapons which is more than enough to use to retaliate against the terrorists who attacked us.

According to Wikipedia, the US has 5,735 active and 9,960 total nuclear warheads. It doesn't say if a MIRV (multiple independent reentry vehicle) is considered one or several, but I presume it is several.

Of course, these are stored at bases and on submarines and warships all over the world, so Al's premise is wildly implausible, but even if it happened, we would have 250 active warheads. If such a wildly implausible thing did happen, You can bet Britain and even France would chip in to flatten the perpetrators.

Bingaman's press secretary told me that he wants the Armed Services Committee to look at the RRW program before he'll make a determination:

http://www.livefromsilvercity.com/?p=641

The U.S has been using a significant amount of radioactive waste to produce munitions that we shoot at people we don't like. It's called depleted uranium and it promises to be an environmental hazard in places like Iraq and Bosnia for thousands of years. The public is also never told that nuclear power plants are only economically viable with billions of dollars in govt. subsidies. They are a hideous boondoggle and are the most egregious form of corporate welfare for companies like Bechtel. I suggest building a massive nuclear waste site outside Crawford, Texas, near the Bush ranch. Then we'll see how much support there is for new nucear power plants.

I think it important to understand that the nuclear complex is under going a brain drain. Those who know how to build these weapons, know how to keep them safe, etc are retiring. If they are unable to train their successors with real world hands on training we will eventually find ourselves starting over from scratch. And that means nuclear testing, that means accidents, that means higher costs, etc..

It is better to throw them a bone once in awhile and keep them trained then it is to start all over when we need them. And the way the world looks it would appear as though we will need them sooner or later.

As for the necessity of the RRW. Just because plutonium pits may remain usable for another century doesn't mean the rest of the bomb will. Most people don't realize how many components go into a nuclear weapon and what the shelf lives are for each and every component. Trust me when I say there is much more to it then just a plutonium pit..

Joe writes:

I think it important to understand that the nuclear complex is under going a brain drain. Those who know how to build these weapons, know how to keep them safe, etc are retiring.

There certainly is a brain drain, and it's even more severe than you imply, because Los Alamos has become a very hostile environment for creative scientists.

It's the safety-nazis and the security-wanks gone amuck, shutting down the lab for weeks or months while subjecting everyone to lots of nonsense 'training'.

Imagine Einstein, Feinmann and Hawking all having to sit through week after week of repetitive 'Drivers Ed' classes and you'll get the idea. Okay, that's an exaggeration, but not by that much.

I can't advise students to go to Los Alamos any more. But Livermore is really doing some very interesting and cutting-edge non-proliferation work, and it would be a real shame if it was shut down.

One thing that the weapons complex can move out on more smartly is cleanup of their sites. There was a huge push to cleanup Rocky Flats with some creative funding and work staging and that work is largely complete. Hanford has a huge challenge, as does Oak Ridge and Savannah River. Right now, though, these are largely Bechtel or Westinghouse boondoggles where tons of money gets spent but little cleanup gets done. Heck, it took the Army Corps of Engineers to start ticking off the cleanup of Manhattan Project sites.

http://cassino.122mb.com/sitemap.htm