back to article Nuclear waste spill: How a pro-organic push sparked $240m blunder

There's a rather dry but absolutely fascinating document out from the US Department of Energy, which you can download in all its couple of hundred page glory here [PDF]. It's about the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad in New Mexico. This is where the Yanks send off all those barrels of radioactive nasties to …

Page:

  1. TRT Silver badge

    Why not organic kitty litter?

    Got to have something to do with all the newspapers and Weetabix byproducts...

    Actually, come to think of byproducts in food production... what DO they do with all the caffeine from decaffeinated coffee?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

      "Actually, come to think of byproducts in food production... what DO they do with all the caffeine from decaffeinated coffee?"

      Red Bull, the Marmite of the energy drink world!

    2. fajensen

      Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

      Organic kitty litter will rot and become soil again eventually so one can dump the contents of the cat-tray in the compost or bury it; The in-organic stuff is basically clay which is dried and "popped" like pop-corn.

      This stuff just sits there, one cannot dump it, it has to go into the bin.

      There is I.O.W. no requirement for cat-shit to last forever - we want it to be GONE, hence the organic cat-litter is the better product.

      If one is covering cat litter with radioactive waste, then, probably, the ecological aspects are less relevant.

      1. JetSetJim
        Mushroom

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        Organic cat litter I get can be flushed down the loo, thus ensuring that the bin I have emptied fortnightly doesn't overflow with cat excrement.

        Not sure I'd recommend flushing for the nuclear waste, mind...

        1. Peter Galbavy

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          Ditto. While my feline overlords used to poop in the house I used "chick crumb" which is both clumping and flushable. Convenient, cheap, turned into fertiliser at the sewage farm.

        2. PNGuinn
          Facepalm

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          Not sure I'd recommend flushing that down the bog. In fact definitely NOT.

          Lots of marketing droids say their stuff is flushable. It helps sales to idiots ('most everyone out there) you know.

          "Got a blockage - your'e flushing it wrong." - Also works for fruity firms apparently.

          Talk to any sewer worker about blockages and what causes them. You have a system - usually 4 inch pipes - designed to cope with s**t + some small pieces of paper designed break up easily. You feed it a s**tload of lawncrapper s**t PLUS a tray of soggy, sticky (to a sewer) gubbins plus a mere 6 litres of water. Hmmm....

          Top tip - don't mention wet wipes, sanitary towels, food waste etc to a sewer worker if you don't want a colourful reply.

          And don't get me started on those so called disinfectant blocks that people clip onto the rim of the pan - presumabably to give little boys something to aim at. Accidently tip one of them in and flush and you have a blockage complete with anchor going down. Very effective (and expensive).

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

            "It helps sales to idiots ('most everyone out there) you know."

            High opinion of your self I see. Do you really think most people are idiots. What is the threshold above which one becomes a person deserving respect in your eyes? I ask as it would give me something to aim for - rather like those disinfectant blocks you mentioned. Oh sorry, did I get you started? Do have a lie down.

        3. Alan Brown Silver badge

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          "Organic cat litter I get can be flushed down the loo"

          The local sewerage people absolutely HATE people who do that.

          Seriously, if you can put it in a bin then do so.

          1. Jan 0 Silver badge

            Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

            > "Organic cat litter I get can be flushed down the loo"

            > The local sewerage people absolutely HATE people who do that.

            > Seriously, if you can put it in a bin then do so.

            It seems that organic cat litter is equivalent to powerline ethernet. Just say no!

        4. Jan 0 Silver badge
          Mushroom

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          JetSetJim typed > Organic cat litter I get can be flushed down the loo

          Can some cat* lover explain to us all why they don't fit pet karzies in their houses? Why not cut out the middleman^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hcat litter and go directly into the sewerage?

          *also apples to dog lovers. Why interpose a pavement beween the dog's arse and the drains?

          Flame, for obvious reasons.

        5. Stuart Moore

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          A bigger issue with flushing cat poo and litter is that a parasite in it can survove the sewage treatment process and go on to harm pregnant women - see http://www.floppycats.com/cat-feces-flushing-a-bad-thing.html

      2. PNGuinn
        Mushroom

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        I was under the impression that most soils were not 100% organic ......

        "There is I.O.W. no requirement for cat-shit to last forever - we want it to be GONE" - No, sensible people want to deal with the problem at source.

        1. Otto is a bear.

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          Oh, I don't know responsible dog owners do and most cats prefer to bury their output in your petunias as a surprise for you later.

          Anyway soil based kitty litter, will break down in landfill, and helps landfill sites to generate gas for the grid. It just becomes biologically richer in the process, although perhaps not in the way the soil cycle usually works. Ask any geologist.

        2. Robert Helpmann??
          Coat

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          No, sensible people want to deal with the problem at source.

          What, with a cork? Ew!

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        "Organic kitty litter will rot..."

        And that's just the problem (along with most if not all bio-degradables), as while it does so it will be producing methane while happily rotting away in the land-fill...

        1. fajensen

          Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

          So? Round these parts, they cover the landfill with a membrane, then one can suck out the methane from the landfill and mix it up with the natural gas - or burn it in a generator if there is a long-ish distance to the gas network.

      4. Dan Paul

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        You don't want to use organic kitty litter if the only use for it on site is as a collection agent for spills in a chemical lab.

        Regular clay based cat litter is somewhat basic and would tend to neutralize and absorb weak acids and other chemicals or spills.

        Organic litter would react with the chemicals and likely offgas. Or decompose and and offgas.

        One would hope that animal testing labs would not use organic litter if they were doing anything radioactive. The animal excrement would be fairly radioactive as it tends to concentrate the testing substances.

      5. Marshalltown

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        "...If one is covering cat litter with radioactive waste, then, probably, the ecological aspects are less relevant...."

        Ah, that would actually be "different" ecological aspects BECOME relevant.

    3. TeeCee Gold badge
      Alert

      Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

      Presumably somewhere there's an enormous mountain made of billions of tons of lard, caused by the trend for low-fat food products....

      Hmmm. I wonder if you can ski on lard.

      1. plrndl

        Re: billions of tons of lard

        It's called "America".

        1. h4rm0ny
          Facepalm

          Re: billions of tons of lard

          So basically I just read a two-page rant by Worstall about "hippies" (which appears to mean anyone who buys organic to Worstall) and how they are in some vague but implied way responsible for someone in the US not knowing how to do their job -- all because Worstall doesn't know that organic cat litter actually has a convenient purpose to it and wants to blame a nuclear accident on a "pro-organic push".

          I really should learn to check the author before reading in future.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: billions of tons of lard

            just because some marketing w*nker put's organic on the packet, does not mean it's better either at the job it's supposed to do, or for the enviroment!

            Damn eco-nutters, will happily fuck everything up through being stupid, as they believe they are saving the fucking planet. (planets do not need saving, it's a huge ball of fucking elements orbiting a star!)

            1. h4rm0ny

              Re: billions of tons of lard

              >>"just because some marketing w*nker put's organic on the packet, does not mean it's better either at the job it's supposed to do, or for the enviroment!"

              Organic cat litter is organic material such as pine chips and decomposes. Inorganic cat litter is typically clay and does not. Worstall basically went on wild goose chase because he apparently doesn't own a cat and can't use Wikipedia. Or even ask a friend who does own a cat!

              And you have taken up his ignorance and run with it.

      2. Omgwtfbbqtime
        Coat

        Re: Hmmm. I wonder if you can ski on lard

        Probably, but you can't hold a candle to it.

        I'll get my coat....

    4. WonkoTheSane
      Headmaster

      Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

      AC is correct. The caffeine from decaf is sold for many megabux to energy drink / cola manufacturers.

      This means that decaf is actually a WASTE product!

      1. Spleen

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        Re Wonko The Sane: Aren't energy drinks the waste product?

      2. Omgwtfbbqtime

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter? @WonkoTheSane

        "AC is correct. The caffeine from decaf is sold for many megabux to energy drink / cola manufacturers."

        Also to BigPharma for their cold and flu products and Squaddie candy.... I mean ProPlus.

      3. Fungus Bob

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        "This means that decaf is actually a WASTE product!"

        Certainly tastes like it...

    5. launcap Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

      > Got to have something to do with all the newspapers and Weetabix byproducts...

      Ours is compressed wood pellets - once the (ahem) solids are sieved out, the remainder can go into the compost heap where it makes a quite nice accellerator..

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

      It's easy to bash "organic", the real problem was ignorance.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        It's easy to bash "organic", the real problem was ignorance.

        Ignorance is, by its nature, an organic trait, though.

    7. hopkinse

      Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

      Organic kitty litter of the compressed wood pellet sawdust variety also absorbs the smell much better than the inorganic. I had 5 young cats at one time so did a fair bit of research on this metter :-)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Why not organic kitty litter?

        get yer nose fixed, your talking rot!

    8. tony2heads

      @TRT

      caffeine goes into headache tablets

      https://www.headaches.org/educational_modules/caffeine/fast.html

  2. This post has been deleted by its author

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Fast Integral Reactor.

      'Stop burying nuclear material'

      I'm quite suprised no-one has thought of storing nuclear waste on the moon. Let's hope that such a strategy wouldn't cause the accumulated waste to eventually reach critical mass and cause a massive thermonuclear explosion, which would act like a giant rocket, pinging the moon out into space. If this were to ever happen, I'm sure the inhabitants of the first moonbase (let's call it 'alpha' for the sake of argument) would have approximately 2 seasons worth of adventures, while they ride the moon through outer space.

      1. graeme leggett Silver badge

        Re: Fast Integral Reactor.

        I've cancelled overflights of the Salado Formation in my light aircraft 'Eagle' just in case.

        1. Otto is a bear.

          Re: Fast Integral Reactor.

          It could be man's way to the starts, after all, it must have been going at one hell of a speed for them to have all those adventures. I wonder how much energy you would need, and for that matter, an older and wiser me wonders why the inhabitants didn't end up as amusing smears on the floor when the moon accelerated.

          1. TRT Silver badge

            Re: Fast Integral Reactor.

            Time dilation effects. For them it seemed like they were adventuring for a whole two seasons but to Earth observers they were actually flattened to a smear across a sheet of celluloid.

          2. Peter Gathercole Silver badge

            Re: Fast Integral Reactor. @otto

            As a story-teller and realiser on the small screen, Gerry Anderson was pretty good. As a scientist, not so hot.

            There were plenty of plot holes. Like why was the moon able to avoid being captured by the stars/planets it passed close to. And where did they get their energy, especially in a form suitable for the Eagles. And how about the seemingly unending supply of Eagles when they were destroyed. And how come they could cross interstellar space so fast, but still slow enough to allow planetary exploration missions. And why the moon was not torn apart by tidal forces when it passed within the Roche limit to planets and even the black hole it went through. And how come so many Earth spaceships found the moon. And how they managed to get enough Sinclair Pocket TVs to make their communicators 10 years after most of them had broken.

            And, to cap it all, why was there so little furniture in the Control Centre that everybody had to stand around, punching buttons on the walls!

            Still, the first season was a good romp, although I thought widening the plot in the second season to include metamorpths and the like was going a bit too far.

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

              1. Diogenes

                Re: Fast Integral Reactor. @otto

                "the second season to include metamorphs" She was quite hot though. In human form, I mean! And even better as Lady Claudine Litton in 'The Return of the Pink Panther'.

                sigh

              2. TeeCee Gold badge
                Coat

                Re: Fast Integral Reactor. @otto

                There's three words for that: Guardian of Piri.

                Every Space 1999 aficionado knows this one.

            2. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

              Re: Fast Integral Reactor. @otto

              As a story-teller and realiser on the small screen, Gerry Anderson was pretty good. As a scientist, not so hot.

              It's Space:1999! Gerry doesn't have to explain shit!

            3. MrDamage Silver badge

              @Peter G

              The genre contains 2 words. The first is science. The second is FICTION.

              If you cannot understand that, I suggest you go sit at Gene Roddenberry's grave, break out your ouiji board, and explain to him how he was wrong as well.

              1. Peter Gathercole Silver badge

                @MrDamage

                And the first, as you pointed out, is Science.

                There was lots of bad science in all of the Gerry Anderson works, and they were all set in the near future, so they could not really play the radical new technology card.

                Dose it detract from the tremendous stories, strong characters (even though most were plastic or plasticine), or the fantastic achievements of AP Films and Century 21 Productions in the field of special effects? No it doesn't.

                I am a huge fan of all of Gerry Anderson's work (well, Dick Spanner was a bit strange, and Terrahawks was below par IMHO), but that never stopped me cringing sometimes at the "Science", even when I was a child (My formative years were during the original runs of the "classics'" in the 1960's and 70's; I am of the Century 21 Productions generation, and am almost exactly the same age as Joe 90 would be).

                (P.S. Answer me this. Why do Thunderbird 1 and 2 come to a dead-stop in the air, and only fire their landing jets when they want to decend?)

      2. Meerkatjie

        Re: Fast Integral Reactor.

        If we did store radioactives on the moon we would likely stick it on the far side (don't want our pretty moonscapes ruined by unsightly piles of waste) so if it did go boom it would push the moon at us rather than space. Nice bit of karma there.

      3. Peter Gathercole Silver badge

        Re: Fast Integral Reactor. @Hadvar

        That's so 1999!

      4. x 7

        Re: Fast Integral Reactor.

        Nuclear waste?

        Just lob it into the sun on a rocket

        1. TRT Silver badge

          Re: Fast Integral Reactor.

          Nuclear waste?

          Just lob it into the sun on a rocket

          Project "Saucerful of Secrets"?

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon