2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

As a Tri-Cities native (current Portland resident) and daughter of a Hanford (Westinghouse employed) employee; I find it disheartening to have the state of Washington sue the Federal Government over clean up. My father was involved with nuclear power from the age 18 until his retirement (initial crew member of the nucelar powered Nautilus, worked at Hanford, Oak Ridge and a number of other domestic and foreign reactors.)
How is a lawsuit going to speed the clean up process?? How will it determine what to do with the "sludge"?? It does not seem at all proactive nor in the best interest of the residents of the Tri-Cities (or down-winders) if there IS a sense of urgency... Honestly - what politician is knowledgeable enough to make a decision on nuclear power and nuclear waste?? I know that the state has a huge deficit - is this one way for Gov. G to bail her reputation out of a huge financial hole? Seems like she doesn't care about the east side of the state until there is a benefit to the greater metropolitan areas of Washington (WEST of the Cascades).
I was listening earler and happy to hear Anna King comment on the Reach. It is BEAUTIFUL and one of the most protected areas of our country. As a Natural Resource graduate, I was able to learn firsthand that the wildlife there is healthy and thriving. I grew up swimming in the Columbia River just in Richland and know that the stretch of the river is MORE polluted here in Portland (and along the Willamette) than areas of the Tri-Cities because of agricultural run-off!
I do feel for the down-winders that feel their health has been compromised by the site and facts being facts, if that the case then YES, the DOE should compensate and help them out. The other side of this is there really a greater number of cancer cases because of the site or is it that we are more medically advanced in our diagnosis of cancers and other diseases?
Anna is correct in that you will find it hard to hear anything negative about the site from the locals. That IS their bread and butter - we live(d) there and see how healthy the locals, land and the wildlife is. It is a positive source of clean energy and we should be able (as a country) to build smarter and cleaner nuclear reactors. I think it is insane to open the reactors for tourism - and in all honestly, should NOT open the Reach to tourism either. The site is the heart of a lot of devistation (for Nagasaki) and should be closed in respect for those citizens - so perhaps more a memorial than a tourist site. The reach is pristine because they have kept humans away. PLEASE don't let that change.
Let the folks (DOE ideally!) who know how to fix the problem do their job without the cloud a time consuming lawsuit hovering.

posted 4 years, 5 months ago
view in context