Q said:

@ An Actual Scientist: Haven’t you expressed some hard feelings for government science programs or stuff you’ve done not being appreciated? Should we be concerned???

Certainly not! No, doing something like harming others to try to make one’s job more important is inexcusable and I’d never consider it.

Let me also explain that I’m not angry at the government or at anyone in any way. Yes, it is true that I have expressed some frustration about policies, but it’s not a personal thing that I ever feel I am being attacked or the government is out to get me or my job or anything.

It is frustrating to see the government terminate a program when it has made great progress and at the same time fund something that is all but useless. It is frustrating to see that some course of action is taken when it’s 180 degrees away from what the research indicates is the best course of action. It’s frustrating to see the government overpay for something or put the wrong people in charge of something or start-stop-start-stop a program which could be over more quickly and cheaply if they would just make up their mind.

However, I need to stress something and that is that this is where I have taken off my scientist hat and put on my “Joe Taxpayer” or “Mister Public” hat. I don’t let this change my work because I value and understand the importance of objective science and I would not want to compromise that.

The other thing is that I get personal satisfaction and it does not matter that much to me that I receive awards or attention. I enjoy the fact that I get mental stimulation and constantly learn something new and solve problems. Recognition is nice and appreciated but it’s not something I feel starved for.

I’ll also say that while I admit that there have been times when it gets personal and I do get a sense of having my own credibility or honesty attacked, but this has only happened on a few very rare and small occasions generally when I made the mistake of trying to answer some questions by some politically opposed groups. I do not take any offense to having my work questioned or my data invalidated. If it turns out that someone else has a better way of doing things then I’m perfectly happy to learn that things have progressed past what I have done. There have been times when other things were displaced inpart by work I did.

If I am wrong about something and it is scientifically proven that I am, then I accept this and I appreciate that things have been fixed.

This guy was not at all comparable to a level-headed scientist who had a few quibbles about funding or procedure. This guy was a vindictive, paranoid, obsessive individual who apparently though he was justified in taking things into his own hands and going beyond the role of researcher.

        DV82XL said:

Security, as I mentioned above is largely a function of secrecy. The number of people aware of any movement, the cargo, its route, and its timing are compartmentalized. This has system worked very well for us, and to the best of my knowledge no shipment has been interdicted by ether criminals or protests.

I don’t know that the whole spent-fuel shipping thing has been entirely worked out in terms of protocol. It should have been by now but it seems like it’s perpetually up in the air and in limbo what with Yucca mountain so far behind and it seems every damn aspect of the project is being stalled by every kind of 11th hour appeal and tactic you can imagine.

In general though, I do not believe military materials or waste that is shipped is released to the public ahead of time, but when it is transported there is generally extraordinary security. This is not just for spent fuel shipping but any radioactive material used in government research is handled with very high standards for security – far far beyond the apparent casual attitude that is reported in the bio labs where scientists can walk in at any hour and borrow equipment and do as they wish without much control of the material.

        An Actual Scientist said:

I imagine Canada takes precautions like the US and most other countries do when they ship anything radioactive.

AECL uses dry cask system that have been designed for truck and rail transport and Canada’s regulatory body granted approval for barge shipments as well, however this has not been done in practice to date. These casks are also used in the three above-ground dry storage facilities now operating. The y are known as Castor Containers, an acronym for “cask for storage and transport of radioactive material.

Security, as I mentioned above is largely a function of secrecy. The number of people aware of any movement, the cargo, its route, and its timing are compartmentalized. This has system worked very well for us, and to the best of my knowledge no shipment has been interdicted by ether criminals or protests.

        George Cross said:

Haven’t you ever heard of a man named Lee Harvey Oswald?

Yeah, that was the loser who shot JFK out of a desire to do something with his life and then he got shot by Jack Ruby, another loose cannon who wanted to be part of history. He’s also the guy all the conspiracy theorists say must have been the fall guy for a big plot.

What about him?

        DV82X said:

Just for comparison, Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission regulations prohibit the disclosure of location, routing and timing of shipments of nuclear materials, such as spent fuel.

I am not sure what the actual regulations are involving whether or not you can disclose the routing location or shipping of spent fuel or other nuclear materials but many of the locations are common knowledge. People know that there is nuclear material at Pantex, ORNL, LANL, nuclear power plants and so on. I’m sure in Canada everyone is aware that there is nuclear material at nuclear material at nuclear power plants and also at places like Chalk River.

One thing I do know is that any weapons or weapons-grade material shipped in the US is not commented on. When they do ship a weapon it may be obvious. When the navy sends a nuclear-tipped missile to be placed in a submarine, it travels in a big truck surrounded by a convoy of security. They will not confirm or deny that it is a nuclear weapon but everyone knows that a large cylinder sent to a submarine base with that kind of security is a nuclear missile.

I honestly don’t know what the regulations would be for something like spent fuel. We have not shipped civilian spent fuel in many years.

I imagine Canada takes precautions like the US and most other countries do when they ship anything radioactive.

        DV82XL said:

That is a very damning observation that security of weaponized pathogens is treated with indifference while solid radioactive waste which is much less hazardous is given full escort when moving in public.

The accountability for radioactive sources tends to be extremely high. All the things mentioned here from vaults to cctv to security clearance generally apply and then some in any government facility. I think that there seems to be a big concern about it on all levels. The first thing that comes to mind of a politician when it comes to securing something are radioactive substances. It’s hard for me to imagine going into a laboratory and walking out with one in the manner that is apparently possible with anthrax. I don’t think anyone with any clearance would be able to have that kind of casual access.

Radioactive has become such a buzzword for dangerous and scary and it is such a big deal for any problems that it seems to have encouraged tight control to the point of being unnecessarily tight in some circumstances. Those who run the facilities understand that even a tiny error like sending a small amount of a radio nucleotide to the wrong destination will be a big deal and heads will roll. It’s entirely disproportionate though, because they sometimes apply unnecessary controls to small mostly harmless sources and may not have as extensive safeguards for more dangerous ones. It’s a bureaucratic thing so it depends on the circumstances.

They did this before, you know. Haven’t you ever heard of a man named Lee Harvey Oswald?

Do some research and don’t be so quick to believe everything you hear from the powers that be.