Western Railroad Discussion > Coming TV program nuclear waste carrying trains

On the history channel, this Tuesday at 10 eastern time there is supposed to be a program about trains that carry nuclear waste. The series is called "Mega Disasters" so I guess
that should tell us something. Aaron 20

Yeah it is suppose to be about the pending movement of trains heading to Yucca Mtn....about 90 miles or so NW of town

Mike
Henderson, NV

Look, the media in this country only make money when they put blood or kids or something similar on the front page - lead story etc.

They are the hucksters of our era. And lies sell. And big lies sell even better.

Trains already come thru here carring Radio Active Waste to the West. upkpfan

MEKoch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look, the media in this country only make money
> when they put blood or kids or something similar
> on the front page - lead story etc.
>
> They are the hucksters of our era. And lies sell.
> And big lies sell even better.

...and so that would make politicians..................??

Oh no...the big bad nuke train is going to derail in my hometown but I sure don't mind paying $5 a gallon for gas.
Seriously,if they made a car that ran on plutonium or some other radioactive substance that the tree-huggers don't like, I'd buy it.
Leave it to the media to scare people away from alternative fuels.....again.



Adam

I remember in the early 50's, Popular Mechanics or one of its competitors had a cover story on an "Atomic Powered Locomotive". Needless to say, the idea never got beyond the "artist's conception" stage, and self-contained nuclear powered transportation is found only in naval vessels (old joke about nuclear-powered submarines staying submerged until it's time for the crew to re-enlist) where profitability is not a concern. The only nuclear powered ground transport is in the form of electric railways, e.g., the San Diego Trolley system gets much of its power from the San Onofre plant. Presumably a battery powered automobile in Orange County (CA) might get some of its "juice" from the same plant.

I would be in less danger of a nuke train going through my town then say a Ethanol train. The nuke cars will stay intact and not release their contents.
Lynn (still glowen in the dark)

Nuke trains are here and are dangerous. There is a different standard for workers in a plant and rail workers and the public.

Our Chairman has made the unions aware of these conditions. Just to show you, the Oregon State Board for the BLE&T has more radiation detectors than the whole US DOT. You would be concerned if you were called for a train and it didn't show that there were 4 cars filled with casks of radio active material and a guard caboose and that consist was billed as just 4 loads/one empty. Or how about a gondola of dirty dirt that was radio active that was filled in New York and never had a containment cover put on it. It sat in the snow for a few weeks and then was picked up and headed west to Nevada. All along the way the snow melted and the car was rained on allowing the water to filter through this dirt and drain out onto the right of way. Would you like a train full of radioactive waste to sit in yard, across from a Atk station and main highway in your town for 3 days? This train putting out radiation where nuke plant workers would not be allowed near it BUT there are different regulations concerning rail workers or the public and the feds say its okay.

This is something to be worried about, believe me. I completed the class of "Modular Emergency Response Radiological Transportation Training", "Train-The Trainer" conducted by the US Dept. of Energy, Transportation Emergency Preparedness Program. It was an eye opener and yes, I would take a load of LPG cars any day compared to nukes.




Nudge

Not taking one side or the other...

Detrimental effects of exposure to radiation are cummulative over a lifetime. Exposure to a tiny amount of radiation might be harmless if it only occurs once. A worker in the nuclear industry might risk encountering that same small amount of exposure many times throughout his career. Therefore, nuclear plant workers have much stricter exposure limits than workers that have only occasional risk for exposure.

This is also why you can have x-rays taken which exposes you to a fairly high radiation dosage while the x-ray technician wears a dosimeter badge and has a very low exposure limit.

So a railroad worker that handles nuclear waste occasionally can have a higher exposure limit yet be afforded the same protection as the nuke plant worker that has potential exposure to radioactive materials all day long, every single day. The key is the total amount of radiation exposure over a period of time. I would expect that the railroad workers would be give dosimeters to wear and careful records would be kept.

I had an engineer tell a student switchman that some tankers are carring AIDS. I was tired and not in the mood to get into it with him, so I did not say anything.

...
Foamer

spnudge Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> This is something to be worried about, believe me.
> I completed the class of "Modular Emergency
> Response Radiological Transportation Training",
> "Train-The Trainer" conducted by the US Dept. of
> Energy, Transportation Emergency Preparedness
> Program. It was an eye opener and yes, I would
> take a load of LPG cars any day compared to
> nukes.
>
>
>
>
> Nudge

The nuclear handling standards for naval crews, and for civilian power plant workers have evolved over 60 years of experience. It would be extremely stupid of both the rail industry and the rail unions not to understand and use this experience to codify their own rules and operating policy.

The same process has evolved over the years with regard to loading grain trains (highly volatile atmosphere), transporting sulphuric acid, amonia, and other hazardous products.

FWIW, I suspect this situation will probably be a pawn in the rail industry's desire to eliminate liability for chemical transport, and the chemical industry's desire to force the rails to carry anything that can be put in a tank car.

Trains that ship nuclear waste will not brake,or crack in a accident due to the high impact container built from 36" tick wall with an internal ring of 24" re in force depleted steel walls.


Does any one have pictures of the ex-nuke transport train (White Train) located at the Amarillo Railroad Museum in (Texas) which was donated by the Pantex (U.S. Department of Energy Site) ?

Or any pictures of it when it was operational during the early 1980's

---

---

---

rhino011 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Trains that ship nuclear waste will not brake,or
> crack in a accident due to the high impact
> container built from 36" tick wall with an
> internal ring of 24" re in force depleted steel
> walls.

Just do a search on YouTube for "flask train".

If a nuclear flask can survive a direct hit from a 100mph passenger train, and not leak, than it's hard to imagine a derailment that would cause a spill.

Radioactive dirt is another story, but often the levels of radioactivity are so low that the risk is no more than dirt contaminated with arsenic or other toxins.