Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-08-2012, 10:25 AM   #41
Curmudgeon
 
BaltimoreLurker's Avatar
 
City: Stoney Creek, MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Moon Dance
Vessel Model: 1974 34' Marine Trader Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,629
And some more .....


USS Enterprise | The Weekly Standard
__________________
Advertisement

BaltimoreLurker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 02:03 PM   #42
Guru
 
fryedaze's Avatar
 
City: Solomons Island Md
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Fryedaze
Vessel Model: MC 42 (Overseas Ltd) Monk 42
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,052
Ssn 649
__________________

__________________
Dave Frye
Fryedaze, MC 42 (Monk 42') 1989 Overseas Co
http://mvfryedaze.blogspot.com/
fryedaze is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 04:57 PM   #43
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by GFC View Post
The reactor cores from the Enterprise will be barged up the Columbia to our area. We have a nuclear area just north of town where they have been burying reactor cores from decommissioned nuke subs for many years.
yep, lots of room for a potential disaster from that operation unfortunately. I remember when it was ok to dispose of nasty chemicals in deep wells because the gov said it would be thousands of years before they would get into the ground water. That was in the seventies, by the eighties there were drinking water contamination problems in Rancho Cordova California from Areojet General Corporations legal disposal of tri clor and other toxics under ground.
What bothers me is this simple chemical contamination is childs play to what may happen from burying spent reactor fuel.
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 05:00 PM   #44
Guru
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Vessel Name: Anastasia III
Vessel Model: Krogen 42
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,716
Used to? We still get rid of waste in deep wells.
Keith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 05:21 PM   #45
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Used to? We still get rid of waste in deep wells.
bad news. Its illegal here and for good reason
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 07:16 PM   #46
Guru
 
Giggitoni's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo, California
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Mahalo Moi
Vessel Model: 1986 Grand Banks 42 Classic
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,532
Why is it bad news? Deep wells are in salt water, not fresh. So drinking water sources are not effected. Crude petroleum comes from deep wells. When was the last time you turned on the tap and had 40 gravity oil pour out? Don't believe all the hype you hear from uninformed people.

Ray Muldrew
__________________
Ray
"Mahalo Moi"
1986 GB-42 Classic
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑβΕ
Giggitoni is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 10:44 PM   #47
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giggitoni View Post
Why is it bad news? Deep wells are in salt water, not fresh. So drinking water sources are not effected. Crude petroleum comes from deep wells. When was the last time you turned on the tap and had 40 gravity oil pour out? Don't believe all the hype you hear from uninformed people.

Ray Muldrew
so in your opinion its ok to pollute the sea? Pollution always comes back to haunt us, just look around you.
We went through deep well injection problems in the seventies and eighties up untill then most were of the same opinion as you. U can never be sure if and when it will show back up when useing deep injection disposal of toxics. The earth is not static and one can never be sure she hasnt a path right into your drinking water or your garden from that deep well. Out of sight out of mind is not the right thing to do ever with garbage.
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-08-2012, 11:34 PM   #48
Guru
 
Giggitoni's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo, California
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Mahalo Moi
Vessel Model: 1986 Grand Banks 42 Classic
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,532
Groundwater at depth is salt water. Has nothing to do with the ocean. Salt water at depth can be found in Kansas! The water is no use to humans. It is virtually Impossible to communicate between deep injection wells and shallow fresh-water aquifers.

It's not an opinion, it's well known fact. I worked as a geologist in oil and gas exploration for 12 years. I have spent the last 24 years cleaning up hazmat spills in soil and groundwater for the transportation industry. Deep injection wells are used for disposal of hazardous substances routinely. No smoke and mirrors. What other facts do you know?

Ray Muldrew
__________________
Ray
"Mahalo Moi"
1986 GB-42 Classic
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑβΕ
Giggitoni is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2012, 10:58 AM   #49
Guru
 
City: Pensacola
Country: USA
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giggitoni
Groundwater at depth is salt water. Has nothing to do with the ocean. Salt water at depth can be found in Kansas! The water is no use to humans. It is virtually Impossible to communicate between deep injection wells and shallow fresh-water aquifers.

It's not an opinion, it's well known fact. I worked as a geologist in oil and gas exploration for 12 years. I have spent the last 24 years cleaning up hazmat spills in soil and groundwater for the transportation industry. Deep injection wells are used for disposal of hazardous substances routinely. No smoke and mirrors. What other facts do you know?

Ray Muldrew
It is usually easier to answer with emotion instead of logic and reason. Thanks for the facts Ray.
Blue Heron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2012, 07:32 PM   #50
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giggitoni View Post
Groundwater at depth is salt water. Has nothing to do with the ocean. Salt water at depth can be found in Kansas! The water is no use to humans. It is virtually Impossible to communicate between deep injection wells and shallow fresh-water aquifers.

It's not an opinion, it's well known fact. I worked as a geologist in oil and gas exploration for 12 years. I have spent the last 24 years cleaning up hazmat spills in soil and groundwater for the transportation industry. Deep injection wells are used for disposal of hazardous substances routinely. No smoke and mirrors. What other facts do you know?

Ray Muldrew

.
Yes in certain areas that practice countinues, But that dosen't make it right.
So, you are one of those people that believes that if you sweep it under the rug, out of sight and out of mind it is harmless? Ever heard of love canal? Or a multitude of other environmental disasters caused by people sweeping toxic's under the rug. Marin, humans are supposed to learn from their mistakes so why would we desire to make the same mistake again? I understand that history teaches us that man never learns he just makes the same mistakes over and over etc.

Don't you think its time we stopped this practice? Please don't get me started. I already stated more than one reason why deep well injection is not the best answer and it is illegal to do so in many areas of the world including California because of Areojet General Corporation's deep well injection of rocket fuel and other toxic's, i could go on and on but this is a trawler forum not a class in bonehead environmental science.
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2012, 08:38 PM   #51
Guru
 
Giggitoni's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo, California
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Mahalo Moi
Vessel Model: 1986 Grand Banks 42 Classic
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,532
The administrators can move this portion of the thread should they feel it is necessary.

Deep injection wells are one viable answer for the disposal of hazardous waste. Obviously Aerojet's methods back in the late '50s and early '60s where not technically correct. Aerojet did not inject the waste stream into a confined stratigraphic layer. The two wells used by Aerojet were drilled into the Ione formation at depths of 940 feet and about 1,600 feet. The overlying rock types were mostly unconsolidated silts and sands which allowed communication with useable aquifers near the surface.

However, other sites, such as Rocky Mountain Arsenal, used injection wells deep into the substrate with multiple confining layers. They injected at a depth of about 12,800 feet below the ground surface. We will never see that material again. It was accomplished correctly.

When I looked at your bio and saw that you are collecting a retirement check from the EPA I didn't know whether to laugh or vomit. You in particular should know that the EPA has developed criteria for the construction and use of deep injection wells. The EPA has divided injection wells into six classes depending on the material injected for disposal. It is a very tedious process to obtain a permit from the EPA for disposal of certain toxics. I know, I've done it! What do you expect humans to do with critically hazardous waste? Store it on the surface where it can enter surface or groundwater? Dump it into a lined landfill and keep your fingers crossed that it won't enter the food chain? What's your alternative? Your kind suggests that we eliminate the toxic stream in the first place. So let's see, we won't have things made of metal. We can forget about anything made from plastic; heaven forbid we would have to drill for oil. Should I go on and on?

I suggest we let this discussion rest and go back to boating where I, for one, can learn about marine systems from knowledgable folks like Al, Eric, Rick, Marin, Ron, etc. I'll let the knowledge I've picked up over the last 37 years solve problems for my clients which, in turn, "saves the environment"...

Ray Muldrew
__________________
Ray
"Mahalo Moi"
1986 GB-42 Classic
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑβΕ
Giggitoni is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-09-2012, 09:18 PM   #52
Guru
 
City: coos bay
Country: usa
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,203
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giggitoni View Post
The administrators can move this portion of the thread should they feel it is necessary.

Deep injection wells are one viable answer for the disposal of hazardous waste. Obviously Aerojet's methods back in the late '50s and early '60s where not technically correct. Aerojet did not inject the waste stream into a confined stratigraphic layer. The two wells used by Aerojet were drilled into the Ione formation at depths of 940 feet and about 1,600 feet. The overlying rock types were mostly unconsolidated silts and sands which allowed communication with useable aquifers near the surface.

However, other sites, such as Rocky Mountain Arsenal, used injection wells deep into the substrate with multiple confining layers. They injected at a depth of about 12,800 feet below the ground surface. We will never see that material again. It was accomplished correctly.

When I looked at your bio and saw that you are collecting a retirement check from the EPA I didn't know whether to laugh or vomit. You in particular should know that the EPA has developed criteria for the construction and use of deep injection wells. The EPA has divided injection wells into six classes depending on the material injected for disposal. It is a very tedious process to obtain a permit from the EPA for disposal of certain toxics. I know, I've done it! What do you expect humans to do with critically hazardous waste? Store it on the surface where it can enter surface or groundwater? Dump it into a lined landfill and keep your fingers crossed that it won't enter the food chain? What's your alternative? Your kind suggests that we eliminate the toxic stream in the first place. So let's see, we won't have things made of metal. We can forget about anything made from plastic; heaven forbid we would have to drill for oil. Should I go on and on?

I suggest we let this discussion rest and go back to boating where I, for one, can learn about marine systems from knowledgable folks like Al, Eric, Rick, Marin, Ron, etc. I'll let the knowledge I've picked up over the last 37 years solve problems for my clients which, in turn, "saves the environment"...

Ray Muldrew
thank you Ray, your right back to boating. However, there is no reason to indicate that injection wells disposal of toxics is any safer than any of the other techniques used in the past. One thing that has proven to be 100% is that every time we try to dispose of toxics without first reconstituting the toxic into a safe form it comes back to haunt us, without exception.
bfloyd4445 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 01:17 AM   #53
Guru
 
Giggitoni's Avatar
 
City: Vallejo, California
Country: United States
Vessel Name: Mahalo Moi
Vessel Model: 1986 Grand Banks 42 Classic
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,532
I think I just threw up in my mouth a little bit...! This will be my last contribution to this thread. I apologize to the original poster for the drift away from topic. Good night...

Ray Muldrew
__________________
Ray
"Mahalo Moi"
1986 GB-42 Classic
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑβΕ
Giggitoni is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 02:25 AM   #54
TF Site Team
 
FlyWright's Avatar
 
City: California Delta and SF Bay
Country: Sacramento, CA, USA (boat in Vallejo)
Vessel Name: FlyWright
Vessel Model: Marshall Californian 34 LRC
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 10,167
LOL...no apology needed!
__________________
Al

Custom Google Trawler Forum Search
FlyWright is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 03:01 AM   #55
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWright View Post
LOL...no apology needed!
+1

If there is one thing I have learned in all the years I've been learning it's how much I will never learn. It always amazes me when I see even a tiny bit of someone else's field of expertise--- in this case Ray's--- how much more complex that field is compared to my outsider's view of it.
Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 09:09 AM   #56
Curmudgeon
 
BaltimoreLurker's Avatar
 
City: Stoney Creek, MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Moon Dance
Vessel Model: 1974 34' Marine Trader Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,629
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
+1

If there is one thing I have learned in all the years I've been learning it's how much I will never learn. It always amazes me when I see even a tiny bit of someone else's field of expertise--- in this case Ray's--- how much more complex that field is compared to my outsider's view of it.

Got that right. When I was 19 I knew everything. Approaching 60 I realize I don't know jack.
BaltimoreLurker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2012, 10:32 AM   #57
Guru
 
SomeSailor's Avatar
 
City: Everett, WA
Vessel Name: Honey Badger
Vessel Model: 42' CHB Europa
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 784
The Enterprise is a very unique vessel it comes to deactivation. She was a floating prototype and had eight reactors (of five different types at one point). Not to get into the details, but she's going to be a very technically challenging deactivation. A Nimitz class boat only has two reactors and their cores are about the size of a large chest freezer.

She'll be de-fueled and then the reactors removed. The fuel will be sent up to Idaho for conversion / study / re-use, and the vessels (no fuel) sent to Oregon for burial.

This is the first time they've done a carrier, and the time it will take is the reason they do all at the RCOH docks at Newport News. PSNS just isn't designed to do this level of work and not interfere with normal yard availabilities.
__________________

SomeSailor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012