upvote
Solar and wind also require many materials extracted through mining, you can't really get away from mining whatever you do.
reply
considering nuclear needs least mining, i doubt effects are too big per kwh vs alternatives.
reply
where was this?
reply
There are a small number of such sites in the US. One that fits closely with this description is a legacy of the Manhattan Project: Coldwater Creek, MO. The Mallinckrodt Chemical Works refined a lot of uranium, and waste handling was about what you would expect given the prerogatives of the 1940's and the Cold War. They carried on refining for power plants after WW2.

Obviously, fuel refining hasn't just carried on like that, in the US and Europe at least. But it's one of many handy cudgels to use whenever folks get excited about nuclear.

reply
It carried on until at least 1989, and the effects were present majorly until around 2000, and the superfund site was completed in 2006. So, like, pretty darn recent on the scale of a human lifetime.
reply
That's all correct; a long tail of consequences.

Going in the opposite historical direction is the other side of that ledger. The actual plant in question was shut down in 1957. The AEC stepped in years earlier to triage the operation, after actually establishing formal exposure limits in 1950, which didn't exist prior to that point. Before that, the company itself had hired staff to control waste and detect contamination. They had to build their own survey equipment because there were no commercial tools available. The worst of the actual contamination was actually incurred prior to that; 1942-1945, when the gloves were entirely off building bombs.

The lessons have been learned. It's tragic and shameful history, but not terribly relevant to modern practice in nuclear power.

reply
The one that injured me and those where I lived was not Mallinckrodt Chemical Works. It was Fernald, and it was active until ‘89.
reply
deleted
reply