Bush: Cut Decontamination Budget, same day as Ricin Found

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SPG, Feb 6, 2004.

  1. SPG macrumors 65816

    SPG

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2001
    Location:
    In the shadow of the Space Needle.
    #1
  2. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #2
    his timing is always spot on. i like to think bush intentionally supports something w/ words one day, only to cut its funding the next, simply to increase the dramatic irony. or to see if anyone's really paying attention.

    often, i think only a select few are.
     
  3. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #3
    Well, we've been worrying about decontamination since the early days of nuclear fallout dust. It seems to me that more research--or at least $8.2 million's worth--is kinda like reinventing the wheel.

    Damned expensive vacuum cleaner! :D

    (Pardon my cynicism. I've been hearing "We need to do more study." for too many decades, even when reasonable answers were already available.)

    :), 'Rat
     
  4. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #4
    'Rat, do you remember how long, and at what cost, those government buildings and postal facilities were out of service after the anthrax attacks? Seems to me we could do a lot better in terms of cost and time. Now whether $8.2 million will get us there I don't know, but you won't get anywhere without research. It's like they say, your odds of winning the lottery improve only slightly by playing, but without playing your odds are zero.
     
  5. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #5
    Seems to me there's a difference between dust/powder in an envelope, and wholesale scatter. Regardless, the big problem comes from having Bad Stuff in the file drawers and in the office equipment--keyboards, etc.

    While I don't advocate a cavalier attitude about dealing with this sort of problem, I do wonder what the minimum level of hazard actually is? What sort of equivalent to an acceptable "parts per million" can be tolerated?

    I guess where I come off as really grumpy is that FEMA has had gazillions of dollars thrown their way, and part of their mission is decontamination of nuke dust. At least, they pound their chests and yowl about how they're the experts. So how is a bit of cobalt or plutonium less hazardous than ricin or anthrax? Or more of a physical problem?

    'Rat
     

Share This Page