Yahoo! Groups : ChildhoodCancer /
Subj: Emergency Alert On Plutonium To Be Launched into Space Jan 11
2006 HELP !!!!!!!!
Date: Saturday, December 3, 2005 7:38:17 AM
From: Hope4Kids2
To: Hope4Kids2, hope4kids2@..., Hope4Kids2USA,
hope4kids2usa@...

From: hope4kids2usa@...
Subject: Launch into space of 24 pounds of Plutonium
Date: December 3, 2005 6:48:49 AM MST
To: mgriffin@...
Cc: Hope4kids2@..., Globalnet@...

Mr Griffin:

I would like to know who is responsible
for approving this New Horizon mission carrying this deadly plutonium
(pu238 & pu239) over the heads of 10 million children in central
Florida on approx Jan 11th 2006, Sir.I ask you , please email me back
this answer within the next 72 hrs , or I will be forced to, take
this information to every speck of media on this earth, on Tuesday
evening Dec 6th 2005 by 9pm est. Sir. In your EIS "Environmental
Impact Statement" you acknowledge that "quote, there is a 1 in 300
chance of an accident" releasing these 24 pounds of Highly Toxic
Plutonium into the atmosphere, over central Florida, which could be
carried by winds, over a 60 mile radius, which in turn , would cost
between $241 million-$1.3 billion per "square mile" to clean it up,But
before getting it cleaned up in your "speedy governmental ways" it can
cause more then 50 million people to die, half of which are innocent
children and babies.. Mr Griffin in all honesty, Please tell me, Sir,
who is taking the responsibility of all these lives into their hands ?
Who Sir could even think of bringing such an untimely death to so many
generations of children. on Jan 11th 2006? approx This is downright
stupid and Irresponsible as well Sir. and I will Sir, make sure,the
citizens of the United States and the World are informed of your
intentions, as well as , who is to blame ,for taking such a huge
chance on such a massive amount of childrens lives.

signed... Bill Heavens
, a very concerned father, grandfather, as well as a mentor to
hundreds of children and their families with Childhood Cancers
already.., due to this governments, slow and untimely, promised,
cleanup of our neighborhoods and environment.you seem to just let
these childrens deaths, go on and on,an at the same time allow it to
be continually poisoned more and more each day.

I Repeat ! ! Stop Killing
our Children ! ! Stop all this Madness! ! Save our Children Now! !

Hope4Kids2@... Please respond Immediatl




From: "Global Network"<globalne NASA plans to launch 24 pounds of
highly toxic plutonium (pu-238 & pu-239) on a New Horizons mission to
the planet Pluto. The launch is set to lift-off on/after January 11,
2006 from the Kennedy Space Center in Florida. The plutonium will be
used in a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG) to convert the
heat from the radioactive decay of the plutonium into on board
electricity.
We are urging the public (in the U.S. and worldwide) to contact NASA,
Congress, and send a Letter to the Editor of your local newspaper
stating your opposition to this launch. See contact information below
and also talking points to make. Please help us spread the word by
passing this e-mail on to others in your community. NASA and Congress
must hear that the public does not support launching more nuclear
materials into space.

Write to:

Michael Griffin
NASA Administrator
300 E. Street SW
Washington DC 20546
(202) 358-0000
mgriffin@...@mindspring.com>
To: "Global Network Against Weapons" <globenet@egroups.com>
Subject: CONTACT NASA: NO PLUTONIUM LAUNCH
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 15:08:24 -0500

CONTACT NASA: NO PLUTONIUM LAUNCH
CANCEL NEW HORIZONS


Yahoo! Groups : ChildhoodCancer /

READ ON BELOW

U.S. Congressional Switchboard: (Toll-free number) 1-888-355-3588

Talking Points (Please use your own words when writing your letter)

1) NASA acknowledges in their Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the New Horizons mission that there is a 1 in 300 chance of an
accident resulting in release of the plutonium. In the event of such
an accident the EIS states that the deadly plutonium could be carried
by winds for a 60-mile radius throughout Central Florida. Clean-up
costs for a plutonium accident would range from $241 million to $1.3
billion per square mile.

2) NASA is moving toward a dramatic escalation in the numbers of
nuclear launches in the coming years. Everything from nuclear powered
bases on the moon to nuclear reactors on rockets to Mars. The
Department of Energy (DoE) is now doing a $300 million laboratory
expansion in Idaho to produce plutonium for future space missions.

3) The Pentagon has long stated that they will require nuclear
reactors to provide power for space-based weapons. NASA says that
each of its space missions will now be dual use, meaning military and
civilian at the same time. The obvious next question is what is the
military application for nuclear power in space?

4) At a time of major fiscal crisis in the U.S. why is NASA using
public tax dollars to put the lives of the people on Earth at risk?

5) Why does NASA not invest in development of alternative space power
technologies and move away from the use of deadly plutonium?

Thank you for your support.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 729-0517
(207) 319-2017 (Cell phone)
globalnet@...
http://www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Our blog)
Please note my friends,The chance of getting in an auto accident are
approx 8500 to 1 now do your math here.
More below,Read on
The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research (IEER) invites you
to send a letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
asking it to tighten the drinking water limit for plutonium and other
alpha-emitting, transuranic long-lived radionuclides.
Join other groups and individuals in telling the EPA that the drinking
water limit for such contaminants must be strengthened to protect
public health and to reflect the most recent scientific assessments of
the radiation doses of these radionuclides.
The goal is to get the EPA to change the combined Maximum Contaminant
Limit (MCL) for alpha-emitting, long-lived transuranic radionuclides
from 15 picocuries per liter to 0.15 picocuries per liter.
The agency is expected to begin its legally-mandated review of
drinking water limits for radionuclides in 2006, so now is a good time
to send EPA this message.
If you are concerned about the potential impact of too much radiation
in your family's drinking water, please send EPA a message. The more
letters sent, the more pressure EPA will feel, and the better than
chances that the agency will act to strengthen the drinking water
standard.
This action remains valid until the EPA concludes its review, probably
in late 2006.
The scientific basis for strengthening the drinking water MCL for
plutonium and similar radionuclides is described in the technical
analysis by the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research
(IEER), entitled "Bad to the Bone: Analysis of the Federal Maximum
Contaminant Levels for Plutonium-239 and Other Alpha-Emitting
Transuranic Radionuclides in Drinking Water." The report is available
online at http://www.ieer.org/reports/badtothebone/index.html

Background and Talking Points

• A major reduction in the allowable amounts of plutonium and
similar radionuclides in drinking water is needed.
• The current federal Maximum Contaminant Limit (MCL) for
plutonium and other alpha-emitting, long-lived transuranic
radionuclides* allows 15 picocuries per liter of contamination. (A
picocurie is a unit of radioactivity.)
• The MCL for alpha-emitting, long-lived transuranic
radionuclides should be reduced from 15 picocuries per liter to 0.15
picocuries per liter because the 15 picocuries per liter limit is
obsolete, not protective of public health, against the spirit of the
Safe Drinking Water Act, and not in accord with the intent of the
initial drinking water regulations.
• This MCL is 100 times too high because it does not
incorporate the last 30 years of scientific research on how plutonium
and radionuclides like it act in the human body. This research has
revealed that substances like plutonium deliver a dose per unit intake
far higher than what is reflected in the current standard. These
research results have been accepted and published by the EPA but have
not been incorporated into the drinking water MCL.
• The EPA is scheduled to review the radionuclide drinking
water standards in 2006. This is an appropriate and good time for the
EPA to decide to strengthen the drinking water standard for plutonium
and similar radionuclides.
• No known contamination of public water systems currently
exists above 0.15 picocuries per liter of alpha-emitting, long-lived
transuranic radionuclides. What is most concerning is the risk of
future contamination.
• Throughout the U.S. nuclear weapons complex, important
water resources are at risk of contamination from mis-management of
radioactive and toxic waste created by nuclear weapons production.
One contaminant of particular concern is plutonium, a radioactive
material with a very long half-life (24,000 years) and which is also a
known carcinogen and a key ingredient in nuclear weapons.
• Sites where large amounts of plutonium waste were dumped or
disposed of include Hanford in Washington state, Idaho National Lab,
Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico, Nevada Test Site, Oak Ridge in
Tennessee, Rocky Flats in Colorado, and Savannah River Site in South
Carolina (bordering Georgia). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is
responsible for activities at all these sites.
• For instance, at the Idaho site – which sits above the
Snake River Plain aquifer, the most important underground water source
in Idaho – more than one metric ton of plutonium (more than 2200 lbs.)
was dumped into unlined pits and trenches in cardboard boxes,
55-gallon drums and wooden crates.
• Some of the contamination has reached important water
resources, like the Columbia River in the Pacific Northwest and the
Savannah River in the Southeast.
• It is very important that the federal government be
required to remediate these contaminated sites to levels of residual
radioactivity that will protect the health of individuals of future
generations.
• The cost of strengthening the drinking water standard is
expected to be minimal because the vast majority of public water
systems have levels of alpha-emitting, long-lived transuranic
radionuclides that are well below the proposed MCL and thus would
require no sampling, monitoring, or remediation. For public water
systems that are hydrologically connected to the abovementioned DOE
sites, a one-time initial sampling and analysis should be done and, if
found clean, further sampling would not be necessary provided the DOE
maintains a thorough water sampling program, which it is presently
mandated to do.

* What is an alpha-emitting, long-lived transuranic radionuclide?
"Transuranic" radionuclides are radioactive isotopes that have atomic
numbers greater than uranium (92), i.e., trans-, or beyond, uranium.
"Alpha-emitting" radionuclides emit alpha particles, which are
positively charged particles consisting of two neutrons and two
protons, when they undergo radioactive decay. "Long-lived" refers to
the half-life of the radionuclide, or the duration that the
radionuclide remains dangerous to human health.


Take Action Now!