Given the government's seeming obsession with wasting money, I suppose it
would be silly to ask why these buildings, if not the incinerators themselves,
could not be used for other purposes?If the reply is, "They were
constructed for such a specific purpose there is nothing else they could be used
for.", then that begs the followup question. Why not build them,
purposefully, to be useful for something beyond chemical weapons
incineration?As someone who studied to become and architect, I
realize it would require a little more planning and perhaps even a slightly
greater cost. But, when compared with the time and cost of first building and
then completely demolishing these multi-Billion dollar facilities, all within a
couple decades, I'm pretty sure a more efficient use of both that time and
money was possible.But, as mentioned previously, when talking about
government run projects, quibbling about greater efficiency and/or the savings
of a few measly **Billion** dollars is probably a fruitless argument.
The reason for demolition would be that this society is a sue happy society that
given the opportunity an individual could maybe work in this facility and one
day become ill then blame it on the government or the State for his or her
illness because they did not get rid of every little speck of contaminant so
they choose to totally demolish said bldg. to avoid that very thing.
AS Mattmo stated it is part of the reason. the main reason is to do a 100% clean
up to make sure zero contamination is around.
Job well done by great people!
Why take it down? What if we put in Nuclear Power for electricity for this ttate
and where would we dump this nuke waist? Does Energy Solution does that?