nuclear-news

Nuclear power still offers no safe bets

Nuclear power still offers no safe bets The Philadelphia Inquirer Mar. 29, 2009  Waste disposal and reactor designs are problematic. Susan Q. Stranahan

……………………Today, as the ailing United States again searches for cheap, dependable, and environmentally benign sources of energy, the self-burnished nuclear industry is back at the table, touting a nuclear renaissance and promoting itself as the answer to our needs. How short is our memory?

As many as 30 new reactors are planned for the United States. (That number may drop now that $50 billion in subsidies were eliminated from the federal stimulus bill and credit is scarce.) Among them is a reactor proposed for the Chesapeake Bay about 150 miles south of Three Mile Island, called Calvert Cliffs-3. (Two other reactors already occupy the site.)

Calvert Cliffs-3 has been heralded as the flagship of the nuclear renaissance. But in the words of one nuclear-safety watchdog, it’s more of a rerun…………
The reactor design is so new it has not even been certified for construction in the United States. A similar design, currently being built in Finland, is nearly two years behind schedule and double its original cost. This so-called European Pressurized Reactor has been plagued with quality-control problems – including substandard cooling pipes and slumping concrete. Its owner has reported $1.7 billion in losses. The final tally will not be known until all the lawsuits are resolved………………………

Especially problematic is the issue that has haunted nuclear power since Day One: Waste disposal. Despite all the talk about 30 new reactors, there is no place to put the spent fuel those plants would spew out – waste that remains dangerous for thousands of years. Actually, there is no place to put the tons of waste produced by the nation’s 103 operating reactors – and the prospects of finding a home for that have dimmed considerably in recent weeks.

The Obama administration has eliminated almost all funding for Yucca Mountain, the controversial and costly ($8 billion so far, and counting) site designated 22 years ago as the permanent repository for spent reactor fuel. Absent its completion, spent fuel currently is stored at the reactors themselves, although some facilities no longer have space for more. By most accounts, Yucca Mountain will never open. Thus, we are no closer to a waste repository than we were 30 years ago.

Come to think of it, nuclear power is not our energy salvation; it is still a high-stakes gamble.

Nuclear power still offers no safe bets | Philadelphia Inquirer | 03/29/2009

March 30, 2009 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized