WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 2013 (UPI) —
http://www.breitbart.com/system/wire/upiUPI-20131009-181235-7704
The United States could be facing a shortage of lithium, an element vital to the operation of many of the country’s nuclear reactors, a study says.
The study from the Government Accountability Office said only China and Russia still produce significant amounts of lithium and the supply may be drying up, The New York Times reported Wednesday.
The possible shortage of lithium — critical to the operation of 65 out of 100 American nuclear reactors — “places their ability to continue to provide electricity at some risk,” the GAO report said.
The material in question is lithium-7, a byproduct of the production of tritium, the fuel that powers hydrogen bombs.
The United States stopped production of lithium-7 in 1963 when it had a large surplus, now mostly used up. With the U.S. nuclear weapons inventory shrinking, there has been little need to create tritium.
China and Russia apparently still have production capability, but because it is related to their weapons program outsiders do not know how much capacity they might have, experts said.
Per Peterson, the chairman of the nuclear engineering department at the University of California, Berkeley, told The Times it would be “pragmatic” for the United States to re-establish production of lithium-6 from lithium-7, something the GAO report said would take five years and $10 million to $12 million.
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
This is a guest post from Campbell Craig and Jan Ruzicka of the Department of International Politics at Aberystwyth University.
*****
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/monkey-cage/wp/2013/10/09/the-problem-with-nuclear-nonproliferation/?wprss=rss_politics&clsrd
Preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking their eventual abolition have long been official objectives of the international community. Who would not want to prevent more states from obtaining nuclear weapons? Who would oppose the goal of a world free of them? These lofty ideals have given rise to a powerful institution, which we call in our new article the nonproliferation complex, a collection of international and governmental agencies, think tanks, and NGOs spanning from the IAEA to the Monterey Institute to the Pugwash conference. Indeed, there are so many nonproliferation institutions now that new umbrella networks, like the EU Non-Proliferation Consortium, have recently formed. Steady, generous funding comes from many governments and large foundations, making the further growth of the complex a good bet.
Like most institutions, the complex has come to privilege its own interests over the founding principles which guided those concerned with nuclear weapons in the 1950s and 1960s. They aimed to prevent nuclear world war by twinning nonproliferation with general disarmament. The complex has over the years, and especially since the end of the Cold War, hitched its wagon to the status quo policies advanced by the great nuclear powers, especially the United States. By doing so, it has been able to secure lavish financial support and wield enviable influence. But this has come at a price. Its refusal to antagonize the nuclear “haves” has perverted the original mission, turning the founding principles into a regime dedicated only to stopping the spread of the bomb to nations opposed to the West. And when a powerful international institution gets gamed, bad things eventually happen.
The invasion of Iraq in 2003 stands as example number one. We do not wish to blame the war on the complex; the invasion might well have happened without it. But the nonproliferation complex’s perpetual alarm about the dangers of proliferation provided the war’s architects with an unchallengeable justification for their adventures. The Bush administration merely took the decade-long warnings about Iraq’s nuclear proliferation potential seriously and decided to, finally, do something radical about them. Even those within the complex who opposed the war at the time, and there were not many, were caught in a trap of their own making: how can you vociferously oppose a war when your own arguments are being used to justify it? This trap has not gone away, and we will likely see it snap again. Will it be Iran, North Korea, or somewhere else unforeseen?
Continue reading →
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
(Reporting by Karolin Schaps; editing by David Evans)
9 October 2013
http://www.samachar.com/UK-regulators-see-Hitachi-nuclear-reactor-approval-by-end2017-nkjwMrbdjif.html
(Reuters) – Britain’s licensing process for Hitachi’s (6501.T) nuclear reactor that will allow the design to be used in the country’s new nuclear plants is expected to finish by the end of 2017, regulators said on Wednesday.
The Japanese company plans to build up to six new nuclear reactors in Britain using its and GE’s (GE.N) Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) at sites in Oldbury and Wylfa which it acquired last year.
The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) and the Environment Agency, which together license new nuclear reactors in Britain through the so-called Generic Design Assessment (GDA), said on Wednesday that lessons learned from previous assessments would shorten Hitachi’s approval process.
“We are estimating that the UK ABWR GDA could be complete in four years from the start of our assessment, i.e. by the end of 2017,” the two bodies said in a joint progress report published on Wednesday.
The regulators finished the GDA process for EDF’s (EDF.PA) European Pressurised Water Reactor (EPR) earlier this year after four and a half years.
It was the first nuclear reactor to be licensed through the newly introduced GDA system.
The ONR and Environment Agency said they would expand their team working on Hitachi’s GDA this autumn and that they expected Hitachi to provide the first technical documents this month and in December.
Britain has an ambitious plan to build new nuclear power stations by the middle of the next decade to replace ageing and polluting plants that are set to shut down.
EDF and Hitachi are two of the companies planning to build new nuclear plants.
A joint venture between France’s GDF Suez (GSZ.PA) and Spain’s Iberdrola (IBE.MC) has also announced a nuclear new build project. Iberdrola is in talks to sell its stake in the joint venture to Toshiba’s Westinghouse unit.
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
http://eyesopenreport.com/brits-lose-control-of-nuke-reactors-unbelievable-seriousness-of-a-major-radioactive-release/
Mac Slavo
9 October 2013
After the world witnessed a widespread radioactive disaster following the Tsunami that took down power systems at the Fukushima nuclear facility in Japan you would think that nuclear regulators and operators would have taken the threat of unforeseen accidents seriously.
Apparently, this is not the case, according to a new report from the United Kingdom.
Nearly the exact same scenario played out in the Devonport Dockyard last summer, when the primary and secondary power sources for nuclear cooling fuel became inexplicably inoperable.
It was a situation kept secret because the implications were so serious that the entire country of Britain could have been turned to a radioactive wasteland overnight.
A major nuclear incident was narrowly averted at the heart of Britain’s Royal Navy submarine fleet, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. The failure of both the primary and secondary power sources of coolant for nuclear reactors at the Devonport dockyard in Plymouth on 29 July last year followed warnings in previous years of just such a situation.
Experts yesterday compared the crisis at the naval base, operated by the Ministry of Defence and government engineering contractors Babcock Marine, with the Fukushima Daiichi power-station meltdown in Japan in 2011.
…
But last July a series of what were described as “unidentified defects” triggered the failures which meant that for more than 90 minutes, submarines were left without their main sources of coolant.
…
John Large, an independent nuclear adviser who led the team that conducted radiation analysis on the Russian Kursk submarine which sank in the Barents Sea in 2000, said:
“It is unbelievable that this happened. It could have been very serious. Things like this shouldn’t happen. It is a fundamental that these fail-safe requirements work. It had all the seriousness of a major meltdown – a major radioactive release.”
…
Among a number of “areas of concern” uncovered by the Babcock investigation was what was described as an “inability to learn from previous incidents and to implement the recommendations from previous event reports”.
A subsequent review from the Base Nuclear Safety Organisation revealed the “unsuccessful connection of diesel generators” and questioned the “effectiveness of the maintenance methodology and its management”, while advising Babcock to “address the shortfalls in their current maintenance regime”.
…
Its own “stress test” on Devonport safety, launched after the Fukushima disaster, said that in the event of the failure of both power supplies, heat levels in reactors could be controlled by emergency portable water pumps, and added that such a failure had occurred a “number of times” previously.
If you think nuclear facilities in the United States and other Western nations are any safer than Fukushima or Devonport, you’d be mistaken.
Because these facilities often operate under the cloak of secrecy, it is impossible for us to know how many times such incidents have occurred in the United States. What we do know is that on March 28, 1979 the 3-Mile Island nuclear facility in Pennsylvania experienced the worst nuclear power plant accident in American history when a meltdown occurred in one of the facility’s two reactors. Thus, accidents at these facilities are not unprecedented.
Continue reading →
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
09/10/2013
http://www.expatica.co.uk/news/local_news/un-atomic-agency-praises-british-nuclear-safety_275743.html
The UN atomic agency on Wednesday praised Britain’s improvements to its regulatory framework for nuclear safety but said more needed to be done!!
Following a 10-day visit, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) said in preliminary findings Britain had made “considerable progress since reviews in 2006 and 2009”.
“Recommendations and suggestions” were however made, “aimed at strengthening the effectiveness of the country’s regulatory framework and functions in line with IAEA Safety Standards, the control of radioactive discharges and environmental monitoring”.
Britain has 16 operating nuclear power reactors at nine sites, producing some 16 percent of its electricity, and 27 units either in permanent shutdown or being decommissioned.
A final report will be published in three months, the IAEA said.
[I may have got the title wrong there,, Arclight2011]
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
Posted: 10/09/2013
http://www.thevalleydispatch.com/ci_24273501/russian-warheads-fueling-half-us-nuclear-power
Uranium fuel from 20,000 disarmed Russian warheads is now generating about half of U.S. nuclear power in a spinoff from a landmark disarmament accord, a top U.S. official said Wednesday.
Rose Gottemoeller, U.S. under-secretary of state for arms control, told a UN committee a 1993 accord between the two former Cold War rivals was one of a growing list of disarmament successes.
The final uranium delivery that the United States is buying from Russia is due to leave St. Petersburg in November, Gottemoeller told the UN disarmament committee.
She hailed the accord as a “significant non-proliferation accomplishment” and said 500 tonnes of weapons-grade uranium has now been processed in Russia.
Low-enriched uranium left from the downgrading “is delivered to the United States, fabricated into nuclear fuel and used by nearly all U.S. nuclear power plants to generate half of the nuclear energy in the United States,” she said.
“Approximately 20,000 nuclear warheads have been eliminated under this unique government-industry partnership,” Gottemoeller told the UN committee.
Over the past 15 years the Russian uranium fuel has accounted for about 10 percent of electricity produced in United States, she added.
U.S. officials will go to St Petersburg in November to mark the loading of the final containers which should arrive in the United States in December, Gottemoeller said.
“We look forward to celebrating this historic achievement,” she said.
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
Karl Wehmhoener
10/09/2013
http://www.myhighplains.com/story/thornberry-house-expects-to-vote-friday-to-fund-pantex-nuclear-weapons-complex/d/story/7R4ksL0M8UyouxAhNOfdmA
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Congressman Mac Thornberry (R-Clarendon) made the following statement in reaction to the Obama Administration’s instructions for Pantex to temporarily shut down operations:
“Pantex has been instructed by the Obama Administration to begin preparing for a temporary shutdown of plant operations. The specifics are still being determined, but plant security will obviously remain in place to ensure nuclear materials remain secure.
There is no reason whatsoever to instruct people who are essential to the security of our country, like workers at Pantex, not to show up to work. On Friday, the House is expected to vote on a targeted funding bill for Pantex and the rest of the nuclear weapons complex. It is one of nine separate spendingill and the other targeted funding bills, and the Presid bills — including measures to pay troops, the National Guard, and Reserves and to fund veterans benefits — the House has passed. The Senate should take up the Pantex bent should sign them.”
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
Canada’s nuclear industry faces a “critical decade” in proving it can bring big projects in on time and on budget, says OPG’s Tom Mitchell
John Spears Business reporter, Published on Wed Oct 09 2013
http://www.thestar.com/business/2013/10/09/nuclear_industry_faces_critical_decade_opg_chief.html
Canada’s nuclear industry faces a “critical decade” in which it will have to prove that big projects can be brought in on time and on budget, says the chief executive of Ontario Power Generation.
Tom Mitchell said many of Ontario’s nuclear reactors are reaching the stage when they need mid-life refurbishment – a complex and expensive process.
That’s certainly the case at OPG’s big Darlington nuclear station, which supplies about 20 per cent of Ontario’s power, and where a multi-year overhaul of all four reactors is due to start in 2016.
OPG also hopes to build two new reactors at its Darlington station – a project that’s likely to be confirmed or quashed when the government releases the review of its long-term energy plan in the next month.
“That decade is upon us – that decade of being able to conduct a major, major amount of work,” Mitchell said in a speech at the Future of Nuclear conference at the MaRS Centre.
“We’re acutely aware at OPG that falling short in this area has been a recurring issue, and quite frankly it’s hurt our credibility. That’s why it’s a major priority.”
Refurbishment of the Pickering A nuclear station a decade ago was supposed to cost $1.3 billion, but ended up costing twice that, with two of the four reactors put in mothballs instead of being overhauled.
Privately owned Bruce Power also came in late and far over budget when it overhauled the Bruce A nuclear station.
“Our challenge and opportunity in this industry comes down to just one word: Execution,” Mitchell said.
“We now know that our biggest test is facing us, which is the refurbishment of Darlington.”
“We feel the eyes on us, and we know we must execute the project on time and on budget. If we don’t, we think the whole industry in Canada will be affected.”
What’s the budget for Darlington?
OPG is still keeping that number close to the vest, as it scopes out the work and carries out meticulous planning. It’s even building a mock-up of a reactor face for crews to train on.
A firm cost and schedule for Darlington won’t be in hand until October, 2015, Mitchell said.
Mitchell argued that nuclear energy still has many virtues. It has low greenhouse gas emissions; it has low operating costs; and the long term costs are more predictable than power from natural gas, where the fuel costs can be volatile.
Mitchell also noted that gas-fired generators – which have blossomed with low natural gas prices – will look less financially attractive if they have to start paying for carbon emissions.
If the cost of nuclear power is compared with the cost of gas-fired electricity, Mitchell argued that it should be carried out with gas plants that capture their carbon emissions before they’re released into the atmosphere.
If OPG gets clearance to build two new reactors at Darlington, it could build Canadian-designed Candu reactors – the latest version of the technology OPG has always used. The company could also build the AP 1000 pressurized reactor designed by Westinghouse.
Mitchell said he’s confident that Canadian nuclear operators and industry suppliers can work with either technology.
That was good news for A. Ron Lewis, vice president of Westinghouse Electric Company, who attended the conference at the MaRS Centre.
Lewis said in an interview that building a pressurized water reactor in Canada would give Canadian companies who supply equipment and services to the nuclear industry exposure to more markets.
“We’re being deployed across the globe, and we think teaming with us will give the industry here more access to global opportunity.”
Reactors being built worldwide are predominantly light-water reactors rather than the heavy water reactors used in Canada, Lewis said.
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
Six workers at Japan’s crippled nuclear power plant have been accidentally doused with highly radioactive water adding to a growing list of mishaps that are shaking confidence in its ability to handle the crisis.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/435503/Workers-exposed-in-nuclear-leak
Published: Wed, October 9, 2013
They removed the wrong pipe from equipment at the plant, sending toxic water spilling onto them and the entire floor of the facility housing a set of three units designed for primary, partial water treatment, said a spokesman for Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco).
Exposure to the workers, who were wearing face masks with filters, protective hazmat suits and raingear, is believed minor but still under investigation. The six were part of an 11-member team, and the remaining five were not affected. The workers managed to reattach the pipe.
The accident is the latest in a spate of leaks and other problems caused by human error that have added to public criticism of Tepco’s handling of the crisis at the Fukushima Dai-ichi, which is still in precarious condition since its triple meltdowns following the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
To keep the melted reactors cool, they must be continuously doused with water that then becomes contaminated with radiation and must be pumped out and stored in tanks at the site.
Last week, workers overfilled a storage tank without fully checking water levels, causing a leak, possibly to the sea.
In August a 300-ton leak seeped from another storage tank. That came after the company and the government acknowledged that contaminated groundwater was seeping into ocean at a rate of 300 tons a day for some time.
Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority Chairman Shunichi Tanaka said repeated mishaps could be a sign of the harsh work environment.
“Careless mistakes are often linked to (declining) morale,” he said. “People usually don’t make silly, careless mistakes when working in positive environment and motivated. The lack of it, I think, may be related to the recent problems.”
-AP
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
07 October 2013
The NDA has today published a Credible Options Paper on Radiation Epidemiology and Radiobiology Research. The paper presents our initial assessment of the options for managing our radiation epidemiology and radiobiology research and associated research assets.
Radiation Epidemiology and Radiobiology Research Credible Options October 2013 (250Kb)
To further evaluate these options and determine a Preferred Option we would like to understand the views of stakeholders on the identified options, the criteria for selecting between them and the results of our initial assessment. If you have any comments on the paper, please email your comments to strategy@nda.gov.uk by 15 November 2013.
http://www.nda.gov.uk/news/credible-options-research-2013.cfm
October 9, 2013
Posted by arclight2011part2 |
Uncategorized |
Leave a comment
Eco Kinetics, a leading business in Solar PV Installers 9 Oct 13 Although solar power has now been on the scene since around the mid-20th century, the revolutionary notion hasn’t spread as much like wildfire as wed have liked. Here are a few reasons why everyone should input those lovely looking solar panels on the roofs of their homes:
Unlike oil, solar power does not emit greenhouse gases or carcinogens into the air, therefore does not pollute it a much better alternative to the contamination produced from the fossil fuels we have come to depend on. Solar energy can be used to heat water, dry clothes, heat swimming pools, power attic fans, power small appliances, produce light for both indoors and outdoors, and even to power cars, among other things.
Also – It’s free! Who doesn’t want free energy to power their homes? The only cost, is the initial price of the panels themselves, but over a period of time you will save a whole lot of money. Solar energy doesn’t require expensive and continuous raw materials like oil or coal, and requires significantly lower operational labouring than conventional power production. So it not only cuts down your household bills but is a great deal greener for the environment.
Because solar doesn’t rely on on-going mining raw materials, it doesn’t result in the destruction of forests and ecosystems that occurs with most fossil fuel operations. Italys Montalto di Castro solar park is a good example of Solar contribution to curbing emissions. It avoids 20,000 tonnes per year of carbon emissions compared to fossil fuel energy production. The sun is a gigantic source of power so why not use it rather than spoil the environment through the use of fossil fuels?
Something you don’t want surrounding your home and annoying your neighbours is noise, so you’ll be pleased to know that solar power is completely silent, you’ll be the envy of your whole street whilst being quiet and modest about it. They don’t make a single peep whilst extracting their useful energy from the sun. However, the colossal machines used for pumping oil create an abundance of noise pollution and are therefore very impractical.
Rooftop power is a good way of supplying energy to a growing community. More cells can be added to homes and businesses as the community grows so that energy generation is in line with demand. Many large scale systems currently end up over generating to ensure that everyone has enough. Additionally, solar cells can also be installed in a distributed fashion, i.e. they don’t need large scale installations.
October 9, 2013
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
2 WORLD, decentralised |
2 Comments
nuclear-news 