nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Nuclear sub accident costs $1m, commander loses job

Down periscope: Nuclear sub accident costs $1m, commander loses job Rt.com  5 Jan, 2016 A US Navy commander has lost his job following an accident that damaged a 18,000-ton nuclear guided-missile submarine. The banged-up sub will cost taxpayers at least $1 million to repair, the Navy said.

Captain Dave Adams was relieved of his command of the USS Georgia on Monday, and was reassigned to another post with Submarine Group 10 of Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay in Georgia.

On November 25, 2015, Adams was commanding one of the two alternating crews that operate the USS Georgia when the 560-foot submarine crashed into a channel buoy on its way back to base in Kings Bay……https://www.rt.com/usa/328018-navy-submarine-crash-georgia/

January 6, 2016 Posted by | incidents, USA | Leave a comment

America’s NRC checking cables at South Carolina’s Oconee nuclear plant

NRC checking cables at South Carolina’s Oconee nuclear plant http://www.wltx.com/story/news/2016/01/05/nrc-checking-cables-south-carolinas-oconee-nuclear-plant/78293416/  Seneca, SC (AP)- Federal regulators are doing a special inspection of a nuclear plant in South Carolina.

Officials from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission say they are going to begin a special inspection on Tuesday at Duke Energy’s Oconee nuclear plant near Seneca.

Inspectors are going to be assessing the degradation of power cables on startup transformers for two of the plant’s three units.

A plant operator making routine inspections last month discovered a disconnected cable that should have been connected to a startup transformer on Unit 3. The NRC says cables on another unit were also degraded.

Officials say all the cables have been repaired, and the transformers are available for use if needed.

The inspectors say they’ll issue a report within 45 days.

January 6, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

NRC says Nuclear plants along Mississippi, Missouri rivers not hurt by heavy rain

Nuclear plants along Mississippi, Missouri rivers not seen hurt by heavy rain -NRC Yahoo News 6 Jan 16  Reuters) – The nuclear plants along the Missouri and Mississippi rivers are not expected to be adversely affected by flooding and heavy rains, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission said on Tuesday….. The swollen Mississippi and rivers that feed into it caused havoc in Missouri and Illinois after late December heavy rain and severe storms brought flooding across several central U.S. states, leaving at least 33 people dead. http://news.yahoo.com/nuclear-plants-along-mississippi-missouri-rivers-not-seen-220326395–finance.html

January 6, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Not much headway in India’s much-touted nuclear power project

‘Make in India’ for affordable nuclear power: Expert Zee News  January 6, 2016 – Mysuru: More nuclear power could be generated if foreign suppliers make technology and products affordable for setting up reactors, an expert said on Tuesday.

“The stumbling block is economics, as installing a nuclear plant has to be affordable to sell its power at a competitive rate,” former Atomic Energy Commission chairman Srikumar Banerjee told IANS at the 103rd Indian Science Congress here, about 140 km from Bengaluru.

In spite of hype over the India-US nuclear deal and opening up of the civilian nuclear industry to foreign suppliers, barring two recent agreements on setting up two more units at the Russian-backed Kudankulam plant in Tamil Nadu and the French-backed Jatipur project in Maharahstra, not much headway has been made over the years.

As setting up nuclear power plants involves not only technology transfer and making components in the country, but also operating them by the state-run Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL), consensus has been eluding stakeholders owing to high cost and liability clause…….http://zeenews.india.com/news/science/make-in-india-for-affordable-nuclear-power-expert_1842048.html

January 6, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Ontario Clean Air Alliance urges Ontario to abandon $13-billion Darlington nuclear rebuild

Environmentalists urge Ontario to abandon $13-billion Darlington nuclear rebuild, National Post Keith Leslie, The Canadian Press | January 5, 2016 TORONTO — Environmentalists want the Ontario government to abandon plans for a $13-billion refurbishment of four nuclear reactors at the Darlington generating station east of Toronto and instead import more electricity from Quebec.

The Ontario Clean Air Alliance says nuclear projects always run over budget, and it doesn’t want to see taxpayers on the hook to pay for rebuilding the Darlington reactors that are owned and operated by Ontario Power Generation.

“Every single nuclear project in Ontario’s history has gone massively over budget by two and a half times,” said Alliance president Jack Gibbons. “OPG says this project will cost $12.9 billion, but if history repeats itself it will be $32 billion.”

Gibbons said even if the refurbishment came in on budget, the cost to taxpayers of maintaining about 2,225 jobs at Darlington would work out to nearly $6 million per job.

Greenpeace Canada, meanwhile, is concerned about the safety and health risks posed by nuclear power generation in the event of an accident, and says refurbishing the aging reactors at Darlington is not worth the risk.

“The government agencies mandated to protect the public are helping push the project through by concealing Darlington’s true risks from the public,” said Greenpeace spokesman Shawn-Patrick Stensil.

Quebec is the fourth-largest producer of electricity generated by water in the world, has the lowest power rates in North America, and could sell Ontario enough electricity to replace what would be generated by a refurbished Darlington, said Gibbons.

“We should sign a long-term deal with Quebec which would enable us to cancel the Darlington rebuild project, keep our lights on and reduce our electricity bills,” he said………

Bruce Power announced plans last month to spend $13 billion to refurbish the nuclear reactors at the generating station it operates in Kincardine, on Lake Huron, and the private company will assume all risks of cost overruns.

Ontario’s only other nuclear station, in Pickering, is also scheduled to be decommissioned by 2020, and there are no plans to rebuild its reactors to extend their lives……. http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/environmentalists-urge-ontario-to-abandon-13-billion-darlington-nuclear-rebuild-2

January 6, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Toronto anxious about city’s unreadiness for a nuclear emergency.

Is Toronto ready for a nuclear radiation emergency? http://www.metronews.ca/news/toronto/2016/01/05/is-toronto-ready-for-a-nuclear-radiation-emergency.html

As KI pill orders skyrocket, critics say Ontario’s nuclear emergency response plan desperately needs a post-Fukushima update. By: Torstar News Service, Published on Tue Jan 05 2016. For 44 years, the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station has operated just five kilometres from Toronto’s eastern edge. The Darlington Nuclear Generating Station sits just over 30 km away. While these plants are essential for keeping the lights on in Toronto, councillors are only just beginning to question the city’s readiness for a nuclear emergency.

On Dec. 1, the city’s executive committee asked the city manager to report back on issues with the Provincial Nuclear Emergency Response Plan, Toronto’s own nuclear emergency response protocols and whether it might be appropriate to expand distribution of potassium iodide (KI) pills beyond the current 10-km radius.

In October, Ontario Power Generation (OPG), which operates both Pickering and Darlington, mailed KI pills — which, taken in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster, can reduce the risk of thyroid cancer — to 200,000 homes and businesses within 10 km of the GTA’s two nuclear power plants.

Anyone living within 50 km of the two plants — an area inhabited by more than 4.5 million people, including the entire city of Toronto — can order them free from preparetobesafe.ca. While just over 600 orders had been placed before a Nov. 10 Torstar News Service story on KI pills, nearly 11,000 additional orders were made by Nov. 15.

“Lessons can be learned from nuclear tragedies in other parts of the world, lessons that can better prepare us and ensure the safety of Toronto residents,” 11 city councillors wrote in their nuclear safety agenda item. “We can also learn from international best practices that shape the emergency response of other regions to ensure we are doing all we can to keep our residents safe.”

Outside city hall, critics are also arguing that the response plan needs to be updated — something the province promised to do after a reactor disaster struck Fukushima, Japan, following a catastrophic tsunami nearly five years ago. Originally drafted in the early 1980s, the provincial response plan hasn’t been revised since 2009.

“Significant work has been done in the past two years related to reviewing and assessing” the response plan, a Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (MCSCS) spokesperson told Torstar. “The objective of this review is to ensure that the PNERP is reflective of a severe, multi-unit nuclear accident comparable to Fukushima.”

The review is expected to be completed this month, with public consultations on a draft plan to begin mid-year. The province would not disclose the details of this new plan.

Although the aging Pickering plant is slated to close in 2020, the multibillion-dollar refurbishing project will extend Darlington’s life by three decades. To critics, a response plan update can’t come soon enough.

Critics on the top issues

Big release of radiation? Big shortcomings

“The province is not planning for an actual big terrible accident like Fukushima,” warns Theresa McClenaghan, executive director of the Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA). “There’s no detailed planning, resourcing or testing for a big accident that has big emissions out to the atmosphere.”

The emergency plan is based on scenarios in which plant operators would be able to contain and control radioactive releases, McClenaghan says.

“They like to think that if something goes really wrong, they can still control events enough to hold onto any radioactive emissions from the plants for a period of time… But based on Fukushima and Chernobyl, you can’t count on something’s going wrong and everything else going right.

The province’s position:

“(I)n a recent study, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) determined that the PNERP would adequately and effectively address a Fukushima type incident.”

Drinking water dangers

“Millions of people get their drinking water from Lake Ontario, but there’s no credible plan on how to deal with tap water contamination in the event of a nuclear accident,” says Greenpeace Canada’s senior nuclear analyst, Shawn- Patrick Stensil.

Both the Darlington and Pickering nuclear power plants sit next to Lake Ontario, and so do three aging nuclear power plants in upstate New York. According to environmental advocacy group Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, nine million Canadians and Americans rely on the lake for their drinking water. Many would be without alterative sources in the event of severe radioactive contamination.

“There’s no planning for this at all,” McClenaghan says. “I have to conclude that they’re assuming that dilution will be the answer.”

The province’s position:

“The PNERP identifies that the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) is responsible for dealing with contaminated water supplies.”

Lack of public awareness

According to a recent poll of 500 people within 10 km of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station, a majority was unaware of decontamination procedures, the location of monitoring stations or emergency shelters or evacuation plans and routes. Some 80 per cent said they had no emergency plan; 58 per cent admitted to being totally unprepared.

“The polling our group did… shows that there needs to be ongoing and consistent education on what people in the GTA need to do to prepare themselves for a nuclear emergency,” says Durham Nuclear Awareness co-ordinator Janet McNeill.

urham Region is also listed as one of the areas slated for dense growth in the province’s Places to Grow plan.

“They are still putting additional population density in this region, which to me is just an appalling circumstance when we have such poor emergency planning,” McClenaghan adds.

The province’s position:

“The evacuation zones were scientifically determined.”

Expand KI pill distribution

In October, residents and businesses within 10 km of the Pickering and Darlington plants received free supplies of potassium iodide (KI) pills to help prevent thyroid cancer in the event of a radioactive release. While this measure is welcome, it lags behind other jurisdictions.

For example, those within 20 km of New Brunswick’s Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station receive pills, while people living within 50 km of Switzerland’s four nuclear power plants get them. On Dec. 1, Toronto’s executive committee voted to study whether the 10-km zone should be expanded to 50 km.

“Even if you did 30-km pre-distribution to every household and 50-km pre-distribution to vulnerable communities and schools, we’d still be far better off than we are today,” McClenaghan says.

The province’s position:

“The current planning basis review is addressing this as well.”

January 6, 2016 Posted by | Canada, safety | Leave a comment

Belgium’s nuclear power plants ‘falling to bits’

Belgium’s nuclear power plants ‘falling to bits’ – German officials 30 Dec, 2015 The German government is preparing “critical questions” to the Belgian authorities on operational safety at the nation’s two active nuclear power plants, following a number of recent successive incidents at nuclear facilities.

After incidents at both Belgian nuclear power plants, German Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks has again put her concerns point-blank, demanding whether security is guaranteed at the Belgian NPPs, proposing Brussels to get rid of the nuclear energy altogether. ……https://www.rt.com/news/327457-belgium-nuclear-power-hendricks/

January 6, 2016 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

    Next Entries »