North pole soon to be ice free in summer
|
North pole soon to be ice free in summer https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-04/uoh-nps042020.php
UNIVERSITY OF HAMBURG The Arctic Ocean in summer will very likely be ice free before 2050, at least temporally. The efficacy of climate-protection measures will determine how often and for how long. These are the results of a new research study involving 21 research institutes from around the world, coordinated by Dirk Notz from the University of Hamburg, Germany.The research team has analyzed recent results from 40 different climate models. Using these models, the researchers considered the future evolution of Arctic sea-ice cover in a scenario with high future CO2 emissions and little climate protection. As expected, Arctic sea ice disappeared quickly in summer in these simulations. However, the new study finds that Arctic summer sea ice also disappears occasionally if CO2 emissions are rapidly reduced. “If we reduce global emissions rapidly and substantially, and thus keep global warming below 2 °C relative to preindustrial levels, Arctic sea ice will nevertheless likely disappear occasionally in summer even before 2050. This really surprised us” said Dirk Notz, who leads the sea-ice research group at University of Hamburg, Germany. Currently, the North Pole is covered by sea ice year round. Each summer, the area of the sea ice cover decreases, in winter it grows again. In response to ongoing global warming, the overall area of the Arctic Ocean that is covered by sea ice has rapidly been reduced over the past few decades. This substantially affects the Arctic ecosystem and climate: The sea-ice cover is a hunting ground and habitat for polar bears and seals, and keeps the Arctic cool by reflecting sunlight. How often the Arctic will lose its sea-ice cover in the future critically depends on future CO2 emissions, the study shows. If emissions are reduced rapidly, ice-free years only occur occasionally. With higher emissions, the Arctic Ocean will become ice free in most years. Hence, humans still have an impact on how often the Arctic loses its year-round sea-ice cover. Technical details: The simulations used in this study are based on so-called SSP Scenarios (shared socio-economic pathways), which will also be used for the next IPCC report. Scenarios SSP1-1.9 and SSP1-2.6 are used to simulate a rapid reduction of future CO2 emissions, while scenario SSP5-8.5 is used to simulate largely unchanged future CO2 emissions. The study is based on simulations from the most recent generation of climate models, collected within the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). Pictures Artic sea ice (free download): https://www.cen.uni-hamburg.de/en/about-cen/news/11-news-2020/2020-04-20-sea-ice-notz.html Contact: Continue reading |
USA’s new rules for nuclear workers – two weeks straight of 12 -hour days
New rules for nuclear plant workers: 12-hour days for two weeks straight, Crains Chicago Business,20 Apr 20,
Exelon Corp., operator of the biggest U.S. nuclear fleet, says the move allows for “healthy workers to remain on site for more hours, reducing the need to bring in outside travelers and vendors.”
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is already allowing six U.S. power plants to extend workers’ shifts, to as long as 12 hours a day for two weeks, and more may be coming. That’s up significantly from current standards that require people to get two-to-three days off a week when pulling shifts that long. Employees can also work as many as 86 hours in a week now, up from 72 hours.
To curb transmission of the virus, utilities also say they want to delay inspections that require people to work in close proximity. Environmental groups, though, warn the changes could have disastrous results, and worry they could lead to further deviations from safety rules.
“This is a step backward,” said Eric Epstein, chairman of Three Mile Island Alert, a Pennsylvania non-profit group. “It’s not a good idea to stretch workers and marginalize safety standards.”
The new rules come as at least 42 construction workers have tested positive for the coronavirus at a nuclear plant in Georgia where Southern Co. is building two new reactors. Last week, the utility and its partners announced they would reduce the 9,000-person workforce by 20 percent to slow the spread of the virus. The government considers nuclear power plants to be essential, and reactors will supply almost 21 percent of the country’s electricity this year…….
watchdog groups are concerned that employees may be overworked, leading to fatigue and potentially errors. “You want an alert workforce,” said Paul Gunter, a director at Beyond Nuclear. “You don’t do this with bus drivers, but they’re saying it’s OK for nuclear power plant workers.”
he NRC is also granting utilities utilities permission to defer some inspections as dozens of reactors go through the annual spring refueling cycle. These projects can involve more than 1,000 people converging on a power plant for a month or more of maintenance and testing.
Postponed Inspection
Pinnacle West Capital Corp. also has approval for longer hours and is postponing an inspection of components on the bottom of the reactor vessel at the 3.9-gigawatt Palo Verde nuclear plant in Arizona, the biggest U.S. nuclear plant. The company had initially planned to conduct the evaluation during its refueling outage this spring, but has now pushed that out until the next one, in late 2021. The utility owner determined that the task posed a potential risk of spreading the deadly virus, and could be safely delayed…….
Entergy Corp. is planning to defer some leak tests at pipes at its Grand Gulf reactor in Mississippi. The tests typically are due every 11 1/2 years, but will now be rescheduled for the next refueling outage in 18 months. Pushing that period out to 13 years won’t affect safety, the company said by email. And at the Indian Point facility north of New York City, Entergy is also seeking permission to postpone annual physical evaluations for firefighters……..https://www.chicagobusiness.com/utilities/new-rules-nuclear-plant-workers-12-hour-days-two-weeks-straight
Piscataway Community Energy Aggregation (PCEA) program DOES NOT INCLUDE NUCLEAR ENERGY
https://www.tapinto.net/towns/piscataway/sections/green/articles/clearing-the-air-on-the-pcea-nuclear-power-not-included The Piscataway Community Energy Aggregation (PCEA) program, just rolled out for township residents, does NOT include nuclear power as one of its “renewable energy” sources. The referendum voters passed last November required that the PCEA use only Class 1 Renewables: wind, solar, geothermal, hydro and other sustainable sources.
We passed the PCEA in order to move our town and state away from dirty power, from the air pollution of fossil fuels and the radioactive wastes of nuclear power. Bulk purchasing as a community also gives us cost savings, along the way to addressing the climate crisis.
nd that’s what we’re getting: a win-win. Residents can access 30% clean electricity by automatically staying in the basic plan, with a savings on their electric bill. If residents want to “opt UP”, they can choose to go immediately to 50% Class 1 Renewables or to 100% Class 1 Renewables, at reasonable rates. The whole town will move forward in stages, reaching 100% clean renewables in 2035. Individual households can also opt out at any time, and businesses can opt in.
Still, there may be some confusion about how the PCEA will work:
1) SOURCING: The energy provider, EnergyHarbor, is a diversified power company, with some nuclear and fossil fuel holdings. But its PCEA contract with the Township is only for clean energy.
(2) SHADE: The Mayor has always knocked the referendum, which let voters decide town policy, not the insiders. OK, the people have spoken, 64%-36%, let’s move on.
(3) INFORMATION: The town website, which is hard to navigate for basic information, is nearly impossible to navigate for PCEA facts and options, including the choice to opt out. We do need to inform ourselves. Here’s an upcoming forum for residents who have questions:
his Wednesday, April 22 at 6 pm: the town’s PCEA administrator, Good Energy LP, is holding an online Q & A session: https://www.tapinto.net/towns/piscataway/events/facebook-live-piscataway-community-energy-aggreg
And Piscataway Progressive Democrats, who endorsed the PCEA referendum, did a special segment explaining the PCEA and your PSE&G bill last Saturday, April 18:
https://www.facebook.com/pwayprogressivedems/?epa=SEARCH_BOX
Let’s celebrate this Earth Day by making Piscataway cleaner and greener!
Formal petition to close Fermi 2 nuclear reactor in Michigan, from coalition of watchdog groups
Groups that include Beyond Nuclear and Don’t Waste Michigan have asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to halt reopening within the next week or so of Fermi 2 — currently shut down for routine scheduled maintenance.
The petition was filed Thursday and requires an NRC review board to make an emergency decision on the application over the next week on whether the groups have valid concerns or that Fermi 2 be allowed to resume operations when its current outage for “refuelling” is completed.
“It is a very high-risk situation,” said Michael Keegan of Don’t Waste Michigan. “It is dangerous since the plant, should it reopen, will be operating in a compromised position. They have got a problem that could be a major nuclear accident.”
A spokesman for DTE, which owns and operates the nuclear generating station, said Sunday that proper maintenance and repairs are being conducted and that the facility is safe.
Thousands of residents in Amherstburg and Boblo Island are among those at greatest risk of a nuclear accident at Fermi — which sits across Lake Erie — but there are also potential health risks for thousands more stretching through LaSalle and into Windsor, as well as Michigan, should a Fermi 2 incident occur.
The petition calls on NRC to take enforcement action to inspect Fermi 2 and make full repairs to what’s known as the “torus,” a donut-type structure at the base of the reactor. ……. https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/watchdog-groups-file-safety-concerns-on-fermi-2-nuclear-reactor/
Investment in green energy could drive Covid-19 recovery – International Renewable Energy Agency report
|
The agency’s director general, Francesco La Camera, said the global crisis ignited by the coronavirus outbreak exposed “the deep vulnerabilities of the current system” and urged governments to invest in renewable energy to kickstart economic growth and help meet climate targets. The agency’s landmark report found that accelerating investment in renewable energy would help tackle the climate crisis and would in effect pay for itself. Investing in renewable energy would deliver global GDP gains of $98tn above a business-as-usual scenario by 2050 by returning between $3 and $8 on every dollar invested. It would also quadruple the number of jobs in the sector to 42m over the next 30 years, and measurably improve global health and welfare scores, according to the report. “Governments are facing a difficult task of bringing the health emergency under control while introducing major stimulus and recovery measures,” La Camera said. “By accelerating renewables and making the energy transition an integral part of the wider recovery, governments can achieve multiple economic and social objectives in the pursuit of a resilient future that leaves nobody behind.” The report also found that renewable energy could curb the rise in global temperatures by helping to reduce the energy industry’s carbon dioxide emissions by 70% by 2050 by replacing fossil fuels. Renewables could play a greater role in cutting carbon emissions from heavy industry and transport to reach virtually zero emissions by 2050, particularly by investing in green hydrogen…… The call for a green economic recovery from the coronavirus crisis comes after a warning from Dr Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency, that government policies must be put in place to avoid an investment hiatus in the energy transition. “We should not allow today’s crisis to compromise the clean energy transition,” he said. “We have an important window of opportunity.”….. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/apr/20/green-energy-could-drive-covid-19-recovery-international-renewable-energy-agency |
|
Occupational Radiation Exposure: Serious Risks and Safety Solutions
Occupational Radiation Exposure: Serious Risks and Safety Solutions, https://www.diagnosticimaging.com/patient-safety/occupational-radiation-exposure-serious-risks-and-safety-solutions Mina S. Makary, MDNicholas Mannix, BS-April 6, 2020, Patient Safety, DI ExecutiveWhile the radiation doses utilized in image-guided procedures are generally considered low, recent studies have demonstrated significant effects of chronic low-dose radiation exposure to the procedural staff. Recent work demonstrated an alarming incidence of brain cancer, higher incidence of skin, thyroid, breast cancers and melanomas, higher incidence of stroke and atherosclerotic disease, increased risk of developing cataracts, decreased memory and verbal fluency, and a higher frequency of chromosomal abnormalities in those who performed fluoroscopically-guided interventional procedures compared to control groups.
The deleterious effects of radiation exposure are not only related to dose thresholds of specific exposures, but they are also a function of the cumulative doses over one’s lifetime exposure. These risks prompt increased awareness and education, improved radiation protection techniques, and further research efforts.
Robust radiation safety and risk reduction approaches are multi-faceted. It goes without saying that the ALRA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle is the cornerstone guiding rule. This means using intermittent fluoroscopy whenever possible, minimizing the pulse rate for standard fluoroscopy, minimizing the frame rate for digital angiography/digital subtraction angiography, collimating and avoiding magnification if feasible, and utilizing the “last image hold” function rather than obtaining new unwarranted images.
Next, capitalizing upon the nature and distribution of scatter radiation, which is the primary source of occupational exposure, further reduces one’s dose. This translates to stepping back as far as possible from the radiation source and angulating the tube towards the operator when oblique views are desired to avoid back scatter. Furthermore, utilizing shielding is the third effective strategy, and this approach includes personal aprons, caps, thyroid shields, eyewear, table shields, mounted side shields, and patient drape shields. Lastly, monitoring of the amount of radiation utilized, staff doses, and patient exposure rates utilizing personal dosimeter and equipment data is key to addressing any significant doses that were delivered.
In addition to protecting the procedural team, good radiation safety habits are good patient care. Minimizing fluoroscopy time and overall dose as reasonably achievable reduces patient exposure. Interestingly, techniques, such as collimation, actually improve image contrast and quality in addition to reducing the dose – an ultimate win-win situation. With the growth of both diagnostic imaging and imaging-guided procedures that require ionizing radiation, patient exposures have significantly increased at an alarming rate over the past three decades, and it is estimated that medical imaging contributed to 48 percent of the public’s radiation exposure in 2006 compared to only 15 percent in the 1980s.
For patients, the most concerning effects are due to direct radiation beam exposure, such as radiation skin burns, but rarer risks may potentially include cataracts and sterility. In addition to the previously discussed occupational radiation reduction techniques, additional approaches to reduce patient dose include using non-ionizing radiation for procedural guidance, such as ultrasound and MRI, as much as possible, maximizing pre-procedural imaging for planning to minimize procedural time, and avoiding unnecessary procedures.
Occupational radiation safety is critical for many reasons. It protects our proceduralists and staff, as well as our patients while also ensuring the patient receives the best care possible. Challenges, such as hardware costs, buy-in of institutional stakeholders, staff training, the heavy weight of shielding, and time to setup do exist, but education and awareness of the significant health risks, the benefits of appropriate protection, good habits, a culture of safety, and research efforts can overcome any barriers. The risks are real. The benefits are real. Radiation safety is both an occupational safety issue, as well as a patient care issue. It is not a luxury, and chronic low-dose radiation does matter. The time is now to prioritize radiation safety in our daily practice.
Mina Makary, M.D., is an interventional radiologist at Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center. He also serves on the Diagnostic Imaging Editorial Board. This article was co-written wth Nicholas Mannix, BS, a medical student at The Ohio State University College of Medicine.
Wind or solar technologies will provide UK with 100% energy, in a predominantly electric future
Chartist 18th April 2020, Dave Toke: As offshore wind technology fully blooms as its own distinctmass industrial technology producing power at low prices, and as the prospect of floating wind turbines comes closer, the potential for the technology threatens to eclipse everything else – at least in countries with a large waterline, such as the UK.another story. The story here is that on its own, the offshore wind available could generate over five times the anticipated total energy requirements for the UK in a ‘net zero carbon’ scenario – that is, based upon the Committee on Climate Change estimate that a mainly electric economy supplied from low carbon sources would require 645TWh of power generation in 2050. Wind power could do this as the cheapest electricity source available – apart from solar power of course, with which the competition will probably be intense in the future.
https://www.chartist.org.uk/offshore-wind-the-force-is-with-you/
The past week in climate and nuclear news
Everything’s quieter, as we all batten down the hatches, and wait for that Covid 19 curve to flatten ….
The planet needs a green recovery. But are governments up for this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1e7zXAGMKQ
Some bits of good news – Optimistic COVID Updates – Himalayan Mountaintops Visible for the First Time in 30 Years as Air Pollution Continues to Plummet in India.
2020 predicted to be Earth’s warmest year on record. Climate Change Multiplies the Threats of Infectious Diseases. To tackle the climate crisis, the world cannot return to normal after Covid-19. Changes for a low carbon economy are possible: we must advocate for this.
Artificial Intelligence in nuclear weapons and military systems.
UKRAINE. Smoke from Chernobyl area wildfires made Ukraine’s capital have the worst air pollution in the world. With dry and windy conditions, new areas of ‘smoldering’ reported near Chernobyl nuclear plant. Heavy winds fan new fires breaking out in Chernobyl exclusion zone. Criirad final report on Chernobyl Fires – Recommendations and findings. Abandoned Chernobyl nuclear plant is threatened by approaching wildfires.
USA.
- Coronavirus doubters follow climate denial playbook . Georgia’s Nuclear Plant Vogtle, workforce cut due to coronavirus, costs increase, and costs flow through community. Impacts of coronavirus on the technical, financial and legal mess that is the Vogtle nuclear project in Georgia, USA. Will nuclear refuelling workers at Limerick nuclear station spread Coronavirus to each other, and to the wider community? Coronavirus cases at Hanford nuclear waste site and at Nuclear Fuel Services. Multiple COVID 19 cases confirmed among Nuclear Fuel Services employees in Erwin.
- Outcry as uranium industry exploits Covid 19 to call for financial bailout.
- Increased tensions between USA and China, as U.S. accuses China of secret nuclear tests. President Trump ‘talked about nuclear weapons’ with Vladimir Putin in a call to the Kremlin over the weekend as START Treaty’s expiration looms.
- A warning to Idaho residents on the danger of Hanford’s nuclear wastes. America’s eternal nuclear waste problem.
- COVID-19 Lessons from Three Mile Island #2 — the NRC . Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection wants delay to license for moving radioactive Nuclear reactor 2 at Three Mile Island.
- Global heating dries up vast areas of the American West, could bring long-lasting megadroughts. Climate change will bring regular major floods to USA – no longer “once in a lifetime” floods.
UK. UK’s plutonium problem as it shuts down its last nuclear reprocessing facility. Environmental rules governing radioactive waste, fish farming, recycling and other sectors are being weakened due to Covid 19. For UK’s new Labour leader, climate action and Green New Deal will be key goals
FRANCE. Covid 19 outbreak causes EDF to extend outages of nuclear reactors for several months. EDF cutting back on its nuclear energy goals.
RUSSIA. Opening the lid on Russia’s super-secretive nuclear industry. No easy fix for Russia’s troubled Arktica ice-breaker – delivery delayed for at least a year.
BELARUS. Belarus to get a new nuclear reactor along with $10 billion debt to Russia.
PACIFIC ISLANDS. With the threat of Covid 9, nuclear test affected Pacific Islanders need Medicaid restored.
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES. United Arab Emirates’ new ‘cheap and cheerful’ Barakah nuclear reactor adds to danger and Middle East tensions.
SAUDI ARABIA. Saudi Arabia’s nuclear reactor will eventually lead to a Saudi nuclear weapon, and to its use.
AUSTRALIA. Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) is critical of Government propaganda on Kimba nuclear waste dump plan. Parliamentary committee finds that Kimba nuclear waste dump law may breach Indigenous human rights. 1
UK’s plutonium problem as it shuts down its last nuclear reprocessing facility
burial. https://thebulletin.org/2020/04/britain-has-139-tons-of-plutonium-thats-a-real-problem/
Climate Change Multiplies the Threats of Infectious Diseases
Climate Change Multiplies the Threats of Infectious Diseases, BY Daniel Ross, Truthout,
April 19, 2020
As the novel coronavirus continues to rage like a wildfire across the planet, its devastating toll has left many asking whether climate change — another multifaceted phenomenon with global reach — has played a part in spreading, even triggering, the pandemic. Some, like Katharine Hayhoe, a climate change scientist and professor of public policy at Texas Tech University, have been able to provide answers.
“Climate change didn’t cause the pandemic, and climate change directly causes very few of them,” Hayhoe told Truthout. “But what climate change does is it interacts with, and in many cases has the potential to exacerbate the impacts.”
For those well-versed in the mechanics of climate change, this comes as no surprise — scientists, policy makers and other experts have long acknowledged the links between global warming and the spread of infectious diseases, promulgating the sorts of findings described in the wide-ranging 2018 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, detailing what efforts are needed to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
Dig down, and this multilayered issue has knock-on effects — from the way rising temperatures exacerbate certain health problems to the disruptions that extreme weather events have on the global supply chain — that are inextricably linked with one another. What’s more, the governmental response to the coronavirus crisis, say experts, offers a troubling glimpse into what might happen in the future as the global thermometer inches upwards.
“What it underscores in the first instance is how underprepared we are,” said Sherri Goodman, a senior fellow at the Wilson Center’s Environmental Change and Security Program and Polar Institute.
As a former first deputy undersecretary of defense in environmental security, she coined the term “threat multiplier” to describe climate change’s kaleidoscopic impacts.
“Our systems — institutional, infrastructure, health, emergency response — could all be overwhelmed from the climate crisis,” Goodman said, warning that the time for wholesale climate resiliency preparedness is upon us. “What we have now is history accelerating itself — things are happening so fast.”
“Where Can These People Go?”
Perhaps most salient in terms of current events is the issue of zoonotic diseases spread between animals and humans, like the COVID-19 virus, which is believed to have originated in bats before being transferred to humans via scaly animals like pangolins. As the world’s population growth continues to rise, natural habitats will continue to be encroached upon and destroyed, not only removing valuable carbon sinks like rainforests but creating environments in which notorious zoonotic disease carriers like bats and rats thrive.
Climate change is also likely to encourage the spread — both in terms of seasonal risk and geographic reach — of “vector-borne” diseases. These are illnesses like West Nile Virus and Lyme Disease that are borne by mosquitoes, ticks and fleas, and already account for a significant number of deaths annually.
According to Sheri Weiser, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), there’s still much to learn about how rising temperatures are impacting the spread of infectious diseases. “But we know the common cause of climate change and COVID-19 — the globalization that’s driving fossil fuel emissions — contributes to the pre-conditions that pave the way for viruses like that,” Weiser said.
Indeed, there’s already an extensive library of medical literature detailing how climate change can impact human health. Extreme weather events — a symptom of a warming planet — can lead to fluctuating temperatures which have been shown to contribute to and worsen cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, kidney disorders and a host of other illnesses. On top of that, extreme heat and humidity can limit the effectiveness of certain medications used to treat these conditions………
the Trump administration’s slash-and-burn approach to the scientific wing of the federal government is the elephant in the room during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Last September, for example, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) effectively shuttered its PREDICT program, which was charged with identifying and combating new emerging viruses. With the COVID-19 death toll in the U.S. now well into five figures, USAID has injected more than $2 million to kickstart the program, at least temporarily. The Environmental Data and Governance Initiative recently found that the Trump administration has repeatedly, “and sometimes successfully,” sought to cut funding aimed at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for fighting global pandemics. Nevertheless, the Trump administration isn’t alone in neglecting science and research; for nearly two decades now, the amount of federal funds funneled toward basic research has shrunk markedly……. https://truthout.org/articles/climate-change-multiplies-the-threats-of-infectious-diseases/?eType=EmailBlastContent&eId=71649a96-ad00-4169-afc2-bb1b572e3345
COVID-19 Lessons from Three Mile Island #2 — the NRC
I happen to think it is worse for a government in crisis to fake it than to admit they aren’t sure of the correct problem, much less the correct answer. To say that COVID-19 is “no worse than the flu” or that “it will disappear in a few weeks” when you don’t really know what you are talking about is dangerous. It costs lives.
No executive ego is worth loss of life.
COVID-19 Lessons from Three Mile Island #2 — the NRC https://www.cringely.com/2020/04/17/covid-19-lessons-from-three-mile-island-2-the-nrc/?fbclid=IwAR3GJkbLC9UyA344IclZfHkFACO4fdj9Oxd0nxfUZ3M8xJ9UC5_VmS-T124 By Robert X. Cringely April 17th, 2020 My last column was about crisis management lessons I learned back in 1979 while investigating the Federal Emergency Management Agency for the President’s Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island (TMI). Let’s just say that FEMA wasn’t ready for a nuclear meltdown. Today we turn to the other federal agency I investigated at that same time — the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). While FEMA was simply unprepared and incompetent, the NRC was unprepared and lied about it.
Like FEMA, the NRC had recently undergone a rebranding from its previous identity as the Atomic Energy Commission — a schizoid agency that had been charged with both regulating nuclear power and promoting it. It’s difficult to be the major booster of technology while at the same time making safety rules for it. Think of the Trump Administration’s approach to coal as an example of such a paradox.
When the NRC was created to regulate nuclear power, that PR function was sent over to the U.S. Department of Energy. So all the NRC had to do at Three Mile Island was to make sure the utility was following the rules and to help them keep the public safe. Not much of either actually happened during the accident, mainly because nobody really had any idea of the actual state of the reactor. This suggests that maybe a bit more regulation should have been done during the reactor design phase.
Since almost nobody but me remembers any of this let’s get out of the way the two most important lessons of Three Mile Island. The first lesson explains why the accident was so bad while the second explains why nobody died.
The primary technical failing of TMI came down to a poor operator training combined with a major user interface glitch. All of the TMI operators were originally trained by the U.S. Navy, where they operated nuclear reactors on submarines and aircraft carriers. This was a deliberate policy on the part of General Public Utilities (GPU), the electric company that owned the plant. And it wasn’t a bad policy. The Navy vets were proven operators who didn’t panic and had been well trained on their ships. Alas, they weren’t especially well trained on the actual reactor they operated at TMI. In fact, they weren’t really trained to operate the reactor at all: they were trained to pass the reactor operator test.
This distinction between being trained to operate the reactor versus being trained to pass the test is crucial. GPU assumed the Navy veterans already knew plenty about reactors, so they concentrated solely in their training on the actual operation of reactor systems. This may sound okay, but what was missing was any deep understanding of what was actually happening inside the reactor that might have been helpful for troubleshooting.
By streamlining their training, the reactor operators may have known which valve to open or close, but not necessarily why they were opening or closing it.
Look at the picture above [on original] of the control room at Three Mile Island Unit 2. There is a lot going on in this picture from 1979. There are hundreds of switches and valves matched by hundreds of meters and gauges. Video screens on the back wall mainly verified the state (open/closed, on/off) of these valves and switches. In this entire control room there was ONE warning light and ONE horn or buzzer. When something went wrong this one light would start to blink red and the buzzer would sound an alarm.
In theory, when the buzzer sounded an operator could scan all the gauges and figure out what was happening inside the reactor. In real terms, however, this was close to impossible to do. There were just too many variables and — remember — the operators weren’t trained to understand the innards of the reactor, just how to run it.
What actually ran the reactor was a minicomputer. So when the warning light started to blink (by this time they’d turned-off the buzzer) the operators could go to that IBM Selectric printer in the foreground of the picture above where the minicomputer would print out a trouble code and description of what had gone wrong. This printer-based user interface was a key failing at TMI because within two minutes of the first alarm sounding, that printer queue was already six hours behind in printing trouble codes.
While designing this printer-centric system they’d apparently never considered what would happen if there were 100 or 1000 trouble codes hitting at the same time. Worse still, every time the system updated (which as I recall was every minute), it sent to the printer another 100 or 1000 codes.
Certainly, there was an engineer somewhere who understood that printing subsystem and could have found a way into the queue, but nobody in Harrisburg knew who that engineer was. That engineer didn’t work for GPU. So the utility was never able to get past this UI problem which made the reactor operators essentially blind. They had to guess what was happening inside the reactor, and their guesses had to be correct, they thought, or people might die.
No pressure here.
The reactor operators were clueless. The GPU executives called-in to help were clueless. And the NRC “experts” were clueless, too. In fact, nobody at the NRC had been through operator training for this particular class of reactor.
will shortly look in some detail at the NRC’s response, but first let’s cover that other lesson of TMI — why nobody died. That nobody died at Three Mile Island was a total fluke. There was at least one over-pressure event that should have blown the containment dome over the reactor, releasing radiation into Middletown, Pennsylvania. The only reason the containment wasn’t breached was TMI had been built extra-strong because it was right next to the Harrisburg International Airport.
In this picture [on original] notice the airport in the background. The final approach goes right past Three Mile Island. There were a dozen Babcock & Wilcox reactors in the U.S. identical to the two units at Three Mile Island, but only those two TMI reactors were built next to what had been a US Air Force B-52 base. So only those two reactors got an extra foot of concrete added to their containment domes, taking them from three feet thick to four feet thick, just in case a B-52 happened to crash into one.
Had the TMI accident happened at the otherwise-identical Rancho Seco reactor near Sacramento, California, people probably would have died.
So TMI-2 melted-down, but it was overbuilt and nobody was actually in danger. However, back in 1979 nobody knew this.
Let’s take a moment here to contrast TMI and Chernobyl, the difference being that there was no containment at Chernobyl. The accidents were comparable, but with no containment, Chernobyl directly killed 31 people with an estimated 4000 additional deaths over the years since from radiation-caused cancer.
Reactor containments are good.
Not knowing what was actually happening inside the reactor, the men controlling Unit 2 made some bad decisions that made things worse. And after the first few hours, those decisions were all made with the agreement of the NRC, which also didn’t have a clue what was happening. For the most part, whatever was done was based on guesses and more of those guesses were wrong than were right. But since the containment was extra-thick, it probably didn’t matter.
Now to the part about lying. It is common for people in positions of authority to prefer that they are seen as acting correctly. Certainly, that was the case with the NRC, which never in the months I investigated them said anything like the truth — that they had no idea what the fuck was happening inside that reactor. They wanted to be seen as professional and calm, not clueless and panicked. So their official accounts projected this professionalism and tended to point fingers mainly at the utility — GPU. The NRC story was that they saved the day.
With the benefit of 41 years of hindsight, it’s pretty clear that nobody saved the day at TMI. Nor was the day especially at risk, though that, too, wasn’t known at the time.
My job in 1979 was to understand what happened and how it was presented to the outside world and when I did interviews at the NRC it just plain felt wrong. If the agency had done everything right, why did the accident seem so perilous?
That’s when I phoned-into the NRC Emergency Operations Center and learned something the agency had failed to disclose.
In one of the documents I retrieved from the NRC I found a telephone number for the NRC Emergency Operations Center. Purely on a hunch, I called it. This was in July 1979 and the accident began in March of that year. Like all government phones 41 years ago, this one was answered by a person. The EOC was still in operation, still supporting the accident recovery. As I spoke on the phone I heard a beeping sound.
“What’s that beep?” I asked.
“That’s the recorder — this call is being recorded,” the person on the phone explained.
“Are all incoming lines recorded?” I asked.
“Yup, all 40 of them,” was the answer.
We were already a month into investigating the NRC and nobody at the agency had mentioned that all incoming lines to the Emergency Operations Center were recorded (this was very unusual at the time). Rather than listen to the NRC explain what had happened back in March, I could presumably listen to the recordings myself.
The NRC said, “no.”
Remember those FEMA guys tapping their West Point rings on the conference table? Ring tapping was common at the NRC as well, where the agency had a huge investment in looking infallible. Giving me access to those recordings could have blown their cover, so they rejected my request.
The NRC, which was part of the Executive Branch, rejected a request effectively from the President of the United States.
At this point, some writers might mention the Deep State. But that implies a conspiracy. What I think was going on here was more like hubris.
We subpoenaed the tapes. The NRC said they couldn’t give us the tapes (no reason was given, by the way — they just “couldn’t” do it). Nor could they copy the tapes for us. So we went to court and eventually the NRC offered to transcribe the tapes for us — a process they estimated would take six weeks. They wanted to wait until all the transcriptions were finished before providing any, so we went back to court for quicker access.
Does any of this make sense to you? If your state governor calls up the highway department and asks for some files, do you think they ever say “no?”
As the transcripts began to trickle out it was clear that something was wrong. Some of the transcriptions simply didn’t make sense. And key sections were missing entirely, with the transcription saying only that they were unintelligible. So it was back to court to get the original tapes, which the NRC still refused to give up. Instead, they set up a listening room at NRC headquarters where only one investigator at a time could go for a few hours per day to listen to the original tapes. We had to know which tapes to ask for based on the bad transcriptions that still weren’t all complete.
The NRC, so intent on maintaining security, had hired an outside transcription service. That service had no special knowledge of nuclear reactor operations, so when technical terms were used they often got them wrong or just said they were unintelligible. Things were unintelligible, too, when more than two people were on the line or when people were urgently speaking over one another. In other words, the most urgent moments were those moments least likely to be correctly transcribed.
Sitting in that NRC listening room, listening to the tapes after a month of fighting to get them, they were actually quite clear. By this time I was an expert, I knew the terms and I knew what the speakers were discussing and the context. When they said things like “Shit, I think it’s going to blow!” that wasn’t unintelligible to me.
The lesson of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at Three Mile Island was that they were incompetent and unhelpful. Part of this was a difficult relationship with GPU, part was that crazy printer-based user interface to the reactor computer, but a lot of it came down to the NRC having a huge investment in looking infallible. And that’s the lesson for COVID-19.
I happen to think it is worse for a government in crisis to fake it than to admit they aren’t sure of the correct problem, much less the correct answer. To say that COVID-19 is “no worse than the flu” or that “it will disappear in a few weeks” when you don’t really know what you are talking about is dangerous. It costs lives.
No executive ego is worth loss of life.
To tackle the climate crisis, the world cannot return to normal after Covid-19.
New Statesman 16th April 2020, To tackle the climate crisis, the world cannot return to normal after
Covid-19. This moment must be used to build a new economic consensus founded on justice, care and sustainability. The same fractures exposed by this pandemic are the fault lines along which the battle for climate justice is fought.
Many of the people most vulnerable in the current crisis will be worst affected by environmental breakdown, while those who are enriched by this pandemic are likely to benefit in the future. Reports this week that UK hedge funds are cashing in on Covid-19 ring eerily similar to now regular stories of investors betting on climate collapse, water
scarcity and crop failure, and investing in the infrastructures and technologies of disaster.
And just as many nations and communities have been abandoned in our response to this pandemic, it is all too easy to imagine a future in which communities from Jakarta to east Yorkshire are left to fend for themselves amid accelerating climate breakdown. Indeed, to imagine it one has only to look at the present.
Post-crisis stimulus should be directed towards green infrastructure and innately low carbon forms of work like health and social care, proven so vital and so undervalued by this crisis. Debts must be written off to allow those countries most vulnerable to climate crisis to build resilience against it. And having exposed austerity as an ideological choice, rather than a necessity, we must ensure these mistakes are never repeated, and social safety nets are both valued and strengthened.
Rapid Transition Alliance 16th April 2020, Andrew Simms: In the debate over the global response to Covid19 a battle of hashtags has broken out between those urging a quick return to ‘normal’, and those saying that ‘normal’ had many problems and the crisis has revealed both the need and an opportunity for changing direction, and a shift of economic purpose.
Saudi Arabia’s nuclear reactor will eventually lead to a Saudi nuclear weapon, and to its use
Saudi Arabia’s Nuclear Reactor Nears Completion, Bringing Prospect Of Saudi WMD – OpEd https://www.eurasiareview.com/19042020-saudi-arabias-nuclear-reactor-nears-completion-bringing-prospect-of-saudi-wmd-oped/, April 19, 2020 Richard Silverstein Bloomberg reported last week that Saudi Arabia’s first nuclear reactor is nearing completion. It purchased the reactor from the Argentinian company, INVAP. But construction and installation of the plant has proven a huge payday for companies in several European countries and the U.S.
After the Obama administration hesitated to support the project, Trump offered full-throated support. One of the most attractive propositions in the deal for him was the lucrative contracts for U.S. businesses who participated.
The reactor is one of the crowning achievements of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (aka “the Headchopper”) in his plan to “modernize” and “reform” the Saudi Arabian economy and military. Part of his ambition has been to project his country’s power and interests in more muscular fashion in the region. One of the ways he did this was to invade Yemen and rain terror upon the Houthi regions of that country killing 100,000 Yemenis and starving even more with a crippling blockade.
Saudi Arabia’s chief regional rival has been Iran. The purpose of the reactor is to send a loud and clear message that Iran’s nuclear ambitions will be met step-for-step by MBS. If Iran gets nuclear weapons, the Crown Prince wants to be right behind. The problem with this approach is that Iran, which has not made such a weapon though it could have if it wanted, has pursued a careful, calibrated approach. While the Saudis have pursued a reckless, aggressive approach in every operation they undertake to project their military power.
If they can decimate Yemen as they have, sinking themselves into a costly quagmire, why would anyone think they would use the products of their nuclear reactor in any more responsible way? Does MBS’s order to murder Jamal Khashoggi, cut his body into pieces and disappear it in acid, give anyone confidence that he wouldn’t be willing to do the same to entire countries he saw as implacable enemies?
Iran has never threatened to use nuclear weapons. Just the opposite, Ayatollah Khamenei has issued a fatwa declaring them forbidden. MBS, despite the fact that his country is a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Pact, would never swear off such weapons. In fact, the moment that he has the ability to build and deliver WMD will likely be the day he threatens to use it.
Every party which collaborated with the Saudis in this project will have blood on their hands when (not if) that country becomes nuclear-capable.
Only a decade ago, the Obama administration supported a regional conference planned to promote a Middle East nuclear-free zone. Israel, with its 200 nuclear weapons, objected strenuously and the idea died of neglect. There will come a time in the near future when the world will regret this tragically-missed opportunity.
Despite boilerplate statements that the reactor is for civilian power and research purposes, mark my words: Saudi Arabia’s nuclear reactor will eventually lead to a Saudi nuclear weapon. That weapon will exponentially increase the likelihood it will be used someday. Again, not “if,” but “when.”
This article was published by Tikun Olam
Smoke from Chernobyl area wildfires made Ukraine’s capital have the worst air pollution in the world
Unilad 18th April 2020, Wildfires burning near the Chernobyl nuclear plant have covered the capital
of Ukraine in smoke and made its air pollution among the worst in the
world. Residents burning rubbish near Chernobyl accidentally sparked fires
on April 4, and though firefighters managed to contain the initial blazes,
three new fires began to spread in the contaminated exclusion zone on
Thursday, April 16. The fires were propelled by strong winds and smoke has
engulfed the capital Kyiv. While many residents are adhering to
stay-at-home orders anyway, authorities are now encouraging residents to
close their windows to prevent the smog filling their houses.
-
Archives
- February 2026 (228)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS


