nuclear-news

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

Narrow escapes from nuclear war

August 29, 2019 Posted by | 2 WORLD, incidents, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Physicist Ed Lyman on new safety threats to US nuclear reactors

BO’s Chernobyl Sparks Questions About US Nuclear Power Safety, UCS, AUGUST 27, 2019

Physicist Ed Lyman discusses new safety threats to US nuclear reactors and why risks here are different than in Russia.

…….Ed: Nuclear power plants in the country today are under great financial pressure, mostly due to the low cost of fossil fuels and their inability to compete. So, the owners of the reactors are looking for any way possible to cut their operating costs. And one expense that the operators see is due to the oversight of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The NRC conducts inspections that not only requires staff time at the reactors to prepare for those inspections, but it also could result in discovery of violations, which have to be fixed and that means spending money.
So if there are fewer inspections, if the inspections don’t look as hard, they may miss problems. And the plant owners may have longer to address them because the regulators didn’t catch them. ……..
that’s really the problem with the changes that are being proposed now. It’s not clear that they’re actually solving any problems. There’s no real rationale for doing them except to reduce oversight of the industry. And in that particular case, there were substantial objections from some NRC staff about reducing the frequency of these inspections without first assessing what the impacts could be. In other words, doing a comprehensive analysis of what those inspections do, and how frequently do you really need to do them to make sure they’re effective. That study has not been completed yet, yet the staff is going ahead and recommending that they reduce the inspection frequency anyway. …….
I’d say that every plant, you know, is unique and has its own concerns. Certainly, some make me worry more than others. For instance, the Indian Point nuclear plant in New York State, it’s only 25 miles from the boundaries of New York City where I grew up. That plant should not have been located where it is because the number of people within 50 miles, last time I checked is over 16 million, is really too great.

If you’re gonna have nuclear power, you should make sure that there’s a sufficient region around every plant that’s low population density. So that if evacuation or other emergency measures are needed, they can be carried out effectively. And by simply suburbanization and development, a lot of plants around the country that were originally sited in rural areas now find themselves in suburbs and the population’s increasing.

And Indian point’s the poster child for that. It is shutting down in the next few years. But certainly, the potential impact of Indian Point, both from a safety and a security perspective has always been a concern. Then there are plants that are vulnerable to seismic events, that are vulnerable to flooding. And again, it’s really highly dependent on the location of the plant and how it was designed in the first place. But I would say every plant has its own risks and they have to be considered in their own context……..
Some plants, I think there are six reactors now, have applied for what they call a subsequent license renewal that would be from 60 years to 80 years. …..

The idea is that it doesn’t really matter too much how old the plant is, as long as you can inspect and maintain those systems, structures, and components that are aging so that they stay within an acceptable range. Now there are certain things that can’t be changed. For instance, the concrete and steel containment buildings around most plants, it’s not something that’s going to be replaced.

There’s buried piping in a lot of plants, this piping was never intended to be replaced, but some of it is corroding.  So, there may be an issue with how do you manage those structures that can’t be replaced. And finally, the reactor vessels, these are the steel vessels that hold the nuclear fuel in reactors, they become brittled over time as they’re bombarded with neutrons. And there is a risk that they could shatter like glass if they are sufficiently brittle and they undergo rapid cooling.

So that’s one of the…what is called a time limiting aspects of a nuclear plant because those reactor vessels would be way too expensive to ever replace……..

Colleen: Ed, is it true that the next generation of nuclear power plants will be so safe that they can’t meltdown?

Ed: It is not true. Any nuclear plant has vulnerabilities that could result in a serious accident or could be exploited. It is true that you can design greater safety into nuclear power, there are ways to reduce that risk. But by and large, you’re always going to have these vulnerabilities and you can’t depend on the design to save the day. It’s always going to be a good design plus a well-run plant, plus well-trained operators, plus robust inspections and maintenance, and also robust security to prevent against sabotage attacks.

Colleen: How far-fetched is the idea that terrorists could attack a nuclear power plant? What would they be trying to do or to get?

Ed: For a commercial nuclear power plant in this country, the greatest concern is radiological sabotage. And that is a deliberate act that could destroy or disable enough of the safety systems and the backup safety systems that the reactor would meltdown and there would be very little that the plant operators could do about that. And it’s a very real threat.

Because if there were a well-trained, paramilitary type terrorist attack at a nuclear reactor, without a robust security response, the attackers could essentially destroy enough equipment to cause a meltdown within minutes. So there is a very short time window for trying to respond if you have this type of event. The best thing to do is to prevent the attack from taking place…..

it’s a fallacy to think that Chernobyl was an event that was only due to Soviet incompetence and corruption and that that kind of thing couldn’t happen here. Chernobyl couldn’t happen here, but Fukushima could or something worse than Fukushima.   https://ucsusa.org/ep66-lyman

August 29, 2019 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

A Small Nuclear Reactor exploded in Russian accident – fallout isotopes prove this

Isotopes’ Composition Proves Nuclear Reactor Was Involved in Russian Explosion, Expert Says

Analyses of the radionuclides in the fallout over Severodvinsk show several isotopes that would not have been present if was a simple RTG in the explosion.

August 26, 2019 Posted by | incidents, Russia, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors | Leave a comment

Contradictory reports from Russia, over the Aug. 8 nuclear incident

August 26, 2019 Posted by | incidents, Russia | Leave a comment

Nuking a Hurricane Would Probably Just Create a Slightly Bigger, Radioactive Hurricane

Nuking a Hurricane Would Probably Just Create a Slightly Bigger, Radioactive Hurricane  https://www.livescience.com/trump-hurricane-nuclear-bomb.html  By Rafi Letzter 26 Aug 19, o Planet Earth 

Has Trump been reading old Live Science articles about nuking hurricanes? And if not, should he be?

President Donald Trump wants to nuke hurricanes into submission before they reach the Atlantic coastline, according to a bizarre article published yesterday (Aug. 25) on Axios. “Why can’t we do that?” he reportedly asked. This raises an important question: Has Trump been reading old Live Science articles? And if not, should he be?

Live Science answered this very question in a 2012 article.

“The theory goes that the energy released by a nuclear bomb detonated just above and ahead of the eye of a storm would heat the cooler air there, disrupting the storm’s convection current,” Rachel Kaufman wrote at the time. “Unfortunately, this idea, which has been around in some form since the 1960s, wouldn’t work.”

The problem is the energy involved, Kaufman reported, citing writing by Chris Landsea, a former National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration research meteorologist.

A hurricane is essentially a powerful, super-efficient country-size engine for pulling heat out of the ocean and releasing it into the atmosphere. As a hurricane’s low-pressure system moves over warm water, that water evaporates and then condenses as droplets in the atmosphere. As the water condenses, it releases the heat it’s carrying into the surrounding air. About 1% of that heat energy gets converted into wind; the rest sticks around as ambient warmth, according to the article.

A hurricane can release 50 terawatts of heat energy at any given moment — a significantly greater output than the entire power system, and comparable to a 10-megaton nuclear bomb detonating every 20 minutes. Trying to stop a hurricane with a nuke would be “about as effective as trying to stop a speeding Buick with a feather,” Kaufman wrote, and might even add energy to the storm

Stopping a smaller tropical depression with a nuke might be more realistic, but there are just too many of them and no good way to tell which will develop into powerful, landfalling hurricanes.

“Finally, whether the bomb would have a minor positive effect, a negative effect, or none at all on the storm’s convection cycle, one thing is for sure: It would create a radioactive hurricane, which would be even worse than a normal one. The fallout would ride Trade Winds to land — arguably a worse outcome than a landfalling hurricane,” Kaufman wrote.

The best way to avoid the destruction of a hurricane, remains a boring one: prepare. In case that’s the route you want to go, how to prepare for a hurricane.

August 26, 2019 Posted by | 2 WORLD, climate change, safety | Leave a comment

18 nuclear power plants in the EU are operating without a valid license,

18 nuclear power plants in the EU are operating without a valid license,  and ,   , 25 Aug 19

August 26, 2019 Posted by | EUROPE, safety | 1 Comment

Chinese Academy of Sciences warns on the safety hazards of new nuclear

Assessing the possible safety issues in the second nuclear era, by Bob Yirka , Phys.org  25 Aug 19, A team of researchers with the Chinese Academy of Sciences has carried out an assessment of possible safety issues tied to the rise of the second nuclear era. In their paper published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the group describes the factors that led to the rise of a second nuclear era and possible safety concerns that need to be addressed……

More information: Yican Wu et al. Nuclear safety in the unexpected second nuclear era, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences(2019). DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1820007116–  https://phys.org/news/2019-08-safety-issues-nuclear-era.html  Journal information: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

August 26, 2019 Posted by | China, Reference, safety | Leave a comment

UK Office of Nuclear Regulation seems to have increased the number of cracks permitted in Hunterston nuclear reactor.

August 24, 2019 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Dismay at safety risks of restarting Hunterston Nuclear Reactor 4

Largs and Millport Weekly News 19th Aug 2019 A SERIES of safety failure at Hunterston could have had ‘serious
consequences’ if the reactors had been in full operation, it was claimed
this week. The Nuclear Free Local Authorities group, which is made up of
councillors around the UK concerned about nuclear power, described the
incidents as ‘notable’. The incident which prevented cooling gas from being
circulated around a reactor was highlighted by the group as ‘a real
concern’. However the nuclear regulators described the incident as ‘minor’
as both incidents happened when both reactors were offline. n relation to
the incident, a spokesperson for Nuclear Free Local Authorities said:
“Whilst there were no radiological consequence from them, this is largely
due to the reactors not being in operation. “A loss of cooling is of real
concern as the consequences of such an eventuality when the reactors are in
full operation could have been extremely serious.”

https://www.largsandmillportnews.com/news/17833610.anger-series-safety-failures-hunterston/

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) is disappointed with the decision
of the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) to permit resumption of
electricity generation at Reactor 4 in the EDF-owned Hunterston site in
North Ayrshire. NFLA believes the age, the amount of keyway root cracks in
both Reactors 3 and 4, and the precautionary principle should have been
considered in the reactors not being reopened for generation.

NFLA 21st Aug 2019

http://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/nfla-disappointed-onr-decision-resume-operations-reactor-4-hunterston-b/

August 23, 2019 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Toxic leak from North Korea’s nuclear programme

August 23, 2019 Posted by | incidents, North Korea | Leave a comment

USA’s nuclear regulators concerned about possibility of an electromagnetic pulse attack

August 23, 2019 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

UK’s nuclear regulator allows EDF to restart Hunterston B nuclear reactor, despite cracks

Nuclear regulator permits restarting of reactor 4 at Hunterston B

EDF Energy is expected to restart reactor a year after it was shut down over safety concerns, Guardian, Jillian Ambrose. 21 Aug 19,  Britain’s nuclear watchdog has agreed to allow one of the country’s oldest nuclear reactors to restart, one year after it was shut down to investigate cracks in its graphite core.

EDF Energy is expected to restart reactor 4 at its 40-year-old Hunterston B nuclear plant on the Firth of Clyde in North Ayrshire within weeks after the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) said the plant was safe.

The regulator will allow the reactor to run for four months after proving that the reactor cores can still fulfil their fundamental safety requirements, despite the cracks in its graphite bricks……..

The reactor was shut down last March after investigators discovered more than expected cracks in the graphite core of reactor 4 and reactor 3 at the Scottish nuclear plant. Its application to restart reactor 3, which was found to have more than 350 hairline cracks in its graphite core, is still pending. ……..

The French-owned energy company owns and operates all of the UK’s existing nuclear power plants, which provide about a fifth of the UK’s electricity. It is hoping to extend the reactors’ expected running lives and build new nuclear plants at the Hinkley Point C and Sizewell B nuclear sites.

The company said in 2016 it would extend the lives of its Heysham 1 and Hartlepool nuclear plants, which were due to close this year but will continue to run until 2024. The closure dates of the Heysham 2 and Torness nuclear plants will both be delayed by seven years to 2030.

EDF Energy hopes to run the Hunterston nuclear plant until 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/aug/20/edf-nuclear-reactor-restarting-hunterston-b

August 22, 2019 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Safety concerns about floating nuclear reactors, and Rosatom admits that electricity from small floating nuclear reactors is more expensive.

August 22, 2019 Posted by | ARCTIC, business and costs, Russia, safety, technology | Leave a comment

USA lost unexploded nuclear bomb in Japanese waters

World War 3: Unexploded US nuclear weapon hiding beneath Japanese waters ‘covered up’  https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1166479/world-war-3-nuclear-bomb-japan-philippine-sea-us-soviet-union-cold-war-sptWORLD WAR 3 could have erupted after the United States Navy accidentally dropped a nuclear bomb in Japanese waters – and it is still there today. by CALLUM HOARE, Aug 18, 2019. On December 5, 1965, just three years after the Cuban Missile Crisis pushed Cold War tensions to the limits, the US made a monumental mistake during a training exercise. A United States Navy Douglas A-4E Skyhawk attack aircraft fell off the side of aircraft carrier USS Ticonderoga while sailing through the Philippine Sea. The pilot, Lieutenant Douglas M Webster, the plane, and the B43 nuclear bomb on board all fell into the water, 68 miles from the coast of Kikai Island, Japan.

However, it was not until 1989 that the Pentagon admitted the loss of a one-megaton hydrogen bomb.

The revelation inspired a diplomatic inquiry from Japan, however, neither the weapon, or the pilot, was ever recovered.The incident, the most serious involving nuclear weapons in the Navy’s history, showed that US warships carried atomic weapons into Japanese ports in violation of policy, according to researchers.

Japanese law banned ships carrying nuclear weapons from sailing in its territorial waters or calling on its ports following the terrible Hiroshima and Nagasaki incidents.

However, the US warship routinely docked in Japan.

William M. Arkin of the liberal Institute for Policy Studies claimed in 1989: “For 24 years, the US Navy has covered up the most politically sensitive accident that has ever taken place.

“The Navy kept the true details of this accident a secret not only because it demonstrates their disregard for the treaty stipulations of foreign governments but because of the questions it raises about nuclear weapons aboard ships in Vietnam.”

The event was highly sensitive, with Japan being the only country to ever be attacked with nuclear weapons at the end of World War 2.

On September 8, 1951, 49 nations drew a line under the devastating event and signed the Treaty of San Francisco – also known as the Treaty of Peace with Japan.

The document officially ended US-led occupation of Japan and marked the start of re-establishing relations with the allied powers.

Meanwhile, In 1965, the US was arguably at the height of tensions with the Soviet Union.

Not only did the accident threaten to spoil already tenuous relations with Japan, but it would have also have given the USSR an excuse to start a nuclear war.

Despite the worrying claims, the US Navy confirmed inn 1989 that the waters were too deep for the weapon to pose a threat.

Worryingly though, it would not be the last of the nuclear gaffes for America. On January 17, 1966, a B-52G USAF bomber collided with a KC-135 tanker during a refuelling mission at 31,000 feet over the Mediterranean Sea.

During the crash, three MK28-type hydrogen bombs headed for land in the small fishing village of Palomares in Almeria, Spain.

Worse still, the explosives in two of the weapons detonated on impact, contaminating the surrounding area of almost one square mile with plutonium.

The fourth sunk off the coast of Spain and was recovered three months later.

August 19, 2019 Posted by | general, history, incidents, Reference, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Anxiety over risks of radiation and heat at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics

 

Controversy over radiation and heat surrounding Tokyo Olympics, HANKYOREH  By Kim Chang-geum, staff reporter : Aug.14,2019


  “…… Safety from radiation and heat at the Tokyo Olympics

Most of the issues related to the upcoming Tokyo Olympics, which are now only a year away, boil down to safety concerns over radiation and extreme heat. Some baseball and softball matches are scheduled to be held in a stadium located close to the Fukushima nuclear reactor that took direct damage during the 2011 earthquake. Korean civic groups have also pointed out that the Japanese government has failed to properly control water contaminated by radiation from the reactor. Plans to source some of the rice and ingredients for the Tokyo Olympics Athletes Village from Fukushima are adding to these concerns. Although the level of radiation measured in such rice is within the acceptable standards in Japan, it is believed to exceed Korean standards.


Extreme heat is another potential issue. After an open water test competition in Odaiba Seaside Park, Tokyo, on Aug. 11, Sports Nippon reported, “Many athletes complained about a foul odor and the high water temperature, and one male athlete made the shocking claim that it ‘smelled like a toilet.’” Although the Olympic Committee did not reveal the water temperature on that day, it has been reported that the temperature was 29.9 degrees Celsius at 5am. The International Swimming Federation (FINA) cancels events if the water temperature reaches 31 degrees Celsius. There have also been warnings about road races. On August 8, Yusuke Suzuki, Japan’s star race-walker and world record holder in the men’s 20km, stated, “I tried training on the Tokyo Olympics race-walking course. There was no shade, so it could cause dehydration.”
Tokyo Olympics delegation heads meeting from Aug. 20-22It appears that the issue of safety from radiation and concerns about food ingredients will be conveyed during the upcoming three-day meeting with the leaders of each country’s delegation in Tokyo on Aug. 20-22, and a request will be made to the Japanese Olympic Committee to change the name of Dokdo used on maps. If the representatives from each country do raise the radiation issue, the IOC will have no choice but to intervene. The Korean Sport & Olympic Committee is also considering providing separate Korean food to Korean athletes through specially prepared meals or lunchboxes.  …. http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/905758.html

August 17, 2019 Posted by | climate change, Japan, safety | Leave a comment