Ukraine’s very dangerous nuclear waste storage situation
Nuclear waste stored in ‘shocking’ way 120 miles from Ukrainian front line, Guardian, Arthur Neslen, 13 May 2015, Experts raise concerns over waste stored in the open air at Europe’s largest nuclear power station, as the conflict increases Ukraine’s reliance on power from its ageing plants C
oncerns have been raised by environmentalists and atomic power experts over the way waste is being stored at Europe’s largest nuclear power station, in crisis-ridden Ukraine.
More than 3,000 spent nuclear fuel rods are kept inside metal casks within towering concrete containers in an open-air yard close to a perimeter fence at Zaporizhia, the Guardian discovered on a recent visit to the plant, which is 124 miles (200km) from the current front line.
“With a war around the corner, it is shocking that the spent fuel rod containers are standing under the open sky, with just a metal gate and some security guards waltzing up and down for protection,” said Patricia Lorenz, a Friends of the Earth nuclear spokeswoman who visited the plant on a fact-finding mission.
“I have never seen anything like it,” she added. “It is unheard of when, in Germany, interim storage operators have been ordered by the court to terror-proof their casks with roofs and reinforced walls.”
Industry experts said that ideally the waste store would have a secondary containment system such as a roof…….
Plant security at Zaporizhia is now at a ‘high readiness’ level, while air force protection and training exercises have been stepped up. Officials say that if fighting reaches the plant, there are plans for the closure of access roads and deployment of soldiers.
But they say that no containment design could take the stresses of military conflict into account. “Given the current state of warfare, I cannot say what could be done to completely protect installations from attack, except to build them on Mars,” Sergiy Bozhko, the chairman of the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate of Ukraine (SNRIU) told the Guardian……
Antony Froggatt, a senior research fellow and European nuclear specialist at Chatham House agreed that a secondary containment system would offer greater protection from internal or external explosions.
“It is obvious that if you do not have an array of dry cast [interim] stores with secondary containment around it, then that will have a greater risk of release of radioactive material,” he said…..
Sources at the European Bank of Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) told the Guardian that any funding request from Ukraine for such a structure would be seriously considered. The bank has already made €300m available for nuclear lifetime extension programmes in Ukraine, before the regulators have even signed off on them.
We know about the weak links in the plant [security]… But I doubt that that these should be disclosed
A pall was cast over security arrangements at Zaporizhia last May when the plant was the scene of an armed confrontation between security guards and paramilitaries from the ultra-nationalist ‘right sector’, which is allied with neo-Nazi groups. The gunmen reportedly wanted to ‘protect’ the plant from pro-Russian forces, but were stopped by guards at a checkpoint…….
Westinghouse has lobbied the Ukrainian government at ministerial level to commit to buying their fuel for at least five reactors. Plant managers say that it will be used in Zaporizhia by 2017.
But local people in the reactor’s shadow say they fear the consequences of a patched up Soviet-era plant cranking up to generate electricity into the 2020s.
“History teaches us that history doesn’t teach us anything,” Ivanovic said. “Another catastrophe could happen again.” https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/06/nuclear-waste-stored-in-shocking-way-120-miles-from-ukraine-front-line
6 USA nuclear stations to have guards with assault rifles
Security Guards at San Onofre, 5 Other Nuclear Power Plants Now Allowed to Carry Assault Rifles, JUNE 8, 2016, BY LOS ANGELES TIMES, U.S. nuclear regulators have granted Southern California Edison permission to arm private security guards at the defunct San Onofre power plant with assault rifles and “ammunition feeding devices.”
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted Edison and five other nuclear power plants the special exemptions as a way to secure the facilities and the spent nuclear waste they store on-site…….http://ktla.com/2016/06/08/security-guards-at-san-onofre-5-other-nuclear-power-plants-now-allowed-to-carry-assault-rifles/
Heightened threat of a nuclear terror attack
The threat of a NUCLEAR terror attack is at its highest since the Cold War, as ISIS continues to try and obtain materials for a dirty bomb, warns international think-tank
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3632958/The-threat-NUCLEAR-terror-attack-highest-Cold-War-ISIS-continues-try-obtain-materials-dirty-bomb-warns-international-think-tank.html#ixzz4B7rqj3W2
- Threat of a nuclear attack on Europe at its highest level since Cold War
- ISIS continues to try to obtain nuclears and threat attack on the West
- Paris and Brussels terrorists had studied Belgian nuclear power plant
By SARA MALM FOR MAILONLINE, 9 June 2016
The threat of a ‘dirty bomb’ terror attack on a European city is at its highest level since the end of the Cold War, international nuclear experts have warned.
ISIS’s efforts to obtain nuclear materials, and continued threats to attack Western capitals contribute to experts’ analysis that the threat of a bomb is higher than ever.
ISIS has used chemical weapons in Iraq and Syria and militants linked to both the Paris and Brussels attacks had been studying a Belgian nuclear power plant.
‘ISIS has already carried out numerous chemical weapons attacks in Syria,’ Moshe Kantor, head of Luxembourg Forum on Preventing Nuclear Catastrophe, said at a conference on Tuesday.
‘We know it wants to go further by carrying out a nuclear attack in the heart of Europe.
‘This, combined with poor levels of security at a host of nuclear research centres in the former Soviet Union mean the threat of a possible ‘dirty-bomb’ attack on a Western capital is high.’
He urged the United States and Russia, both nuclear powers, to cooperate on using their technological resources to monitor the illegal transportation of radioactive materials.
In March, it emerged that Brussels suicide bomber brothers Khalid and Ibrahim El Bakraoui had originally been considering an attack on a nuclear site in Belgium…….http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3632958/The-threat-NUCLEAR-terror-attack-highest-Cold-War-ISIS-continues-try-obtain-materials-dirty-bomb-warns-international-think-tank.html
Rockland County Lawmakers Want Shutdown of Dangerous Indian Point Nuclear Station
VOICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE MAJORITY: Shut Down Indian Point
http://www.rocklandtimes.com/2016/06/09/voice-of-the-legislative-majority-shut-down-indian-point/June 9th, 2016 By Legislator Alden H. Wolfe (D- Montebello) Chairman, Rockland County Legislature
From the moment the Indian Point nuclear power plants went on line, safety issues began to emerge. Malfunctions and faulty parts caused the plants to be closed, and later restarted. As the Hudson Valley population grew and the problems at Indian Point increased, the reality of the potential for a catastrophic disaster became clearer and clearer.
Sadly, the Indian Point facility continues to suffer more failures than ever before. In the last year alone, there have been seven plant shutdowns. At this point, there is undoubtedly only one solution: Indian Point must be shut down immediately.
This week, I stood with other governmental and environmental leaders in Westchester to call for the shutdown of the plant, and to raise awareness about continuing dangerous conditions that exists in the plant.
One of the critical components of a nuclear plant is its cooling capability. Carefully laid metal plates channel cooling water through the reactor at a rate of 250,000 gallons per minute. The water flows through the core of the plant, cooling it and preventing a nuclear meltdown. The plates need to be arranged in such a way to control the amount and speed of the water that flows in the plant. Any deviation from those parameters could create a devastating meltdown endangering hundreds of thousands of lives.
The plates are kept in place by bolts known as “baffle-former assembly bolts.” The Indian Point Unit 2 nuclear reactor has 832 of these bolts, and each one is essential to keeping the metal plates secure. Nationally, roughly 1 – 3 percent of bolts at the average nuclear power plant are broken or missing. At Indian Point, that number is an astounding 27 percent.
Two hundred and twenty seven of the 832 bolts that are the difference between life and death are broken or missing at Indian Point. According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, that is “the largest seen to date at a U.S. reactor.” Shockingly, these failures occurred under the watchful eye of the NRC, which now declares the reactor safe to restart once the bolts are replaced. What other critical safety component will be the next to fail at this aging plant?
As if the threat of loss of life weren’t enough, last month it was estimated that in the event of a nuclear meltdown, it would take 1.5 million workers and as much as $1 trillion – with a T – to decontaminate the affected areas.
Indian Point is a powder keg. Every minute it operates is another risk to all of us, and it is a risk we should no longer allow. The Legislature will continue to work with those committed to closing Indian Point to put an end to this unnecessary gamble with our lives.
Alarm sounded on Southern California Edison’s plan for nuclear waste burial near beach
Local Leaders, Scientists Sounding Alarm Over Possible Nuclear Disaster In Southland http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/06/08/local-leaders-scientists-sounding-alarm-over-planned-nuclear-waste-dumping-in-san-onofre-state-beach/ June 8, 2016 LAGUNA BEACH (CBSLA.com) — A standing-room-only public forum was held Wednesday night to warn the community about Southern California Edison’s plans to bury radioactive waste near San Onofre State Beach.
If nothing is done, the utility will be allowed to bury 2,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste in canister less than an inch thick 100 feet from the beach, according to the newly formed Secure Nuclear Waste Coalition, made up of scientists, city leaders and people who live near the San Onofre nuclear plant.
“Each canister contains a Chernobyl’s worth of radiation, and there’s 50 of them. And they want to put 100 more without dealing with the fact that ocean air is going to cause them to crack and potentially and even explode,” Donna Gilmore said.
The California Coastal Commission approved the beachfront nuclear waste burial on October 6, 2015.
The group told those living within the 50-mile evacuation zone from San Diego to Long Beach that even though the San Onofre nuclear- generating station has been shut down, the real danger still lies in the still highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel that will remain on site for years.
“They have been called rightfully so – bombs in our backyard,” warned Rita Conn of the coalition.
Edison has maintained the shuttered nuclear power plant and the spent fuel rods stored there are safe. But some fear Southern California is one earthquake, one tsunami or one terrorist attack away from a nuclear disaster.
“Whether it’s mother nature, human error or terrorism, anything could close down the 7th largest economy of the United States for the next 10,000 years,” Laguna Beach resident Marni Magda said.
“If we don’t do anything about it, people are just going to have their heads in the sand and heaven forbid, something terrible happens,” Donna Tiab warned.
A call to Southern California Edison for comment Wednesday night was not returned.
Iran nuclear deal points to a better nuclear order
The Iran Deal’s Building Blocks of a Better Nuclear Order, Carnegie Endowment For International Peace, GEORGE PERKOVICH June 9, 2016 The U.S. debate over the Iran nuclear deal focused primarily on whether the agreement’s terms were sufficient to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, whether Iran would cheat, and whether Iran would use gains from sanctions relief to fund aggression against its neighbors and Israel. Practically no attention was paid in the media or in Congress to the possibility that the nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), could provide opportunities to strengthen the global nonproliferation regime. Of course, the potential to build on the agreement depends on its being successfully implemented; the deal’s collapse would create an international crisis that would subsume efforts to adopt its salutary provisions elsewhere.
It will take considerable time and patient give-and-take bargaining to persuade Russia and other influential players in nuclear diplomacy to build on the JCPOA, but there is no need to rush. Beyond the Republic of Korea, there are no other states on the near horizon that have the capability and intention to initiate a new fuel-cycle program.
The JCPOA innovatively fills in each of these lacunae in the NPT. While it does not settle or fully address these complex issues, it offers potentially important building blocks for doing so. For example, the JCPOA, in practice, establishes that the NPT does not a priori deny states the “right” to acquire and utilize capabilities to produce fissile materials for peaceful purposes. Critics have identified this as a major shortcoming. The agreement makes it easier for other states to insist that they, too, should be allowed to enrich uranium, which many observers fear could exacerbate proliferation risks. But the JCPOA also defines conditions, as well as monitoring and verification mechanisms, that would significantly bolster international confidence that a state’s fuel-cycle activities are exclusively peaceful.
Macau environmentalists warn on dangers for Taishan nuclear power plant
ENVIRONMENTALIST RAISES RED FLAGS ON NUCLEAR PLANT Macao Daily Times , MAY 31, 2016 – Sammie Lun, chairman of Green Environment Protection Association of Macau, is concerned about safety issues surrounding the upcoming Taishan nuclear power plant. The plant, located approximately 80 kilometers west of Macau, is currently under construction and has been surrounded by controversies….
Lun told the Times “I am personally totally against nuclear power plants.” Furthermore, he added that he maintains his opposition to the plant simply because of the pollution risks that are known to come with all nuclear power plants. “Even if the nuclear power plant is clean, if problems arise, they will be catastrophic, pollution will exist forever,” said Lun…..
NUCLEAR safety experts are calling for households in the UK to be supplied with anti-radiation pills
nuclear materials transported by road, rail, sea and air are also potential targets.
Fears of nuclear terror attack grow amid call for UK homes to be sent anti-
radiation pills NUCLEAR safety experts are calling for households in the UK to be supplied with anti-radiation pills as fears grow of the potential for terrorists to strike highly-sensitive sites around the country. Express, By TOM BATCHELOR May 31 A new report warns British nuclear plants are at risk of mass drone strikes, sophisticated cyber attacks and terrorist infiltrators.
Analysis for the Nuclear-Free Local Authorities (NFLA) found nuclear facilities at Faslane – where the UK stations its Trident missile system – was vulnerable to attack. Sensitive nuclear sites at Hunterston, Torness and Dounreay are also at risk, the study claims. More worrying still, UK authorities were deemed to be underestimating the risk of devastating terrorist attacks.
The report demands urgent action from ministers as it warns governments and regulatory agencies are struggling to keep up with evolving threats. Such is the fear of an attack that the NFLA is demanding anti-radiation pills be distributed to households in Glasgow, Edinburgh and surrounding areas.
The medication is a preventative measure which would help protect people from a radiation leak – either accidental or a deliberate attack.
The report on nuclear security, compiled by Dr David Lowry, a senior research fellow with the US Institute for Resource and Security Studies, argues that nuclear materials transported by road, rail, sea and air are also potential targets. He said: “The main consequences would be, whatever the level of attack, mass public panic and sensationalist media reportage. “We would inevitably see total road gridlock, as everyone tries to flee by car en masse at once.”
Drones could carry shaped charges, poison gas, booby traps or decoys, and could come individually or in large groups. The report said: “One heavily laden small drone could probably travel at least 20mph with a load of 5-10kg. “Just one 5kg shaped charge can penetrate 0.75 metres of reinforced concrete, or 0.25 meters of steel.”
The second report for NFLA, written by Dr Ian Fairlie, an independent radiation scientist, focuses on the stable iodine tablets that can prevent radiation poisoning after some nuclear accidents.
Several other European countries distribute the pills across a wide area, but in Scotland they are only given to residents who live within two or three kilometres of nuclear plants……..
EDF Energy, the French company that runs nuclear power stations in Scotland, and the Ministry of Defence, which runs the Faslane nuclear base, declined to comment. http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/675515/Nuclear-terror-attack-fears-experts-call-government-hand-out-anti-radiation-pills
China’s plans for floating nuclear power plants- major risks, good terrorism targets
While floating power plants may seem to present exciting economic opportunities–both for sites lacking affordable power and for the entities selling the plants—they also come with major risks.
“naval bombardment” is a growing risk in the South China Sea. A floating nuclear power plant might make a tempting target.
Floating nuclear power plants: China is far from first, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Dawn Stover , 2 June 16 On April 22, the state-owned Chinese newspaper Global Times reported that China plans to build as many as 20 floating nuclear power plants, the first of which could be producing power in just a few years. The story made a splash because the power from the floating reactors would most likely be used to accelerate construction of oil rigs and artificial islands in the South China Sea—already a source of border disputes and escalating tension between China and its neighbors.
Portable power stations may sound futuristic, but the idea is far from new. The United States launched the first floating nuclear power plant five decades ago, and Russia started its own construction project in 2000. Where the United States has seen a proprietary technology, though, China sees a marketing opportunity.
China floats an idea. Earlier this year, as part of its latest five-year plan, China’s National Development and Reform Commission approved the development of two nuclear reactors for marine platforms, one each from the country’s two big nuclear companies: The China General Nuclear Power Group will develop the ACPR50S, a small modular reactor with a generating capacity of 200 megawatts. Meanwhile, the China National Nuclear Corporation plans to work on the AC100S reactor, a marine version of its ACP100, which would generate 100 megawatts.
China General Nuclear has signed an agreement with China National Offshore Oil Corporation, which would presumably use floating nuclear power plants to provide power for offshore oil and gas exploration. China Shipbuilding Industry Corporation, the country’s largest shipbuilder, is building a barge-like platform for China General Nuclear’s pilot plant. An illustration of the platform looks very similar to Russian designs, which is not surprising. Only a few years ago, the Chinese were planning to build floating nuclear power plants in China using Russian technology; now the Chinese are floating their own designs………
Potential risks and rewards. Russia’s nuclear-powered icebreakers use highly enriched uranium, but the modified reactors for the Akademik Lomonosov will run on low-enriched uranium. That helps to alleviate concerns about proliferation, but environmental and safety concerns remain. A floating nuclear power plant would probably be safe from earthquakes, but storms could be a threat, and accident response would be slow in remote Arctic areas.
In the event of a nuclear accident, an offshore plant would have plenty of cooling water readily available. But a floating nuclear power plant might not have access to off-site backup power, and it would be more difficult to contain any radioactive releases than when an accident occurs at a land-based plant. A failed reactor might end up being abandoned at sea, as has happened to seven Soviet or Russian nuclear submarines.
Those risks aren’t preventing the Russians and Chinese from moving ahead with plans for floating nuclear power plants. Russia hopes to lease floating plants to other countries, and China sees an opportunity to capitalize on technologies originally developed by the United States and Russia…….
While floating power plants may seem to present exciting economic opportunities–both for sites lacking affordable power and for the entities selling the plants—they also come with major risks. As Bennett Ramberg, author of the book Nuclear Power Plants as Weapons for the Enemy: An Unrecognized Military Peril, noted in the Bulletin’s March 1986 issue: “[F]acilities can be placed on large lakes, inland seas, or oceans—on floating platforms surrounded by breakwaters, on floating vessels anchored to the marine floor, on artificial islands, or even undersea. However, there would be higher transmission costs for reactors, unique construction costs, and exposure to such dangers as ship collisions, accidental explosions, and naval bombardment.”
Thirty years later, “naval bombardment” is a growing risk in the South China Sea. A floating nuclear power plant might make a tempting target.
Editor’s note: The Bulletin’s archives from 1945 to 1998, complete with the original covers and artwork, can be found here. Anything after 1998 can be found via the search engine on the Bulletin’s home page. http://thebulletin.org/floating-nuclear-power-plants-china-far-first9522
Nuclear stations more at risk than Regulators say
Undercovered: New Report Says Nuclear Power Plants More Vulnerable Than Regulators Said, Mediaite, by Sam Reisman May 31st, 2016
Welcome to Undercovered: our new daily feature bringing attention to excellent reporting and stories we feel deserve a larger audience.
Nuclear power plants in the United States are more vulnerable to the threats of natural disaster or terrorism than federal regulators have said, according to study released May 20 by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
The Academies’ study is something of a rebuke to a 2014 study by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, a government agency that oversees the nuclear power industry. According to the chair of Academies board, the NRC’s study neglected to adequately evaluate the risks posed by terrorism or sabotage to nuclear power plants, specifically to the aboveground pools that hold the spent nuclear fuel. There are 96 such pools in the U.S. spread out across 30 states………http://www.mediaite.com/online/undercovered-new-report-says-nuclear-power-plants-more-vulnerable-than-regulators-said/
Probability of a big nuclear accident within the next 10 years
The Chances of Another Chernobyl Before 2050? 50%, Say Safety Specialists
And there’s a 50:50 chance of a Three Mile Island-scale disaster in the next 10 years, according to the largest statistical analysis of nuclear accidents ever undertaken. MIT Technology Review April 17, 2015 Given that most countries with nuclear power intend to keep their reactors running and that many new reactors are planned, an important goal is to better understand the nature of risk in the nuclear industry. What, for example, is the likelihood of another Chernobyl in the next few years?
Today, we get an answer thanks to the work of Spencer Wheatley and Didier Sornette at ETH Zurich in Switzerland and Benjamin Sovacool at Aarhus University in Denmark. These guys have compiled the most comprehensive list of nuclear accidents ever created and used it to calculate the likelihood of other accidents in future.
Their worrying conclusion is that the chances are 50:50 that a major nuclear disaster will occur somewhere in the world before 2050. “There is a 50 per cent chance that a Chernobyl event (or larger) occurs in the next 27 years,” they conclude.
The nuclear industry has long been criticised for its over-confident attitude to risk. But truly independent analyses are few and far between, partly because much of the data on accidents is compiled by the nuclear industry itself, which is reluctant to share it.
The International Atomic Energy Agency rates accidents using a system called the International Nuclear Event Scale, which is related to the amount of radiation released. However, the Agency does not publish a historical database of these accidents, probably because it has a dual role of both regulating the nuclear industry and promoting it.
So it has fallen to others to compile lists of accidents, the most comprehensive of which contains details of 102 events. (By comparison there are 72 events that have a rating on the International Nuclear Event Scale.)
Wheatley and co have significantly increased this number. They refrain from using the data from the International Atomic Energy Agency and compile their own list instead……..
The resulting list ranks 174 accidents between 1946 and 2014 and includes their date, location, the monetary cost in U.S. dollars, and the rating where available on the International Nuclear Event Scale and on another well-known scale called the Nuclear Accident Magnitude Scale.
The top five accidents ranked by monetary cost are the Fukushima accident in March 2011, the Chernobyl explosion in April 1986, a fire at the Tsuruga nuclear plant in December 1995, a fire at Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant in September 1957 and an incident in March 1955 at Sellafield, then known as Windscale, two years before the infamous fire at the facility. Indeed, Sellafield appears five times in the list of the top 15 of most expensive nuclear accidents.
The new database contains 75 percent more entries than the most comprehensive list up until now. And this extra data significantly improves the kind of statistical analysis that can be done.
Wheatley and co take full advantage of this. They say for a start that the new database reveals just how poor the International Nuclear Event Scale actually is. For that to be consistent, the Fukushima disaster would need to be rated at 10 or 11, rather than at the current maximum level of 7, they say…….
These kinds of large unexpected events are known as dragon king events and particularly difficult to analyse because they follow this different distribution, have unforeseen causes, and are few in number.
Nevertheless, Wheatley and co say their data suggests that the nuclear industry remains vulnerable dragon king events. “There is a 50% chance that a Fukushima event (or larger) occurs in the next 50 years,” they say……
The team calculate that a Chernobyl-scale event, the most severe in terms of radiation release, is as likely as not in the next 27 years. And they say a Three Mile Island event in the next 10 years has a probability of 50 percent……
Wheatley and co’s work suggests that a Chernobyl-scale accident is worryingly likely to occur within the working lifetime of the reactors now being built. And when that happens, a once obscure place will enter the lexicon as a synonym for catastrophe, just like Chernobyl, Windscale and Fukushima.
These risks will have to be carefully weighed against the advantages. The question for engineers, policy makers and the general public alike is whether that risk is worth taking, given what’s at stake.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1504.02380 : Of Disasters and Dragon Kings: A Statistical Analysis of Nuclear Power Incidents & Accidents https://www.technologyreview.com/s/536886/the-chances-of-another-chernobyl-before-2050-50-say-safety-specialists/
Growing anxiety over the safety of Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant
Concern Mounts For Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant http://www.ladailypost.com/content/concern-mounts-indian-point-nuclear-power-plant by Carol A. Clark on May 31, 2016 SECURITY News:
Located 26 miles from New York City, in the right weather conditions a radiation release at Indian Point nuclear power plant could reach Times Square in as little as 90 minutes, making evacuation of New York City impossible and rendering the area uninhabitable for a long time.
Critics of the agiing plant say that the disappearance and disintegration of more than 1 in 4 critical bolts holding the Indian Point nuclear reactor cooling system together is far more serious than owner, Entergy, admits.
Friends of the Earth (FOE) filed an emergency petition with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) May 24, calling for immediate action by the agency. The filing demands keeping reactor 2 offline until theNRC certifies that the problem is fully diagnosed and fixed, and that the reactor is safe to operate. It also calls for an immediate shutdown to inspect reactor 3 to ensure that the reactor’s bolts have not also disintegrated. Reactor 3 is the twin of reactor 2, but Entergy has rejected inspecting it until 2017 despite it being the same design and almost as old. Friends of the Earth also released an expert report detailing the breadth and depth of the bolt problem.
Although critical to the core cooling system (essential to preventing a nuclear meltdown), bolts securing the plates that channel cooling water through the reactor core are broken, degraded or missing in reactor 2. FOE says that Entergy is pushing simply to replace the bolts and restart the reactor in June—in time for the profitable peak summer energy season. The company has said that it will conduct a root cause analysis of why the bolts broke or disappeared but are conducting the repairs without completing such a comprehensive review.
“This is a matter of common sense denied: if a machine breaks, you have to figure out what is wrong and then fix it,” said Damon Moglen of Friends of the Earth. “Instead, at Indian Point, Entergy has decided that the priority is to get the damaged reactor up and running by summer to protect their profits. They are making a theoretical fix to a serious but undiagnosed problem. This is a recipe for disaster.”
The technical report, also released by Friends of the Earth, concludes that the more than 25 percent failure rate of the bolts is extraordinarily high and appears to be unprecedented in the history of the global nuclear power industry. Without a full root cause analysis approved by the NRC, the report warns that there can be no assurance that the remaining old bolts will not fail or that simply replacing bolts will fix the problem.
“Only a utility that puts profits ahead of public safety would resume running this nuclear reactor without an “all clear” from the federal regulator,” said Dave Freeman, who was the head of NYPA in the mid-1990s, and operated the nuclear reactors at that time.
FOE says that just as the Space Shuttle Challenger was brought down by a seemingly minor faulty O-ring, Indian Point is in danger from the damaged and missing bolts. Located twenty-six miles from New York City,in the right weather conditions a radiation release at Indian Point could reach Times Square in as little as ninety minutes, making evacuation of New York City impossible and rendering the area uninhabitable for a long time.
The Indian Point reactors’ licenses expired in 2013 and 2015, respectively, and the plant is operating beyond its 40-year life span. The NRC must intervene and take immediate steps to protect the public.
Russia’s backyard a hotbed of nuclear danger – Armenia
Dangerous Nuclear Security Failures in Russia’s Backyard Armenia is gambling with nuclear safety. National Interest Petra Posega May 30, 2016 Nuclear security is seemingly at the forefront of global attention, but the large framework of international safeguards is increasingly perceived as a toothless tiger. In the contemporary age, where asymmetric threats to security are among the most dangerous, the time is nigh to mitigate the risk of rogue actors having potential access to materials that are necessary to develop nuclear weapons.
Nowhere is this urgency more pivotal than in already turbulent areas, such as the South Caucasus. With many geopolitical instabilities, lasting for decades with no completely bulletproof conflict resolution process in place, adding the threat of potential nuclear weapons means creating a house of cards that can cause a complete collapse of regional peace and stability. That is precisely why Armenia’s recently uncovered recurring actions toward the goal of building its own nuclear capacity must be addressed more seriously. They should also attract a bolder response to ensure safety of the region is sustained.
According to a report by the Vienna-based nuclear watchdog the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Armenia has established a record of illegal trafficking in nuclear and other radioactive materials. There have been several serious incidents spanning from 1999 onward. A large number of reported incidents has occurred on the country’s border with Georgia, leading the IAEA to conclude there is high probability that a so-called Armenian route does in fact exist. There is a further evidence to support this assertion. An unusually high number of Armenians have been caught in nuclear trafficking activities. Additionally, some of the incidents that made their way into the official reports suggest that the main focus of trafficking activities is the smuggling of materials that could be used for nuclear weapons. There were also reports suggesting the trafficking of other radioactive materials that could be used for alternate purposes, such as building a so-called dirty bomb. Since the stakes are always high with nuclear weapons, this threat must not be underrated and dismissed too easily……..
It is worrying that some of the nuclear material that was trying to find its way into Armenia through South Ossetia has been, at least according to some reports, traced back to Russian nuclear facilities. This is of course no small wonder, since Russia is the official supplier of nuclear fuel for the only nuclear power plant in Armenia—the Metsamor nuclear plant, which supplies roughly 40 percent of the country’s electricity.
But the reactor itself demonstrates another facet of the nuclear threats that Armenia poses, namely, nuclear safety threats. The reactor is extremely outdated, and there are no proper safeguards and safety mechanisms installed to ensure adequate monitoring of its operations and recognition of potential faults in the system.
The world just marked the thirtieth anniversary of the devastating Chernobyl accident, and it is unsettling to know there is high risk of a similar disaster in an adjacent area. …. http://nationalinterest.org/feature/dangerous-nuclear-security-failures-russias-backyard-16392?page=2
Exposing the vulnerability of Scottish nuclear facilities to terrorist attack
Nuclear-Free Local Authorities say Scottish nuclear facilities are vulnerable to terrorist attack Herald Scotland, Rob Edwards 29 May 16, UK authorities are underestimating the risks of devastating terrorist attacks on nuclear plants and shipments of radioactive material, according to an expert report seen by the Sunday Herald.
A new analysis for the 40-strong group of Nuclear-Free Local Authorities (NFLA) highlights the vulnerability of Scottish nuclear facilities at Faslane, Hunterston, Torness and Dounreay to mass drone strikes, sophisticated cyber attacks and terrorist infiltrators.
UK authorities are underestimating the risks of devastating terrorist attacks on nuclear plants and shipments of radioactive material, according to an expert report seen by the Sunday Herald.
A new analysis for the 40-strong group of Nuclear-Free Local Authorities (NFLA) highlights the vulnerability of Scottish nuclear facilities at Faslane, Hunterston, Torness and Dounreay to mass drone strikes, sophisticated cyber attacks and terrorist infiltrators.
“The main consequences would be, whatever the level of attack, mass public panic and sensationalist media reportage,” he says. “We would inevitably see total road gridlock, as everyone tries to flee by car en masse at once.”
His report argues that a series of unidentified drone flights over French nuclear power stations last summer “should be seen as a major wake-up call for the nuclear industry”. Drones could carry shaped charges, poison gas, booby traps or decoys, and could come individually or in large groups.
Special Report on Nuclear America
Nuclear America: RT special report on state of US nuclear facilities 27 May, 2016 Over the past 18 months, a number of nuclear facilities across the country have experienced problems. From the Hanford Site in Washington state to Indian Point in New York, RT America takes a close look at the disastrous conditions at US nuclear sites.
Nuclear America: Special Report
Taking a look at the past, present and future of nuclear facilities in the US, Friday’s special report seeks to fill in the gap about America’s crumbling radioactive infrastructure that the mainstream media has ignored….https://www.rt.com/usa/344636-nuclear-america-special-report/
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
29 April – Nuclear Expert Webinar #1 – Radiation Impacts on Families with Mary Olson and Cindy Folkers
- 12:15 PM MT – 1:45 PM MT
- Location: Virtual – REGISTER TODAY
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- May 2026 (22)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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
nuclear-news 