Fire at Japan’s Hamaoka nuclear power plant
Fire at Japan nuclear plant put out; no danger to public – operator http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/asiapacific/fire-at-japan-nuclear-pla/2406296.html
Posted 07 Jan 2016 TOKYO: A fire broke out at Chubu Electric Power Co’s (9502.T) Hamaoka nuclear power plant in central Japan on Thursday, but was quickly put out and there had been no danger to the public, the company said.
The fire started at about 11 a.m. (0200 GMT) in the exhaust fan of the turbine building of the plant’s No.2 reactor, which is currently under being decommissioned, a company spokesman said.
The fan was shut down and the fire was confirmed as put out an hour later, he said. An investigation into the cause of the fire was under way.
The plant’s No.1 and No.2 reactors are being decommissioned, while its No.3, No.4 and No.5 reactors remain shut pending stringent safety checks imposed following the Fukushima nuclear disaster nearly five years ago.
(Reporting by Osamu Tsukimori; Editing by Richard Pullin) Reuters
Timeline of major incidents at Los Alamos National Laboratory
2013: A waste container at the lab is packaged with a volatile mix of nitrate salts and organic kitty litter and is shipped to WIPP.
Feb. 14, 2014: The container ruptures in the underground WIPP facility, leaking radiation. Several workers are exposed, although levels are not considered a health hazard. WIPP is closed indefinitely.
March-December 2014: Federal investigators issue scathing reports finding multiple problems with how waste is handled at the lab. One report finds workers who tried to alert supervisors to problems with waste containers were ignored.
Chronology of major incidents marking Los Alamos National Laboratory’s management history, Local News, Santa Fe, New Mexico , 4 Jan 16 The New Mexican
Jan. 1, 1943: A secret national laboratory is set up in Los Alamos to design a nuclear bomb during World War II. The University of California is named the official lab manager and is paid $5 million for a one-year contract. The U.S. Department of Energy oversees the lab’s operations. J. Robert Oppenheimer is the lab’s director.
1945: An atomic bomb is tested at the Trinity Site in Southern New Mexico on July 16, ushering in the nuclear age………
1988: A new federal law gives the Department of Energy more leverage over lab contractors. The University of California at Los Alamos National Laboratory is exempted from the law. Continue reading
Nuclear sub accident costs $1m, commander loses job
Down periscope: Nuclear sub accident costs $1m, commander loses job Rt.com 5 Jan, 2016 A US Navy commander has lost his job following an accident that damaged a 18,000-ton nuclear guided-missile submarine. The banged-up sub will cost taxpayers at least $1 million to repair, the Navy said.
Captain Dave Adams was relieved of his command of the USS Georgia on Monday, and was reassigned to another post with Submarine Group 10 of Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay in Georgia.
On November 25, 2015, Adams was commanding one of the two alternating crews that operate the USS Georgia when the 560-foot submarine crashed into a channel buoy on its way back to base in Kings Bay……https://www.rt.com/usa/328018-navy-submarine-crash-georgia/
Toronto anxious about city’s unreadiness for a nuclear emergency.
Is Toronto ready for a nuclear radiation emergency? http://www.metronews.ca/news/toronto/2016/01/05/is-toronto-ready-for-a-nuclear-radiation-emergency.html
As KI pill orders skyrocket, critics say Ontario’s nuclear emergency response plan desperately needs a post-Fukushima update. By: Torstar News Service, Published on Tue Jan 05 2016. For 44 years, the Pickering Nuclear Generating Station has operated just five kilometres from Toronto’s eastern edge. The Darlington Nuclear Generating Station sits just over 30 km away. While these plants are essential for keeping the lights on in Toronto, councillors are only just beginning to question the city’s readiness for a nuclear emergency.
On Dec. 1, the city’s executive committee asked the city manager to report back on issues with the Provincial Nuclear Emergency Response Plan, Toronto’s own nuclear emergency response protocols and whether it might be appropriate to expand distribution of potassium iodide (KI) pills beyond the current 10-km radius.
In October, Ontario Power Generation (OPG), which operates both Pickering and Darlington, mailed KI pills — which, taken in the aftermath of a nuclear disaster, can reduce the risk of thyroid cancer — to 200,000 homes and businesses within 10 km of the GTA’s two nuclear power plants.
Anyone living within 50 km of the two plants — an area inhabited by more than 4.5 million people, including the entire city of Toronto — can order them free from preparetobesafe.ca. While just over 600 orders had been placed before a Nov. 10 Torstar News Service story on KI pills, nearly 11,000 additional orders were made by Nov. 15.
“Lessons can be learned from nuclear tragedies in other parts of the world, lessons that can better prepare us and ensure the safety of Toronto residents,” 11 city councillors wrote in their nuclear safety agenda item. “We can also learn from international best practices that shape the emergency response of other regions to ensure we are doing all we can to keep our residents safe.”
Outside city hall, critics are also arguing that the response plan needs to be updated — something the province promised to do after a reactor disaster struck Fukushima, Japan, following a catastrophic tsunami nearly five years ago. Originally drafted in the early 1980s, the provincial response plan hasn’t been revised since 2009.
“Significant work has been done in the past two years related to reviewing and assessing” the response plan, a Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services (MCSCS) spokesperson told Torstar. “The objective of this review is to ensure that the PNERP is reflective of a severe, multi-unit nuclear accident comparable to Fukushima.”
The review is expected to be completed this month, with public consultations on a draft plan to begin mid-year. The province would not disclose the details of this new plan.
Although the aging Pickering plant is slated to close in 2020, the multibillion-dollar refurbishing project will extend Darlington’s life by three decades. To critics, a response plan update can’t come soon enough.
Critics on the top issues
Big release of radiation? Big shortcomings
“The province is not planning for an actual big terrible accident like Fukushima,” warns Theresa McClenaghan, executive director of the Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA). “There’s no detailed planning, resourcing or testing for a big accident that has big emissions out to the atmosphere.”
The emergency plan is based on scenarios in which plant operators would be able to contain and control radioactive releases, McClenaghan says.
“They like to think that if something goes really wrong, they can still control events enough to hold onto any radioactive emissions from the plants for a period of time… But based on Fukushima and Chernobyl, you can’t count on something’s going wrong and everything else going right.
The province’s position:
“(I)n a recent study, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) determined that the PNERP would adequately and effectively address a Fukushima type incident.”
Drinking water dangers
“Millions of people get their drinking water from Lake Ontario, but there’s no credible plan on how to deal with tap water contamination in the event of a nuclear accident,” says Greenpeace Canada’s senior nuclear analyst, Shawn- Patrick Stensil.
Both the Darlington and Pickering nuclear power plants sit next to Lake Ontario, and so do three aging nuclear power plants in upstate New York. According to environmental advocacy group Lake Ontario Waterkeeper, nine million Canadians and Americans rely on the lake for their drinking water. Many would be without alterative sources in the event of severe radioactive contamination.
“There’s no planning for this at all,” McClenaghan says. “I have to conclude that they’re assuming that dilution will be the answer.”
The province’s position:
“The PNERP identifies that the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) is responsible for dealing with contaminated water supplies.”
Lack of public awareness
According to a recent poll of 500 people within 10 km of the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station, a majority was unaware of decontamination procedures, the location of monitoring stations or emergency shelters or evacuation plans and routes. Some 80 per cent said they had no emergency plan; 58 per cent admitted to being totally unprepared.
“The polling our group did… shows that there needs to be ongoing and consistent education on what people in the GTA need to do to prepare themselves for a nuclear emergency,” says Durham Nuclear Awareness co-ordinator Janet McNeill.
urham Region is also listed as one of the areas slated for dense growth in the province’s Places to Grow plan.
“They are still putting additional population density in this region, which to me is just an appalling circumstance when we have such poor emergency planning,” McClenaghan adds.
The province’s position:
“The evacuation zones were scientifically determined.”
Expand KI pill distribution
In October, residents and businesses within 10 km of the Pickering and Darlington plants received free supplies of potassium iodide (KI) pills to help prevent thyroid cancer in the event of a radioactive release. While this measure is welcome, it lags behind other jurisdictions.
For example, those within 20 km of New Brunswick’s Point Lepreau Nuclear Generating Station receive pills, while people living within 50 km of Switzerland’s four nuclear power plants get them. On Dec. 1, Toronto’s executive committee voted to study whether the 10-km zone should be expanded to 50 km.
“Even if you did 30-km pre-distribution to every household and 50-km pre-distribution to vulnerable communities and schools, we’d still be far better off than we are today,” McClenaghan says.
The province’s position:
“The current planning basis review is addressing this as well.”
Documents reveal sloppy unsafe radiation management at San Onofre Nuclear Station
“My general impression from what I have seen in that report is San Onofre was very very sloppy, very very careless in handling radioactive material,” he told NBC 7 Investigates. “You basically had hundreds of pieces of contaminated equipment.”
The radiation levels around the concrete cubicle were so elevated “the inspector did not perform a survey inside,” according to the document
Documents Detail How Nuclear Material Was Handled at San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, 7 San Diego
Expert tells NBC 7 Investigates handling of nuclear material was “sloppy”
By JW August and Lynn Walsh Documents newly obtained by NBC 7 Investigates during secret talks about the condition of the land where the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station (SONGS) sits detail how nuclear material was handled at the plant since the 1980s.
The documents were released to individuals involved with the secret negotiations about the current condition and future handling of the 25-acre property. According to a source familiar with the negotiations, the secret meetings have been going on for about 20 months and involve all the players with a stake in the prime coastal property.
Those players include the U.S. Navy, which owns the property; the U.S. Marines, whose base surrounds the property; and Southern California Edison (SCE) and San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), both of which hold the lease to the property. Continue reading
A nuclear expert has serious concerns about safety, in South Africa’s nuclear project
Serious Nuclear oversight concerns, News 24, Desmund Bernardo , 3 Jan 16 I started my career within the South African Nuclear industry at Koeberg Nuclear Power Station in 1992. The country was going through a serious transition at the time that brought with it excitement as well as trepidation. I had a bright future ahead of me with continuous growth and opportunity. ………I now ask myself if the NNR is in itself, as an independent government body, skilled enough and have the qualified staff to license current and future licensed staff at Koeberg and future Nuclear Power stations?
To answer this question I had to use common sense and world-best practice. In the USA the NRC is their equivalent of the South African National Nuclear regulator. Within the NRC you find experts and highly skilled professionals that have reached the highest echelons of the American Nuclear industry. These people are accomplished and the Licensees in the industry treat them with utmost respect. The people that oversee and administer exams have at some stage also received a license to manipulate reactor controls. They know what to look out for…….
Today however the invaluable industry experience is sorely lacking within the NNR. Most of the staff in the NNR has never worked within the Nuclear industry at all. Very few have spent time at a Nuclear Power station never mind holding a license to operate from a control room……
Is the Government honest with us when they say that SA is ready to build more Nuclear power stations? Do the Government and the NNR understand their true duty to public safety? Can the President of South Africa assure the public that the employees within the NNR are capable and skilled? Can the NNR assure the public that they will ensure their safety as a watch-dog?
If you are concerned about the oversight issues in the Nuclear industry, the nuclear new build public participation process is a great opportunity for you to raise your concerns and hold the government accountable. Make your voice heard. http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/serious-nuclear-oversight-concerns-20160103
Rain-sodium reaction caused fire in nuclear waste dump
Beatty waste dump fire blamed on rain-sodium reaction By Wesley Juhl Las Vegas Review-Journal, December 31, 2015 A fire at a low-level radioactive waste dump in Nye County that shut down a 140-mile stretch of Nevada’s main north-south highway for almost 24 hours in October was caused by rainfall that seeped through a compromised cover and reacted with metallic sodium, according to a report released Thursday.
On Oct. 18, during heavy rainfall, the now-closed, state-owned landfill at the US Ecology dump near Beatty roared to life with explosions and fire. Beatty is about 115 miles northwest of Las Vegas, off of U.S. Highway 95.
A state probe of the incident was launched to consider if the fire was related to the wet weather, and if disposal records kept by the state in Carson City and at the site list any materials that could have reacted with water to cause the fire. Monday’s report details how corrosion of the steel drums containing the metallic sodium allowed the packing fluid to seep out, leaving the metallic sodium exposed to underground elements.
The 305-page report released Thursday collects statements from staffers who were there, aerial maps, results of laboratory analyses and a 195-page study on low-level radioactive waste management from 1981 as an attachment……..
Recommendations for long-term fixes from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection include setting up enhanced monitoring of the waste facility capable of handling remote video surveillance and radioactivity measurement. The agency suggested an evaluation of the various types of wastes placed in the site and a redesign of a more protective cover cap…….. http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/nevada/beatty-waste-dump-fire-blamed-rain-sodium-reaction
Underground wall ordered by EPA to prevent fire reaching nuclear waste landfill in Bridgestone
EPA orders barrier for nuclear waste landfill in Bridgestone http://www.bignewsnetwork.com/news/239881975/epa-orders-barrier-for-nuclear-waste-landfill-in-bridgestone Big News Network.comThursday 31st December, 2015 LENEXA, Kansas – The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has ordered the installation of a physical isolation barrier separating the radioactively contaminated West Lake Landfill Superfund Site from the smoldering Bridgeton Landfill to make sure that the underground fire does not reach the buried nuclear waste.
The barrier will consist of an underground wall. The decision also calls for the installation of additional engineering controls, such as cooling loops, to prevent potential impacts that could result if the subsurface smoldering were to come into contact with the radioactive materialscontained in the West Lake Landfill, Mark Hague, EPA regional administrator, said Thursday.
For years landfill owner Republic Services and state and federal regulators have considered a subterranean firebreak separating the smoldering Bridgeton Landfill from the adjacent West Lake Landfill, just a few hundred feet away.
But uncertainty over the location and extent of West Lake’s radioactive contamination has prompted more studies of West Lake, contaminated in 1973 with nuclear weapons processing waste from the Manhattan Project .
Now, EPA says those assessments, conducted with assistance from the US Army Corps of Engineers, are nearly complete. “We now have a better understanding of where those materials are located,” EPA spokeswoman Angela Brees said. “We’re at a point now where we had enough data where we needed to make a decision about a wall.”
The latest report on the radioactive contamination’s location is under final review and will be released soon, she said.
The worrying part is that the underground fire is now within 1,200 feet from the West Lake landfill.
“Finding a solution to mitigate the potential impacts of a subsurface smoldering event is a top priority for the community, and a top priority for EPA,” said Hague. “Today’s announcement is the first step in moving forward with the installation of a physical barrier and other engineering controls to address this issue.”
“We are now working through the highly complex details of implementing our decision and the associated legal steps. Once the plan is finalized, we are committed to providing this information to the public.”
The work of creating an underground barrier will be paid for by Republic Services, owner of both landfills. A spokesman for Republic Services said the company is ready to proceed with the barrier installation work. The company insists there is no risk of the fire reaching the nuclear material, but environmentalists disagree.
Ed Smith of the Missouri Coalition for the Environment said the barrier is not enough. “The only way to ensure a smoldering or surface fire doesn’t impact the radioactive wastes is to remove them,” Smith said, reported abc News.
West Lake was declared a Superfund site in 1990. In 2008, the EPA announced a remediation plan to cap the nuclear waste with rock, clay and soil. Opposition from the environmentalists however forced that the EPA to reconsider its decision.
No new plan has been worked out despite criticism from some lawmakers and residents who feel the agency is moving too slowly.
Japan’s Nuclear Regulation Authority is by no means confident of nuclear energy safety
No endorsement of nuclear safety, Japan Times, DEC 30, 2015 Power companies and the government should not be under the illusion that the safety of nuclear power plants under the new standards of the Nuclear Regulation Authority has been endorsed by the judiciary. While last week’s decision by the Fukui District Court paves the way for Kansai Electric Power Co. to restart reactors No. 3 and 4 at its Takahama Nuclear Power Plant as early as next month, the court urged the utility and the NRA to make constant efforts to aim higher for safety in the operation of nuclear plants.
The Fukui court reversed the decision given by the same court eight months ago under a different judge, who has since been transferred to another court. In April, the court ordered an injunction banning the restart of the Takahama plant on the Sea of Japan coast in Fukui Prefecture on the grounds that the NRA’s plant safety regulations, tightened after the Tepco plant meltdowns to make nuclear power plants resilient against bigger quakes and tsunami as well as severe accidents, were too lax to secure the plant’s safety. If the logic behind the decision was to be upheld, it would have dealt a crushing blow to the restart bid by the power industry and the administration because it negates the validity of the NRA regulation itself.
In its Dec. 24 decision on a complaint filed by Kepco against the April decision, the Fukui court said the NRA’s regulations are based on the latest scientific and technological knowledge and therefore rational. There’s nothing irrational in the NRA’s approval of Kepco’s plans to restart the Takahama plant, the court said in lifting the ban on reactivating the reactors that have cleared the NRA’s safety screening.
The two opposite decisions by the same court appear to symbolize the shakiness of legal judgments on the safety of nuclear power plant operation just four years after the nation experienced the world’s worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl. Residents in areas around the Takahama plant who sought the injunction banning its restart plan to take the case to a higher court, but Kepco, which started loading nuclear fuel to the No. 3 Takahama reactor the day after the court decision, is ready to reactivate it as early as next month……..
public concern over the safety of nuclear power remains strong. ………In lifting the ban on the Takahama plant’s restart, the Fukui court urged the utility, the national and local governments involved to take multi-layered measures to protect against severe accidents at nuclear power plants, including more effective evacuation plans. The court decision should serve as a reminder that merely clearing the NRA standard does not vouch for the safety of a nuclear power plant. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2015/12/30/editorials/no-endorsement-nuclear-safety/#.VoWP0LZ97Gh
Danger of moving plutonium from Dounreay to Sellafield after major flooding in Cumbria
Concerns over moving of Dounreay material by rail after flooding 14 December 2015 by David Kerr A campaign group has raised new concerns about the movement of waste materials from Dounreay by rail after major flooding in Cumbria.
Spent “exotic fuels” are being moved from the Caithness site to Sellafield in the north of England by rail, as part of the decommissioning process.
The first of a series of loads of unirradiated plutonium fuel from Dounreay’s Prototype Fast Reactor arrived at Sellafield last Monday.
Around 13 tonnes is due to be moved between the north of Scotland and Sellafield over the next few years……
Core spokesman Martin Forwood said: “It beggars belief that the decision to risk the plutonium fuel transport was taken despite the widely-trailed storm evidence and rail warnings.
“We condemn the perverse decision as being dangerously irresponsible and as a blatant breach of the stringent safety and security rules required for such transports.
“Those responsible have shown a level of incompetence that verges on criminal and should be weeded out, so that public and rail safety is not similarly endangered again.
“If any public confidence at all in such transports is to be salvaged, answers on the decisionmaking process must be given and lessons learned.”
The unirradiated plutonium is the latest fuel to be removed from Dounreay as part of a decommisioning program which started in 2001 when the site was closed. ………..https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/highlands/778884/concerns-raised-by-campaigners-over-moving-dounreay-material-by-rail-after-flooding/
.
Fukushima evacuees stay away: population at lowest level since 1945
Fukushima population at postwar low, down 5.7%, as nuclear disaster evacuees steer clear: census http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/12/28/national/fukushima-population-postwar-low-5-7-nuclear-disaster-evacuees-steer-clear-census/#.VoL85rZ97Gg FUKUSHIMA 29 DEC 15 – The population of Fukushima Prefecture fell by 115,458, or 5.7 percent, from 2010 to stand at 1,913,606 as of Oct. 1, marking the lowest level since the end of World War II, the prefecture has said.
The size of the drop, shown in a preliminary report on the census for 2015 released Friday, was the largest on record, due mainly to the evacuation of residents after the nuclear disaster at Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s disaster-crippled Fukushima No. 1 plant in March 2011.
The population was zero in the towns of Okuma, Futaba, Tomioka and Namie, all of which were evacuated.
The prefecture’s population fell for the fourth consecutive time in the census, which is conducted every five years.
By municipality, the population plunged 87.3 percent to 976 in the town of Naraha, where the government’s evacuation advisory was mostly lifted in September.
The population dropped 28.3 percent to 2,021 in the village of Kawauchi, where the evacuation advisory for its eastern part was removed in October 2014.
The figures indicate a lack of progress in the return of residents to the two municipalities.
By contrast, the population grew 0.6 to 2.1 percent in the cities of Fukushima, Iwaki and Soma, as well as the town of Miharu, as they accepted evacuees from areas close to the Tepco plant and workers involved in reconstruction-related projects, such as the decontamination of areas tainted by radioactive materials from the plant.
The number of households in Fukushima Prefecture rose 2.2 percent to 736,616, up for the 19th time in a row since the first census.
JIJI
St. Louis and the Radiation problem – recommendation – Just get out of town!
Fukushima Update: “Your Radiation This Week BEFORE IT’S NEWS, Dec 19 to Dec 26, 2015″ By Bob Nichols “………St. Louis and the Rad problem: St. Louis, now and forever more, will be remembered as a Manhattan Project nuclear garbage dump. It was for the most poisonous, flammable elements in the universe that just happen to also be radioactive. What will happen to the pieces of the rocks that incinerated Hiroshima, Japan and turned former people into mere shadows on the concrete? Nagasaki was blown away by Plutonium, manufactured by all reactors.My recommendation remains the same for healthy,
able-bodied people in St. Louis – Just leave, get out of town……
Underwater drones becoming a threat to UK’s Trident nuclear submarines
Trident: Nuclear deterrent under threat from underwater drones, expert warns, The Independent 27 Dec 15 Advances in technology may turn Britain’s £31bn nuclear submarine programme into an expensive liability. Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent could be torpedoed by an increasingly sophisticated breed of underwater drone, a leading defence expert has warned.
Rapid advances in underwater drone technology – autonomous underwater vehicles that can be controlled by ship- or land-based operators – threaten to make the controversial Trident nuclear submarines vulnerable, according to Paul Ingram, the chief executive of the British American Security Information Council (Basic).
Submarines have traditionally been seen as capable of providing stealth and invulnerability to pre-emptive attacks. The current requirement for Trident replacement subs is for them to operate as near to silently as possible.
However, a revolution in underwater drones, as well as advances in sonar, satellite and other anti-submarine warfare systems, mean that even totally silent submarines are likely to become detectable. Some sensor technologies can detect large submerged objects by monitoring small movements of surface water.
Experts warn that as the capabilities of detecting systems improve and their cost falls, large-scale remote and potentially autonomous sensor deployments become possible. The result is that the world’s oceans will become increasingly transparent, seriously calling into question the UK’s heavy reliance upon the Trident submarine programme for its nuclear deterrence………
In January, Carol Naughton, of the non-proliferation group British Pugwash, will launch a research project into the appropriateness of Trident as a platform for the UK’s nuclear weapons capability.
“We are in danger of embarking on a major spend that will not only fail to deliver the invulnerability required of the proposed deterrent system, but is also likely to add a worrying degree of instability into the nuclear weapons situation,” she said.
Last month the Prime Minister revealed that the strategic defence and security review (SDSR) had put the cost of the four subs at £31bn, up from £25bn nine years ago. The review said a contingency fund of £10bn would be set aside, suggesting the MoD anticipates the costs could rise still further.
The first sub is not due to come into service until the early 2030s. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/trident-nuclear-deterrent-under-threat-from-underwater-drones-expert-warns-a6786946.html
Dangerous to evaporate Fukushima’s radioactive water
Fukushima: Evaporating tank contents is not the solution http://www.ianfairlie.org/news/fukushima-evaporating-tank-contents-is-not-the-solution/ April 10, 2015 Recent news stories are suggesting that TEPCO is considering evaporating the 280,000 tonnes of highly radioactive water held in the 1,500 tanks at Fukushima. See http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/08/us-japan-fukushima-water-idUSKBN0MZ0WC20150408 and
http://rt.com/news/248041-fukushima-waters-evaporate-tepco/
Disposing large volumes of highly tritiated water is a serious problem for TEPCO but its evaporation proposal is quite dangerous. It is based on several misconceptions.
First, evaporating this radioactive water will NOT isolate the radioactivity: all it would do is convert liquid tritiated water to tritiated water vapour which would be emitted to the air at Fukushima and result in high exposures to those downwind of the plumes.
Second, evaporation would make the problem worse as, contrary to what many people assume, aerial emissions are more hazardous than liquid discharges to sea. Briefly, this is because you can avoid drinking tritiated water and food to a large degree, but you can’t avoid breathing in tritiated water vapour or absorbing it through skin.
Third, tritium is not “relatively harmless” as alleged. This is a common misconception: in fact, tritium is a relatively dangerous nuclide. For example, its beta particle inside the body is more harmful than most X-rays and gamma rays. But that’s just one aspect: tritiated water vapour has several other dangerous properties, and organically bound tritium (ie attached to lipids, carbohydrates and proteins) inside us is even more dangerous. See “Tritium- risks not properly assessed” in http://www.ianfairlie.org/lectures/
A complicating factor is the very high tritium levels in the tanks. From Japanese Government Meti fileshttp://www.meti.go.jp/earthquake/nuclear/pdf/140424/140424_02_008.pdf
– see slides 5 and 21- it can be seen that the tritium concentration in March 2014 was about 500,000 Bq per litre.
This is a very high level. As far as I’m aware, no internationally agreed limits exist for discharging tritium to water. But as a yardstick, the limit used by Ontario Power Generation (a nuclear utility in Canada) is 4,000 Bq/L.
TEPCO is facing a storage problem with its tanks on site now full, and no space to build more. But neither evaporating the tank contents nor discharging them to sea appears to be a solution. http://www.ianfairlie.org/news/fukushima-evaporating-tank-contents-is-not-the-solution/
The dangerous deception of ‘nuclear safety’ – Limerick Nuclear Plant
Nuclear safety a ‘dangerous deception’ http://www.pottsmerc.com/article/MP/20151226/NEWS/151229801— Dr. Lewis Cuthbert ACE President 12/26/15,
It is dangerous deception to suggest safety is first for Limerick Nuclear Plant (Mercury, Nov. 18). No emergency plan or drill can make Limerick safe.
A body of evidence shows why “safety first” is not Exelon’s policy for Limerick Nuclear Plant.
Examples:
1. Without continuous high-intensity flashing lights (day and night), Limerick’s cooling towers are considered a height safety hazard by FAA.
• Any structure over 200 feet is a safety hazard. Limerick’s cooling towers are 507 feet high, • A structure less than three miles from a public-access airport must be marked. Limerick’s Heritage Airport is about one mile from Limerick’s cooling towers.
Exelon, an electric company, should have no difficulty immediately restoring lights on Limerick’s cooling towers, yet Exelon failed to do that.
Safety first? Hardly! The fact is, lights onoth cooling towers remained out for at least 24 days, despite increased air traffic over the holidays and occasional dense fog (reported Dec. 2). Even worse:
• Unit 2 cooling tower lights were left out for over six months. May 2015 residents informed NRC, yet it was December before Exelon restored Unit 2 lights.
• November 9 Exelon reported that Unit 1 cooling tower lights went out too. Unit 1 lights will remain out until spring 2016 (Mercury Dec. 10).
The only reason Limerick’s cooling tower height safety hazard designation was waived in the first place during construction was the promise that Limerick’s cooling towers would have continuous flashing lights. Now, they remain out for as long as six months at a time because Exelon, an electric company, won’t fix them immediately. This is reckless negligence!
2. Four Years after Fukushima, Limerick’s Fukushima-like reactors are no safer.
• Exelon is making a mockery of NRCs 2012 Post-Fukushima Safety Recommendations to minimize meltdowns risks at Limerick Nuclear Plant. Exelon is using dangerous delay tactics to avoid costs for minimizing catastrophic meltdowns risks. NRC negligently lets them get away with it.
• Despite requesting compliance without delay in 2012, NRC’s 2015 reports show that Exelon’s “PLANS” for compliance aren’t even complete.
Some important Limerick safety compliance issues have been delayed until 2019, despite dramatically increasing meltdown risks at Limerick. Examples of dangerous delays to avoid and/or eliminate Exelon’s costs:
• Vent installations – to avoid hydrogen explosions. In 2015, Exelon still has no workable plan.
• No filters for vents – to minimize radiation releases after meltdowns. Exelon refused to install filters, despite NRC staff stating, “Vents without filters become radioactive hoses into the sky. Vents are vital, regardless of costs to the industry.”
• Spent fuel pool instrumentation – still not installed, despite risk of fuel pool meltdowns.
• Emergency equipment still not guaranteed to be deployable – during earthquakes and tornadoes. Despite stronger and more frequent threats at Limerick, Exelon’s timeline to finalize procedures and designs remains open. Despite earthquake fault fractures under Limerick’s reactors, fuel pools, control room, turbine building, and rad-waste building, Exelon is planning to delay its self-serving seismic “study” for Limerick until 2019.
3. Exelon makes no effort to reduce public exposure to limerick’s routine and accidental radiation releases or cooling tower pollution.
Despite documented cancer rates far higher than the national and state average, especially in children, Exelon failed to:
• Filter routine radioactive discharges into the Schuylkill River, a vital drinking water resource.
• Notify the public until 23 days after the March 19, 2012 radioactive spill into the river.
• Stop using high-burn fuel (up to 30 percent more radioactive gas releases).
• Filter massive, toxic cooling tower pollution.
• Clean up water and soil from Limerick’s radioactive spills.
It’s far too dangerous for Exelon to avoid costs for Limerick’s safety. That further jeopardizes our health, safety, and financial interests. If safety was actually first, Limerick would close now. Agree? E-mail aceactivists@comcast.net.
1 This Month
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (74)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
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
