nuclear-news

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

ISIS insurgents get hold of nuclear materials in Iraq

safety-symbol1flag-IraqIraq tells UN that ‘terrorist groups’ have seized nuclear materials  SMH, July 10, 2014 – Michelle Nichols New York: ISIL insurgents in Iraq have seized nuclear materials used for scientific research at a university in the country’s north, Iraq has told the United Nations in a letter appealing for help to “stave off the threat of their use by terrorists in Iraq or abroad”.

Nearly 40 kilograms of uranium compounds were kept at Mosul University, Iraq’s UN Ambassador Mohamed Ali Alhakim told UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in a letter this week.

“Terrorist groups have seized control of nuclear material at the sites that came out of the control of the state,” Mr Alhakim wrote, adding that such materials “can be used in manufacturing weapons of mass destruction”. However, US security sources said it would be difficult to make weapons from the material.

“These nuclear materials, despite the limited amounts mentioned, can enable terrorist groups, with the availability of the required expertise, to use it separate or in combination with other materials in its terrorist acts,” Mr Alhakim said.

He warned that they could also be smuggled out of Iraq.

A US government source familiar with the matter said the materials were not believed to be enriched uranium and therefore would be difficult to use to manufacture into a weapon………http://www.smh.com.au/world/iraq-tells-un-that-terrorist-groups-have-seized-nuclear-materials-20140710-zt2eb.html#ixzz378WRoppD

July 10, 2014 Posted by | incidents, Iraq | Leave a comment

Ukraine’s nuclear reactors now a perilous risk, with the threat of civil war

exclamation-flag-UkraineThe Chilling Threat Of Nuclear Civil War In Ukraine http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article46340.html  Jul 07, 2014 By: Andrew_McKillop Playing With Fire The WNA-World Nuclear Association which tirelessly promotes nuclear power presents Ukraine as a poster child of civil nuclear power. It says that after construction of Ukraine’s first-ever civil nuclear power complex – at Chernobyl in 1970 – Ukraine’s present 15 NPPs (nuclear reactors) grouped into 4 major complexes operated by State monopoly NNEGC Energoatom had a combined capacity of about 13 900 MW and were all VVER-type reactors (mostly VVER-320s) of Soviet design. Using 2009 data, they produced about 48% of Ukraine’s total electricity output of 177 billion kWh of which 4 billion kWh was exported.

Nearly all major Ukrainian NPP complexes are in western Ukraine – with the exception of Zaporijia or Zaporhyzhya, located about 125 kms north of Crimea. Flight time from Crimea in a Mikoyan-Gourevitch 29 (Mig-29 or Su-29) carrying up to 5000 kilograms weight of bombs and missiles can be estimated at about 3 minutes and 24 seconds. Russia’s Crimean forces also have the later navalised enhanced Mig-29K codenamed Fulcrum-D by Nato, with a combat radius of about 1800 kilometres.

The net total capacity of the six-reactor Zaporija complex is given by the WNA as the highest in Europe, at 5718 MW, with the Graveslines complex near Dunkerque in France, operated by France’s EDF as second-largest in Europe at 5400 MW. The radiological inventory of either of these complexes is hundreds of times the radiological output of the single Hiroshima atom bomb of 1945.

Apart from Zaporija-6, all other VVER-320 reactors at the complex were built before 1989 with a 30-year design lifetime. Rather than decommissioning these reactors, and as in other European countries, Ukraine has sought to extend their operating lifetimes. As of March 2013, the European Bank for Reconstruction & Development (EBRD) announced a 300 million euro loan for reactor safety upgrading to the end of 2017, matching another 300 million euro loan from Euratom.

In total, EU atomic agencies have provided or intend to provide 1.4 billion euros to extend Ukrainian reactor lifetimes by investing in “up to 87 safety measures addressing design and safety issues”, including national emergency preparedness for NPP accident management.

To be sure, none of this includes deliberate attack by military aircraft on particularly soft NPP targets!

Unsafe (Even In) Peacetime
Soviet design VVERs have a deserved reputation for danger. Accession to the European Union of Bulgaria, Slovakia and Lithuania was delayed solely by the question of shutting down their 8 Soviet-design PWRs (pressurized water reactors).

This was a non-negotiable condition for their entry to the EU.

However and overall in eastern Europe, 11 of the earlier RBMK series of PWRs, and 4 VVER 230s, which preceded the slightly safer 320s still operate. The RBMK series, exactly like early Westinghouse (American) PWRs was directly scaled up from graphite-moderated, water-cooled submarine power reactors. It could be called a “naked reactor” due to its critically low amounts of shielding and cladding. Apart from submarine propulsion, its other main design goal was maximized plutonium production – for bomb material – during operation. Operator safety was a minor concern!

After the Chernobyl accident in April 1986, EU governments were quick to point the finger at RBMK and first-generation VVER 230 reactors in Eastern Europe, mainly to tout the claimed high levels of safety built into Western designs. In the emotive discussions after Chernobyl, Western safety standards were taken as unquestioned yardsticks. The politically-motivated communication on this subject enabled Western governments to avoid shutting down any Western PWRs and no Western construction project was aborted by political decision, due to constant and heavy manipulation of public opinion.

In the run-up to Germany’s reunification, the government in 1989 examined the feasibility of upgrading the six VVER reactors then under construction in East Germany, one of which had just started up. For purely financial reasons the four operating V-230s at Greifswald and an earlier VVER at Rheinsberg were closed in 1990. Although the units under construction could be brought up to Western safety standards, no investor could be found to take on the re-licensing risk. Especially in Germany, the post-Chernobyl reactor safety scare led Siemens to develop the claimed “uber safe PWR’ now called the EPR. Since Siemens complete abandonment of nuclear engineering in 2011, after Fukushima, only France’s Areva continues with this uber-expensive reactor design. Following 9/11, firstly Siemens and then Areva claim that EPRs are able to resist the crash of 1 wide-bodied civil airplane.
No mention is made of potential military attack by fully-armed Mig-29s. Either singly or in groups!

Ukraine’s Nuclear Civil War
Energoatom provides a map of major reactor complexes in Ukraine, mostly located in western Ukraine
http://www.energoatom.kiev.ua/en/map_aes/.

We can note that towns focused for military repression of pro-Russian separatists by the Kiev government – Mariupol, Slovyansk, Luhansk and Donetsk – are like Crimea also about 120 to 150 kilometres from the Zaporija reactor complex. Well before the Flash Mob uprising in Kiev, former Ukrainian minister of Energy and Coal, Eduard Stawicki on January 27 stated that UN IAEA experts were going to arrive in the country with an unscheduled inspection “conditioned with the fact of threats of seizure and blocking Ukrainian thermal, nuclear and hydro power stations. We have permanent inspection regime, but now the situation is very difficult with such tension in the society”.

Since late January there have been several under-reported and nuclear-related actions in Ukraine as tension deepens, such as the brief occupation of the Zaporija complex by 40 Neo-nazi Right Sector actvists from Kiev in May in an action “designed to deter pro-Russian federalists and separatists”. From April 2014, the Kiev government has on several occasions made calls for “Western governments” to provide international monitors and “non-aligned peacekeeping forces” to protect the country’s NPPs, repeatedly stating that major attacks on NPP complexes could release more radiation than Chernobyl and Fukushima combined.

To be sure no action has resulted and all is in place for Ukraine’s civil war to “go nuclear”. The nuclear threat is with no possible doubt yet another reason why Western powers are making sur not to engage Russia in a hot war for the control of Ukraine – but the internal and domestic dynamic of civil war and Kiev’s attempt to suppress pro-Russian activists open the door to a nuclear endgame at any time.

By Andrew McKillop Contact: xtran9@gmail.com

Former chief policy analyst, Division A Policy, DG XVII Energy, European Commission. Andrew McKillop Biographic Highlights

Co-author ‘The Doomsday Machine’, Palgrave Macmillan USA, 2012

 

July 7, 2014 Posted by | safety, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Mystery, danger and continuing radiation release from Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP)

radiation-warningRadiation Releases Continue from Nuclear Waste Isolation Project Something Happened in February, Something is STILL Going On Dissident Voice, by William Boardman / July 6th, 2014

Environmental radiation releases spiked again in mid-June around the surface site of the only U.S. underground nuclear weapons waste storage facility near Carlsbad, New Mexico. The facility, the Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP), has been shut down since February 14, when its isolation technology failed, releasing unsafe levels of Plutonium, Americium, and other radio-nuclides into the environment around the site.

Radiation levels in the underground storage area, 2,150 feet below the surface vary from near-normal to potentially lethal. At the time of the February accident, more than 20 WIPP workers suffered low level radioactive contamination, even though none of them were underground. WIPP assumes, but cannot confirm, that underground conditions have not changed since May 31, when the last entry team went into the mine, as reported by WIPP field manager Jose Franco on June 5:…….

What happened underground remains a mystery and a danger

More than five months after the February accident, officials still have no certain understanding of what went wrong. It is generally thought that one 55 gallon drum of waste (perhaps more than one) overheated and burst, spilling radioactive waste in a part of the storage area known as Panel 7, Room 7. This room, designated a “High Contamination Area,” measures 33 by 80 feet and presently has 24 rows of waste containers. The room holds 258 containers, tightly stacked and packed wall-to-wall, with no aisles to allow easy access. There is some clearance between the top of the stacks and the room’s ceiling.

The high contamination in Room 7 is a threat to human inspectors, limiting inspection of the room to date to mechanical means, primarily cameras on extension arms. As a result of these limitations, WIPP teams have inspected only ten of the 24 rows of waste containers in Room 7. Rows #1-14 have been out of reach of the available equipment.

WIPP has begun building a full scale replica of Room 7 above ground, to provide a realistic staging area in which to test methods of remote observationthat might reach the 14 uninspected rows………http://dissidentvoice.org/2014/07/radiation-releases-continue-from-nuclear-waste-isolation-project

July 7, 2014 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

Unreported very high risk of nuclear drums exploding at New Mexico waste facility

safety-symbol-SmFlag-USAInternal Memo: 10 times more WIPP nuclear drums risk exploding than media reported — Expert: Data shows increasing amount of radioactivity going into environment — Official: Something “caused drum to later catch fire”; Gov’t should investigate if truck fire & electrical surge led to the radiation release http://enenews.com/10-times-as-many-potentially-explosive-nuclear-waste-drums-inside-wipp-dump-than-reported-expert-data-shows-increased-amounts-of-radioactivity-going-into-environment-official-drum-ca

AP, July 4, 2014 (emphasis added): Teams of scientists and engineers are still trying to determine exactly what caused a barrel [at New Mexico’s Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)] from Los Alamos to burst […] Despite hundreds of experiments to date, investigators have been unable to create any reaction that would have caused the container to leak like it did […] The accident has […] indefinitely shuttered the mine […] According to the memo obtained by The Associated Press, [Los Alamos National Laboratory’s Principal Associate Lab Director Terry Wallace] told employees at a meeting Monday that the probe is focused on 16 barrels of highly acidic, nitrate-salt-bearing waste, including the drum that leaked at [WIPP]. Ten of the other barrels [11 total, including the one that ruptured] are also underground at the [WIPP] mine[…] Wallace is quoted in the memo as saying that a technical review “identified certain conditions that might potentially cause an exothermic reaction inside a drum. Among them are neutralized liquids, a low pH and the presence of metals.”

According to the AP’s article above, the investigation is now focusing on 11 barrels in the WIPP underground, yet only a few weeks ago the AP reported: “Officials say 6… potentially explosive containers of waste [were shipped] from Los Alamos National Laboratory… [Five] are being stored at a site in West Texas [and] one at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant [believed to be the source of the radiation leak].

Albuquerque Journal interview with Miles Smith, EnergySolutions’ vice president of Southwest operations, July 3, 2014: “We don’t believe the combination we put into the drums, we don’t think it has the ability to start burning on its own. It needs an outside source of ignition […] It doesn’t look like the kitty litter was the cause […] I don’t believe [absorbent materials] caused the explosion or the fire. [One of the two suspect products, an acid neutralizer, is not a problem]. Its safety sheet says it is not incompatible [The other product, a base neutralizer, is incompatible with the nitrates in WIPP waste but this neutralizer wasn’t used in the WIPP-bound barrels.] We think there are other things that caused the drum to later catch fire [there] are a lot of things out there [to investigate, including a truck fire and an electrical surge in the days before the leak.]

See also: “Very likely” multiple nuclear waste drums exploded at WIPP — Signs of fire observed — It was clearly something major

Albuquerque Journal, July 3, 2014: Don Hancock of the Southwest Research and Information Center, a WIPP watchdog, said Smith’s comments are consistent with those of state Environment Department […] but noted that no one from [Los Alamos National Lab] has weighed in. “I would say I’ve always been skeptical of the kitty litter issue,” he said. “Anybody with a cat knows that kitty litter itself is not combustible. It’s got to be kitty litter and something else.”

Don Hancock, Southwest Research and Information Center, June 25, 2014: […] the current data show that there are increased amounts of radioactivity going into the environment as contaminated filters are being changed. […] DOE presumes that the ventilation system and the exhaust shaft are too contaminated to use in a re-opened facility. On June 18, the House Appropriations Committee approved $20 million dollars […] as a down payment for new ventilation and a new exhaust shaft. […] it is very difficult or impossible to determine exactly what happened and how much contamination was released.

See also: Radiation spikes at WIPP nuclear facility — Hits highest levels since initial hours of radioactive release in February — Document link removed from official website — Gov’t analyzing samples for “potential impact on human health”

July 7, 2014 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

Japanese nuclear power plant to restart without a crucial off-site emergency center

safety-symbol1flag-japanSendai nuclear plant set to restart without off-site emergency center July 07, 2014 THE ASAHI SHIMBUN  by Toshio Kawada and Chikako Kawahara. The Sendai nuclear power plant in Kagoshima Prefecture could restart two reactors in autumn without a crucial emergency facility in place to deal with a possible nuclear accident and evacuations of host communities.

The Sendai plant, operated by Kyushu Electric Power Co., is expected to be the first to resume operations among all plants that have applied for safety screenings by the Nuclear Regulation Authority.

The Cabinet Office in September 2012 instructed all prefectures hosting nuclear power plants to ensure that off-site emergency centers be equipped with ventilation and other systems to prevent radiation contamination and be located between 5 and 30 kilometers from the nuclear plant.

It also mandated host prefectures to designate multiple backup facilities in case the functions of the off-site centers are crippled by a disaster, which is what occurred during the Fukushima nuclear disaster that started in March 2011.

The deadline for completion of the emergency off-site centers is September 2015.

Kagoshima prefectural government officials said construction of the off-site emergency center for the Sendai plant has lagged behind schedule due to delays in discussions with the central government…….

the Nuclear Regulation Authority is set to compile a draft of the safety screening results for the Sendai plant in Satsuma-Sendai as early as July 9. If the plant clears the NRA’s safety screening process, its two reactors will be restarted in autumn at the earliest.

Off-site emergency centers are supposed to function as the bases of operations for officials from the central government, local governments and utilities to combat a nuclear crisis and coordinate evacuations of residents…….

The government’s Investigation Committee on the Accident at the Fukushima Nuclear Power Stations has called for the prompt construction of off-site emergency centers.

But renovations and relocations of the emergency facilities are also behind schedule around Japan.

In addition to the Fukushima plant, off-site centers need to be relocated from the 5-km radius of four other nuclear power plants, including Shikoku Electric Power Co.’s Ikata nuclear plant in Ehime Prefecture.

An official of Ehime Prefecture said if an accident at the Ikata plant cripples the existing off-site center before September 2015, the front-line headquarters will be “relocated to a safe location like in the Fukushima crisis” in a stop-gap measure. http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201407070029

July 7, 2014 Posted by | Japan, safety | Leave a comment

All too close to USA Nuclear Waste project – very strong earthquake

‘Very strong’ quake hits New Mexico border — Seismic data spikes at WIPP nuke site — Emergency declared at nearest nuclear plant — “Larger magnitude event could still occur” — TV: “Sounded like a train derailed” — “Very rare… Still trying to figure out what caused it… no known fault lines in area” (VIDEOS) http://enenews.com/very-strong-quake-hits-near-new-mexico-border-seismic-data-spikes-near-wipp-site-emergency-decalred-at-nearest-nuclear-plant-larger-magnitude-event-could-still-occur-tv-sounded?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=e

USGS, June 29, 2014: M5.2 – 50km NW of Lordsburg, NM 04:59:33 UTC (Max CDI (maximum reported intensity) = VII, Very Strong)

Fox 10, June 29, 2014: “Thought we heard a train coming… it sounded like a train might have derailed… [Scared] is an understatement, we were shaking.” -Sherry Huggins, near New Mexico/AZ border

KOLD-TV Tuscon, June 29, 2014: “A very rare occurrence… even the lights were moving around [in our Tuscon studio]”

Fox 10, June 29, 2014: “A lot of people were like what’s going on?… Looks like a bomb went off.” -Steve Krafft, reporter

NRC, June 30, 2014: PALO VERDE (nuclear plant near Phoenix, AZ) […] Emergency Class: UNUSUAL EVENT […] EMERGENCY DECLARED […] “The following event description is based on information currently available. If through subsequent reviews of this event, additional information is identified that is pertinent to this event or alters the information being provided at this time, a follow-up notification will be made […] Initial walkdowns of plant equipment and review of plant parameters have found no unusual conditions or damage to plant equipment. No abnormalities caused by the seismic event were observed. […] Initial analysis of the Seismic Monitoring Instrumentation System indicated a seismic event, below the magnitude of the 0.10g spectra Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) and the 0.20g spectra Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE). […] Notified DHS, FEMA  […] Emergency classification termination was declared […]

KOLD-TV Tuscon, June 29, 2014: “They are still trying to figure out what caused the quake because there is no known fault line in the area… It’s very common to see aftershocks, especially after a strong earthquake like what we saw… So where is this all coming from?… It’s probably occurring along a fault that we don’t know anything about… Maybe there is a new fault… and they’re going to be able to hopefully identify that fault… it’s not coming from any of the known faults.”

KRQE, June 29, 2014: “The southern half of New Mexico got a Saturday shake-up.”

Copper Area News, June 30, 2014: It is likely that small magnitude aftershocks will continue in the Duncan area for days or weeks. Most will probably go unfelt. A larger magnitude event could still occur. In the event of severe ground shaking, residents are advised to “Drop, Cover and Hold on”.

See also: – Official: We believe there’s been a breach… “It’s a very serious thing” — ‘Seismic event’ mentioned — High levels of alpha and beta radiation detected (VIDEO)

July 5, 2014 Posted by | incidents, USA | Leave a comment

Safety and secrecy concerns about China owning and managing Britains nuclear reactors

flag-Chinaflag-UKCHINA NIGHTMARE http://tomburke.co.uk/2014/07/03/china-nightmare/ July 3, 2014 by tomburke The prospect of the Chinese becoming owners, managers and even constructors of nuclear power stations in Britain has caused anxiety in some unexpected places. Both the right and the left, united in their determination to press ahead with more nuclear, have raised objections. Carefully wrapped in a blanket of security rhetoric, their argument boils down to an Augustinian ‘Bring me nuclear, but not by them’.

Meanwhile, a truly substantial reason why we should worry about Chinese involvement in the nuclear industry is yet to be noticed by anyone but the French Nuclear Safety Authority. They have just complained publicly about the lack of communication with their Chinese counterparts. Explaining this to the French Parliament they pointed out that ‘one of the difficulties in our relations is that the Chinese safety authorities lack means. They are overwhelmed.’

This led one of the French regulators to worry that ‘It’s not always easy to know what is happening at the Taishan site.’ (where Areva are constructing a reactor of the same type as they want to build in Britain). Another French inspector reported seeing big machinery such as steam generators and pumps not being maintained at ‘an adequate level.’

So why does this matter to us? We have very good safety regulators with an impressive track record of managing nuclear facilities well. We should worry about it because the Chinese are currently building only 28 reactors at the same time. This is the fastest rate of reactor build anywhere ever. Even so, they intend to double this build rate before the end of this decade. This is likely to make ‘overwhelmed’ seem like an understatement.

The importance of a rigorous regulatory regime has long been understood by the nuclear industry to be essential to retaining public confidence. ‘ An accident anywhere is an accident everywhere.’ has long been a mantra of industry leaders. Among the many contributors to the seriousness of the accident at Fukushima were failings in the nuclear regulatory culture.

Britain’s nuclear reactor programmes may have been a regulatory success but they have been an economic failure. A former head of the then nationalised electricity industry told Parliament that the AGR programme was ‘the worst civil engineering disaster in British history’. But this had one huge, if unlooked for advantage. No-one else had reactors like them. This meant that when the accidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima happened we were well placed to argue that it couldn’t happen here.

If we go ahead with the reactor at Hinkley this comfortable position will no longer be defensible. Hinkley will be a pressurised water reactor (PWR) just like most of the reactors in operation around the world and all those the Chinese are building. If the already stretched  Chinese nuclear regulators prove unable to prevent a nuclear accident in China it will have  direct repercussions here.

This compounds the gamble that the British government is taking with Hinkley. Not only are we selling 35 years of index linked tax receipts to the French government in return for electricity at twice the price we are currently paying for it but we are also placing the security of our future electricity supply into the hands of China’s ‘overwhelmed’ nuclear regulators.

If they fail to prevent an accident at a PWR in China it is very unlikely that the people of Somerset, or the rest of the country for that matter, will consent to one continuing to operate in Britain.

July 5, 2014 Posted by | China, safety, UK | Leave a comment

False alarm at Californian nuclear power plant

Erroneous Alerts, Sirens, Calls, Alarm Californians, Firehouse MATT HAMILTON  ASSOCIATED PRESS  JUNE 28, 2014 Repairs to a nuclear power plant’s siren system in San Luis Obispo County sent residents into a panic as they were accompanied by cellphone messages telling them to ‘prepare for action.’ LOS ANGELES (AP) — People in San Luis Obispo County received a series of unsettling, erroneous emergency alerts Friday as repairs were being made to a nuclear power plant’s siren system, including a vague cellphone message that told them to “prepare for action.”

The chain of mistaken alerts began arousing confusion and fear when a siren that’s part of the Diablo Canyon Power Plant’s warning system began wailing Friday afternoon for no apparent reason, county emergency services manager Ron Alsop said………http://www.firehouse.com/news/11539311/erroneous-alerts-sirens-calls-alarm-californians

June 30, 2014 Posted by | incidents, USA | Leave a comment

Plutonium release from WIPP probably caused by hydrogen explosion – more to come?

Nuclear Expert: Hydrogen explosion suspected as cause of WIPP plutonium release — Meeting: Are more lids going to blow? Seeing how top of drum blew off has me concerned it isn’t ‘low level’ — Former DOE Expert: US will inevitably shift to storing radioactive waste on surface after this (VIDEO) http://enenews.com/nuclear-expert-wipp-hydrogen-explosion-organic-kitty-litter-involved-meeting-waiting-lids-blow-drums-lid-blown-concerned-isnt-really-low-level-former-doe-coordinator-will-inevitably-shift-above

Gerard Martinez, Waste Management Committee, Northern New Mexico Citizens’ Advisory Board, May 21, 2014 (at 31:30 in): Are we waiting for more lids to blow? I know that we were told before it’s ‘low level’… But seeing the blow on that lid has me concerned that this isn’t really a type of ‘low level’ […] we really, really need to know. And then we’re going to have to go back into that inventory, of course and find out what else is in there, what’s caused this, what other materials are in those drums that’s caused this? If it’s unknown, we have another set of problems on our hands. Then we start to lose the public trust as to why we’ve done this to begin with. […] It seems like it’s getting bigger. >> Watch the Advisory Board meeting here


Robert Alvarez, coordinated Dept. of Energy’s nuclear material strategic planning in 1990s, June 16, 2014: “When you think about Los Alamos as being the pre-eminent institution in terms of knowledge of explosives, that something like this would slip through their fingers really indicates several levels of breakdown, from the federal government to the contractors managing the labs […] I think that we’re really looking at an inexorable reality of having to shift toward safe surface storage containment. Probably (the waste at sites around the country) is going to have to stay where it is in containers that can hold up for a long period of time while we sort this out. I’m afraid that’s the reality.”

Chris Harris, former licensed Senior Reactor Operator and engineer, June 12, 2014 (at 20:00 in): This report says there was a potential for a plutonium flash – which is a criticality event. I haven’t done the analysis on that myself […] I was just talking it over today with one of my colleagues, who’s very esteemed in waste handling and waste processing — we’ll call him Barney for now. He said, “Is that what they did? They put organic material [in the drums with plutonium salts] — that’s a hydrogen explosion.”

Full interview with harris here

June 19, 2014 Posted by | safety, USA | Leave a comment

AS Russia spens $millions on new submarines, it again delays cleanup of radiologically dangerous ship us

text-radiationVessel a radiological hazard  The scientific community in Russia has been unified, repeatedly underscoring to Russian media that the unloaded spent nuclear fuel aboard the ship poses a major environmental danger to the Arkangelsk Region, where Zvezdochka is located

Long-time push to dismantle huge Soviet nuclear battle cruiser again put off  The long struggle to dismantle the Soviet era nuclear missile cruiser Admiral Ushakov – which has been out of active duty for the past 17 years following a machinery accident – has been put off for another year over cost concerns, raising environmental and radiological concerns, the b-port news portal in Murmansk reported. Bellona, June 11, 2014 by  

The long struggle to dismantle the Soviet era nuclear missile cruiserAdmiral Ushakov – which has been out of active duty for the past 17 years following a machinery accident – has been put off for another year over cost concerns, raising environmental and radiological concerns, the b-port news portal in Murmansk reported.

A spokesman for Zvezdochka ship repair yard where the vessel is moored, yesterday told b-port that dismantlement works on the enormous vessel would not begin until 2016 at the earliest.

Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom has included in its 2015 budget costs for drawing up engineering schematics for its dismantlement, but by all accounts, the project is running late and short on cash.

The financial crunch to dismantle the Admiral Ushakov comes as a bad time. The majority of international aid flowing to nuclear submarine dismantlement and radiological waste security via the G-8 Global Partnership plan has already been committed, laying the burden for securing the vessel on the Russian government.

ship-Russian-missile-cruise

Unilateral funding from the United States’ Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) program has also reached its conclusion, and tensions between the West and Russia over the simmering crisis in Ukraine make it difficult for Moscow to find donors.

What’s more, the costs for dismantling nuclear battleships and cruisers run as much as 10 times more than dismantling the largest nuclear submarines, experts say, mostly because the expertise for nuclear battleship and cruiser deconstruction in Russia is in short supply, and international assistance almost a necessity, officials told b-port. This could become a problem with as many as three older nuclear battleships still on the Russian Navy’s registers.

For its part, the Russian Navy is instead pouring a mint into developing new submarine technologies at the expense of cleaning up legacy waste, said Nils Bøhmer, Bellona’s general manager and nuclear physicist

‘The Russian navy is currently spending millions on new submarines which is diverting funding from cleaning up radiological challenges left over from the past,” said Bøhmer.  “To have this vessel lying around for 17 years with spent fuel is a dangerous and uncertain situation.”…….

Vessel a radiological hazard

The scientific community in Russia has been unified, repeatedly underscoring to Russian media that the unloaded spent nuclear fuel aboard the ship poses a major environmental danger to the Arkangelsk Region, where Zvezdochka is located…….http://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/radioactive-waste-and-spent-nuclear-fuel/2014-06-long-time-push-dismantle-huge-soviet-nuclear-battleship-put

 

June 13, 2014 Posted by | Russia, safety | Leave a comment

European Energy Commission directs stricter rues on nuclear reactor safety

safety-symbol-Smflag-EUEurope orders nuclear power operators to be more open on safety issues http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/news/international-news/124795-europe-orders-nuclear-power-operators-to-be-more-open-on-safety-issues.htmlby ClickGreen staff. Published Wed 11 Jun 2014 The European Union has agreed new laws to tighten up safety standards and improve supervision of nuclear facilities in response to the lessons learned from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan.
For the first time a legally binding “safety objective” will cover all existing and new nuclear installations across Europe.

The new regulations include the requirement for greater transparency and to provide better public information on the safety record of nuclear sites.

In March 2011, an earthquake and subsequent tsunami caused the world’s worst nuclear accident in 25 years, releasing radiation over Fukushima and forcing more than 150,000 people from their homes.

The European Union, in response, carried out a series of stress tests to examine the resilience of nuclear power stations and used the results to draft a response plan based on the latest international standards.

In March this year, ClickGreen revealed how nuclear power generator EDF Energy had not informed local residents that a safety inspection at its Dungeness nuclear power station had found its existing flood defence measures could be overwhelmed by the sea.

The company also failed to tell the local population that a condition of its continued operation was that it must shut down its reactor immediately should a severe weather warning be issued.

There are 132 nuclear reactors currently in operation in Europe.

Today’s announcement of an agreement for this new Directive was reached under the Greek Presidency, after “delicate and strenuous negotiation”, since the safety of nuclear installations is for member states an important matter of national sovereignty.

European Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger said: “Nuclear safety is paramount to all European citizens. We need to put all our efforts into making sure that the highest safety standards are followed in every single nuclear power plant across the EU.

“The new Nuclear Safety Directive, once formally adopted, will help ensure continuous improvement of the safety of our nuclear installations.”

The new nuclear safety architecture provides that member states implement a regulatory framework requiring accident prevention, and should an accident occur, mitigating the consequences of radioactive releases.

It also reinforces crucial components of the nuclear safety system, such as the independent role and function of the regulatory authorities, the safety peer reviews mechanism and the promotion of safety culture.

Specifically, the Directive:

• Introduces higher standards for nuclear safety in Europe, as it requires that member states take prevention measures for any type of accident, no matter how much unlikely may be considered

• Introduces topical peer reviews of the nuclear installations throughout Europe every six years, in coordination among member states. The first topical peer review is scheduled for 2017

• Requires operators to have infrastructure and suitable arrangements for accident management and emergency response

• Requires the strengthening of the role, function and effective independence of the regulatory authorities

• Introduces for member states the legal requirement to promote and enhance nuclear safety culture

• Introduces requirements on transparency, public information, public participation and cooperation between member states, nuclear and non-nuclear, in the vicinity of nuclear installations.

The Chairman of the Greek Atomic Energy Commission (EEAE), Christos Housiadas, commented: “All member states, nuclear and non-nuclear, had an equal opportunity to participate in this negotiation, as the consequences of nuclear accidents do not stop at borders.”

June 12, 2014 Posted by | EUROPE, safety | Leave a comment

A risky situation – conflict in Ukraine and Ukraine’s nuclear reactors

exclamation-Smflag-UkraineUkraine crisis raises risk for nuclear reactors, DW 10 June 14,  Ukraine’s volatility exacerbates the risk for the country’s 15 Soviet-style nuclear reactors, warn German experts. They demand more attention for the country where the world’s worst nuclear accident took place The recent news of a water shortage due to a broken pipeline affecting thousands in
strife ravaged Eastern Ukraine spells trouble for the safety of the country’s nuclear power plants.

That’s because the security and reliability of a country’s critical infrastructure like its electrical power and water grid is essential to safely run nuclear reactors.

“Once you have decided to operate a nuclear power plant or like in this case a nuclear reactor park, you must guarantee you don’t have unstable social situations and you definitely can’t have a war,” Michael Sailer, chairman of the German Nuclear Waste Management Commission and member of the German Reactor Safety Commission, told DW.

Potential for human error   “We are talking about nuclear power plants that have a high risk even when they are constructed well and properly maintained,” Sailer who also heads Freiburg-based environmental think tank Öko-Institut added. “And in the Ukraine we are talking about the additional problem that there is an increased potential for human error due to less motivated nuclear operators than elsewhere and the fact that the security features of these reactors are a lot weaker than those of modern reactors.”

Ukraine currently has four nuclear power plants with 15 reactors online providing roughly half of the country’s energy needs which makes it practically impossible to shut them down during the crisis. All of the reactors stem from the Soviet era, went on the grid in the 1980s and are similar to the Chernobyl reactor that blew in 1986 causing the worst nuclear accident in history. Ukraine’s largest plant in Zaporizhia is located about 200 kilometers from Donetsk, the epicenter of the clash between pro-Russian militants and the Kyiv government.

Danger of sabotage But it’s not just the maintenance of the technical infrastructure and the motivation of the engineers operating the reactors that has the experts worried. The continued fighting between government and pro-Russian forces including the seizure of buildings raises the risk that the country’s nuclear plants could also be drawn into the mix…….

More attention The Chernobyl ruin serves as a reminder of the danger of nuclear energy

That the command structures particularly in the east of the country are already tenuous and embattled is evidenced by the ongoing fighting, the hostage taking of OSCE observers and the seizures of public buildings. And that this can easily affect critical infrastructure is highlighted by the recent news of a broken water pipeline in Eastern Ukraine.

That’s why – notwithstanding NATO’s assistance – not enough attention is being paid to the security of nuclear power plants in Ukraine, argue the experts.

“It’s really a problem, because only very few people think about this,” said Sailer. Nuclear experts usually don’t focus on such instable situations and the people who are concerned with instable situations like diplomats usually don’t realize how sensitive a nuclear power plant is.”http://www.dw.de/ukraine-crisis-raises-risk-for-nuclear-reactors/a-17694776

June 11, 2014 Posted by | safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Borth Carolina had a close shave with a nuclear bomb

book-Command-and-ControlNuclear bomb nearly detonated after falling on North Carolina, declassified report says June 11, 2014  SMH, Dan Lamothe and Walter Russell Mead There are few things in this world that can change the course of history faster than a nuclear bomb exploding. The devastation is immediate and lasts for years.

That makes the latest details to emerge about a January 24, 1961, incident involving two nuclear bombs all the more jarring.

A B-52 bomber broke up in the sky over North Carolina, and one of the two bombs on board was in the “armed” setting by the time it hit the ground near Goldsboro, North Carolina, according to a newly declassified report published on Monday by the National Security Archive. f the switch had not been damaged by the impact of the crash, the weapon could have detonated, the report said……..

That incident, which led to an anti-­nuclear movement in Britain, where the plane was bound, is one of many stories Eric Schlosser, the author of Fast Food Nation, tells in Command and Control.

During the cold war, nuclear bombs fell out of the sky, burned up in plane ­crashes and were lost at sea. In the incident Schlosser describes in greatest detail, “the Damascus accident” of September 18, 1980, the warhead from a Titan II missile was ejected after a series of mishaps that began when a repairman dropped a socket wrench and pierced a fuel tank.

Tactical nuclear weapons scattered across Europe had minimal security; misplaced tools and failed repairs triggered serious accidents; inadequate safety procedures and poor oversight led to dozens of close brushes with nuclear explosions.

People have died in these accidents, sometimes as a result of their own carelessness or bad luck, but often while doing their best to protect the rest of us from an accidental nuclear blast.: http://www.smh.com.au/world/nuclear-bomb-nearly-detonated-after-falling-on-north-carolina-declassified-report-says-20140611-zs3en.html#ixzz34OSCZMvQ

June 11, 2014 Posted by | incidents | Leave a comment

Fracking brings instability and anxiety to the area around USA’s Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP)

safety-symbol1Flag-USAWill Fracking Cause Our Next Nuclear Disaster?  09 June 2014 By Dahr Jamail, Truthout | The idea of storing radioactive nuclear waste inside a hollowed-out salt cavern might look good on paper. The concept is to carve out the insides of the caverns, deep underground, then carefully move in the waste. Over time, the logic goes, the salt will move in and insulate the containers for thousands of generations. “The whole game is to engineer something that can contain those contaminants on the order of tens of thousands of years,” Tim Judson, the executive director of the Nuclear Information Resource Service(NIRS), told Truthout. NIRS is intended to be a national information and networking center for citizens and environmental activists concerned about nuclear power, radioactive waste, radiation and sustainable energy issues, according to Judson.

Salt-cavern storage was the plan for the Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP), the world’s third-deepest geological repository, constructed and licensed to permanently dispose of radioactive waste for 10,000 years. The repository sits approximately 26 miles east of the town of Carlsbad in southeastern New Mexico.

Since shipments began in 1999, more than 80,000 cubic meters and 11,000 shipments of waste have been transferred to WIPP.

But at the moment, there are several ongoing critical problems at the site, which has been closed and unable to accept shipments of radioactive waste ever since a fire and radiation release in February. Dozens of barrels of radioactive waste from Los Alamos National Lab, like the one that caused the radiation leak, now pose an “imminent” or “substantial” threat to public health and the environment.

Yet, these problems could pale in comparison to what might happen at the site if an earthquake were to strike, or if the protective salt layer were compromised by nearby drilling for oil and gas, and in particular, hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as fracking.

Fracking is a technique used in obtaining gas and petroleum, in which water is mixed with sand and toxic chemicals, and the mixture is injected at extremely high pressure into a wellbore to create small fractures.

Thus, one would logically deduce that fracking should never be done anywhere near WIPP. However, it is being done there, and experts expect it to increase.

“In the last three years, a dozen fracking wells have become operational within five miles of the site [WIPP],” Don Hancock, the director of the Nuclear Waste Safety Program at Southwest Research and Information Center, told Truthout.

Given that it is already well known that fracking causes earthquakes, it is clear that the nuclear waste storage site is now in danger of having its structural integrity compromised.

“These are the major concerns,” Hancock warned. “There is clearly a possibility that the deep fracking can affect the stability, but even more likely is fracking liquids nearing or entering the waste beds – which would be a very bad thing.”

“They Are Drilling All Around It”

Truthout spoke with a state of New Mexico employee who is intimately familiar with the permitting and drilling processes related to WIPP. The employee spoke on condition of strict anonymity, due to a fear of reprisals from the pro-drilling administration of radical right-wing Tea Party Governor Susana Martinez.

“There is so much drilling coming online down there now,” the employee explained. “They are going back into existing fields and drilling horizontally, and the WIPP siteis located right in the middle of all these fields, so they are drilling all around it.”

The source said that the oil and gas companies who are drilling and fracking near WIPP “have permission to go under the [WIPP] boundary to target the reservoirs there, so it appears as though most of the wells are horizontal, and that is a concern.”

According to the employee, “The fracking fluids they are injecting are very unstable, and if it continues like this there could be big problems…. There was a 5.2 [earthquake] in West Texas from fracking, and that’s a big concern given the sensitivity of the WIPP site and what the possible consequences could be.”…….http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/24201-will-fracking-cause-our-next-nuclear-disaster

 

June 11, 2014 Posted by | safety, USA, wastes | Leave a comment

India wants Russia to make Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant safer

India Seeks More Security Measures for Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant New Indian Express, By Prashant Rangnekar 9 June 14 MOSCOW: India has sought “enhanced security measures” for the Koodankulam Nuclear Power Plant after the Fukushmia Daichi atomic disaster in Japan, Russia said.

“We had received a request from India for enhanced safety measures. Of course India had to pay more for such kind of system. The Koodankulam plants have four channels of safety system,” said V Asmolov, first deputy general of Rosenergoatom, the Russian nuclear power station operations subsidiary of a state-owned company.

“This can lead to immediate stopping of chain reaction in case of crisis. The system will ensure water supply for cooling of the reactor even if there is a black out for 24 hours,” Asmolov said.

He was speaking at the sidelines of Atom2014 Expo, a conference organised by Rosatom, a Russian state atomic energy body……

Anti-nuclear activists and People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy (PMANE) have been spearheading more than a two-year-old protest against KNPP in Tirunelveli, demanding its closure, citing safety reasons.http://www.newindianexpress.com/nation/India-Seeks-More-Security-Measures-for-Koodankulam-Nuclear-Power-Plant/2014/06/09/article2271651.ece

June 11, 2014 Posted by | India, safety | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »