nuclear-news

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

Ontario to announce refurbishment of four reactors at Pickering Plant

MATTHEW MCCLEARN, JEFF GRAY, QUEEN’S PARK REPORTER, TORONTO, 30 Jan 24,  https://www-theglobeandmail-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.theglobeandmail.com/amp/canada/article-ontario-pickering-nuclear-reactor/

Ontario is proceeding with a massive, multibillion-dollar refurbishment of four aging nuclear reactors at its Pickering power plant east of Toronto, according to two provincial government sources.

The decision will be formally unveiled by Ontario Energy Minister Todd Smith at the facility in Pickering on Tuesday, a senior government source said. This would mark the government’s latest major move to preserve and expand the province’s reactor fleet.

Another government official said the province has approved a $2-billion budget for Ontario Power Generation, the plant’s owner, to complete the necessary engineering and design work and order crucial components, which can require years to manufacture. The Globe and Mail is not naming the sources, because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the decision.

No full cost estimate for the project has been revealed. Refurbishments under way at OPG’s Darlington nuclear plant in Clarington, and at Bruce Power’s station in Tiverton, have cost between $2-billion and more than $3-billion a reactor.

Mr. Smith’s announcement had been expected. In 2022, the province asked OPG to study the feasibility of refurbishing the four Pickering “B” units, which entered service in the mid-1980s and had previously been passed over for refurbishment 15 years ago. Mr. Smith received OPG’s report last summer, but his ministry rebuffed a request from this newspaper to release it underthe province’s freedom of information legislation.

The Pickering station, situated on the shore of Lake Ontario about 30 kilometres from downtown Toronto, generates about 15 per cent of Ontario’s power. It also includes the four 1970s-era Pickering “A” reactors, which are not currently being considered for refurbishment. Two have been dormant for decades after an aborted refurbishment, and the remaining two are scheduled to shut down permanently this year.

OPG’s current licence for Pickering B allows its reactors to operate only to the end of this year. OPG has applied to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, which regulates the industry, for permission to operate them until late 2026. CNSC approval would also be required for a refurbishment.

Refurbishment involves replacing major components to extend reactors’ operating lives by 30 years, although the list of required upgrades varies from station to station. Subo Sinnathamby, OPG’s chief projects officer, told The Globe earlier this month that, if the project were approved, OPG would begin Pickering’s refurbishment in 2028, with the goal of returning its reactors to service by the mid-2030s. Previous refurbishments have unfolded over longer periods.

“It is a compressed timeline,” she acknowledged. But she added that this time OPG will benefit from the experience it and its contractors and suppliers gained during previous refurbishments.

January 31, 2024 Posted by | Canada, safety | Leave a comment

Failure to deal with Trident concerns ‘puts Scots lives at risk’

FAILING to address acute concerns about the state of Trident nuclear
submarines is putting Scottish lives “at risk” and shows Westminster’s
“blatant disregard for Scotland”, an MP has said.

Martin Docherty-Hughes issued the warning ahead of a debate in Parliament today,
in which he will attempt to get answers from the UK Government over serious
concerns raised by a top insider about Britain’s nuclear weapons. The SNP
defence spokesperson will lead an adjournment debate on Wednesday evening
to highlight bombshell comments from former top government adviser Dominic
Cummings.

Cummings sparked concerns about Trident when he claimed to have
sought assurances from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak that he would deal with
the “scandal” of nuclear weapons infrastructure which he described as a
“dangerous disaster and a budget nightmare of hard-to-believe and highly
classified proportions”.

The National 24th Jan 2024

https://www.thenational.scot/news/24070255.failure-deal-trident-concerns-puts-scots-lives-risk/

January 30, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

UK’s Ministry of Defence has continued to allow critical parts of the nuclear weapons infrastructure to rot

Dominic Cummings said amongst other things the MoD has: continued to allow
critical parts of the nuclear weapons infrastructure to rot creating
further massive secret budget nightmares as well as extremely serious
physical dangers (cf. the recent near disaster with a submarine),

UK Parliament 24th Jan 2024

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2024-01-24/debates/1F1CF40C-91E6-4C9B-A9BB-32A7EB43DAC4/NuclearDefenceInfrastructureParliamentaryScrutiny

January 29, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

More time needed for safety statement on Finland’s planned used fuel repository: no safety case has been made

COMMENT: The story below, from a pro-nuclear source, puts the best possible spin they can muster on the delays in the review of the Finnish nuclear waste burial proponent’s application for a deep geololgical repository for nuclear fuel waste. Here’s the straight story: the review period is being extended for another year (for now) because the regulator is waiting for missing information from the proponent, Posiva. No safety case has been made. 

In comparison, the application by the Swedish proponent SKB was submitted in 2011, there have been repeated delays and extensions while the regulator waited for additional information, and while the Swedish government issued a political approval last year the Land and Environment Court has not issued the necessary approval.

23 January 2024,  https://www.neimagazine.com/news/newsmore-time-needed-for-safety-statement-on-finlands-planned-used-fuel-repository-11456534

Finland’s Radiation & Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK – Säteilyturvakeskus) in its monitoring report from the last third of 2023 indicates that Posiva Oy, which is responsible for the final disposal of used nuclear fuel, is progressing without major problems, but at a slightly slower pace than was previously anticipated. Posiva is constructing the world’s first final used nuclear fuel disposal facility in Olkiluoto in Eurajoki. However, before it can start the operation of the facility it needs a permit from the Government. The permit decision requires a statement from STUK.

The Ministry of Labour & Business (TEM Työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö) had requested STUK’s opinion by the end of 2023 but, as the processing of the licence application data is still ongoing at STUK has requested additional time from TEM for issuing the statement until the end of 2024.

STUK says in its third-year report that the material to be inspected for the safety assessment for the operating licence is very large. Furthermore, STUK has not always been able to make its assessments based on the materials first submitted by Posiva and has required updates. Therefore, the processing of the material has taken longer than expected.

Posiva, owned by Teollisuuden Voima Oyj’s Olkiluoto NPP and Fortum Power & Heat Oy’s Loviisa NPP, applied for a construction licence application to TEM in December 2013. Posiva investigated the rock at Olkiluoto and based its licence application on results from the Onkalo underground laboratory, which will be expanded to form the basis of the repository. The government granted a construction licence in November 2015 and work began in December 2016. The site for the repository was selected in 2000 and parliament approved the decision-in-principle for the project in 2001.

Posiva has been preparing for the disposal of used nuclear fuel for more than 40 years. Its encapsulation plant is located above ground, and the fuel repository of the underground disposal facility is located in the bedrock at a depth of approximately 400-430 metres. Once it receives the operating licence, Posiva can start the final disposal of used fuel generated by the two NPPs, which were hoping to use the facility between 2024 and 2070. The facility will operate for about 100 years.

By the end of 2023, STUK had not only prepared a safety assessment, but also continued to supervise Posiva and its work. The matters to be monitored include the installation of equipment in the encapsulation plant, test runs and test run plans, as well as the ongoing rock construction work in the underground final disposal locations. It is also monitoring and inspecting the security arrangements of Posiva’s final disposal facility, the safety culture of the organisation and Posiva’s readiness to start final disposal operations.

January 28, 2024 Posted by | Finland, safety | Leave a comment

The Post Office Scandal, Nuclear Waste and The Bransty Tunnel – Off Limits for Nuclear Luvvies at Britain Remade?

 https://www.lakesagainstnucleardump.com/post/the-post-office-scandal-nuclear-waste-and-the-bransty-tunnel-off-limits-for-nuclear-luvvies-at-br?fbclid=IwAR1KpP9iidhPdh6hyL3dhFAkUvOaXSla84RLykZttBRu4lOlokQIVRUjOvc 24 Jan 24

Trudy Harrison MP and wannabe MP Josh MacAlister have joined forces under the banner of “Britain Remade”. Their dream of building a nuclear prefab “faster” and “cheaper” next to the worlds biggest stockpile of plutonium is within our grasp they breathlessly tell us. “There could be new nuclear power in Cumbria, delivering jobs for the region, and clean energy for the whole country”.

Hot and dangerous Nuclear wastes from their “clean energy” trundles through the Bransty Rail Tunnel under the town of Whitehaven EVERY week enroute to the Sellafield site already bursting at the seams with radioactive crapola. The Bransty Rail Tunnel has served Network Rail and the nuclear industry well. It is a fine piece of old Victorian engineering which extends for a full 1km directly under homes and businesses in Whitehaven. Only recently it has become unstable. Network Rail are rather worried about the impacts of reactivated old mine water water bubbling up into the tunnel and even putting pressure on the sides of the tunnel (as we can see from Network Rail’s own video taken recently).

Rather than gushing about building untried untested nuclear prefabs (euphemistically called “Small Modular Reactors” actually pretty large at half the size of Calder Hall reactors), the MP and wannabe MP should be putting EVERY EFFORT into protecting the safety of the folk of Whitehaven by CLOSING THIS TUNNEL certainly to Nuclear Waste Transports and possibly to passenger and other freight trains. Ceasing nuclear waste production in Scotland and the North wouldn’t make a huge difference to electricity as nuclear’s contribution to the UKs electrcity capacity has been minimal according to National Grid with wind producing many times more capacity in the recent cold weather.

The most urgent question for Whitehaven is:

Why is heavily polluted mine water is still gushing into the nuclear waste route of the Bransty Tunnel over one year on and into Queens Dock, Whitehaven and what are Trudy Harrison MP and Josh MacAlister wannabe MP doing to address this?

Another equally urgent and topical question given the Post Office scandal is:

Are the MP and prospective MP happy that all nuclear waste consignments including those travelling a few times a week through the Bransty Tunnel are monitored and tracked by the same company, Fujitsu, responsible for the Post Office scandal. Fujitsu’s “Accountancy and Tracking Of Material” ATOM was contracted by the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority in 2001. “Fujitsu chose a combination of Microsoft and Oracle systems with web portal technology to make this possible, i.e. to successfully design and implement a package to process, update and report on nuclear and radioactive materials throughout the supply chain.” As Dik Third of UKAEA says, “We believe that there is no other system in the world capable of dealing with such complexity and breadth of plant operations and regulatory accounting requirements.” Does Whitehaven feel lucky? Britain is being Remade into what? A Nuclear Sacrifice Zone?

January 27, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

UN Nuclear Chief Says ‘Very Real’ Threat Remains at Moscow-Held Zaporizhzhia Plant

Moscow Times 26 Jan 24

The possibility of a nuclear disaster at the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant in Ukraine remains “very real,” according to the head of the UN’s nuclear watchdog. …….

Regular shelling and drone attacks around the plant have raised the risks of a radioactive disaster, while Kyiv and Moscow have accused each other of planning provocations.

Experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have been on the ground monitoring the Zaporizhzhia plant since September 2022.

“The plant’s six reactors have been shut down since mid-2022 — five of them in cold shutdown and one in hot shutdown. But the potential dangers of a major nuclear accident remain very real,” IAEA chief Rafael Grossi told the UN Security Council on Thursday.

Grossi warned that issues with access to power could lead to a disaster at the Moscow-controlled nuclear plant.

Emergency diesel generators are now “the last line of defense against a nuclear accident” after they were activated eight times when the plant lost all off-site power, he added.

“The plant is currently relying on just two lines of external power, and sometimes just one, or for a period the backup power was not properly configured. This demonstrates the highly precarious situation regarding essential off-site power.”………. https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2024/01/26/un-nuclear-chief-says-very-real-threat-remains-at-moscow-held-zaporizhzhia-plant-a83860

January 27, 2024 Posted by | safety, Ukraine | Leave a comment

Nuclear lobby “kills” nomination of regulator who cares too much about safety

We killed this nomination,” said Ted Nordhaus, executive director of the Breakthrough Institute, a California-based climate think tank that advocates for more nuclear energy.

Biden Drops Nuclear Regulator Nominee After Senate Backlash

Alexander C. Kaufman, Tue, 23 January 2024  https://au.news.yahoo.com/biden-drops-nuclear-regulator-nominee-190521226.html

President Joe Biden is dropping his pick to fill the open seat on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission after a handful of Democrats joined Senate Republicans to block the nomination last year, HuffPost has learned. 

Jeff Baran had held a seat on the five-person federal panel overseeing atomic energy and radiation safety since former President Barack Obama first named to the position in 2014. The Democratic commissioner easily won Senate approval when former President Donald Trump renominated him in 2018. 

But pro-nuclear advocates angry over what they saw as Baran’s unwillingness to overhaul the regulatory process in favor of building new types of reactor technologies launched a campaign against the commissioner last year. With Republicans opposed to the nomination, the Biden administration needed almost every Democrat in the Senate to vote for Baran ― or leave the NRC without a tie-breaker for party-line votes between the four current commissioners. 

The White House had wanted the Senate’s narrow Democratic majority to reconfirm Baran before his term ended last July. But as many as four senators on the Democratic side, including Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.), either planned to come out against Baran or refused to pledge their votes, according to a source with knowledge of the process. Neither senator’s office immediately responded to emails requesting comment on Monday.

When the Senate ended 2023 last month without a vote, the nomination automatically went back to the White House. 

The NRC directed HuffPost’s questions about when the administration would name its nominee for the open commission seat to the White House, which did not respond to a request for comment.

But three sources with knowledge of the plans confirmed to HuffPost that the Biden administration does not plan to nominate Baran again. Two spoke to HuffPost on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to comment publicly. The third claimed Baran’s loss as a victory. 

“We killed this nomination,” said Ted Nordhaus, executive director of the Breakthrough Institute, a California-based climate think tank that advocates for more nuclear energy.

He was among the most vocal opponents of Baran’s nomination, and helped drum up votes against the Democratic commissioner. Nordhaus had cast Baran as a holdover from an earlier era of liberal regulators who saw their job primarily as safeguarding the public against the atomic energy industry. 

“It is my job to focus on nuclear safety and security,” Baran said in 2017 at his reconfirmation hearing before the Senate Environment and Public Works committee. “It is not my job to weigh in on the pros and cons of the merits of nuclear power.”

That view, Nordhaus said, was common among Democrats for decades. But a modern outlook on nuclear safety has to consider not only the threats of using atomic energy, but the risks that not doing so increases pollution from fossil fuels that damages lungs and traps heat in the planet’s atmosphere.

“Everyone went into this just assuming everybody would line up behind Baran, that this is just the kind of guy Democrats put on the commission,” Nordhaus said. 

“The fact that enough Democratic senators were willing to say we’re not going to vote for this guy,” he added, “it’s pretty clear that for the first time in maybe ever a bunch of Democrats now recognize that we need reform at the NRC, that something has to change, that the technology can’t succeed if the NRC continues to approach this in the way it historically has.” 

But Baran had defenders. The progressive pro-nuclear group Good Energy Collective previously told HuffPost Baran had a strong record of fighting for environmental justice and building relationships with communities saddled with radioactive pollution from the past. 

January 23, 2024 Posted by | politics, safety, USA | Leave a comment

Top Nuclear Regulator Faces Tough Reconfirmation Battle In The Senate

Biden wants to keep Jeff Baran on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but the GOP and pro-nuclear activists say he’s holding back an atomic renaissance.

Huff Post, By Alexander C. Kaufman, Jun 27, 2023

When President Barack Obama first named Jeff Baran to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2014, the Democratic majority in the Senate confirmed the former congressional staffer in a 52-40 vote. When President Donald Trump renominated the Democrat for another five-year term in 2018, the GOP-led Senate approved Baran by a simple voice tally.

But President Joe Biden’s plan to give Baran a third stint on the federal body responsible for the world’s largest fleet of commercial reactors has already hit the rocks, as Republicans move to block a commissioner critics paint as an “obstructionist” with a record of voting for policies nuclear advocates say make it harder to keep existing plants open and more expensive, if not impossible, to deploy advanced next-generation atomic technologies.

Last Friday, the Senate went on break for the next two weeks, all but guaranteeing that Baran’s current term ends on June 30 without a decision on whether he will rejoin the five-member board, creating a vacancy that could cause gridlock on some decisions and mark a return to the partisan feuds of a decade ago…………

The White House and the Democrats who control the Senate hope to reinstate Baran in a vote next month, casting the regulator as a sober-minded professional with an ear to the woes of those living in polluted or impoverished communities. The battle highlights growing tensions over nuclear energy in the United States, the country that built the world’s first full-scale fission power plant nearly seven decades ago but all but ceased expanding atomic energy in the 30 years since the Cold War ended…………………………………………………………….

“His voting record shows he’s been a consistent obstructionist, a defender of a regulatory system that has basically presided over the long-term decline of the nuclear sector in the U.S.,” said Ted Nordhaus, executive director of the Breakthrough Institute, a California-based environmental think tank that advocates for nuclear energy. “There’s a broad view at a pretty bipartisan level that we need nuclear energy. If Democrats are serious about it, they have to stop putting a guy like Jeff Baran at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.”

The Breakthrough Institute was among five pro-nuclear groups that signed on to a June 12 letter urging the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works to reject the White House’s nomination of Baran for a third term.

The NRC declined HuffPost’s request to interview Baran…………………………………………………

The Case Against Baran

Baran came to power right as the last attempt at a “nuclear renaissance” fizzled…………………

As governments scrambled to keep operating reactors from going out of business, Baran voted last July to increase the frequency of federal safety inspections on existing nuclear plants, arguing that it would allow for “more focused inspections” that would “provide the staff flexibility to take a deeper dive into different areas of high safety importance” as the reactor fleet ages.

Baran also came out against measures that supporters of new reactor designs say would have helped tailor the regulatory process to the specific needs of novel technologies…………………

Baran issued the NRC’s sole vote against three recent proposals to make it easier to build an SMR at a former coal- or gas-fired plant, to tailor the size of the emergency preparedness zone to the size of the reactor, and to update the environmental permitting requirements for new reactors to account for the dramatic difference in water use between traditional and new designs…………..

While outnumbered by the other four commissioners, Baran’s hard-line view against easing regulations mirrors the Fukushima era in which he came to power, when Democrats Gregory Jaczko and Allison Macfarlane chaired the NRC and delivered on Reid’s efforts to block key nuclear projects. Nordhaus described Baran as a holdover from that period…………………..

The Case For Baran

Baran is not without his defenders among atomic energy advocates.

“It’s not as though he’s anti-nuclear,” said Jackie Toth, the Washington-based deputy director of the Good Energy Collective, a progressive pro-nuclear group headquartered in California. She noted that Baran’s critics often paint him as having the same views as Jaczko and Macfarlane. “To pool them together without looking at the full breadth of his record and what he’s done is unfair.”

“He prioritizes safety and not simply taking industry at its word,” Toth said. “It’s critical to have on the commission someone who understands both the need for increased nuclear capacity on our grid for climate, communities and energy security, but still wants to make sure the industry is putting its best foot forward.”

In particular, she said, Baran has been a crucial supporter of efforts to make it easier for poor and polluted communities — which, thanks to the U.S. history of racist legal and cultural norms, tend to be populated by Black, Latino or Native Americans — to participate in the public regulatory process. While she said she “did not have concerns regarding” the other commissioners’ dedication to environmental justice, Baran’s focus on the issue served to “complement” the other four regulators.

“We feel it’s an asset to have someone like him at the NRC who gets the climate imperative for new reactors but also upholds the agency’s mission to be a trusted regulator that prioritizes public health and safety,” Toth said.

‘Rolling The Dice’

But as Congress presses ahead with legislation to boost nuclear power, Baran’s opponents see him as a potential hurdle to implementing the laws.

In 2018, Congress passed the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act, which directed the NRC to establish a novel regulatory framework for new technologies that takes into account the differences between advanced reactors and traditional ones. Baran consistently voted against adjusting the size of a new nuclear plant’s emergency planning zone to align with the size of the reactor, or insisted that the Federal Emergency Management Agency should decide even though the NRC is the regulator with the technical expertise to make the final call.

Over the past two years, Congress earmarked billions of dollars for new reactors in the landmark infrastructure laws Biden signed. And the same Senate committee that narrowly voted along party lines to confirm Baran’s renomination for another term overwhelmingly passed a new bill known as the ADVANCE Act to speed up deployment of new reactor technologies earlier this month………………………..

January 23, 2024 Posted by | politics, safety | Leave a comment

Ontario is about to decide whether to overhaul Canada’s oldest nuclear power plant. Does it deserve a second life?

All of these are Candu reactors – Canada’s homegrown reactor design. They deteriorate with age. Inside their cores, pressure tubes (which contain the uranium fuel) grow longer, thinner and weaker. They begin to sag and corrode, increasing the risk of ruptures. Feeder pipes, which supply water to the pressure tubes, also corrode and thin.

Globe and Mail,   MATTHEW MCCLEARN, 21 Jan 24

The Pickering Nuclear Generating Station’s dull, mottled-grey concrete domes testify to its more than half a century of faithful service. Lately, its six operating reactors have produced enough electricity to supply 1.5 million people, about one-tenth of Ontario’s total population.

In the coming weeks, Ontario Energy Minister Todd Smith is expected to reveal whether the province will extend the plant’s life. A study last summer from Ontario Power Generation, the station’s owner, examined the feasibility of refurbishing Pickering’s four “B” reactors, commissioned between 1983 and 1986. OPG has said there’s no technical reason the work can’t proceed. If approved, it would begin in 2028, with the aim of returning the reactors to service in the mid-2030s.

The real question is whether it’s worth it.

A firm cost estimate for extending the reactors’ lifespan has not been finalized. Refurbishments under way at OPG’s Darlington nuclear plant in Clarington and Bruce Power’s station in Tiverton have cost between $2-billion and more than $3-billion per reactor. The reactors at Pickering, Canada’s oldest nuclear plant, could cost even more, though their output is relatively small by modern standards.

Ontario’s government has said little about how it is weighing this decision, and it’s unclear what other options, if any, the province is considering. OPG has said its feasibility study would compare the refurbishment’s economic viability to “potential alternatives,” but the finished report has not been released publicly.

The Globe and Mail made a freedom of information request for a copy of the study. But Sean Keelor, chief administrative officer at Ontario’s Ministry of Energy, withheld the document in its entirety. He cited exemptions within the province’s Freedom of Information Act for “advice to government” and for information that could damage the “economic or other interests of Ontario.”

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, which regulates the industry, allows utilitiesto perform upgrades thateffectively double reactors’ lives, as long as “all practicable safety improvements to bring the facility up to modern standards” have been identified. Upgrading Pickering would be no small undertaking.

“They are very old reactors, and the equipment is out of date,” said Ibrahim Attieh, a reactor physicist who worked on Candu designs. “It’s going to be a lot more costly to retrofit new equipment in.”

The Pickering station, situated on the shore of Lake Ontario about 30 kilometres east of downtown Toronto, also includes the four 1970s-era Pickering “A” reactors, which are not under consideration for refurbishment.

Two have been dormant for decades after an aborted refurbishment, and the remaining two are scheduled to shut down permanently this year.

All of these are Candu reactors – Canada’s homegrown reactor design. They deteriorate with age. Inside their cores, pressure tubes (which contain the uranium fuel) grow longer, thinner and weaker. They begin to sag and corrode, increasing the risk of ruptures. Feeder pipes, which supply water to the pressure tubes, also corrode and thin.

Candus were originally expected to operate for about 30 years. The industry has said decisions on whether to refurbish should be made after a quarter century – a milestone Pickering B has already passed.

All refurbishments involve sending workers into a reactor’s radioactive core, to replace major components such as pressure tubes and feeder pipes. But the scope of work varies considerably, depending on the age, design and condition of components, as well as other factors. A utility might also improve other infrastructure at a nuclear plant, such as turbines and control room equipment.

Subo Sinnathamby, OPG’s chief projects officer, said that among the components that would need to be replaced at Pickering B are the steam generators, which use heat produced inside the core to boil water, creating steam that drives turbine blades.

Ms. Sinnathamby said these components are too large to be removed through the reactor’s airlocks.

“We will have to cut a hole in the dome to remove it,” she said.

Pickering B’s control room is straight out of the Cold War and would also require modernization.

Continue reading

January 22, 2024 Posted by | Canada, safety | Leave a comment

Hinkley C site fire safety fears trigger enforcement notices


By Phil Hill
,@GazettePHill,  https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/24055739.hinkley-c-site-fire-safety-fears-trigger-enforcement-notices/ 17 Jan 24

Pre-planned inspections in November at the Unit 1 HR Building on the site led to ONR identifying the breaches and issuing the notices.

These have been served on licensee NNB Generation Company (HPC) Ltd, contractors Bouygues Travaux Publics SAS and Laing O’Rourke Construction Limited, who are the joint venture partners in BYLOR JV, and REEL UK.

The enforcement notices require improvements to be made to address the shortfalls and prevent re-occurrence.

There were no consequences to employees, the public or the environment as a result of the shortfalls.

However, ONR identified the potential for harm and risk of serious injury, which required regulatory action.

Shane Turner, superintending inspector and head of safety regulation at Hinkley Point C, said: “The enforcement notices require these four organisations to make improvements in fire safety arrangements at the Hinkley Point C site.

We will engage with each of them during the period of the enforcement notice to ensure positive progress is made.”

The notices require necessary improvements are made by March 31.

The enforcement action relates to contraventions under the requirements of Article 22 of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.

1

January 21, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Limping along: EDF Energy looking to extend operational life of aging reactors AGAIN.

Nuclear Free Local Authorities, 18 Jan 24

The UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities are concerned that EDF Energy, the arm of French state-owned Électricité de France which operates the UK nuclear fleet, has just announced its intention to further extend operations at its four remaining aging Advanced Gas-Cooled Reactor plants.

Hartlepool, Heysham-1, Heysham-2, and Torness first began generating in either 1983 or 1988, with an estimated operational life of 30 years. In 2023, the operating lives of Hartlepool and Heysham-1 were extended by two years from 2024 to March 2026, however the closure of Heysham-2 and Torness had previously been brought forward from 2030 to March 2028 because of ‘impacts on the graphite cores’.

The aging AGR plants will have been operating for at least 40 years by 2028, and the NFLAs’ core concerns revolve around the safety risk posed by the degradation of the graphite neutron moderators in each reactor.

NFLA Scotland Policy Advisor Pete Roche finds the rethink of the situation at Torness and Heysham 2 totally inexplicable: “In May 2020 we learnt that the cores of the four reactors at Torness and Heysham 2 were predicted to start cracking in 2022, six years earlier than previously thought. These last two AGRs have a significant design difference, compared to other AGRs which could make the cracking problem worse. Several commentators, at the time, questioned whether the two stations would make it even as far as 2028.

In 2020 the Office for Nuclear Regulation said the design difference at Torness and Heysham 2 could lead to graphite debris challenging the reactors’ ability to move or adequately cool fuel. And if the Regulators modelling predictions on the graphite core cracking were realised, then the reactors would not be safe to operate for another ten years. Heysham-1 and Hartlepool face similar operational challenges.

Yet in the ‘UK Nuclear Free Stakeholder Update’ published earlier this month, EDF company bosses state: ‘The prospect of further AGR lifetime extensions ([of] four power stations) will be reviewed again by the end [of] 2024 and the ambition is to generate beyond these dates, subject to plant inspections and regulatory approvals.’[1]

To support this ‘ambition’, EDF Energy also pledges to: ‘invest a further £1.3 billion over the next three years (2024-26) to help sustain current levels of generation’ within the company’s Nuclear Operations Division.

The function of the graphite core and the impact of aging is detailed by the Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR) on its website:

https://www.onr.org.uk/civil-nuclear-reactors/graphite-core-ageing.htm

‘As well as moderation, the fundamental safety requirements of an AGR core include allowing free movement of control rods, free movement of fuel and directing the flow of coolant gas to ensure adequate cooling of the fuel and core structure.  Essentially, significant weight-loss and cracking may compromise these safety requirements.
‘During operation, the graphite slowly loses weight due to oxidation caused by the reactor’s carbon dioxide coolant gas.  Loss of weight affects both the mechanical properties of the graphite brick, and reduces its effectiveness as a moderator.’

We raised our concerns that graphite core cracking could over time seriously compromise safety as far back as 2014 and most recently in correspondence, and in meetings, with officials from the ONR.

Our concerns and activities on this issue were outlined in our briefing No 250 ‘Update on the AGR closure programme’, dated 17 October 2022:……………………………………………………

Three AGRs at Dungeness-B, Hinkley Point-B and Hunterston-B have already closed, and are in the process of defueling, but those that remain continue to experience defects during their end-of-life cycle in addition to any cracking of the graphite core moderator.

Dr Paul Dorfman, Chair of the Nuclear Consulting Group, who is often called upon to comment on nuclear power and renewable energy issues by media outlets worldwide, is clear that closure of the AGRs is long overdue:

“All the UK nuclear reactors that EDF want to ‘life extend’ have histories of technical problems – by far the most significant is the cracking of the graphite bricks in the core moderator. The role of the graphite moderator is to slow down the fast neutrons to allow the chain reaction.


“Due to irradiation damage over time, the bricks crack and reactor core distorts. Channels run through the bricks, allowing control rods to shut-down the reactor in an emergency. Because the graphite core can’t be repaired or replaced, this means that core damage is a life-limiting condition.
This is why these reactor’s original operating design life was just 30 years.

“All things considered, much better to be safe than sorry. Shut them down.”

The status and operating history of the AGRs does indeed belie the claim of government ministers and industry supremos that nuclear is a reliable source of electricity generation; indeed, generation at the plants can best be described as ‘intermittent’, a term commonly used by detractors of renewable energy technologies……………………………………………..

There will doubtless be a point where it will simply be uneconomic for EDF Energy to continue generating electricity at these elderly plants, but Councillor Lawrence O’Neill, Chair of the NFLAs, wonders if EDF Energy’s motivation is in part driven by the need to generate extra income in the medium term given the significant delays in delivering Hinkley Point C:

“Frankly EDF Energy could do with the money from continuing operations at the four AGR plants. Hinkley Point C is being built at EDF’s risk and EDF’s cost. It is massively over budget and hugely behind schedule. It may well not be generating by 2028 or even by 2030, and broadsheet newspapers like The Telegraph and Guardian have recently speculated that the plant may even not be online before 2032. In the meantime, EDF Energy will be haemorrhaging cash”…………………………………… https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/limping-along-edf-energy-looking-to-extend-operational-life-of-aging-reactors-again/

January 20, 2024 Posted by | safety | Leave a comment

Fresh Trident safety fears as submarines’ ‘life expectancy’ extended repeatedly

NEW concerns have been raised about the safety of Britain’s nuclear
fleet – with two submarines still in action previously predicted to have
been out of commission by this year. Former top government adviser Dominic
Cummings (below) sparked interest in the state of Britain’s nuclear fleet
at the beginning of this month when he revealed he had attempted to secure
assurances the Government would address the “horror show” of the
arsenal in return for his help in Rishi Sunak’s election campaign.

 The National 14th Jan 2024

https://www.thenational.scot/news/24046989.fresh-trident-safety-fears-submarines-life-expectancy-extended-repeatedly/

January 15, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Nuclear convoys: Blacked-out lorries carry ‘deadly cargo’ through the village

 A TINY English village could be top of Putin’s nuclear hitlist, locals
fear. Brize Norton is only a stone’s throw away from the largest station in
the Royal Air Force.

Huge convoys of blacked-out lorries, police riot vans,
ambulances and other trucks regularly rumble through, clogging up the
village’s narrow main road. Locals claim they’ve had guns pointed at them
by cops, and even been forced to pull over to make room for the fleet of
“deadly cargo”.

One video shows parents and kids on the school run having
to stand aside as a convoy with blue flashing lights thunders through,
shaking the walls of surrounding buildings and towering over homes just
metres away. The cargo, widely believed to contain “nuclear material”, is a
key part of Britain’s Trident weapons programme.

 The Sun 13th Jan 2024

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25310004/brize-norton-nuclear-weapons-putin-oxfordshire-cotswolds/

January 15, 2024 Posted by | safety, UK | Leave a comment

Japanese nuclear plant admits 20,000 litres of oil leaked when it was hit by 10ft tsunami sparked by New Year’s Day earthquake – as officials call for drones to monitor radiation levels

  • Hokuriku Electric Power reported second oil leak at Shika nuclear power station

Daily Mail, By JAMES CALLERY, 12 January 2024

A Japanese nuclear power station has admitted that 20,000 litres of oil leaked when 10ft tsunami waves slammed into the plant after the 7.6-magnitude New Year’s Day earthquake.

Shika nuclear power plant, which contains two reactors, was hit by the huge waves shortly after the powerful earthquake struck the central Ishikawa region on January 1.

Around 19,900 litres of insulating oil leaked after the transformers in the two nuclear reactors were damaged in the quake, Hokurika Electric Power, which runs the facility, said. A second oil leak was reported yesterday, raising yet more safety fears.

Water used to cool spent fuel rods was spilt and the plant’s electricity power was temporarily knocked out as a result of the 7.6-magnitude quake, which killed more than 200 people.

Though Hokuriku Electric claims that no that radiation leaked from the plant, a small number of nearby monitoring stations were taken offline by the earthquake, raising fears that there could in fact be more damage.

Nobuhiko Ban, a safety panel member at Japan’s nuclear watchdog NRA, said this is a ‘huge problem’ and proposed utilising drones and aircraft to measure radiation levels until the operator’s monitoring stations could be repaired………………………………………………………………………. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12951991/Japanese-nuclear-power-station-admits-10ft-tsunami-waves-slammed-plant-7-6-magnitude-New-Years-Day-earthquake-facility-battles-contain-oil-leaks-amid-fears-safety.html

January 14, 2024 Posted by | Japan, safety | Leave a comment

Japan’s NRA orders probe on quake damage at Shika nuclear power plant

Japan Times, 11 Jan 24

The Nuclear Regulation Authority has ordered its secretariat to thoroughly investigate the cause of damage to a nuclear power plant from the 7.6 magnitude earthquake that struck the Noto Peninsula on Jan. 1.

The regulatory watchdog gave the order at a regular meeting on Wednesday.

According to Hokuriku Electric Power, the quake measured an upper 5 on the Japanese seismic intensity scale at the basement of the No. 1 reactor building of its Shika nuclear power plant in Ishikawa Prefecture.

The temblor caused oil to leak from two transformers. The company also could no longer measure radiation levels at up to 18 of its 116 monitoring posts around the plant after the earthquake.

At Wednesday’s meeting, the NRA secretariat presented data from Hokuriku Electric showing ground movements resulting from the quake at the plant’s two reactors had experienced sharper accelerations than the maximum levels expected for the facilities, although it did not find any immediate threats to safety.

Both reactors have been idled since 2011, the company said, adding that the quake did not cause any radiation leaks or have any effect on cooling operations in their spent fuel pools……………………………………………………………. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2024/01/11/japan/science-health/japan-regulator-probe-on-nuke-plant/

January 12, 2024 Posted by | Japan, safety | Leave a comment