nuclear-news

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

Decommissioning nuclear reactors, expensive, but prudent, and cheaper than an accident

Europe’s approach is the prudent one…….America’s approach is to play russian roulette with 105 reactors that are already showing plenty of signs of serious wear and tear 
by Geoffrey Small,6/9/2012  The article (How hard is it to dismantle 150 nuclear reactors?)  fails to put costs and risks in their proper perspective. The cost of de-commissioning a nuclear plant is easily 1 billion euros or dollars. And no, these costs are never honestly factored in by the nuclear industry when accounting for costs per kw/hr or new-build construction bids.
But they are actually puny when faced with a major nuclear accident. At current best estimates today, Fukushima will cost well over 250 billion dollars. Not 1 but 250 billion. That’s a quarter of a trillion dollars.
And there are a truckload of unpredictable complications that could further push that estimate much higher, including another major accident involving the still-vulnerable spent fuel rod pools at reactors 3 and 4. And that is only for a single major accident. Continue reading →

June 11, 2012 Posted by | 2 WORLD, decommission reactor, Reference | Leave a comment

Europe’s challenge in decommissioning 150 nuclear reactors

How hard is it to dismantle 150 nuclear reactors?  Europe is about to find out http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/how-hard-is-it-to-dismantle-150-nuclear-reactors-europes-about-to-find-out/2012/06/09/gJQA2EH0PV_blog.html
Brad Plumer, 06/09/2012  Last year, after the tsunami and reactor meltdown in Fukushima, Japan, many European nations decided to phase out their existing fleets of nuclear power plants. Germany and Belgium are aiming to end all atomic generation by 2030. Switzerland is shooting for 2035.

Not so easy to get rid of.  Yet the mere act of shutting down those reactors is going to pose a huge challenge in the years ahead. Continue reading →

June 11, 2012 Posted by | decommission reactor, EUROPE, Reference | Leave a comment

USA federal ruling means delay in licensing of nuclear power plants

The New York attorney general’s office said the ruling means the NRC cannot license or relicense any nuclear power plant until it examines those risks. That process could take a couple of years, Geoff Fettus, an attorney who argued in court on behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council, told msnbc.com.

“The need for a new strategy is urgent,” the panel wrote in its report, “not just to address these damages and costs but because this generation has a fundamental, ethical obligation to avoid burdening future generations with the entire task of finding a safe, permanent solution for managing hazardous nuclear materials they had no part in creating.”

Nuclear headache: What to do with 65,000 tons of spent fuel,  By Miguel Llanos, msnbc.com   http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/08/12127578-nuclear-headache-what-to-do-with-65000-tons-of-spent-fuel?lite   In a blow to the nuclear energy industry, a federal appeals court on Friday threw out a rule allowing plants to store spent nuclear fuel onsite for decades after they’ve closed, and ordered regulators to study the risks involved with that storage – 65,000 tons now spread across the country, and growing at 2,000 tons a year.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission “apparently has no long-term plan other than hoping for a geologic repository,” the unanimous ruling stated . “If the government continues to fail in its quest to establish one, then SNF (spent nuclear fuel) will seemingly be stored on site at nuclear plants on a permanent basis. The Commission can and must assess the potential environmental effects of such a failure.” Nuclear plants have been storing spent fuel onsite for decades and the NRC recently said, barring a repository, they may continue to do so even after they shut down. Continue reading →

June 9, 2012 Posted by | USA, wastes | 1 Comment

Sellafield nuclear reprocessing to shut, but no plan for waste disposal!

and they still want to keep on making the stuff!

 the authority said it was “still many years from making final decisions on the design” of the dump and even where it would be located.

Construction on the UK’s national nuclear waste dump, to be built deep underground, is expected to start in 2075, though a location has not yet been chosen.


Controversial Thorp plant at Sellafield to be shut down, Irish Times, MARK HENNESSY, London Editor, 7 June 12, SELLAFIELD’S CONTROVERSIAL Thorp nuclear reprocessing plant is to close. The facility will be shut down in six years’ time, Britain’s Nuclear Decommissioning Authority has said.

The decision will mean that spent nuclear rods produced by the British nuclear industry after 2018 will have to be buried untreated in a temporary nuclear storage dump for up to a century.

“Our strategy to close Thorp following completion of the reprocessing contracts has potentially wider policy implications for spent fuel management in the UK,” the authority acknowledged. Continue reading →

June 8, 2012 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

France’s nuclear dilemma – costs of shutting aged reactors

Nuclear Europe: a dream unwinding, China Dialogue, Steve Thomas June 06, 2012“…… the real challenge – regardless of whether Hollande or Sarkozy had won the election – was always going to be what to do about France’s existing plants when they reach the end of their lives. Under present plans, these ageing reactors will be retired at a rate of five to six per year from 2017 onwards. The cheaper option for the country’s power giant EDF would be to do as the Americans and extend the plants’ lifespans from 40 to 60 years, though thanks to post-Fukushima regulatory requirements that existing plants be made more robust for “extreme situations” this is not such a cheap option as it once was.

Such a move would also likely sound the death knell for Areva’s problematic European Pressurised Reactor (EPR), the design causing huge delays and cost overruns at Olkiluoto in Finland and Flamanville in France. Both projects are running four years or more late and about 100% over budget. Without new French orders from Areva – a French company – the design would lose all credibility.

On the other hand, if France takes the route of replacing old reactors with EPRs, assuming problems around cost, licensing and construction can be solved, and the EPR remains a viable option, then the cost to EDF of replacing old capacity would be astronomical – far higher than first time around. It is doubtful that France could sustain the logistical and financial challenge of ordering and building four or five EPRs a year for a decade. It would also have to start paying huge sums for decommissioning existing reactors. That leaves France facing some tough choices…. http://www.chinadialogue.net/article/show/single/en/4956

June 7, 2012 Posted by | business and costs, decommission reactor, France | Leave a comment

Japan’s “wide area incineration” plan to manage radioactive debris

Japan’s Latest Nuclear Crisis: Getting Rid of the Radioactive Debris The Atlantic, JUN 4 2012“.……While the government insists on the necessity of removing rubble from the earthquake region as quickly as possible, critics point out that the government plan calls for 80 percent of the debris to be burned locally, and say that transporting only 20 percent of the feared waste to incinerators around the country makes little sense. After all, if the goal is to remove debris from the area, why is the vast majority of it staying there? Continue reading →

June 6, 2012 Posted by | Japan, wastes | Leave a comment

Japan – 37 tons of deadly plutonium, and planning to produce more

Other countries, including the United States, have scaled back the separation of plutonium because it is a proliferation concern and is more expensive than other alternatives, including long-term storage of spent fuel.

Fuel reprocessing remains unreliable and it is questionable whether it is a viable way of reducing Japan’s massive amounts of spent fuel rods

 Japan’s plutonium stockpile — most of which is stored in France and Britain — has swelled despite Tokyo’s promise to international regulators not to produce a plutonium surplus.

Japan to make more plutonium despite big stockpile, Fox News  June 01, 2012 Associated Press TOKYO –  Last year’s tsunami disaster in Japan clouded the nation’s nuclear future, idled its reactors and rendered its huge stockpile of plutonium useless for now. So, the industry’s plan to produce even more has raised a red flag.

Nuclear industry officials say they hope to start producing a half-ton of plutonium within months, in addition to the more than 35 tons Japan already has stored around the world. That’s even though all the reactors that might use it are either inoperable or offline while the country rethinks its nuclear policy after the tsunami-generated Fukushima crisis. Continue reading →

June 2, 2012 Posted by | - plutonium, Japan, reprocessing | Leave a comment

USA legal fuss over Nuclear Waste Fund, as no waste solution found

Appeals courts criticizes Energy Department over billions paid into nuclear waste fund  Washington Post, By Associated Press,  June 1 WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court says the Energy Department did not complete a review required to continue collecting $750 million a year in fees from operators of nuclear power plants.

Bu the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia did not order the fee collection suspended. Instead, officials were given six more months to complete the review.

More than $26 billion has been paid into the federal Nuclear Waste Fund for long-term storage and disposal of nuclear waste from the nation’s 104 commercial nuclear reactors. The money has sat idle for decades amid disputes about how to dispose of the waste….
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/appeals-courts-criticizes-energy-department-over-billions-paid-into-nuclear-waste-fund/2012/06/01/gJQA5ALe7U_story.html

June 2, 2012 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

High level nuclear waste dump for shores of Great Lakes!

how did governments around the world, citizens like us around the world, science and the nuclear industry, turn a blind eye to the huge buildup of nuclear waste for more than 40 years as we enjoyed the fruits of nuclear power?

the nuclear waste dangers will remain for thousands of years, longer than civilization itself. And right next to the largest fresh-water lake system in the world.

Nuclear waste, tourism don’t mix http://www.lfpress.com/comment/2012/05/25/19800186.html By WAYNE MACDONALD,  May 26, 2012  A packed council chambers in Saugeen Shores, where I live, stood in stunned amazement as its local council- once again – took a huge step toward changing the face of this lakeside community with no discussion, no debate. Absolutely none. Continue reading →

May 26, 2012 Posted by | Canada, environment, wastes | Leave a comment

Plutonium’s deadly history

The Manhattan Project’s Fatal “Demon Core”, Physics Central, May 21, 2012 Sixty six years ago today, Louis Slotin saw a flash of blue light in the depths of Los Alamos National Laboratory. Seconds before, all that separated the young scientist from a lethal dose of radiation was a thin screwdriver.

The screwdriver supported a reflective covering that encased a sphere of plutonium, and if the reflector fell into place, a nuclear chain reaction would commence. When Slotin’s hand slipped, a lethal burst of radiation hit him, and he died nine days later. Continue reading →

May 23, 2012 Posted by | - plutonium, history, Reference | Leave a comment

Stop Kent nuclear waste bunker plan says Campaign to Protect Rural England,

Environmental group slams Kent nuclear waste bunker proposal  BBC 20 May 2012 A proposal to build a nuclear waste bunker in Kent has been criticised by an environmental group.

Shepway District Council is considering whether a nuclear disposal facility, where waste is buried underground, could be built at Romney Marsh.

Protect Kent have reacted strongly to the proposal saying it must be “quashed at the outset”.

The council said it has “no formal view” about the proposal.

The Romney Marsh Nuclear Research and Disposal Facility would be buried 200m (656ft) to 1,000m (3,280ft) below ground……. Kent County Council has already signalled its opposition to the idea, saying it would push for a county-wide referendum.

Andrew Ogden, from Protect Kent, local branch of the Campaign to Protect Rural England, said the proposal was “unfeasible”.

“This is an ill-considered idea that must be quashed at the outset,” he said.

“Perhaps more significantly, it is a proposal that is so unfeasible and so unlikely to be given any credence by the government. Shepway District Council are wasting time, energy and money in trying to pursue it.”…..  Shepway District Council will hold a series of public exhibitions  over the next three weeks detailing the proposals. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-18137403

May 21, 2012 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

UK government wooing county Kent to accept nuclear waste dump

Wetlands of Romney Marsh in Kent could become new home of nuclear waste dump Mail Online, By SUZANNAH HILLS, 17 May 2012 The wildlife-rich wetlands of Romney Marsh in Kent could become the home of an underground nuclear waste dumping ground if government plans get the go ahead.
Thousands of letters have been sent by Shepway District Council to residents living in the area as part of a consultation over the proposal for a multi-million pound Nuclear Research and Disposal Facility.
Under the plans, hazardous nuclear waste would be buried between 200m to 1000m below the ground in underground vaults, while a research facility would be constructed on the surface…. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2145628/Wetlands-Romney-Marsh-Kent-new-home-nuclear-waste-dump.html#ixzz1vGB2CiZp

May 18, 2012 Posted by | UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Kent County Council opposes nuclear waste bunker plan

Kent nuclear waste bunker proposal considered BBC News 16 May 12  A bunker used to store nuclear waste from all over the UK could be built in Kent, under a council’s plans. Shepway District Council is examining whether a nuclear disposal facility, where waste is buried underground, could be built at Romney Marsh. The authority said it could bring jobs to the area as Dungeness A and B power stations are phased out.

However, Kent County Council said it would use “every tool in the box” to oppose the scheme. The Romney Marsh Nuclear Research and Disposal Facility would be buried 200m (656ft) to 1,000m (3,280ft) below ground…..

Council leader’s ‘horror’ The leader of Kent County Council, Paul Carter, said his authority
opposed the plan and would push for a county-wide referendum if necessary. “We are totally opposed to initiating any process that even entertains the possibility of building a nuclear waste disposal site anywhere near or around Kent,” he said. “We will do everything possible to oppose this unviable proposal and will use every tool in the box to bring an end to this scheme…. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-18086988

May 17, 2012 Posted by | opposition to nuclear, Reference, UK, wastes | Leave a comment

Finland’s plan for eternal storage of nuclear waste

there is the problem of time. HLW will remain dangerous for longer than civilization itself has existed. Future civilizations may not even have the ability to address the dangers—even if we could somehow warn them what they’re dealing with. 

Meanwhile, the construction of new nuclear facilities continues apace, even in the U.S. Earlier this year, federal regulators granted licenses to construct two new plants in Georgia, the first such licenses in the U.S. since 1978. So our waste problem, and the world’s, will only get worse. 

Finland’s Crazy Plan to Make Nuclear Waste Disappear, Popular Mechanics,  By Tim Heffernan 11 May 12, The U.S. plan to bury nuclear waste in Yucca Mountain may be dead, but in Finland, engineers are going ahead with a plan to build an enormous bunker to house the dangerous stuff. And they have a radical solution to keep future civilizations away—hide the nuclear waste somewhere so unremarkable and unpleasant that nobody would ever think to go there.   Barring a disaster—or a miracle, depending on your viewpoint—the Finnish government later this year will begin the final licensing of the world’s first permanent storage facility for high-level nuclear waste. Continue reading →

May 11, 2012 Posted by | Finland, Reference, wastes | Leave a comment

Recycling plutonium more dangerous and costly than burying it

Experts urge Britain to bury plutonium rather than recycling
http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20120510p2g00m0in010000c.html 10 May 12, WASHINGTON (Kyodo) — Four U.S. nuclear experts urged Britain to bury plutonium rather than recycling for fuel for nuclear reactors as it is more cost-effective, according to the British science journal Nature’s Thursday edition.

Citing an estimate in 2000 that recycling plutonium from spent fuel to make mixed oxide fuel adds $750 million each year to the cost of electric power generation in France, the four said, ”Britain should seriously evaluate the less costly and less risky method of direct
plutonium disposal, and take the opportunity to lead the world towards a better solution for reducing stockpiles.” Continue reading →

May 10, 2012 Posted by | - plutonium, Reference, UK | 1 Comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »