nuclear-news

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

Problems ahead for the nuclear industry in the closing and disposal of dead nuclear reactors

Regions like Europe are expected to face significant growing pains as the
expansion of nuclear generation picks up pace. This will include not only
the challenge of building new facilities, but also how to handle more
widespread decommissioning and maintenance work.

Many existing plants are
ageing, built as long ago as the 1970s with a typical lifespan of around 40
to 50 years. These assets will need to be replaced in the coming decades
for the continent to meet its energy transition goals. The growing need for
decommissioning and maintenance should be met most efficiently and –
above all – safely.

A major challenge that will be increasingly faced by
nuclear projects is the sheer variety of different facilities that were
built from the 1970s onwards. This means that there is no one methodology
that can be applied across all sites. This is not simply a case of
construction and layout, but also the data available – it is quite common
to have to work with a lack of detailed information on older plants built
some 50 years ago or more.

This means that more work is needed early in
each project to ensure the logistic methodologies will work within the
site. This early involvement also gives suppliers the best chance of
developing bespoke equipment within the project timeframe. Problems can
often be solved by addressing them laterally. It can be highly undesirable
or simply impossible to move modules through the plant itself. Instead,
alternative options should be considered such as cutting a hole in the roof
of the containment building, lifting the vessel out using a crane or
gantry, or creating a bespoke engineering solution that has not been used
before.

 NS Energy 7th June 2023 https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/how-to-ensure-safe-and-effective-nuclear-decommissioning-and-maintenance/

https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/how-to-ensure-safe-and-effective-nuclear-decommissioning-and-maintenance/

June 10, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, decommission reactor | Leave a comment

Timeline: The history of radioactive contamination in St. Louis County

The long history of radioactive contamination in St. Louis County began with the Manhattan Project during World War II.

5 on Your Side, Clarissa Cowley, June 8, 2023

FLORISSANT, Mo. — Jana Elementary School has been in the spotlight for months after conflicting reports regarding radioactive pollution at the school. At its root is nearby Coldwater Creek, which was contaminated for years by improperly stored nuclear waste.

In the months since an independent report showed high levels of radioactive lead at the school, parents and community members have called for action to clean up the pollution, and some families said they are even moving out of their homes and away from the Hazelwood School District.

Now the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers planned to hold a public meeting Thursday night at Jana Elementary School after it made public the final results of its testing, which conversely found no radiological concerns at the school.

5 On Your Side has created a timeline of the decades-long saga leading up to this point, citing public documents as well as our own records and reporting.

The details below include information about the atomic waste illegally dumped in the Bridgeton Landfill, which sits inside the West Lake Landfill site off St. Charles Rock Road. It was a dumpsite for radioactive material following World War II, and in 2010, a fire broke out underground not far from that dump site that is still burning. In addition, this timeline breaks down the history of chemical pollution alongside Coldwater Creek near Jana Elementary School.

Timeline:

1940

  • The Manhattan Project, an American-led effort during World War II to develop a functional atomic weapon, is officially created. The Mallinckrodt Chemical Works plant in St. Louis begins processing uranium oxide used by the Manhattan Project.
  • 1947
  • Waste from the uranium oxide production is taken and stored at a site north of St. Louis Lambert International Airport from 1947 until the late 1960s. 
  • 957
  • Mallinckrodt moves uranium processing to a Weldon Spring facility, where it would continue until 1966.
  • 1960s
  • The toxic waste is purchased and moved from the airport site to a site half a mile away on Latty Avenue. This site and the airport site were located near 19-mile-long Coldwater Creek. Radioactive waste would contaminate the creek, which would then carry the contamination into north St. Louis County.
  • 1973
  • Atomic waste is illegally dumped in the West Lake Landfill.
  • A long-time employee of the Mallinckrodt plant, who took radioactive waste to Coldwater Creek in Styrofoam containers in an open-air truck, dies of brain cancer.
  • The EPA takes over West Lake Landfill as a Superfund Site.
  • 2004
  • Mallinckrodt employees, who worked with uranium used in nuclear weapon manufacturing, become eligible for compensation in Weldon Spring and St. Louis. Workers had to prove how much exposure they had to radiation while working for the Mallinckrodt facility.
  •  
  • 2010
  • A smoldering underground fire is found at the Bridgeton Landfill, raising concerns it would threaten the nearby radioactive material. 
  • Families and workers around the Bridgeton Landfill are burdened by smelly fumes that were emitting from the fire still burning underground. The smoldering accelerated the decay of solid waste at the site, causing excessive gas release and powerful odors that many living nearby said made them sick. 
  • 2012 
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) began a detailed investigation of Coldwater Creek and its floodplain areas in October 2012, working downstream from the historical source areas.
  • 2013 
  • Three years after the underground smoldering started at the landfill, then-Attorney General Chris Koster files a lawsuit against Republic Services over ongoing concerns.

…………………………………………………….January 2022

…………………………August 2022: Several details regarding the levels of contamination begin to come to light. Parents are notified that soil sampling showed a presence of low-level radioactive contamination on the banks of Coldwater Creek. The amount of toxins found around Jana Elementary and the two landfills (Bridgeton and West Lake) had to reach a certain threshold, according to CDC guidelines. Based on these findings, parents became concerned about exposure and health risk.

…………………………………………………………………..June 8, 2023 

  • The Army Corps of Engineers planned to hold a public meeting to discuss the findings of all three reports with the community.

All Army Corps of Engineers reports can be found here.  

June 10, 2023 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

World Ocean Day appeal to international bodies over Fukushima dump plan

Nuclear Free Local Authorities 8 June 23

Today (8 June) is celebrated the world over as UN World Ocean Day. The UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities have chosen this day to make a final appeal to the International Maritime Organisation and the United Nations to intercede to stop the Japanese Government and nuclear industry from committing a criminal folly.

For the Japanese Government and executives at Tokyo Electric Power (TEPCO) which formerly operated the Fukushima nuclear power plant, plan imminently to dump well over one million tonnes of radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean. This water has been used to cool the reactors at the plant which were destroyed by an earthquake and tsunami in March 2011. The radioactive water has been stored on site in large drums; now there are plans to start to discharge the water out to sea through a pipeline especially built for this purpose.

Although the water has been ‘treated’ this cannot remove the radioactive tritium that is present that if inhaled or ingested can become fatal to marine life and ultimately to any humans who come into contact with it.

Councillor Lawrence O’Neill, Chair of the UK/Ireland Nuclear Free Local Authorities, said: “In looking to release the contaminated water, Japan will be transgressing the commitments it has made as a nation under the London Protocol and the UN Law of the Sea not to pollute our oceans and, more specifically, not to pollute them with radioactive materials.

“We are concerned that not only will marine life be jeopardised but human life too and that the discharge will destroy many livelihoods as this will have an adverse impact on the fishing and tourism industries. We stand with the people and nations of the Pacific in calling upon the Japanese Government and nuclear industry to step back and save our ocean from this blight. This water should be retained on land until it is truly safe.”…………….more https://www.nuclearpolicy.info/news/world-ocean-day-appeal-to-international-bodies-over-fukushima-dump-plan/

June 10, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, oceans, wastes | Leave a comment

Rosatom says nuclear cleanup in Arctic done – Far from the case, says Bellona.

The nuclear cleanup in the Arctic is not done, there is still radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel that needs securing.

Those items remaining to be cleaned up and secured include at least 11,000 spent nuclear fuel assemblies at Andreyeva Bay, a former Soviet submarine base. They also include two sunken nuclear submarines, over a dozen nuclear reactors and barrels of radioactive waste scuttled by the Soviet Navy in the Kara and Barents Seas. Issues of securing spent fuel and radioactive waste stored on nuclear icebreaker service ships likewise remain unresolved.  

Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom said last week that more than two decades worth of efforts to rid the Arctic of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from decommissioned submarines will now come to an end. Bellona fears Rosatom is leaving undone a raft of crucial projects initiated with international support.

June 7, 2023 by Bellona

Russia’s state nuclear corporation Rosatom said last week that more than two decades worth of efforts to rid the Arctic of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel from decommissioned submarines will now come to an end. Bellona fears Rosatom is leaving undone a raft of crucial projects initiated with international support. 

” [This work]began back in the early 2000s with the analysis of large deposits of spent nuclear fuel from nuclear submarine reactors,” said Rosatom CEO Aleksei Likhachev in remarks reported by official Russian newswire Tass “In total, thousands of tons of radioactive materials have been handled, and today we are at the finish line of this work, returning these territories to public use under strict administrative, public, and international control.” 

Since the 1990s, the Bellona Foundation has been involved in discovering and documenting nuclear hazards and radiation threats in Arctic Russia and based on that experience, the organization asserts that Likhachev’s announcement is untrue — Russia is nowhere near the “finish line” in these efforts

Furthermore, Likhachev’s remarks contradict earlier statements from Rosatom that many of these cleanup operations would be ongoing until late in this decade. 

“Russian authorities are backtracking on earlier statements from May last year, and confirming Bellona’s fears that these projects will not be continued or completed, says Frederic Hauge, president of the Bellona Foundation. 

“The nuclear cleanup in the Arctic is not done, there is still radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel that needs securing – both in the former marine base at Andreeva Bay and at the bottom of the Arctic seas”, says underlines Hauge. 

Since the early 2000s, cleanup projects to rid the Arctic of the nuclear legacy of the Soviet Northern fleet have been ongoing in North-West Russia. These efforts were orchestrated through international cooperation between Russia and other countries and aided by large funding pledges from international donors.  

These multinational efforts continued until February of 2022, when Moscow invaded Ukraine. Since then, international assistance to Moscow has been put on ice. But even then, key figures at Rosatom pledged that cleanup work would continue, nonetheless.  

But Likhachev’s statement seems to put an end to that and declares victory well before the battle is finished  

Those items remaining to be cleaned up and secured include at least 11,000 spent nuclear fuel assemblies at Andreyeva Bay, a former Soviet submarine base. They also include two sunken nuclear submarines, over a dozen nuclear reactors and barrels of radioactive waste scuttled by the Soviet Navy in the Kara and Barents Seas. Issues of securing spent fuel and radioactive waste stored on nuclear icebreaker service ships likewise remain unresolved. 

In 2022, after Moscow launched its invasion of Ukraine, Russian authorities sought to assure their international counterparts that each of these projects would nonetheless continue, despite the withdrawal of international assistance.   

Bellona had since that time been concerned that Russia, in its state of war, would fail to prioritize these critical projects, and in November the organization warned that the efforts to lift sunken Soviet submarines would at best be indefinitely postponed  …………………………………

The issue of the sunken objects left by the Soviet Union will not be solved by itself. Ninety percent of that radiation from the sunken objects in the Kara and Barents seas is emitted by six objects that Rosatom has deemed urgent and targeted for lifting: two nuclear submarines; the reactor compartments from three nuclear submarines; and the reactor from the legendary icebreaker Lenin. …………….

“Why do they choose to say that the cleanup is done now – when that clearly is not the case? Rosatom has time and again underlined the importance of finishing the cleanup projects and lifting the sunken objects from the bottom of the sea, says Hauge. 

 “If we were to speculate, it might be that they are trying to force a renewed dialogue on financing of these projects, despite the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Perhaps they are fishing for reactions from Norwegian authorities and other western governments – perhaps particularly when it comes to the sunken objects,” continues Hauge 

“They know that the more delayed a decision to raise these subs is, the higher the risk of a lifting operation failing. Thus, such a statement can put pressure on former cooperation partners to reevaluate their decision to discontinue cooperation with Russia and financial support on these topics because of the invasion of Ukraine. If that is the correct interpretation, then it is a form of blackmail – nuclear blackmail,” Hauge concludes.  https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2023-06-rosatom-says-nuclear-cleanup-in-arctic-done-far-from-the-case-says-bellona

 

June 9, 2023 Posted by | ARCTIC, oceans, Russia, wastes | 1 Comment

Amid opposition, Japan takes 1st step to release nuclear waste water into ocean

China slams Tokyo’s ‘irresponsible’ actions on Fukushima’s contaminated water, urging safe disposal

Alperen Aktas  |07.06.2023

Despite mounting pressure, Japan has begun injecting seawater into a drainage tunnel of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant as a first step to release treated radioactive wastewater into the ocean.

The tunnel was filled with water on Tuesday, triggering a sharp response from the Chinese mission in Tokyo.

Japan plans to release treated radioactive wastewater into the ocean, triggering opposition and concerns from local fishing communities and neighboring countries.

“The harm caused by the discharge of nuclear water into the sea is immeasurable,” China’s diplomatic mission in Japan said in a statement.

“Workers at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant are sending seawater into an underwater tunnel that has been built to release treated and diluted water from the facility into the ocean,” Japanese public broadcaster NHK reported.

“Once filled with seawater, the tunnel will guide treated water from the plant to a point about 1 kilometer offshore.”

The water release system is nearing completion, with the exception of a reservoir that will store treated water prior to its release. The utility aims to finish all construction tasks by the end of June……………………

Urging Japan not to put future generations at risk, the Chinese Embassy stressed that besides ocean discharge, formation injection, steam discharge, hydrogen discharge, and underground burial are also viable options. However, it is “irresponsible” for the Japanese side not to seriously consider and show other extermination options.

Zhang Kejian, Chairman of China Atomic Energy Authority, also criticized Japan’s “extremely irresponsible” act.

Japan disregarded the concerns of its people and other countries, providing no scientific answers or consulting with neighbors and stakeholders, he said at an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors meeting held on Monday in Austria.

A signature campaign was launched in South Korea last week to oppose Japan’s intended discharge of radioactive water from the crippled Fukushima nuclear power plant.

The campaign was initiated by South Korea’s leading opposition Democratic Party in the capital Seoul.

DP Chairman Lee Jae-Myung expressed his concerns, questioning how the president and the ruling party can support Japan and grant them immunity and permission to dispose of hazardous nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean.

Japan unveiled the water discharge plan in April 2021, triggering massive criticism from China, South Korea, North Korea, the island nation of Taiwan, and international bodies, including the UN…………………….  https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/amid-opposition-japan-takes-1st-step-to-release-nuclear-waste-into-ocean/2916489

June 9, 2023 Posted by | Japan, oceans, wastes | Leave a comment

  Detailed evidence exposes Japan’s lies, loopholes in nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping plan

Japan’s existing ocean discharge plan and evaluation are based on the assumption that the nuclear-contaminated wastewater can meet discharge standards after treatment.

But unfortunately, the data released by TEPCO showed that as of September 30, 2021, some 70 percent of the then 1.243 million cubic meters of ALPS-treated nuclear-contaminated wastewater still failed to meet the criteria, 18 percent of which even exceeded the standards 10 to 20,000 times over

Firstly, the types of radionuclides that TEPCO monitors are relatively few, making it far from being able to reflect the correct radionuclide dispersion in the contaminated wastewater.

The Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater, coming from the wastewater which was directly in contact with the core of the melted reactor, theoretically contains all the hundreds of types of radionuclides in the melted reactor, such as fission nuclides, a uranium isotope, and transuranic nuclide.

But TEPCO at first only listed 64 types of radionuclides including H-3 and C-14 as a (data) foundation for the works including monitoring and analysis, emission control, and environmental impact assessment. These 64 radionuclides did not include the uranium isotope and certain other α-nuclides, which have long half-lives while some are highly toxic.

TEPCO’s exclusion of the radionuclides mentioned above has greatly compromised the effectiveness of its monitoring work, as well as the credibility of its environmental impact assessment result.

“TEPCO’s plan of only monitoring a few types of radionuclides is unscientific,” the insider told the Global Times.

Later, during the review process of the IAEA Task Force in 2022, TEPCO changed the number of radionuclide types it was monitoring and analyzing to 30, and then decreased it to 29 this year. This is far from enough to provide a complete assessment of the extremely complex nuclides in the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater.

Secondly, there are missing activity concentration values for multiple radionuclides in TEPCO’s monitoring scheme.

TEPCO’s public report on the 64 radionuclides only provides activity concentration values for 12 radioactive nuclides other than tritium, while over 50 other nuclides do not have specific activity concentration values. The report, while only offering gross α and gross β values, doesn’t disclose the respective concentration levels of many highly toxic radionuclides in the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater, such as Pu-239, Pu-240 and Am-241. 

“[TEPCO’s] current plan only monitors some of the nuclides and the gross α and gross β values, which cannot accurately indicate the fluctuations or changes in the activity of each nuclide after treating the contaminated wastewater due to the fluctuation of the nuclide source term composition,” said the insider. 

This operation of TEPCO has largely increased the uncertainty of the [nuclide] source item information of the nuclear-contaminated wastewater, and thus greatly increases the difficulties of making subsequent monitoring plans and marine ecological environmental impact assessment.

Thirdly, TEPCO didn’t make conservative assumptions in many aspects of its monitoring data, and some of the assumptions it made were somewhat “negligent.”

In the process of treating the nuclear-contaminated wastewater, the slight particle shedding of chemical precipitants and inorganic adsorbents in the ALPS may cause some radionuclides to exist in a colloidal state.

Therefore, TEPCO’s assumption that all nuclides in nuclear-contaminated wastewater in the ALPS are water-soluble is obviously invalid, said the insider. “TEPCO should scientifically and comprehensively analyze whether colloidal nuclides are present in the nuclear-contaminated wastewater based on the long-term operation experience of its ALPS system,” he noted.

Huang Lanlan Jun 05, 2023  https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202306/1291969.shtml

The Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant Photo: VCGAs the date for Japan’s planned dumping of nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean approaches, a Pandora’s Box threatening the global marine ecosystem is likely to be opened. 

The Japanese government announced its decision on April 13 to release the nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the storage tanks at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the sea. Starting from 2023, the discharge is scheduled to last about 30 years. This decision has garnered widespread attention and sparked great concern across the globe.

While Japanese authorities are busy colluding with some Western politicians in boasting about the discharge plan, Fukushima residents, international experts in ecology, and various stakeholders around the world have kept calling for Japan to reconsider and modify its flawed plan.

Japan’s attempt to “whitewash” the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater release plan failed again at the Group of Seven (G7) summit in May. The joint statement of the summit did not explicitly state nor allude to the G7 members’ “welcome” of the current dumping plan due to strong opposition. Instead, it only reiterated support for the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) review of Fukushima’s treated water release.

An insider familiar with Japan’s dumping plan recently told the Global Times that he has many concerns and doubts about the plan. The insider provided detailed evidence exposing Japan’s lie that whitewashes its dumping plan. He also revealed many loopholes in the plan that the Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) have refused to talk about or even deliberately concealed from the public.

All provided evidence considered, it is apparent that, currently, Japan is incapable of properly handling the nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping. The toxic wastewater processed by the Japanese side cannot currently meet international discharge standards, and the country’s reckless behavior, if not stopped and corrected in time, may cause irreparable damage to the global ecosystem.

“There are still many unresolved issues with the source terms of the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater,” the insider said. 

“If the Japanese government and TEPCO continue to have their own way, it may cause improper discharge of nuclear-contaminated water, and that must be taken seriously,” he noted, calling on the two sides to be open, transparent, and honest in solving the problem.

Disappointing data monitoring

Japan’s current plan of releasing nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea, though superficially reasonable at first glance, cannot hold up to close scrutiny. Its monitoring on the source terms of the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater is incomplete, and the data it collects is likely unreliable, observers told the Global Times.

In February 2022, the IAEA Task Force released its first report, the IAEA Review of Safety Related Aspects of Handling ALPS-Treated Water at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. The report clearly stated that the Task Force “commented on the importance of defining the source term for the discharge of ALPS (Advanced Liquid Processing System) treated water in a sufficiently conservative yet realistic manner.” 

Source terms of contaminated water include the composition of radionuclide and the activity of simulation of nuclides dispersion. As the premise of marine environmental monitoring, the accuracy and reliability of the source term-related data is crucial. However, Japan’s data statistics and monitoring on the source terms are disappointingly full of loopholes. 

Continue reading →

June 7, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, Japan, radiation, Reference, wastes | 1 Comment

Tritium found beyond safe limits in treated Fukushima wastewater

 A type of radioactive isotope in the over 1.3 million tons of wastewater
being collected at the destroyed Fukushima nuclear power plant and planned
for discharge by as early as this summer has been found at levels beyond
those earlier suggested to be safe by the Japanese government, a wastewater
safety review report by the International Atomic Energy Agency showed
Thursday.

According to the report, which corroborated analyses of the treated wastewater by six laboratories including the Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety, the activity concentrations of tritium in the treated water were estimated to be at least 148,900 becquerels per liter.

The wastewater filtered through Japan’s Advanced Liquid Processing System at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station contained more tritium than what was stipulated in Japan’s national regulatory standards for discharge, 60,000 becquerels per liter……………………………………………

 Korea Herald 1st June 2023

http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?mp=1&np=1&ud=20230601000750

June 4, 2023 Posted by | Fukushima continuing, oceans, radiation, wastes | Leave a comment

$528 Billion nuclear clean-up at Hanford Site in jeopardy

The government now appears to be seriously considering whether it will be necessary to leave thousands of gallons of leftover waste buried forever in Hanford’s shallow underground tanks, according to some of those familiar with the negotiations, and protect some of the waste not in impenetrable glass, but in a concrete grout casing that would almost certainly decay thousands of years before the toxic materials that it is designed to hold at bay.

At site after site, the solution has come down to a choice between an expensive, decades-long cleanup or quicker action that leaves a large amount of waste in place.

A Poisonous Cold War Legacy That Defies a Solution

NYT, By Ralph Vartabedian, Reporting from Richland, Wash., May 31, 2023

From 1950 to 1990, the U.S. Energy Department produced an average of four nuclear bombs every day, turning them out of hastily built factories with few environmental safeguards that left behind a vast legacy of toxic radioactive waste.

Nowhere were the problems greater than at the Hanford Site in Washington State, where engineers sent to clean up the mess after the Cold War discovered 54 million gallons of highly radioactive sludge left from producing the plutonium in America’s atomic bombs, including the one dropped on the Japanese city of Nagasaki in 1945.

Cleaning out the underground tanks that were leaching poisonous waste toward the Columbia River just six miles away and somehow stabilizing it for permanent disposal presented one of the most complex chemical problems ever encountered. Engineers thought they had solved it years ago with an elaborate plan to pump out the sludge, embed it in glass and deposit it deep in the mountains of the Nevada desert.

But construction of a five-story, 137,000 square-foot chemical treatment plant for the task was halted in 2012 — after an expenditure of $4 billion — when it was found to be riddled with safety defects. The naked superstructure of the plant has stood in mothballs for 11 years, a potent symbol of the nation’s failure, nearly 80 years after the Second World War, to deal decisively with the atomic era’s deadliest legacy.

The cleanup at Hanford is now at an inflection point. The Energy Department has been in closed-door negotiations with state officials and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, trying to revamp the plan. But many fear the most likely compromises, which could be announced in the coming months, will put the speed and quality of the cleanup at risk.

The government now appears to be seriously considering whether it will be necessary to leave thousands of gallons of leftover waste buried forever in Hanford’s shallow underground tanks, according to some of those familiar with the negotiations, and protect some of the waste not in impenetrable glass, but in a concrete grout casing that would almost certainly decay thousands of years before the toxic materials that it is designed to hold at bay.

“The Energy Department is coming to a big crossroads,” said Thomas Grumbly, a former assistant secretary at the department who oversaw the early days of the project during the Clinton administration.

Successive energy secretaries over the last 30 years, he said, “have slammed their heads against the wall” to come up with a technology and budget that would make the problem go away not only at Hanford, but also at other nuclear weapons sites around the country.

Plants in South Carolina, Washington, Ohio and Idaho that helped produce more than 60,000 atomic bombs have tons of radioactive debris that will be radioactive for thousands of years. And unlike nuclear power plants, whose waste consists of dry uranium pellets locked away in metal tubes, the weapons facilities are dealing with millions of gallons of a peanut butter-like sludge stored in aging underground tanks.

Two million pounds of mercury remain in the soils and waters of eastern Tennessee. Radioactive plumes are contaminating the Great Miami aquifer near Cincinnati.

At site after site, the solution has come down to a choice between an expensive, decades-long cleanup or quicker action that leaves a large amount of waste in place.

Hanford, some 580 square miles of shrub-steppe desert in south-central Washington State, is the largest and most contaminated of all the weapons production sites — too polluted to ever be returned to public use. But the problem is urgent, given the risk of radionuclides contaminating the Columbia River, a vital lifeline for cities, farms, tribes and wildlife in two states……………………………………………………………………………………………………

“The closer you get to the bottom of those tanks, the more radioactive, toxic and dangerous waste is,” said Geoffrey Fettus, a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council, which has sued the government over the Hanford cleanup………………………………………………………………. more https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/31/us/nuclear-waste-cleanup.html

June 2, 2023 Posted by | USA, wastes | 1 Comment

Proximity principle – nuclear waste should be stored as near as possible to the point of generation

Groups opposed to nuclear waste burial go to Queens Park, Toronto

Two anti-nuclear waste activist groups present a petition calling for the Ford government to implement a proximity principle for nuclear waste storage.

Clint Fleury 31 May 23 NWONewsWatch,

TORONTO — Two activist groups opposing the storage of nuclear waste in a deep geological repository are calling on the Ford government to mandate that a proximity principle to have the material stored cosser to where it is generated.

Members of We the Nuclear Free North in Northern Ontario from Northwestern Ontario and Protect Our Waterways – No Nuclear Waste in Southwestern Ontario have collected 1,141 signatures, with the petition presented in Queens Park on tuesday by Thunder Bay-Superior North MPP Lise Vaugeois, Kiiwetinoong MPP Sol Mamakwa and Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner.

“Their plan is not very well defined for the deep geological repository and it has several questionable areas. One of which is an option for a shallow cavern, which if approved, could see nuclear waste being moved into the area before the deep geological repository is complete and in operation,” said Charles Faust, a representative with We the Nuclear Free North.

Faust argued that the Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s plan to transport nuclear waste from power plants to a deep geological repository is “questionable.”

“I want you to remember 1,694. That’s the number of kilometres that it takes for a one-way trip from the average site of nuclear waste storage in Southern Ontario to the Ignace area — 1,694 kilometres,” Faust said. “They’re proposing two to three trucks a day, every day, for 50 years. That’s to deal with the 50,000 tonnes that are out there right now that they are looking for a place to be deposited.”

According to Faust, the concern with the transportation of nuclear waste is that Nuclear Waste Management Organization’s transportation phase is still in the early stages of development.

Bill Noll, a representative with Protect Our Waterways, expressed concern that once the nuclear waste reaches its destination, the fuel bundles will be sent to a repackaged facility and then stored in the repository.

“The repackaging facility is really unique. No other countries, Sweden, Finland, or any other country that I am aware of, is actually thinking about repackaging capability in what is a very small container,” said Noll.

Noll claimed the issue with nuclear waste is the spent heat that is generated.

“This is one of the real issues with the whole idea of how long it will last. It is a function of how much heat will be generated and how much damage that heat will do to not only the rock, but the container itself,” Noll said.

Both activist groups proposed that the solution to their concern would be for the Ford government to implement a proximity principle.

“Nuclear fuel waste should be managed at the point of generation by making on-site storage more robust and adopting a program of rolling stewardship for the long-term management of radioactive at or near its current location,” said Faust……………………………………

During the press conference, Vaugeois called the process of managing Canada’s nuclear waste “undemocratic.” https://www.nwonewswatch.com/local-news/groups-opposed-to-nuclear-waste-burial-go-to-queens-park-7073336

June 1, 2023 Posted by | Canada, wastes | Leave a comment

Nuclear waste disposal site could be built next to power plant, Estonia

ERR News Editor: Mari Peegel, Helen Wright,  https://news.err.ee/1608994484/nuclear-waste-disposal-site-could-be-built-next-to-power-plant, 31 May 23

Waste produced by a future nuclear power plant could be stored on the same site, newly published analysis carried out by the Ministry of the Environment and the Ministry of Finance shows.

The government is studying several sites across the country to see if any are suitable for a future small reactor.

After the announcement was made in April, additional research was carried out into the plant’s waste disposal at sites in Loksa, Kunda, Toila, and Varbla.

Now the results show it would be possible to build storage sites for nuclear waste at these locations, said Anna-Helena Purre from Steiger OÜ, who undertook the study.

“We carried out a spatial analysis: We looked at the location of the plant itself in open and closed cooling systems. Secondly, we looked at waste disposal – the low- and intermediate-level waste scenarios – and spent fuel disposal – the high-level waste scenario. These can be buried in deep boreholes, for example,” she said.

The government has not yet decided whether it will build a nuclear power plant and a decision is likely to be made in 2024. Production would start in 2035 at the earliest.

The U.S., France, Canada, UK, Japan, and Germany have stepped up to cooperate with Estonia.

Initially, 15 sites in Toila, Kunda, Loksa, Kuusalu, Viimsi, Paljaassaare, Kakumäe, Saare and Hiiumaa, Varbla and Harku municipalities were under consideration. But taking into account the plant’s socio-economic aspects, sites in places with a decreasing and below-average population far from the capital are preferred.

June 1, 2023 Posted by | EUROPE, wastes | Leave a comment

Gordon Edwards explains and comments on Canada’s policy on radioactive waste and nuclear decommissioning

Until recently, Canada’s stated policy on radioactive waste management consisted of a flimsy 25-year-old statement of 143 words, making no mention of intermediate level waste (such as decommissioning waste) or plutonium extraction (reprocessing).

In 2019, a team of IAEA nuclear experts reviewed Canada’s nuclear regulatory practices and recommended that Canada produce an enhanced radioactive policy statement and articulate an accompanying national radioactive waste strategy for the first time ever.

In 2020 Canada accepted this recommendation and undertook a two year consultation period with hundreds of Canadian organizations and individuals. 

Non-governmental organizations overwhelmingly recommended that Canada should have radioactive waste management and decommissioning agency that is independent of the nuclear waste producers and agencies that promote nuclear power, such as the Natural Resources Department (NRCan).

They also recommended that reprocessing (plutonium extraction) be banned altogether and that careful consideration be given to establishing a classification of radioactive waste materials based on toxicity, mobility, longevity, and radioactive progeny. Special attention was paid to the need for a policy regarding intermediate level wastes such as those resulting from rector decommissioning operations.

In 2022 a draft policy was released for public comment and an alternative policy was recommended by Nuclear Waste Watch, incorporating the policy recommendations mentioned in the preceding paragraphs.

In March 2023, the government — through NRCan, the very department that is obligated to promote nuclear power and uranium mining — released its final radioactive waste and decommissioning policy. That document ignores almost completely the input from civil society over the course of the previous two years. The policy is verbose and rhetorical with very little substance, and with a pronounced pro-nuclear bias.

On May 25, Nuclear Waste Watch hosted a “debriefing” webinar to inform other groups who had also participated in the consultation process of the nature of the government’s policy, and the distressing fact that NRCan has relegated to the nuclear waste producers the task of constructing a radioactive waste strategy for Canada.

Here is a short slide show (bilingual) that summaries and briefly comments on the main features of the Canadian government’s radioactive waste policy:

Click to access Radwaste_Policy_2023.pdf

May 29, 2023 Posted by | Canada, decommission reactor | Leave a comment

Canadian reactors that “recycle” plutonium would create more problems than they solve

Bulletin, By Jungmin Kang, M.V. Ramana | May 25, 2023

In 2021, nine US nonproliferation experts sent an open letter to Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. In their letter, the experts expressed their concern that the Canadian government was actually increasing the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation by funding reactors that are fueled with plutonium. Earlier that year, the Federal Government had provided 50.5 million Canadian dollars to Moltex Energy, a company exploring a nuclear reactor design fueled with plutonium. The linkage to nuclear weapons proliferation has also led several civil society groups to urge the Canadian government to ban plutonium reprocessing.

Much of the concern so far has been on Canada setting a poor example by sending a “dangerous signal to other countries that it is OK to for them to extract plutonium for commercial use.” But Moltex plans to export its reactors to other countries raise a different concern. Even if a country importing such a reactor does not start a commercial program to extract plutonium, it would still have a relatively easy access to plutonium in the fuel that the reactor relies on to operate. Below we provide a rough estimate of the quantities of plutonium involved—and their potential impact on nuclear weapons proliferation—to help explain the magnitude of the problem. But there is more. By separating multiple radionuclides from the solid spent fuel and channeling it into waste streams, Moltex reactors will only make the nuclear waste problem worse.

Moltex’s technological claims. Moltex established its Canadian headquarters in the province of New Brunswick after it received an infusion of 5 million Canadian dollars from the provincial government. The company offers two products: a molten salt reactor and a proprietary chemical process that Moltex terms “waste to stable salts” technology. Moltex claims that, by using its chemical process, it can “convert” spent fuel from Canada’s deuterium uranium nuclear reactors (CANDUs) into new fuel that can be used in its reactor design. Moltex essentially claims it can “reduce waste.” In light of the problematic history associated with molten salt reactors, Moltex’s proposed reactors, and especially the chemical process needed to produce fuel, deserve more scrutiny. These will have serious implications for nuclear policy.

In its response to the open letter from the US nonproliferation experts, Moltex dismissed the ability of outsiders to comment, arguing that experts “are not aware of [its proprietary] process as only high-level details are made public.” Moltex has been indeed sparse in what it shared publicly about its technologies. Still, there is much one can surmise from earlier experiences with the processing of spent fuel and from basic science. With some simple calculations based on these high-level details provided by Moltex so far—and taking those at face value, i.e., without evaluating the feasibility of the design or their plans—we show that there is reason to be concerned about the amounts of plutonium that will be used in the reactor.

[Technical explanation here about chemical processes]…………………………………………………………………………….

Moltex’s proposed technology has not yet been evaluated by the International Atomic Energy Agency for how well it can be safeguarded; nor is it possible to evaluate how well the technology can be safeguarded in advance of a final design. But there is good reason to think that a determined country—one that might not play by the rules set by the IAEA—might find a way to divert some plutonium from Moltex’s chemical process to use it in nuclear weapons.

Diversion has been a long-standing concern with pyroprocessing, which is closely related to what Moltex is proposing. …………………………………………………………more  https://thebulletin.org/2023/05/canadian-reactors-that-recycle-plutonium-would-create-more-problems-than-they-solve/

May 27, 2023 Posted by | - plutonium, Canada, technology | Leave a comment

What we know about the federal government’s ongoing nuclear waste plans in New Mexico

Adrian Hedden, Carlsbad Current-Argus  https://www.currentargus.com/story/news/2023/05/24/what-we-know-about-federal-nuclear-waste-plans-in-new-mexico-waste-isolation-pilot-plant-wipp/70242952007/

Southeast New Mexico is home to the nation’s only repository for nuclear waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant about 30 miles east of Carlsbad.

At WIPP, transuranic (TRU) nuclear waste from across the country is trucked in and buried in a salt deposit about 2,000 feet underground.

The waste comes from national laboratories and other facilities owned by the U.S. Department of Energy and WIPP is managed by the DOE’s Office of Environmental Management to clean up waste left at generator sites and new waste produced through the agency’s ongoing nuclear activities.

Here are the key takeaways from the federal government’s recent accomplishments and plans for WIPP future.

Air system at WIPP hoped to finish construction

Two projects were underway at WIPP intended to rebuild its underground ventilation system and improve airflows for workers in the underground.

After an accidental radiological release in 2014 air was restricted at the site, limiting personnel in the underground, and slowing progress in emplacing waste for disposal and mining new areas of the facility.

The Safety Significant Confinement Ventilation System (SSCVS) project along with a new utility shaft to act as an air intake were expected to increase available air at WIPP from 170,000 cubic feet per minute (cfm) to 540,000 cfm.

In 2023, the DOE said it hoped the primary construction of the SSCVS – a series of building and filters that will clean the air at WIPP before exhausting it at the surface- would be finished in 2023

In 2022, the DOE reported it partially completed constructing the SSCVS’ new filter building.

WIPP’s utility shaft finished this year

Meanwhile, the DOE planned to finish sinking the utility shaft to its planned depth of 2,150 feet underground.

The agency also reported it was 50 percent complete in mining a west access drift for the new shaft as of 2022.

Goal set for 400 shipments of nuclear waste to WIPP in 2023

The DOE said it hoped to send about 400 shipments of TRU waste to WIPP from its generator sites in 2023.

This would be the most shipped to WIPP since the 2014 incident, and subsequent three-year shutdown of WIPP’s underground operations.

Included in this listed priority was also ensuring no backlog of waste at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in northern New Mexico, in response to pressure from the State of New Mexico that instate facilities be prioritized by the DOE for cleanup.

The DOE estimated it was taking in about two shipments a week from Los Alamos, contending they were sent to WIPP as soon as the drums were ready for transport.

Since opening in 1999, WIPP accepted 1,608 shipments from LANL, about 12 percent of WIPP’s total of 13,460 shipments, according to DOE records.

The DOE completed its 2022 goal, read the report, of 30 LANL shipments.

Where else does WIPP get its waste from?

Other major shippers include Idaho National Laboratory – WIPP’s biggest shipper – with 6,880 shipments sent to the repository opened, about 51 percent of WIPP’s total.

The second-biggest active shipper was the Savannah River site in South Carolina, which sent 1,714 shipments in total during WIPP’s lifetime, records show.

The decommissioned Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site near Denver was the second-biggest overall shipper to WIPP with 2,045 shipments of nuclear waste to the repository.

Nuclear waste retrieved from Texas site could go to WIPP

Buoying the DOE’s priorities at LANL was a goal for this year to retrieve drums of Los Alamos waste from the Waste Control Specialists (WCS) facility in Andrews, Texas and likely prepare them for disposal at WIPP.

The DOE reported after last year it “partially completed” a goal to install equipment needed for this work.

The DOE was originally slated, via an agreement with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), to remove the 74 waste boxes from LANL stored at WCS in 2014 temporarily amid WIPP’s closure as it resumed operations in 2017.

The TCEQ “extended the deadline multiple times” for the waste’s removal from WCS, read a May 2022 letter from the agency to the DOE, or the State of Texas would take “additional enforcement actions.”

Adrian Heddencan be reached at 575-628-5516,achedden@currentargus.com or@AdrianHedden on Twitter.

May 25, 2023 Posted by | USA, wastes | Leave a comment

Stanford-led research finds small modular reactors will exacerbate challenges of highly radioactive nuclear waste

Small modular reactors, long touted as the future of nuclear energy, will actually generate more radioactive waste than conventional nuclear power plants, according to research from Stanford and the University of British Columbia.

BY MARK SHWARTZ, 30 May, News Stanford

Nuclear reactors generate reliable supplies of electricity with limited greenhouse gas emissions. But a nuclear power plant that generates 1,000 megawatts of electric power also produces radioactive waste that must be isolated from the environment for hundreds of thousands of years. Furthermore, the cost of building a large nuclear power plant can be tens of billions of dollars.

To address these challenges, the nuclear industry is developing small modular reactors that generate less than 300 megawatts of electric power and can be assembled in factories. Industry analysts say these advanced modular designs will be cheaper and produce fewer radioactive byproducts than conventional large-scale reactors.

But a study published May 31 in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences has reached the opposite conclusion.

“Our results show that most small modular reactor designs will actually increase the volume of nuclear waste in need of management and disposal, by factors of 2 to 30 for the reactors in our case study,” said study lead author Lindsay Krall, a former MacArthur Postdoctoral Fellow at Stanford University’s Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC). “These findings stand in sharp contrast to the cost and waste reduction benefits that advocates have claimed for advanced nuclear technologies.”

…………………………………. In the U.S. alone, commercial nuclear power plants have produced more than 88,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel, as well as substantial volumes of intermediate and low-level radioactive waste. The most highly radioactive waste, mainly spent fuel, will have to be isolated in deep-mined geologic repositories for hundreds of thousands of years. At present, the U.S. has no program to develop a geologic repository  after spending decades and billions of dollars on the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada. As a result, spent nuclear fuel is currently stored in pools or in dry casks at reactor sites, accumulating at a rate of about 2,000 metric tonnes per year.

Simple metrics

Some analysts maintain that small modular reactors will significantly reduce the mass of spent nuclear fuel generated compared to much larger, conventional nuclear reactors. But that conclusion is overly optimistic, according to Krall and her colleagues.

“Simple metrics, such as estimates of the mass of spent fuel, offer little insight into the resources that will be required to store, package, and dispose of the spent fuel and other radioactive waste,” said Krall, who is now a scientist at the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company. “In fact, remarkably few studies have analyzed the management and disposal of nuclear waste streams from small modular reactors.”

Dozens of small modular reactor designs have been proposed. For this study, Krall analyzed the nuclear waste streams from three types of small modular reactors being developed by Toshiba, NuScale, and Terrestrial Energy. Each company uses a different design. Results from case studies were corroborated by theoretical calculations and a broader design survey. This three-pronged approach enabled the authors to draw powerful conclusions.

“The analysis was difficult, because none of these reactors are in operation yet,” said study co-author Rodney Ewing, the Frank Stanton Professor in Nuclear Security at Stanford and co-director of CISAC. “Also, the designs of some of the reactors are proprietary, adding additional hurdles to the research.”

Neutron leakage

Energy is produced in a nuclear reactor when a neutron splits a uranium atom in the reactor core, generating additional neutrons that go on to split other uranium atoms, creating a chain reaction. But some neutrons escape from the core – a problem called neutron leakage – and strike surrounding structural materials, such as steel and concrete. These materials become radioactive when “activated” by neutrons lost from the core.

The new study found that, because of their smaller size, small modular reactors will experience more neutron leakage than conventional reactors. This increased leakage affects the amount and composition of their waste streams.

“The more neutrons that are leaked, the greater the amount of radioactivity created by the activation process of neutrons,” Ewing said. “We found that small modular reactors will generate at least nine times more neutron-activated steel than conventional power plants. These radioactive materials have to be carefully managed prior to disposal, which will be expensive.”

The study also found that the spent nuclear fuel from small modular reactors will be discharged in greater volumes per unit energy extracted and can be far more complex than the spent fuel discharged from existing power plants.

“Some small modular reactor designs call for chemically exotic fuels and coolants that can produce difficult-to-manage wastes for disposal,” said co-author Allison Macfarlane, professor and director of the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs at the University of British Columbia. “Those exotic fuels and coolants may require costly chemical treatment prior to disposal.”

“The takeaway message for the industry and investors is that the back end of the fuel cycle may include hidden costs that must be addressed,” Macfarlane said. “It’s in the best interest of the reactor designer and the regulator to understand the waste implications of these reactors.”

Radiotoxicity

The study concludes that, overall, small modular designs are inferior to conventional reactors with respect to radioactive waste generation, management requirements, and disposal options.

One problem is long-term radiation from spent nuclear fuel. The research team estimated that after 10,000 years, the radiotoxicity of plutonium in spent fuels discharged from the three study modules would be at least 50 percent higher than the plutonium in conventional spent fuel per unit energy extracted. ……..more https://news.stanford.edu/2022/05/30/small-modular-reactors-produce-high-levels-nuclear-waste/?fbclid=IwAR3hUe5R3zYb25eJ-8dJzM_vXATq4Du7Hk_XEhdeED_BTvwCqm0XLo3mE8o

May 17, 2023 Posted by | Reference, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, wastes | Leave a comment

Nuclear’s Dangerous Waste Is ‘Rapidly Catching Up’ With Industry

Jonathan Tirone, Bloomberg News, 15 May 23

  • World faces a wave of decommissioning in coming decades: IAEA
  • That will create streams of long-lasting, radioactive waste

Swelling inventories of radioactive waste need to be dealt with more effectively if nuclear energy is to become a key tool in combating climate change, the International Atomic Energy Agency said.

While nuclear power stations don’t emit planet-warming greenhouse gases, they do create streams of long-lasting, hazardous waste. It takes engineers and regulators years to plan and execute the decommissioning of a single site, with costs sometimes running into the billions of dollars.

“Even as we look into the future, the past is rapidly catching up,” IAEA Director-General Rafael Mariano Grossi said Monday at a conference in Vienna, where hundreds … (subscribers only) more https://news.bloomberglaw.com/health-law-and-business/nuclears-dangerous-waste-is-rapidly-catching-up-with-industry

May 17, 2023 Posted by | 2 WORLD, wastes | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »