nuclear-news

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

Preparing for a nuclear fallout?

Preparing for a nuclear fallout?
LINEX Legal ource: Herbert Smith LLP –
Key points include: No reason was put forward for not affording nuclear sector specialists the same protections as the wider membership of the construction industry / Government has now given the go-ahead for a new generation of power stations, and the sheer size and complexity of these operations is bound to give rise to disputes / The courts have grappled with the problem of making a distinction between construction work falling within the provisions of the HGCRA 1996 and outside.

Linex Legal > Herbert Smith LLP > Preparing for a nuclear fallout?

July 28, 2009 Posted by | 1 | Leave a comment

Nuclear Regulator Says Waste Isn’t An “Urgent” Problem

Nuclear Regulator Says Waste Isn’t An “Urgent” Problem

The Business Insider Jay Yarow|Jul. 23, 2009,
“………….Finding a permanent site for spent nuclear fuel in the U.S. isn’t “an urgent problem,” the head of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said…………. he’s wrong that it’s not an urgent problem.

Over the past two decades, the government gathered billions of dollars from utilities for a national storage facility. That facility was supposed to be Yucca Mountain, which was eliminated earlier this year. The power companies have spent billions of their own dollars on storage facilities.

Utilities are suing the government for $11 billion. While the government twiddles its thumbs trying to come up with a solution, this problem only gets worse.

July 28, 2009 Posted by | 1 | Leave a comment

Unholy trinity

Unholy Trinity
ON LINE opinion by Bill Williams 28 July 09
“……………………..We have just entered the 65th year of humanity’s troubled relationship with nuclear arms, the world’s worst weapons of terror. So it’s a good time to be promoting their retirement and for Australia to be using every tool in its diplomatic kitbag to encourage the nine Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) to negotiate and implement a global treaty that eliminates their nukes once and for all.

On July 16, 1945 the Americans detonated their first nuclear weapon – the “Trinity” test – in the New Mexico desert, prompting its mastermind Robert Oppenheimer to recall the words of Vishnu in the Bhagavad-Gita: “I am become death, the destroyer of worlds.”

This fantastic power was unleashed upon the residents of the Japanese city of Hiroshima just three weeks later, at 8.15 on the morning of August 6, when the uranium-bomb – “Little Boy” – exploded above the city: by nightfall about 70,000 people were dead and since then an estimated further 180,000 have died. The cancer rates among the ageing survivors continue to rise even today.

But we all still live in the shadow of nuclear Armageddon. There remain 23,000 nukes in the arsenals of the nine Nuclear Weapons States (NWS): Russia, USA, UK, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and now North Korea. Two thousand five hundred of these weapons are retained on high-alert status, capable of launch within 15 minutes – and there’s no bringing them back. Meanwhile the risk of other nations joining the “club” is on the increase, with the current focus being on Iran. Bear in mind, however, that at least 44 nations have nuclear bomb-making capabilities, including all those states with civil nuclear power plants, which are producing plutonium as a fission byproduct in those reactors.

Unholy trinity – On Line Opinion – 28/7/2009

July 28, 2009 Posted by | 1, 2 WORLD, weapons and war | , , | Leave a comment

Nuclear decommissioning – costs blow out endlessly!

nuclear-costsSaving funds for shutdown of nuclear plants proves tricky
MISSOURIAN  July 24, 2009
BY DAVE GRAM and FRANK BASS/The Associated PressVERNON, Vt. — The companies that own almost half the nation’s nuclear reactors are not setting aside enough money to dismantle them, and many may sit idle for decades and pose safety and security risks as a result, an Associated Press investigation has found……………………….

At 19 nuclear plants, owners have won approval to idle reactors for as long as 60 years, presumably enough time to allow investments to recover and eventually pay for dismantling the plants and removing radioactive material.

But mothballing nuclear reactors or shutting them down inadequately presents the most severe of risks. Radioactive waste could leak from abandoned plants into ground water or be released into the air, and spent nuclear fuel rods could be stolen by terrorists.

During the past two years, estimates of dismantling costs have soared by more than $4.6 billion because rising energy and labor costs, while the investment funds that are supposed to pay for shutting plants down have lost $4.4 billion in the battered stock market………………………………

“No one at the NRC wants to acknowledge what is absolutely obvious to us, that the funds are inadequate and that the industry has bare assets,” said Arnold Gundersen, a retired nuclear engineer and decommissioning expert.

Those critics say the industry is making assumptions about their investments that do not account for another market collapse, political obstacles to getting the licenses renewed and unforeseen safety problems that could make nuclear power less palatable.

Last week, British officials reported on a 2007 leak in a cooling tank at the decommissioned Sizewell-A nuclear plant.

Saving funds for shutdown of nuclear plants proves tricky – Columbia Missourian

July 25, 2009 Posted by | 1, 2 WORLD, business and costs | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Nuclear reactor shuts down after malfunction

Nuclear reactor shuts down after malfunction
The Local 24 Jul 09
One of Germany’s most modern nuclear power stations was shut down on Friday due to a technical fault, operator RWE said, less than three weeks after problems at another reactor hit the headlines.
The Emsland reactor in northwest Germany, which supplies around 3.5 million households, underwent an automatic shutdown at 3:00 am (0100 GMT), RWE said in a statement……………………In early July, the Krümmel reactor near Hamburg was shut down after problems – not long after it had been reopened following two years of repairs.

This reignited the nuclear debate in Germany, which decided in 2000 under then chancellor Gerhard Schröder to mothball its 17 reactors by about 2020 amid strong public opposition to atomic energy.

Nuclear reactor shuts down after malfunction – The Local

July 25, 2009 Posted by | 1, Germany, safety | , , , , | Leave a comment

Perry nuclear plant reduces power

Perry nuclear plant reduces power
WKSU , July 24, 2009
The Perry Nuclear power plant east of Cleveland has reduced power to 37-percent. The plant is operated by FirstEnergy. Company spokesman Todd Schneider says employees found a leak in the system that controls the turbine and reduced power to make repair

WKSU News: Perry nuclear plant reduces power

July 25, 2009 Posted by | 1, safety, USA | , , , | Leave a comment

The costs and risks of nuclear energy

The costs and risks of nuclear energy

Gainsville.com Diane Forkel 24 July 09 “……………….Progress Energy is looking ahead to increasing energy use. Their plans are to build two new nuclear power plants. However, electric customers beware, excessive cost overruns (and defects and deficiencies) at a Finnish power plant have been reported in the New York Times. If Progress Energy experiences similar problems, utility customers should brace for a double-cost whammy in their electric bills.

Nuclear power plants carry a good deal of financial risk, so the industry is heavily backed by the government. Currently, applications are being made for billions of dollars in loan guarantees, aka government bailouts. And they could end up being just that.

A Union of Concerned Scientist website notes in 1985 Forbes magazine called the nuclear industry bailout of that era “the largest managerial disaster in business history.”……………The nuclear power plant carbon footprint (CF) is also quite large. It encompasses plant construction, plant decommissioning, and construction of a huge waste storage facility, such as Yucca Mountain, and/or other additional storage facilities. I am sure new research buildings and experimental plants for nuke waste technological breakthroughs will also add to CF………………………..

Inexperience is also blamed for Areva’s costly nuclear power plant construction problems in Finland. Yet Areva has more experience than its U.S. counterparts in building nuclear facilities.

Areva’s costly construction issues are unnerving. Structural construction problems raise safety concerns. An accident at any nuclear facility could be devastating in terms of loss of live and long-term environmental damage.

I have to wonder if this country is adequately prepared to handle radiation fallout from a nuclear accident. And the financial burden of a nuclear accident, or even just a huge bailout, could cause the country’s soaring deficit to shatter and crash.

Diane Forkel: The costs and risks of nuclear energy | Gainesville.com | The Gainesville Sun | Gainesville, FL

July 25, 2009 Posted by | 1, business and costs, USA | , , , , | Leave a comment

Nuclear power rejected anew in Indonesia – Infoshop News

Nuclear power rejected anew in Indonesia

Infoshop News July 23 2009  PHILIPPINES — The rejection of nuclear power in Indonesia is another nail in the coffin of the nuclear industry, Greenpeace said today as it demanded the Philippine government to follow suit and abandon its dangerous nuclear power plans which it criticized as “backward and unproductive,” and seemingly “reeking of less-than-noble intentions.”

The environment organization had recently welcomed the decision of Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization, Nahdlatul Ulama, (NU), that nuclear power is haram (forbidden) on the island of Madura, East Java.

he announcement in Madura, close to Indonesia’s second largest city of Surabaya, follows a similar decision by the Jepara, Central Java chapter of NU on 1 September 2007, when scholars and clerics concluded that the threat to the local communities from potential radioactive leaks and radioactive waste handling far outweighed any potential benefits.

“In Indonesia and in any part of the world including the Philippines, communities clearly do not want nuclear power as they will be the most at risk from its operations. This latest case of rejection of nuclear power is another nail in the coffin for the obsolete nuclear power industry.

…………………..Worldwide, the nuclear industry is failing and still struggles with the same problems as it did forty years ago. Very few of the 435 operational nuclear power plants, as well as waste storage sites around the globe have been built within budget and on schedule. While there were reactors being built in 2008, many of these were delayed and no new reactors came online–compared to 27,000 megawatts of wind energy which came online in the same year.

Nuclear power rejected anew in Indonesia – Infoshop News

July 24, 2009 Posted by | 1, Indonesia, politics | , , , , | 1 Comment

    Next Entries »