On the Brink of a Meltdown

[Youngstownshrimp]

Dennis, there is no reason to insult the Sarge, he sacrificed for us, he deserves a little bit more respect.  What sacrifice have you made?

[irishbobcat]

The fact is a problem such as a terrorist attack on the Perry plant could result in as much of a danger as an earthquake.....
what army were you in again, Sarge?

[sfc_oliver]

Keep reading Sarge......From Ohio PIRG.....

The U.S. government just urged Americans within 50 miles of the stricken nuclear plant in Japan to evacuate. It's the same warning, they say, that would be issued in a comparable situation here in the United States.

The 50-mile evacuation warning came after the U.S. reviewed radiation levels, concluding that radiation levels were "extremely high," higher than Japanese officials were stating.

What if a comparable situation did take place here?  Across the country, more than 108 million Americans, including more than 4 million people in Ohio, live within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant. (including the Mahoning Valley)

That is a risk that is too big to take. For example, if a situation comparable to the Fukushima disaster happened at the Perry nuclear plant near Cleveland, that would force more than 2 million people to evacuate the area.

In spite of this, the president and others in his administration continue to renew their support for nuclear energy.

The events at Fukushima suggest that, if anything, we may have underestimated the dangers of nuclear power. Instead of responding to this crisis by staying the course, the president should at least ask the tough questions about the dangers of our existing nuclear plants here at home. Too many of those concerns have been downplayed for too long. The tragedy in Japan should be the event that gets us to finally address these important concerns about our safety.

Really? So the Perry plant is in danger of a 9.0 earthquake and a tsunami? Now that is news. the rest of this is at least 2 days old.....

[irishbobcat]

Keep reading Sarge......From Ohio PIRG.....

The U.S. government just urged Americans within 50 miles of the stricken nuclear plant in Japan to evacuate. It's the same warning, they say, that would be issued in a comparable situation here in the United States.

The 50-mile evacuation warning came after the U.S. reviewed radiation levels, concluding that radiation levels were "extremely high," higher than Japanese officials were stating.

What if a comparable situation did take place here?  Across the country, more than 108 million Americans, including more than 4 million people in Ohio, live within 50 miles of a nuclear power plant. (including the Mahoning Valley)

That is a risk that is too big to take. For example, if a situation comparable to the Fukushima disaster happened at the Perry nuclear plant near Cleveland, that would force more than 2 million people to evacuate the area.

In spite of this, the president and others in his administration continue to renew their support for nuclear energy.

The events at Fukushima suggest that, if anything, we may have underestimated the dangers of nuclear power. Instead of responding to this crisis by staying the course, the president should at least ask the tough questions about the dangers of our existing nuclear plants here at home. Too many of those concerns have been downplayed for too long. The tragedy in Japan should be the event that gets us to finally address these important concerns about our safety.

[sfc_oliver]

Really Dennis, instead of boring us with your cut and pastes why don't you just supply us with a link and we can look them up if we are interested.

At least you could give credit to the real authors of the articles. You know, instead of the probable copyright infringements....

[irishbobcat]

Send a note to Congress: Nuke Power is not safe.....

One thing remains certain: this crisis further proves that nuclear reactors are neither safe nor clean.

We must learn from this disaster. Tell your members of Congress that nuclear power should not be part of our energy future.

As the crisis has worsened, the nuclear industry's lobbying has, appallingly, become more and more aggressive. President Obama, Secretary of Energy Steven Chu, and many members of Congress have said that it would be premature to halt the push for new reactors. Congressman Devin Nunes from California, where several reactors sit on seismic fault lines, actually asserted, "I believe this will make the case for nuclear power in the long run."

The United States is unfortunately no stranger to close calls and radioactive releases. Three Mile Island is only the most famous. Mechanical, electrical and human errors have rocked reactors in Ohio, Illinois, Alabama, Oregon, Massachusetts and elsewhere. And just last year, aging pipes at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant were found to be leaking radioactive tritium into the groundwater. On top of the threats posed by reactors, we still have no way to safely dispose of spent fuel and other nuclear waste, which can remain dangerously radioactive for tens of thousands of years.

No one ever says, "It could happen here." But nuclear accidents do happen -- and have catastrophic potential. Join Friends of the Earth's members and activists in calling on Congress to put the breaks on nuclear power.

As Americans watch the searing images from Japan, the nuclear industry knows it is losing public support -- 70 percent of Americans surveyed in a new USA Today/Gallup poll said they've grown more concerned about the industry's safety. And more Americans oppose than support the building of new nuclear reactors.

Financial analysts on Wall Street have said once again that nuclear reactors are not a viable investment. The only way the nuclear industry can build a new reactor is if you foot the bill. Unfortunately, President Obama has said he wants to press ahead with a $55 billion nuclear bailout guarantee that would put you on the hook for financing this dirty and dangerous source of energy.

Friends of the Earth has been leading the fight against new nuclear reactors in the Southeast -- and has been instrumental in stopping wasteful handouts to the nuclear industry. 

We have better alternatives. It's time to move into the 21st century with truly safe and renewable energy sources. Tell your congresspeople right now, America does not want nuclear power.

[Rick Rowlands]

So we have a worse case scenario that could happen to a nuclear plant, a large earthquake followed by a flood.  Out of that we get some tainted milk and spinach (not sure how high above the limits they are), and a few dozen workers (heroes) who may have been exposed to elevated radiation levels.  Seems pretty safe to me.

[irishbobcat]

try to stay awake, Sarge, man-made nuke plants are dangerous, even here in the US....

The nuclear crisis in Japan has prompted a re-examination of the safety net for nuclear power in the United States, with former regulators and safety advocates warning that gaps in the nation's regulatory armor could leave Americans similarly vulnerable to disaster.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal oversight body tasked with licensing and inspecting civilian nuclear facilities, too frequently relies on reports from the industry itself in monitoring for trouble, and is too lenient in meting out sanctions when it encounters violations, these critics say.

Though the commission posts inspectors at every plant, several independent and government reports note that these on-site observers document only a fraction of the events they observe on a daily basis.

"This co-dependent relationship between the industry and the NRC is stronger than the SEC and their relationship with Wall Street," said Robert Alvarez, a former advisor in the Department of Energy, and now a senior scholar on nuclear policy at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington. The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) is oft-blamed for failing to adequately police the financial system in the years before the recent banking crisis.

A report released Thursday by the Union of Concerned Scientists, an environmental safety group, documents a series of inconsistent approaches used by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission when encountering major problems at plants over the last year, making enforcement appear haphazard.

In one case, at the Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant in New York, NRC inspectors allowed a leaking water containment system to persist for more than 15 years despite documentation of the problem, according to the report. A spokesman for Entergy, the utility that runs Indian Point, said the leaking is not "ideal," but that the water stays on site and does not pose a risk to the environment.

At the Calvert Cliffs plant in Maryland, a leaking roof that workers had known about for eight years caused an electrical short in 2010, forcing a shutdown of two reactors.

A spokeswoman for the NRC said that officials at the oversight agency were aware of the report, but had not been able to review it in depth because of attention to the events in Japan.

"The NRC remains confident that our Reactor Oversight Program, which includes both on-site and region-based inspectors, is effectively monitoring the safety of U.S. nuclear power plants," the spokeswoman wrote in an e-mailed statement.

The report from the Union of Concerned Scientists asserts that the NRC is only able to audit about 5 percent of activities at nuclear plants across the country in any given year, and that regulators are often too focused on the minutiae of individual violations instead of addressing systemic problems at a plant that may have led to deficiencies.

"The NRC must draw larger implications from narrow findings for the simple reason that it audits only about 5 percent of activities at every nuclear plant each year," wrote David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer who authored the report for the Union of Concerned Scientists. "Each NRC finding therefore has two important components: identifying a broken device or impaired procedure, and revealing deficient testing and inspection regimes that prevented workers from fixing a problem before the NRC found it."

The report looked at 14 "near-misses" over the past year - events that required a special investigations team from the NRC to do a detailed inspection after a problem occurred. Many of the issues involved electrical shorts or deficient equipment at various plants that led to fires or unplanned shutdowns of the reactors.

One of the more egregious examples cited involved the HB Robinson plant in South Carolina, operated by Progress Energy, which had to shut down reactors twice in six months due to mechanical failures and electrical shorts. In the first case, an electrical cable that was not up to standards and had been installed in 1986 caused the power shortage leading to the shutdown.

Nonetheless, the majority of the violations were classified as "green" - the lowest level of sanction - which typically do not result in any monetary fine and require only formal written responses.

At the Brunswick Nuclear Power Plant in North Carolina, also operated by Progress Energy, the NRC's report from the time documented confusion and delays in responses among the plant workers after a gas was inadvertently released at the plant. The release should have led workers to activate nearby emergency response shelters and issue warnings to local, state and federal government officials, but the personnel did not know how to activate such alarms.

Eventually plant managers had to step in, and the alarms were only triggered after the federally mandated deadline. Despite the major failure in emergency response, the company was cited with only one potential monetary violation.

A spokesman for Progress Energy said the company has since installed more modern notification systems and increased the number of drills to twice-a-year, up from once every two years.

"We have taken specific actions to address each of the events last year that led to special inspections," the spokesman said in a written statement.

At the Honeywell Specialty Materials plant in Metropolis, Ill., the sole U.S. refinery that processes uranium for use in nuclear power plants, a union lockout has left temporary workers in charge of the facility. The locked-out members of United Steelworkers have erected 42 crosses in front of the Honeywell plant in memory of coworkers who succumbed to cancer in the past decade. Twenty-seven smaller crosses represent colleagues who survived a brush with cancer.

When the plant began hiring replacement employees after the June lockout, the NRC found that management coached candidates on how to properly answer questions on a required examination to work there. According to the NRC, the temporary workers were given answers prior to questioning and were helped during the course of the evaluation process if they became confused.

"The labor force was locked out and the Honeywell facility was trying to qualify as many operators as they could to make sure the plant could operate," NRC inspector Joe Calle said. "The process got overwhelmed, so to speak."

The NRC slapped Honeywell with a violation, and stopped the hiring process. Last fall, the NRC noted in a report that all the temporary workers had been retrained at the plant. The commission expressed assurances that the plant is being safely run.

But the commission has also cited the Metropolis Honeywell plant for a series of other violations since the lockout began, including an uncontrolled furnace ignition resulting when "operating procedures were not followed," according to a letter from the NRC to Rep. Jerry Costello (D-Ill.)

The NRC says it has no definitive proof that temporary workers were at fault, and that the violations were similar to earlier problems that were present when Union workers were working on site. But the locked-out union members pin the troubles on an inexperienced work force that was never fully vetted by the required examinations.

"A lot of people could open up a manual and go by that manual, but in an actual emergency it takes knowledge and experience to be able to handle it correctly and quickly," said a spokesman for the Steelworkers Local 7-669, John Paul Smith.

[sfc_oliver]

OMG, Nuclear power isn't safe, hurry turn off the sun......

[irishbobcat]

Sarge, will you ever wake up and realize any type of nuke power plant  is not safe?

nope, cause you march to a twisted neo-con drum beat like Ricky, Dan and the mutant others.....

[sfc_oliver]

Yes Dennis, we know. You see we can read and watch the news, same as you. But we aren't compelled to cut and paste it here for everyones enjoyment.

The good news is that they have re-established power to the control rooms.

The bad news is that they have found traces of radioactive iodine in the water in Tokyo.

And yes I am still in favor of building more (newer, better) Nuclear power plants.

[irishbobcat]

Japan Cites Unsafe Radiation Levels in Spinach, Milk Near Stricken PlantMar 19, 2011 – 6:53 AM .

AP FUKUSHIMA, Japan -- Japan said radiation levels in spinach and milk from farms near its tsunami-crippled nuclear complex exceeded government safety limits, as emergency teams scrambled Saturday to restore power to the plant so it could cool dangerously overheated fuel.

Firefighters also pumped tons of water directly from the ocean into one of the most troubled areas of the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear complex, the cooling pool for used fuel rods at the plant's Unit 3, which are at risk of burning up and sending a broad release of radioactive material into the environment.

The first word on contaminated food in the crisis came as Japan continued to grapple with overwhelming consequences of the cascade of disasters unleashed by a 9.0-magnitude earthquake on March 11. The quake spawned a tsunami that ravaged Japan's northeast coast, killing more than 7,200 people, and knocked out backup cooling systems at the nuclear plant, which has been leaking radiation.

The tainted milk was found 20 miles (30 kilometers) from the plant while the spinach was collected between 50 miles (80 kilometers) and 65 miles (100 kilometers) to the south, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano told reporters in Tokyo.

[irishbobcat]

How close is your home to a nuke power plant?

You'll be surprised.....

better get your bottle water ready....

http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/nuclear_power_plants_locations/index.html

[Why?Town]

UPDATE AS OF 11:35 A.M. EDT, THURSDAY, MARCH 17:

Fukushima Daiichi
The reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant are in stable condition and are being cooled with seawater, but workers at the plant continue efforts to add cooling water to fuel pools at reactors 3 and 4.

The status of the reactors at the site is as follows:

Reactor 1's primary containment is believed to be intact and the reactor is in a stable condition. Seawater injection into the reactor is continuing.

Reactor 2 is in stable condition with seawater injection continuing. The reactor's primary containment may not have been breached, Tokyo Electric Power Co. and World Association of Nuclear Operators officials said on Thursday.

Access problems at the site have delayed connection of a temporary cable to restore off-site electricity. The connection will provide power to the control rod drive pump, instrumentation, batteries and the control room. Power has not been available at the site since the earthquake on March 11.

Reactor 3 is in stable condition with seawater injection continuing. The primary containment is believed to be intact. Pressure in the containment has fluctuated due to venting of the reactor containment structure.

TEPCO officials say that although one side of the concrete wall of the fuel pool structure has collapsed, the steel liner of the pool remains intact, based on aerial photos of the reactor taken on March 17. The pool still has water providing some cooling for the fuel; however, helicopters dropped water on the reactor four times during the morning (Japan time) on March 17. Water also was sprayed at reactor 4 using high-pressure water cannons.

Reactors 5 and 6 were both shut down before the quake occurred. Primary and secondary containments are intact at both reactors. Temperature instruments in the spent fuel pools at reactors 5 and 6 are operational, and temperatures are being maintained at about 62 degrees Celsius. TEPCO is continuing efforts to restore power at reactor 5.

Based on the design basis accidents they used in the 1950's, when the Daichii plant was being designed, in my opinion this is one of the greatest engineering successes of the last century. New nukes like our AP1000 won't even make the news in a 9.0 quake.

Be careful what you read!!

#########
Westinghouse Nuclear R&D
Small Modular Reactor Design

[irishbobcat]

what good are new nuke plants when we build them on fault lines? Even here in Ohio?

LOS ANGELES -- Two years before an immense coastal earthquake plunged Japan into a nuclear crisis, a geologic fault was discovered about a half-mile from a California seaside reactor - alarming regulators who say not enough has been done to gauge the threat to the nation's most populous state.

The situation of the Diablo Canyon plant is not unique. Across the country, a spider's web of faults in the Earth's crust raises questions about earthquakes and safety at aging nuclear plants, amplified by horrific images from Japan, where nuclear reactors were crippled by a tsunami caused by a 9-magnitude quake.

The Indian Point Energy Center, for example, lies near a fault line 35 miles north of Manhattan; on Wednesday, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo ordered a safety review at the plant.

But none of the questions are more pressing than in quake-prone California, where about 10 powerful shakers - stronger than magnitude 7 - have hit since 1900.

At issue at Diablo Canyon is not what is known, but what is not.

Preliminary research at the site, which sits on a wave-washed bluff above the Pacific, found its twin reactors could withstand a potential earthquake generated by the recently identified Shoreline Fault, just off the coast.

But that hasn't satisfied California regulators. Since late 2008, when the undersea crack was identified, they have pressed plant owner Pacific Gas & Electric Co. to conduct sophisticated, independently reviewed studies that they say are needed to fully assess the danger at a site within 200 miles of Los Angeles.

The recently discovered fault is close to, and might intersect with, another bigger crack three miles offshore, and the fear is the two faults could begin shaking in tandem, creating a larger quake than either fault would be capable of producing on its own.

"We don't yet have a firm idea of the hazard posed by the Shoreline Fault," says Thomas Brocher, director of the Earthquake Science Center at the U.S. Geological Survey in Menlo Park, Calif., who led the team that discovered the fault.

State Sen. Sam Blakeslee, a Republican who holds a doctorate in earthquake studies, wants PG&E to pull back an application to extend the plant's operating license for 20 years until more is known.

"Aging nuclear power plants and large, active fault systems should not be in close proximity. This isn't exactly rocket science," Blakeslee says. Because the Shoreline Fault is so close to the Diablo Canyon plant it "can produce shaking far in excess of what's expected."

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and PG&E say the plant is safe and built to withstand a magnitude 7.5 earthquake, the maximum considered possible for the site. Damage from a Japan-like tsunami is unlikely, because the reactors sit on an 85-foot cliff above the ocean and fault structure in the area differs from the Pacific Rim.

Critics around the United States say the government has moved too slowly to assess possible threats from earthquakes.

NRC spokeswoman Lara Uselding said she did not know of a single case in which a U.S. reactor was damaged by a quake. But this does not dispel concerns that may be unavoidable because the study of earthquakes remains an imprecise science. They cannot be predicted, and the damage - as witnessed in Japan - can be catastrophic.

The dangers of earthquakes have been raised repeatedly by opponents of nuclear energy. The Perry nuclear plant, east of Cleveland, lies within 40 miles of two faults; in 1986, a year before the plant opened, a 5.0 earthquake shook the area, but didn't damage the plant, said Todd Schneider, a FirstEnergy spokesman. There have since been less severe quakes.

A citizens group filed suit after the quake, trying to block the plant from opening. They argued that an earthquake greater than the plant was built to withstand was likely to occur in the future; U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia turned down their request.

The plant's design includes piping with shock absorbers intended to prevent breakage in a quake. "Before the plants are even built, there's research done by seismologists and geologists to determine what the maximum earthquake could be," Schneider said. "The plants are designed beyond that."

Indian Point, too, is safe and built to withstand earthquakes, says a spokesman for owner Entergy Nuclear. But earlier this week, Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., urged the NRC to look closely at the earthquake preparedness there. A 2008 analysis of earthquake activity around New York City found that many small faults that were believed to be inactive could contribute to a major temblor, and that a line of seismic activity comes within two miles of the plant on the Hudson River.

Another fault line near Indian Point was already known, so the findings suggest Indian Point is at an intersection of faults. The environmental group Riverkeeper says seismic studies used to assess safety are decades out of date.

Major earthquakes are rare in the southeast United States, although the region is crossed by the New Madrid fault in the west and a fault near Charleston, S.C. in the east. University of Georgia geologist Jim Wright said although the plate sitting under the southeast is stable it's also rigid, meaning the jolt from an earthquake would carry farther than in a region where the earth's crust has been fragmented by seismic activity.

The Atlanta-based Southern Co. has reviewed seismic activity in the area that could impact the Wayneboro, Ga., site where it has two operating reactors and hopes to build two more. Among the largest known regional earthquakes was an 1886 earthquake that struck Charleston, S.C., about 85 miles from the Plant Vogtle site, according to the company's regulatory filings.

To this day, geologists are divided on exactly which faults caused the earthquake. Southern Co. spokeswoman Beth Thomas said the company's reactors comply with federal requirements that they be able to safely withstand the strongest earthquake that could be expected in a 10,000-year period. Thomas said the company has not seen anything in Japan to make it alter its current operations.

The Tennessee Valley Authority's Browns Ferry plant, which is located near Athens, Ala., has boiling water reactors similar in design to the malfunctioning reactors in Japan. That plant was designed to withstand a 6.0-magnitude earthquake based on its proximity to the New Madrid fault, TVA spokesman Duncan Mansfield said.

The TVA's Watts Bar nuclear plant at Spring City, Tenn., and its Sequoyah plant at Soddy-Daisy, Tenn., are designed to withstand a 5.8-magnitude quake based on an 1897 tremor at Giles County, Va., Mansfield said. None of the TVA's reactors are seen as being vulnerable to tsunamis since they are so far inland.

Arkansas' only nuclear plant is located about 150 miles away from the New Madrid fault zone, which produced a series of large quakes in 1811 and 1812, including several over magnitude 7. The shaking was so strong that it reportedly caused the Mississippi River to flow backward and could be felt as far away as New England. Arkansas Nuclear One officials said the plant is designed to withstand natural disasters including quakes, has an emergency plan in place, and routinely trains for the worst-case scenario.

Using increasing sensitive technology, scientists are constantly identifying new faults in the country, sometimes after earthquakes are detected. In Southern California alone, there are an estimated 10,000 earthquakes a year, though most of them are too small to be noticed by residents.

The state's senators, Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein, on Wednesday sent a letter to Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Gregory Jaczko, asking that the agency "perform a thorough inspection" of the plants at Diablo Canyon and San Onofre.

A 30-foot concrete seawall surrounds San Onofre, built along the beach in northern San Diego County, where officials say it's strong enough to withstand major quakes and any potential tsunami.

Diablo Canyon, whose reactors began operating in the mid-1980s, has a long history of seismic issues. The discovery of the offshore Hosgri Fault in 1971, after the plant's construction permits were issued, forced a major, costly redesign.

Brocher, the USGS scientist, said scientists do not know how fast the adjacent sides of the Shoreline Fault are sliding, a key measurement to determine potential danger. A higher rate of slippage leads to increased pressure - and a greater chance for an earthquake.

With the two faults in proximity "the uncertainty is ... to what extent they might interact," says Barbara Byron, a senior nuclear policy adviser for the California Energy Commission. Since 2008, the commission has urged the plant to conduct three-dimensional mapping of the Shoreline Fault, using technology employed in oil exploration.

Funding has been approved for the study. In testimony to the NRC last year, she called the plant's seismic data "incomplete ... outdated" and urged a review of its evacuation plans.

Uselding, the NRC spokeswoman, said preliminary reviews found that it's unlikely an earthquake would take place directly under Diablo Canyon, but that potential shaking could cause minor damage to buried piping and conduits.

Diablo Canyon has an extensive seismic monitoring system, ready to detect any shifts in the area. "Potential impacts of the Shoreline Fault fall within all safety margins," company spokesman Kory Raftery said.

To University of Southern California professor Naj Meshkati, an expert on earthquakes and nuclear power plants, the risk is not the massive plant structures but the reliability of backup systems that failed in the Japanese tsunami.

While such a large quake and killer wave is unlikely in California, the plants face similar dangers in backup equipment.

"If someone says this cannot happen here, they should really ... take a very hard look at some of their assumptions," Meshkati said.