Showing posts with label Nuclear power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nuclear power. Show all posts

Thursday, October 24, 2019

ISSUES: NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS - LIST OF 93 PLUS GLOBAL NUCLEAR REACTOR MELTDOWNS/FIRES

Just so everyone in aware! 1942 to 2015

Chalk River, Canada

1962 - 2015 – RTG's; 9 Deadly Radioactive Plutonium Reactor Containing Satellites Exploded, Melted And/Or Burned Up On Reentry - Radioactive Heavy Metal Poison Dust Breathed In By Everyone On The Planet, 1 Microgram Is Enough To Kill A Person - 79 Nuclear Reactors Orbiting Earth

1942 – Leipzig, Germany, L-IV Atomic Pile Melts Down

1940-1943 - Chicago Pile I - First US Nuclear Plant Meltdown? - Nuclear Reactor Buried In Woods, Argonne Labs, Cook County Illinois, Red Gate Woods, Radioactive Waste Secretly Dumped Into 2 Mile Creek And Well

1952 - Chalk River, Ontario, Canada, NRX Reactor Melted Down

Friday, September 9, 2011

Vermont Yankee Trial Begins Next Week

Posted: 09 Sep 2011 12:04 PM PDT
Should Vermont have a say in the future of Vermont Yankee, an aging nuclear plant on the banks of the Connecticut River?  A trial to answer that question begins next week.  Vermont Yankee’s owner sued the State of Vermont in April.  Yankee’s owners want to avoid State oversight, and filed suit as a last ditch effort to keep the plant operating.   
The State has a strong case.  For years, Vermont has responsibly overseen the economic, power supply and land use impacts of Vermont Yankee – matters within traditional state authority.  Vermont Yankee’s owners ignore this long history and want the Court to find all actions by Vermont are an attempt to regulate radioactive safety – something within exclusive federal authority.
Conservation Law Foundation provided a “friend of the court” brief explaining the history, legal background and context of the State’s actions focusing on the owner’s untrustworthiness, poor economics of continued operation, and Vermont’s interests in advancing renewable power. 
Beginning Monday, experts on power supply and regulation will explain their views.  The trial will last three days.  A decision is expected later this fall.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

NUCLEAR CONCERNS: Remember Strontium 90? I do and it's now part of the radioactive cocktail out of Japan.

WMD world mapImage via Wikipedia

Well, I do remember Strontium 90 from way back in the nuclear testing age. It was well understood then that there is no such thing as a small dose, since S-90 accumulates in the bone and more and more is deposited as your intake rises ... regardless of the dose levels in the air.

Nevertheless, "officials" in Japan say there is no risk to human health. Garbage!

My thoughts today. Art

*********************


Radioactive strontium detected more than 30 km from Fukushima plant

TOKYO, April 12, Kyodo
Minute amounts of radioactive strontium have been detected in soil and plants in Fukushima Prefecture beyond the 30-kilometer zone around the crippled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, the science ministry said Tuesday.
It is the first time that radioactive strontium has been detected since the Fukushima plant began leaking radioactive substances after it was severely damaged by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami.
There is no safety limit set by the government for exposure to strontium, but the amount found so far is extremely low and does not pose a threat to human health, the Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology said.
Experts, however, expressed concern that the accumulation of strontium could have adverse health effects. When strontium enters the human body, it tends to accumulate in bones and is believed to cause bone cancer and leukemia.
Samples of soil and plants were taken March 16 to 19 from a number of locations in Fukushima Prefecture.
The government has designated the area within a 20-km radius of the plant as an evacuation zone, while people residing in areas in the 20- to 30-km ring have been asked to remain indoors. On Monday, the government expanded the evacuation zone to some municipalities beyond the 20-km radius where residents will evacuate in around a month.
==Kyodo


Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, April 7, 2011

NUCLEAR: Who says renewable energy can't replace nuclear in New Brunswick?

Icon of Wind Turbines
Now get this all you renewable naysaying nuc-freaks! 

The share of domestic U.S. energy production derived from renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass/biofuels, geothermal, solar, water, wind) rose to 10.92% in 2010, up from 10.65% in 2009. By comparison, nuclear power's share of domestic energy production dropped from 11.48% in 2009 to 11.26% in 2010. 

Art

************************
Renewable Energy Provided 11% of Domestic Energy Production in 2010
By Ken Bossong, Sun Day Campaign
April 6, 2011 | 2 Comments
Electricity from non-hydro renewables grows 16.5% while nuclear power's share drops.

Do you like this article?
Email Bookmark Print Feed Share
Share5


Washington, DC, USA -- According to the most recent issue of the "Monthly Energy Review" by the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), nuclear power and renewable energy sources are now neck-in-neck with nuclear power's share of domestic energy production dropping while that from renewable sources growing rapidly.


The share of domestic U.S. energy production derived from renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass/biofuels, geothermal, solar, water, wind) rose to 10.92% in 2010, up from 10.65% in 2009. By comparison, nuclear power's share of domestic energy production dropped from 11.48% in 2009 to 11.26% in 2010.

Looking at the full energy sector (i.e., electricity, transportation, thermal, and other end-uses), overall domestic production of renewable energy, including hydropower, increased by 5.6% in 2010 compared to the previous year. However, non-hydro renewables increased by 11.6% from 2009 to 2010.

Among renewable energy sources, biomass and biofuels combined accounted for 51.98% of the total, followed by hydropower (30.66%), wind (11.29%), geothermal (4.68%), and solar (1.38%). Comparing 2010 production to that in 2009, wind energy increased by 28%, biomass/biofuels by 10%, and solar and geothermal by 4% each. Hydropower dropped by 6%.

Looking at just the electricity sector, the latest issue of EIA’s "Electric Power Monthly," with full-year data for 2010, reveals that non-hydropower renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, solar, wind) increased by 16.5% over 2009 and provided 4.08% of net U.S. electrical generation. Renewables, including hydropower, accounted for 10.32% of net electrical generation.

During 2010, solar increased by 45.8%, wind grew by 28.1%, geothermal expanded by 4.4%, and biomass increased by 3.7%. Among the non-hydro renewable sources, wind accounted for 56.3%, biomass for 33.6%, geothermal for 9.3%, and solar for 0.8%. Nuclear power's share of net electrical generation dropped from 20.22% in 2009 to 19.59% in 2010.

Against the backdrop of the on-going nuclear disaster in Japan and the pressure for financial belt-tightening at home, the U.S. government’s latest energy statistics once again confirm that limited federal dollars are far better invested in rapidly expanding renewable energy technologies and not in the black hole that is nuclear power.

Ken Bossong is Executive Director of the SUN DAY Campaign.

Note: The U.S. Energy Information Administration released its most recent "Monthly Energy Review" on March 29, 2011. It can be found at: http://www.eia.doe.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly. The relevant charts from which the data above are extrapolated are Tables 1.1 and 1.2. EIA released its most recent "Electric Power Monthly" on March 11, 2011; see: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html. The relevant charts are Tables ES1.B, 1.1, and 1.1A.

Image via Wikipedia

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com
Enhanced by Zemanta

Thursday, March 17, 2011

ENERGY:Nuclear Power Plants in Canada.

For the record. Here is a list of all Canadian nuclear reactors.



Courtesy Canadian Nuclear Society

On the map, circles represent research reactors, triangles represent commercial facilities. Please refer to CNS' site map for more detail.

Research 1-Univ Alberta, Edmonton (S), 2-Saskatchewan Research Council, Saskatoon (S), 3-AECL Whiteshell (WR-1, S Demo), 4-McMaster Univ, Hamilton (P), 5-Univ. Toronto (S), 6-Royal Military College, Kingston (S), 7-AECL Chalk River Laboratories (NRU, NRX, PTR, ZED-2, ZEEP), 8-Nordion, Kanata (S), 9-Ecole Polytechnique, Montreal (S), 10-Dalhousie Univ., Halifax (S). S=Slowpoke II (20 kw); P=Swimming Pool (5 MW). AECL's Whiteshell reactors and Chalk River NRX and ZEEP reactors are shutdown.

Commercial 1-Bruce and Douglas Point, 2-Pickering, 3-Darlington, 4-Gentilly, 5-Point Lepreau, 6-NPD. Douglas Point, Gentilly 1, and NPD have been decommissioned; Bruce A2 is mothballed.

Canada has focused on the CANDU (Canadian Deuterium-Uranium) design, which uses heavy water as the moderator and coolant and natural uranium as the fuel. Canadian companies operating the reactors are - Ontario Power Generation (Nuclear division), Bruce Power, and Quebec Hydro - and the New Brunswick Power Commission operate the commercial facilities.

Canadian nuclear reactors are regulated by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), the successor to the former Atomic Energy Control Board (AECB)

More information here.

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com

ENERGY: LePage administration still eyeing nuclear, despite Japan crisis

The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant.Image via WikipediaBy Kevin Miller, BDN Staff
Posted March 16, 2011, at 8:54 p.m.

AUGUSTA, Maine — Maine Gov. Paul LePage still regards nuclear power as a potential option for Maine’s future energy mix despite the unfolding crisis in Japan, according to his spokesman.

“What is happening in Japan is tragic,” Dan Demeritt, the governor’s communications director, said Wednesday. “But we are not changing our position that we need to consider all energy options going forward.”

Meanwhile, officials with the decommissioned Maine Yankee nuclear power plant, say the events taking place in Japan could not happen at the Wiscasset site due to differences between an operating plant and a non-working facility.

“It’s just not comparable,” said Maine Yankee spokesman Eric Howes.

Not long ago, nuclear was part of Maine’s energy mix, and LePage has said that he supports keeping nuclear power on the table as Maine seeks to reduce energy costs and reduce reliance on fossil fuels.

Demeritt said Wednesday the governor continues to support exploring “any option that would safely reduce the costs for Maine businesses and families” as the state seeks a broader energy mix.

That said, Demeritt said, to his knowledge, the administration is “not having those conversations at this point” with any potential developers.

The situation in Japan appears to be cooling the appetite for nuclear energy elsewhere in New England and across the country, however. In Vermont, the trouble-plagued Vermont Yankee nuclear plant likely faces even more opposition in the legislature to its request for a 20-year license extension after the nuclear disaster in Japan.

“I don’t think they had a pulse last week, but we’ve picked out the casket now,” Rep. Tony Klein, chairman of the Vermont House committee that oversees Vermont Yankee, said of the plant’s political prospects in the state.

When Maine Yankee was operating in Wiscasset, it generated nearly 120 billion kilowatts of electricity between 1972 and 1996. The plant was shut down and gradually dismantled beginning in 1997.

Today, all that is left of the Maine Yankee plant on Bailey Point is 64 “dry cask canisters” that hold the spent nuclear fuel rods and other radioactive materials. Those dry canisters are different from the spent fuel pools formerly used in Wiscasset and still used at the Japanese plants facing potential meltdowns, Howes said

The spent fuel in Wiscasset is encapsulated in thick, sealed stainless steel canisters which are then encased in a 2 ½-inch thick steel liner plus 28-inch thick concrete cylinders reinforced with steel.

Howes did not have specific numbers handy on Wednesday but said that, as part of Maine Yankee’s safety permit with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the facility was designed to withstand an earthquake bigger than the largest recorded ever for that region. Maine Yankee’s fuel storage facility is also designed to withstand tornadoes and hurricanes of historic proportions for that area, he said.

In fact, the 300,000-pound concrete canisters are designed so that even if they toppled over they would stay sealed, he said.

Additionally, unlike at an operating nuclear plant, there are no high-pressure pipes or other mechanical systems that would propel radiation into the atmosphere if there was a leak.

As a result, the “emergency planning zone” or exclusion zone is restricted to the 300-meter site around the storage facility, whereas during Maine Yankee’s operating days the zone surrounded the plant for 10 miles.

Instead, the storage canisters use a passive system of air to cool the rods.

“It’s a passive system that doesn’t require any electricity or pumps,” Howes said. The facility is nonetheless monitored around the clock.

The federal government was supposed to remove the spent fuel from Wiscasset and other plants across the country. But that never happened amid the political battles over where to site a large storage facility. As a result, Maine Yankee and ratepayers pick up the estimated $6 million to $8 million annual tab to store and monitor the radioactive fuel.

Across the country, the nuclear industry is coming under new scrutiny with questions being raised about whether a big dose of bad news about the technology might cool the ardor for a renaissance in the industry.

“The timing could not be worse,” said Richard Levick, CEO of Levick Strategic Communications, a Washington-based firm that advises companies on how to handle public-relations crises. “We saw the American nuclear industry really starting to reposition itself for growth. At best this is a short-term setback.”

As the crisis in Japan worsened, U.S. nuclear industry officials were scrambling to reassure the public. New Orleans-based Entergy Corp., which owns Vermont Yankee and other plants, issued a statement saying “lessons will be learned and translated to even greater safety and effectiveness to meet the challenges of the most adverse and unexpected events, creating stronger public confidence in U.S. nuclear programs.”

The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced last week that it would grant the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant a 20-year extension on its operating license. However, in Vermont, the state legislature must also sign off on granting an extension, and legislative leaders suggested they have no interest in bringing the issue up for a vote.

Vermont Yankee is a General Electric boiling-water reactor with a GE Mark 1 containment dating from the early 1970s — the same as the Fukushima reactors in Japan. Vermont Yankee spokesman Larry Smith said the plant was designed to withstand a magnitude-6.2 earthquake, slightly larger than the strongest recorded earthquake to hit the region, a magnitude-6 temblor centered in East Haddam, Conn., in 1791.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Get the pictures and subscribe at: http://fundytides.blogspot.com
Enhanced by Zemanta