Antinuclear

USA’s dangerous nuclear cooling ponds – is it only a matter of time?

U.S. pools are generally more densely packed than in Japan. Vermont Yankee’s pool contains two to three times the amount of spent fuel as Fukushima Daiichi’s Reactor 4

 Alvarez estimated a meltdown of spent fuel in the Indian Point pool, which has three times the radioactivity of four Fukushima spent fuel pools, would kill 5,600 people, do $461 billion in damage and render a large area uninhabitable.

The U.S. has 65,000 metric tons of nuclear waste, which we leave to our children in perpetuity…don’t make more nuclear waste until we safely dispose of what we have made.

No more Fukushimas: US plants still face risks, BY GWEN L. DUBOIS, The Baltimore Sun, 14 March 12,   “…..Our nuclear plants are no better designed than those in Japan. Twenty-three are Mark 1 boiling water reactors, identical to Fukushima Daiichi reactors 1-5. This includes Peach
Bottom, 36 miles from Baltimore in York County, Pa.; and Vermont Yankee, notorious for pipes leaking radioactive tritium, which was relicensed for 20 years on March 10, 2011, over the objection of Vermonters.

Nor are our plants immune from natural or manmade disasters. Nearly half of the 104 reactors in the U.S. are near major fault lines. In August, a 5.8 earthquake 11 miles from Virginia’s North Anna nuclear power plant, which is 70 miles from Washington D.C., rattled nerves in Baltimore and far beyond. The quake caused twice the amount of ground movement for which North Anna was designed. One backup generator failed. The presence of a geological fault below the reactors was known and covered up by the owners and regulators at the time of construction.

Twenty-seven reactors have not made adequate provisions for earthquake
protection, including Indian Point, the nuclear reactor within 25
miles of New York City. Forty-seven reactors do not meet Nuclear
Regulatory Commission requirements for fire prevention. Fort Calhoun
in Nebraska has remained off-line since a major flood in June. A
recent report by the NRC on nuclear power safety in the U.S.
supposedly redacted a section that dealt with the precarious state of
dams in this country.

Any of these events could cause a loss of power, overheating of
nuclear fuel, and a partial or full meltdown. Just as in Japan, an
event in the spent fuel pool would be far worse than one in a reactor.
Unlike the reactor core, which sits in a steel vessel surrounded by a
primary steel and concrete container, the spent fuel pool is
surrounded only by the easily breached secondary structure, which
nuclear expert Robert Alvarez describes as a building “no more secure
than a car dealership.”

U.S. pools are generally more densely packed than in Japan. Vermont
Yankee’s pool contains two to three times the amount of spent fuel as
Fukushima Daiichi’s Reactor 4, described above. The crowding increases
the risk of initiating a nuclear chain reaction. The NRC does not
require backup generators or batteries. Overheating could cause an
explosion breaching the secondary structure, carrying radioactive
material hundreds of miles. Alvarez estimated a meltdown of spent fuel
in the Indian Point pool, which has three times the radioactivity of
four Fukushima spent fuel pools, would kill 5,600 people, do $461
billion in damage and render a large area uninhabitable.
A National Academy of Science report recommended that fuel be moved to
casks once sufficiently cooled. This has two inherent advantages over
pool storage: “(1) It is a passive system that relies on natural air
circulation for cooling; and (2) it divides the inventory of that
spent fuel among a large number of discrete, robust containers.”
Critics of nuclear power agree: After five years, fuel from ponds
should be moved into hardened onsite storage as the best option until
the unlikely time a permanent repository is found.

The U.S. has 65,000 metric tons of nuclear waste, which we leave to
our children in perpetuity. “You don’t build a house without a toilet”
said Jitsuro Terashima, president of the Japan Research Institute and
a member of a panel advising the Japanese government. This anniversary
is a good time to rethink how we should view our energy needs: consume
less, manufacture products that are maximally energy efficient,
promote renewables such as wind and solar – and don’t make more
nuclear waste until we safely dispose of what we have made.
http://www.kansascity.com/2012/03/14/3490060/no-more-fukushimas-us-plants-still.html#storylink=cpy

March 17, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | Uncategorized