Nuclear Power Needs To Go

[Boreas]

All four of these crises are ongoing and he result of negligence and corruption. Nuclear power is unsustainable and should be phased out globally.

http://www.newsweek.com/hanford-nucl...e-waste-454808

http://elpais.com/elpais/2016/05/01/...34_134674.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/08/bu...rgy-areva.html

https://www.rt.com/usa/338410-indian...ernie-sanders/

[JJIII]

Rob used to champion the CANDU power plants in Canada. Does anyone have any info on how they operate?

[finnbow]

The current lower price of natural gas will probably have more to do with nuclear energy's demise than anything in the OP's links. BTW, the Hanford Site's leaking tanks have nothing to do with commercial nuclear power.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

The current lower price of natural gas will probably have more to do with nuclear energy's demise than anything in the OP's links. BTW, the Hanford Site's leaking tanks have nothing to do with commercial nuclear power.

A distinction without a difference, IMO. In any event, some of the waste stored at Hanford is waste from commercial reactors that was destined for Yucca Mtn.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

A distinction without a difference, IMO. In any event, some of the waste stored at Hanford is waste from commercial reactors that was destined for Yucca Mtn.

While this may be true, it's certainly news to me, having been to Hanford bunches of times. Only the N Reactor was dual use (military/civilian), but I doubt that a small portion of the mixed waste in the underground tanks has been specifically deemed Yucca Mountain waste. Perhaps the spent fuel is, but the spent fuel has absolutely nothing to do with the leaky tanks.

In any event, using Hanford to make an argument against the use of modern nuclear reactor designs is silly. The use of single walls underground tanks to accommodate 100 million gallons of mixed waste was due to war time exigencies (beating Hitler to the bomb and keeping ahead of the Russians). These exigencies don't exist in the civilian nuclear power industry. If anything kills nuclear, it will be the price of natural gas lowered by virtue of fracking.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

While this may be true, it's certainly news to me, having been to Hanford bunches of times. Only the N Reactor was dual use (military/civilian), but I doubt that a small portion of the mixed waste in the underground tanks has been specifically deemed Yucca Mountain waste. Perhaps the spent fuel is, but the spent fuel has absolutely nothing to do with the leaky tanks.

In any event, using Hanford to make an argument against the use of modern nuclear reactor designs is silly. The use of single walls underground tanks to accommodate 100 million gallons of mixed waste was due to war time exigencies (beating Hitler to the bomb and keeping ahead of the Russians). These exigencies don't exist in the civilian nuclear power industry. If anything kills nuclear, it will be the price of natural gas lowered by virtue of fracking.

It is true. That's what happens when you retire. And pointing to the permanent risks associated with nuclear waste storage, however it was generated, is not "silly". Or do you maintain that this is a soluble problem?

And there are indications that there are now some double wall tanks, those not built under wartime exigencies, that are leaking. Tanks that are 400 yards from the second largest river in the US.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

It is true. That's what happens when you retire. And pointing to the permanent risks associated with nuclear waste storage, however it was generated, is not "silly". Or do you maintain that this is a soluble problem?

And there are indications that there are now some double wall tanks, those not built under wartime exigencies, that are leaking. Tanks that are 400 yards from the second largest river in the US.

Not all "nuclear waste storage" is the same. When one normally speaks of nuclear waste storage in the civilian nuclear industry, they're talking of spent fuel. The contents of Hanford's tanks isn't spent fuel. Conflating the two in making an argument against civilian nuclear reactors shows a lack of understanding of the nuclear fuel cycle and the nature of the mess at Hanford.

That said, cheap natural gas and existing regulatory burdens have pretty much killed the civilian nuclear industry. AFAIK, the V.C. Summer plant expansion in South Carolina is pretty much the only ongoing civilian reactor project and I'm sure its owner, SCE&G, would in retrospect much preferred to have built a natural gas plant considering costs that have skyrocketed to $12 billion.

http://www.thestate.com/news/busines...e41740257.html

The handwriting is pretty much on the wall already. The NRC, which was going great guns 20 years ago with the promise of a resurgent civilian nuclear industry, is downsizing dramatically in recognition of the dynamics noted above.

[flacaltenn]

Originally Posted by Boreas

A distinction without a difference, IMO. In any event, some of the waste stored at Hanford is waste from commercial reactors that was destined for Yucca Mtn.

Hanford, Savannah River, Oak Ridge and others are a complete consequence of the Weapons Programs. They are the most serious overlooked enviro disaster in this country for the past 40 years. They continue to BURY bulldozers in place because after a few months of service -- they are too radioactive to operate.

And if you actually READ that link to the NewYork nuclear plant -- their "major problems" were birds shitting on the powerlines and transformers busting OUTSIDE the reactors. The tritium leak was a one time incident and tritium has a very short half-life. Much shorter than the INFINTITE half-life of the pollutants that came spilling out of those busted transformers.

There is no other reliable 24/7/365 power source that is CO2 free, and can power your home for a year with only 0.7 ounces of waste. That's an amount that we ought to be able to handle. About equiv to a AA battery. Especially if you are a fan of putting 400 lbs of limited life batteries on wheels without a real plan for end of life recycling.

Nuclear is the RIGHT NOW solution for those suffering from GWarming hysteria. Even top Ecologists now are speaking out to use more of it. And for gosh sakes to rebuild the 40 or so seriously aged plants that are still percolating out there supplying over 20% of our electricity..

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

Hanford, Savannah River, Oak Ridge and others are a complete consequence of the Weapons Programs. They are the most serious overlooked enviro disaster in this country for the past 40 years. They continue to BURY bulldozers in place because after a few months of service -- they are too radioactive to operate.

Look up this document MLM-MU-77-66-0001.pdf it is now declassified and tells (most) of the radioactivity they left in the Mound Lab at Miamisburg, Ohio. This was where my late wife worked testing detonators for the A-bombs. It is also where they gave her the ovarian cancer that eventually killed her. This was because OSHA had not come up with "best practices" for handling radioactive materials and the contractors, in this case Monsanto, were so bloody careless as to be criminal.

The part they never tell you about is the several floors of the T building that were underground. From all the documents available you are led to believe that building only had two floors. BS

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by flacaltenn

Hanford, Savannah River, Oak Ridge and others are a complete consequence of the Weapons Programs. They are the most serious overlooked enviro disaster in this country for the past 40 years. They continue to BURY bulldozers in place because after a few months of service -- they are too radioactive to operate.

Look up this document MLM-MU-77-66-0001.pdf it is now declassified and tells (most) of the radioactivity they left in the Mound Lab at Miamisburg, Ohio. This was where my late wife worked testing detonators for the A-bombs. It is also where they gave her the ovarian cancer that eventually killed her. This was because OSHA had not come up with "best practices" for handling radioactive materials and the contractors, in this case Monsanto, were so bloody careless as to be criminal.

Even after OSHA did publish guidelines it was like setting a speed limit but having no highway patrol. Karen Silkwood died well after the guidelines came out. DOE finally sent me all Florence's work records, well at least all the ones that had not been lost. I can point to another document where they wrote;;

3. Records Management
3.1 Finding aids may be insufficient to support the
identification and retrieval of records in the
future that may be required to support postclosure
activities.
High Initiate a cooperative effort between
LM and EM to identify/document
existing finding aids. Determination of
mitigation actions required will be
borne out by assessment.
3.2 EM may not inventory, archive, or disposition
all of its records prior to transfer of the site
because of lack of knowledgeable personnel,
resources, etc.
Medium Determine resources required to
disposition records in accordance with
NARA guidance prior to transfer of
the site.
4. Information Management
4.1 There may be delays in the transfer (or
insufficient transfer) of relational databases
(e.g., MEIMS) deemed critical for post-closure
because of lack of knowledgeable personnel,
resources, etc.

Upon reading the document I pointed at above, one scientist commented;

“Yes I said Monsanto... owner of the dirtiest, most unsafe nuclear research facility on Earth. A while back someone sent me a single document... declassified with all the appropriate marks... it was quite an eye opener. First I had never heard of this lab before... slipped under my radar and it was supposed to be closed... a real environmental mess”