America’s Nuclear Nightmare - Rolling Stone Magazine Expose 4/27

[flamingdem]

The U.S. has 31 reactors just like Japan’s — but regulators are ignoring the risks and boosting industry profits

April 27, 2011 9:00 AM ET

Five days after a massive earthquake and tsunami struck Japan, triggering the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl, America's leading nuclear regulator came before Congress bearing good news: Don't worry, it can't happen here. In the aftermath of the Japanese catastrophe, officials in Germany moved swiftly to shut down old plants for inspection, and China put licensing of new plants on hold. But Gregory Jaczko, the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, reassured lawmakers that nothing at the Fukushima Daiichi reactors warranted any immediate changes at U.S. nuclear plants. Indeed, 10 days after the earthquake in Japan, the NRC extended the license of the 40-year-old Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor — a virtual twin of Fukushima — for another two decades. The license renewal was granted even though the reactor's cooling tower had literally fallen down, and the plant had repeatedly leaked radioactive fluid.

more at link
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/america-s-nuclear-nightmare-20110427

[Scuba]

1. They like privatization so much, why don't they buy insurance on the commercial market?

[nc4bo]

2. Heh.

Even the greediest, piggiest, biggest most corrupt insurance company in the world would touch these things with a 10 ft. pole.

Hmmmm I wonder why that is.

[flamingdem]

3. Good News: Board Rejects Proposed Contract With Vermont Yankee Nuke Plant

VEC Board Rejects Proposed Contract With Vermont Yankee
Board Voted 9-1 To Not Purchase Power from Vernon Nuclear Plant

http://www.wptz.com/news/27676663/detail.html
-----------
JOHNSON, Vt. -- The Board of Directors at Vermont Electric Co-op, Vermont's third largest electric utility, voted 9 to 1 to reject the proposed contract to buy power from the beleaguered Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.

The state's Legislature and governor appear convinced the Vernon reactor is "not reliable" and ought to close when the original 40-year operating license expires in March, 2012. Gov. Peter Shumlin has repeatedly focused on a series of VY management and maintenance missteps, which have included leaking pipes that spewed radioactive fluids into the ground last year.

The state's leaders have refused to allow the Vermont Public Service Board to consider a new permit application sought by VY 's owner, Entergy Nuclear, which prompted Entergy to file a federal lawsuit against Vermont last week.

The suit claims Vermont's position interferes with federal law and interstate power markets. MORE AT LINK

[RC]

4. Which nuclear reactors are vulnerable to tsunamis here in the United States?

There was no real problem at Fukushima till the tsunami hit. That was what caused almost all of the damage.

More spin and fear mongering.

[Scuba]

5. What's that got to do with it? It was a power outage, not tsunami, that caused the fails in Japan.

[RC]

12. The tsunami directly cause the power outage.

Without the tsunami, there would not have been a problem.
What part of cause and affect do you not understand?

[Scuba]

15. So by your logic, only power outages caused by tsunamis can cause nuke plant fails?

[RC]

20. With logic like that, I can see where you don't have a clue.

Come on, you are smarter than that.

[Scuba]

24. OK, help me out here. Let's say an ice storm hits, knocks out power....

...is the nuke plant OK, or does being without power mean they cannot run their pumps?

[robdogbucky]

18. I forgot to post this one, re: tsunami

Risk Of Huge Pacific Ocean Tsunami On West Coast Of America Greater Than Previously Thought

ScienceDaily (July 20, 2009) — The potential for a huge Pacific Ocean tsunami on the West Coast of America may be greater than previously thought, according to a new study of geological evidence along the Gulf of Alaska coast.

The new research suggests that future tsunamis could reach a scale far beyond that suffered in the tsunami generated by the great 1964 Alaskan earthquake. Official figures put the number of deaths caused by the earthquake at around 130: 114 in Alaska and 16 in Oregon and California. The tsunami killed 35 people directly and caused extensive damage in Alaska, British Columbia, and the US Pacific region*.

The 1964 Alaskan earthquake – the second biggest recorded in history with a magnitude of 9.2 – triggered a series of massive waves with run up heights of as much as 12.7 metres in the Alaskan Gulf region and 52 metres in the Shoup Bay submarine slide in Valdez Arm.

The study suggests that rupture of an even larger area than the 1964 rupture zone could create an even bigger tsunami. Warning systems are in place on the west coast of North America but the findings suggest a need for a review of evacuation plans in the region.

The research team from Durham University in the UK, the University of Utah and Plafker Geohazard Consultants, gauged the extent of earthquakes over the last 2,000 years by studying subsoil samples and sediment sequences at sites along the Alaskan coast. The team radiocarbon-dated peat layers and sediments, and analysed the distribution of mud, sand and peat within them. The results suggest that earthquakes in the region may rupture even larger segments of the coast and sea floor than was previously thought.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090720083421.htm




It goes on to cite that radiocarbon data indicate that previous quakes/tsunami to the west coast of North America. Because of the convergance of so many tectonic plates in this region, a multi-rupture event could send tsunami over a longer strike distance, with another huge Alaska quake generating a tsunami that could impact Washington State through California.

[jpak]

6. San Onefre and Diablo Canyon have real seismic risks - as do reactors in SC

yup

[robdogbucky]

7. Perhaps you were asleep

when the tsunami from the Japan quake hit the west coast. There were plenty of coastal communities here on the west coast that had millions of dollars in damage to marinas and harbors all up and down the coast, as far north as Vancouver and as far south as Santa Barbara.

Want me to link the many news stories about them? And that was from the quake on the other side of the Pacific.

San Onofre and Diablo Canyon are the two plants with two reactors each, that sit near known active fault lines and are "on the beach," to use an apt description. You may or may not know that an earthquake plan was ruled not applicable when the Diablo plant was built and the US Appeals Court panel that made that ruling included Antonin Scalia and Ken Starr;


At California Nuclear Plant, Earthquake Response Plan Not Required

"...But the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant, which sits less than a mile from an offshore fault line, was not required to include earthquakes in its emergency response plan as a condition of being granted its license more than a quarter of a century ago. Though experts warned from the beginning that the plant would be vulnerable to an earthquake, asserting 25 years ago that it required an emergency plan as a condition of its license, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission fought against making such a provision mandatory as it allowed the facility to be built.

The case made its way to the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., where a 5-4 majority -- including current Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and former Clinton independent counsel Kenneth Starr -- ruled that earthquakes did not have to be included in the plant's emergency response plans.

The underlying theory was that the plant's design, which came after years of planning and geological studies, could withstand any foreseeable earthquake in the area -- the same assumption that guided thinking in Japan.

"What they're saying is that there could be an earthquake, but in no way could it ever cause a radioactive release at the same time," said Rochelle Becker, who led the San Luis Obispo, Calif., group that first sued the Nuclear Regulatory Commission over earthquake preparedness in the 1980s. "I'm pretty sure we now have evidence that it does."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/16/california-nuclear-emergency-response_n_836751.html




Is California next? Experts warn U.S. West Coast could be next victim of devastating earthquake on Pacific's 'Ring of Fire'
By Mark Duell
Last updated

The U.S. West Coast could be the next area shaken by a big earthquake, experts warned today.

The earthquakes last Friday in Japan, last month in New Zealand and last year in Chile all happened along the ‘Ring of Fire’ that encircles much of the Pacific Ocean.

Scientists believe the West Coast could be hit as part of a cluster of earthquakes, with a Pacific Northwest fault having similar characteristics to the one underneath Japan...

...‘We're worried about a large subduction zone similar to Japan,’ Mr Gaherty, of the Lamont Research Center at Columbia University, told CBS. The Ring of Fire is a chain of large faults associated with the Pacific plate’s interaction with surrounding plates, which can produce earthquakes and volcanoes...


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1366198/Japan-earthquake-tsunami-US-West-Coast-victim.html



Unfortunately, you make the same posts on every one of these threads, little content, much sound and fury about nothing. Please try to be accurate once in a while amongst your rants, although I must admit I now look forward to them, as I use them as a teaching tool.

Keep up the good work.

[flamingdem]

8. Interesting history about San Onofre, thanks nt

[suffragette]

9. Some are vulnerable to earthquake plus dam failure/levee Break

Seems to me that would be quite similar in terms of impact

[Tom Rinaldo]

11. It was the stupidity of putting back up generators at sea level

There is no effective safeguard against human greed and/or stupidity. That's almost always the root problem, and then the apologists come along and say don't blame the technology, it was a stupid human error and we'll make sure THAT one never happens again.

[flamingdem]

13. The reward doesn't equal the risk

but the nuclear industry attempts to disguise the risk to health and the issue of spent fuel disposal and the true costs of that are exorbitant.

[dfgrbac]

21. So many dangers - fission nuclear power is not worth this!

Contrary to nuclear industry propaganda, these reactors are dangerous because of their contents and how they function. Thom Hartmann had an informative interview with Michio Kaku (the great physicist) about the dangers. Apparently it was posted on YouTube but I can't get it to work. Here is another video interview, this one from another program.

But aside from the dangers of these power plants directly, we have all that spent nuclear fuel that keeps piling up by the tons. There are no real disposal plans for this dangerous stuff. They just talk about burying it (an unreasonably silly solution since it stays dangerous for thousands of years).

[JohnyCanuck]

17. "no effective safeguard against human greed and/or stupidity"

That's it in a nutshell.

[RC]

19. Your hindsight is 20/20

If those nuclear scientist were so smart, they should have foreseen the Magnitude 9 earthquake and 23+ foot tsunami 40 + years ago while this was in the planing stages. And don't forget the 3 foot drop of the land along the shore and 30 foot wall of water over-washing to almost 2½ inland.


http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2011/03/massive_earthquake_hits_japan.html
Lots of Pictures, so no one has to read facts.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_T%C5%8Dhoku_earthquake_and_tsunami
2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami
The tsunami inundated a total area of approximately 181.5 sq mi in Japan.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And the nuclear power plants at Fukushima was supposed to emerge unscathed? Yeah, sure, yabetcha thar Charley.
How about some empathy for the almost 30,000 dead and missing so far? To say nothing of all those that lost absolutely everything but their lives.

To a lot of the Japanese those nuclear power plants are not at the top of their worry list.

[Tom Rinaldo]

22. No, not hindsight.

The utility was warned in a study at least4 or 5 years ago that there was a ten percent chance that a much stronger earthquake than the plant was designed for might occur along that fault line.

Number one, AFTER that report came out they decided to extend the operational life of that plant.

Number two, at that point it would not have cost them a fortune to construct some means to elevate the back up generaters above ground level. They had time enough to accomplish that had they wanted to. Some might say it would have been a prudent measure based on new information.

[JohnyCanuck]

10. K&R n/t

[Ignis]

14. K&R

[marions ghost]

16. America's 13 worst nukes

Pictures at this link:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/photos/americas-worst-nukes-20110427

:thumbsup: good article

[franzia99]

23. k & r