Welcome to the Nuclear Power Section of the Agriculture Defense Coalition Website
If you click on the link below you will find videos and other information about the Japan Nuclear Crisis that occurred on March 11, 2011. Japan Disaster 2011
The Documents, Reports, Articles, Videos, and other information you will find on this Nuclear Section Relates to Vital Issues that may impact everyone in the United States. President Obama and U.S. Energy Secretary Chu have placed $34Billion in their new budget to fund a nuclear power revival in the United States. You will find a copy of this map with the proposed plants below. In addition, the money to fund this nuclear power revival will be funded by U.S. taxpayers.
U.S. Energy Secretary Chu made a deal to bring nuclear waste here from Italy and is working on agreements for other countries to ship their waste here for reprocessing in Idaho or Texas, and then, because it is still dangerous, to be stored in the U.S. at taxpayer expense. This information is located on the U.S. Energy Department website. The question is whether the U.S. should become a nuclear waste dump for other countries.
THE U.S. HAS BROUGHT OVER 5,000 LBS OF PLUTONIUM FROM CHILE & OTHER COUNTRIES INTO THE U.S. FOR PROCESSING & PERMANENT STORAGE (Where will this waste be safely processed and stored for generations? Will these materials be used to upgrade our own nuclear arsenal or will this material be used in our nuclear power plant revitalization or sold to other countries by the U.S. for their nuclear power plants or arsenals?)
United States New World Role: Nuclear Waste Dump
Unites States Promotes Nuclear Power Revitalization at Taxpayer Expense - 2011 Budget = $34Billion Read
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Map of Proposed New Nuclear Power Plants if President Obama's New Budget is passed giving the U.S. Department of Energy $34Billion in taxpayer funding to revitalize the U.S. Nuclear Industry. Note that the one slated for construction near an Earthquake Fault in Fresno, California, is not listed): Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 24, 2011 by the U.S. NRC Website for more information:
General Nuclear Power Plant Information
It should be noted that Nuclear Power Plants in the United States have been leaking radioactive materials into the air and water for years. When the Japan Nuclear Disaster happened on March 11, 2011, positive radiation tests were reported from across the United States.
It should be noted that the radiation levels downwind and around nuclear power plants in the U.S. tested positive as well. It is alleged that many of these readings attributed to radiation from Japan may have been from our own leaking nuclear power plants. This issue should be investigated.
Nuclear Power Plants - U.S. NRC Current & Proposed - U.S. Maps + Posters
U.S. Nucler Power Plants - Problems - Water Issues - Weather Events - Plants Getting Older - Oversight - Violations & Other Issues
U.S. NRC Violations
U.S. NRC - Information of Specific Interest - Nuclear Power Plants Currently in Operation & Violations
Worst Nuclear Power Plants in America With Poor Records
Connecticut & Other Nuclear Power Plants
Heat Waves Place Pressure on Outmoded Cooling Technologies at Nuclear Power Plants
Fire Risks & Safety Problems at Nuclear Power Plants
Radioactive Tritium Leaking from Many U.S. Nuclear Power Plants + Safety Questions
Safety Questions at Nuclear Power Plants
Fire & Safety Issues at Nuclear Power Plants
Nuclear Power Plants - Disaster Planning Inadequate
NEBRASKA - 2 NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS - FLOODING & WEATHER EVENTS 2011
Nuclear Power Plants in California - Proposed New Nuclear Power Plant in Fresno, CA
Nuclear Power Plants - Government Agencies - Reports
Radioactive Isotopes Section & Other General Information
Glossary & Definitions
U.S. Nuclear Power Revitalization - Taxpayers Funding Needed for Loan Guarantees & Insurance $Billions
U.S. Nuclear Power Historical Information
The New Nuclear Danger
May 26, 2004
C-SPAN | Washington Journal
Dr. Caldicott talked about her book The New Nuclear Danger: George W. Bush's Military-Industrial Complex, published by New Press. She discussed the nuclear weapons still in existence, plans for disarmament, and near catastrophic accidents which have occurred. She responded to telephone calls, .. Read More
Dr. Caldicott talked about her book The New Nuclear Danger: George W. Bush's Military-Industrial Complex, published by New Press. She discussed the nuclear weapons still in existence, plans for disarmament, and near catastrophic accidents which have occurred. She responded to telephone calls, faxes, and electronic mail from viewers.
IN DEPTH WITH HELEN CALDICOTT MARCH 6, 2005 C-SPAN INTERVIEW
Helen Caldicott was interviewed about her life and work and responded to telephone calls, faxes, and electronic mail from viewers. Helen Caldicott is the author of five books: Nuclear Madness (1979), Missile Envy] (1984), If You Love This Planet: A Plan to Heal the Earth (1992), A Desperate Passion: An Autobiography (1996), and The New Nuclear Danger: George Bush's Military Industrial Complex (2001). Helen Caldicott was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize by Nobel Laureate Linus Pauling, and she was named one of the most influential women of the 20th century by the Smithsonian Institute. Physicians for Social Responsibility, which she co-founded in 1977, was co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1985. She has been the subject of several films, including Eight Minutes to Midnight and If You Love This Planet, which won the Academy Award for best documentary in 1982. In 1987 she ran for Federal Parliament in Australia, losing by 600 votes. Helen Caldicott was born in Melbourne, Australia in 1938. She currently divides her time between Australia and the U.S. She is the founder and president of the Nuclear Policy Research Institute, headquartered in Washington, D.C.
NUCLEAR POWER IS NOT THE ANSWER - SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 C-SPAN PROGRAM
Helen Caldicott talked about her book Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer, published by The New Press. An antinuclear activist, she contended that nuclear power is not the solution to global warming. She examined the costs, toxic effects, and terrorism risks of nuclear energy, and described alternative, renewable energy sources. After her presentation she responded to audience members' questions.
Nuclear Power Industry General Information
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants - Lawsuits, Legal Issues, Legislation - Reports Other Issues
Nuclear Insurance: The Price-Anderson Act
Ralph Nader Testimony Before the U.S. House of Representatives - June 30, 1999 - On Corporate Welfare
The nuclear industry may be the most subsidized in U.S. history. It is completely a product of U.S. government research and development. Having emerged from massive government investments, the nuclear industry has never cut its umbilical cord tie to the government.47
One critical, ongoing support for the industry is the Price-Anderson Indemnity Act, which limits the liability of the nuclear industry (both plant operators, and suppliers and vendors) in the event of a major nuclear accident. Under Price-Anderson, each utility is required to maintain $200 million in liability insurance per reactor. If claims following an accident exceed that amount, all other nuclear operators are required to pay up to $83.9 million for each reactor they operate. Under the terms of Price-Anderson, neither the owner of a unit which has a major accident nor the entire utility can be held liable for more than these sums. As of August 1998, this system capped insurance coverage for any accident at $9.43 billion.48
When the Price-Anderson Act was adopted in 1957, at the dawn of the commercial nuclear industry, "the Act was intended to overcome reluctance to participate [in the transition to private nuclear industry] by the nascent industry worried by the possibility of catastrophic, uninsured claims resulting from a large nuclear accident."49 Leaving aside for the moment the ecological and economic risks which should disqualify continuation of, let alone support for, the nuclear industry, assume that such a rationale was defensible at the time, as the government tried to promote development of an energy source which many believed would be safe, cheap and abundant.
But watch how the rationalization perpetuates itself. "By 1965," the NRC reports, "when the first 10-year extension of the Act was being considered, a handful of nuclear power reactors was coming into operation, and the nuclear industry considered itself on the verge of expanding into large-scale nuclear power generation. Thus, the need for continued operation of the Price-Anderson system for the forthcoming 10 years was believed to be critical for the unrestricted development of nuclear power."50
A decade later, when another extension of the Act was being considered, the industry was more buoyantly optimistic than it ever had been or would be again. "With dozens of plants in operation or under construction and with hundreds more being contemplated to be in operation by the end of the century," the industry urged that the Act be extended rapidly so that "any uncertainty about extension would not disrupt nuclear power development,"51 says the NRC.
Now the industry is in decline. There have been no new orders for nuclear plants for the past 25 years, and aging plants are beginning to be shuttered. The original rationale for the Act is no longer plausible. But nothing has changed with respect to Price Anderson. Indeed, the NRC argues, "Given industry perception of the continuing need for Price-Anderson, and in view of the lack of new orders in plants, the situation is in some respects similar to what it was when Congress saw the need for enactment of the original Price-Anderson Act."52
(In one way, things are worse than they were in 1957: with nuclear plants closing due to aging, safety concerns, inefficiency and license expiration, the Price-Anderson liability cap will progressively decline in future years. If the upper end of nuclear plant closing projections occurs, available insurance funds could shrink to $4.5 billion in 2013.53)
The industry has gone through a full life cycle, but somehow it never outgrew the need for a federal insurance scheme and liability cap. The result has been a massive subsidy to nuclear power companies. Using the NRC's conservative numbers for the upper limit on a worst-case scenario accident and on the probability of such an accident occurring, Professors Jeffrey Dubin and Geoffrey Rothwell estimated the cumulative Price-Anderson subsidy to the nuclear industry through 1988 to be $111 billion in 1985 dollars.54 This estimate is based on NRC data on the cost of worst-case accidents -- data which is conservative because it does not include health effects.
If, again, we leave aside the demerits of nuclear power, there could be justification for a federal scheme to promote risk sharing in a context which poses a (hypothetically) very small chance of an extremely large loss. (It should be emphasized, however, that this is exactly the situation for which the private insurance and reinsurance markets are designed.) But there is no justification for combining such a scheme with an overall liability cap.
The $9.4 billion liability is nowhere near sufficient to pay for the human health and property damages that could result from a nuclear meltdown. Nuclear Regulatory Commission studies have estimated costs in a worst-case scenario at more than $300 billion for a single catastrophe.55
The nuclear industry's real insurance program is not the $9.4 billion scheme of Price-Anderson, but the free insurance provided by the public. In the event of a catastrophic accident, after the $9.4 billion was spent, it is the federal government that would inevitably cover the costs -- with some costs probably absorbed by victims who have their injuries compounded by inadequate compensation.
Price-Anderson is a textbook example of the hybrid insurance-liability cap program that should be prohibited per se.
"Many nuclear suppliers express the view that without Price-Anderson coverage, they would not participate in the nuclear industry," reports the NRC.56 If an industry which has benefited from massive government research and development and other subsidies for more than four decades, and which creates staggering, environmentally dangerous waste disposal problems and poses enormous risks to human health, cannot survive without government support, then it should not survive. The nuclear industry cannot meet the market insurance test and, with substitute energy sources available, it is not needed. The Price Anderson Act expires in 2002. If it is not repealed before then, it should not be renewed. If nuclear facilities close as a result, well, occasionally at least, corporate America should be subjected to its widely touted rigors of a free market.
47. In addition to the Price-Anderson Act discussed here, the industry benefits from government assistance in helping address its enormous waste problem, and utilities that own nuclear power plants are now seeking to unload the "stranded costs" of such facilities on unsuspected ratepayers as part of electricity deregulation. See Public Citizen's Critical Mass Energy Project, "Utility Deregulation: Why Should You Care?" available at http://www.citizen.org/cmep/restructuring/utility.htm
48. The Price-Anderson Act - Crossing the Bridge to the Next Century: A Report to Congress, Division of Reactor Program Management, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, October 1998, (NUREG/CR-661).
As originally passed, Price-Anderson maintained a limit on operator liability, but did not maintain the industry risk sharing scheme. Until 1975, the Act limited liability for any single nuclear incident to $560 million. The unit operator was responsible for $60 million, and the federal government was responsible for the next $500 million. Following amendments and revisions in the program, the federal indemnity role has effectively ended.
50. pp. 127-128. 51. p. 12.52 52. p 128 53.p. 36
54. Jeffrey Dubin and Geoffrey Rothwell, "Subsidy to Nuclear Power Through Price-Anderson Liability Limit," Contemporary Policy Issues, Vol. VIII, NO. 3, July 1990, p. 76. The subsidy calculation was based on the NRC's 1985 assumption that a worst case scenario accident had a .0000008 percent chance of occurring, and that such a worst case accident would cause property damage of no more than $10 billion.
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants - Oceans, Rivers, Streams, Aquatic Life - Miscellaneous Issues
Nuclear Power Plants - News Articles
Texas Water Pollution - Radioactive Water Contaminents
Nuclear Power Plants - Spent Fuel Rods & Storage Pools - Cooling - Problems
U.S. Nuclear Power Plant - Three Mile Island
CHERNOBYL NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ACCIDENT
Nuclear Power Issues - Foreign Countries (Historical to Current Events)
Nuclear Power Plant Lightning Problem
Nuclear Power Plants Hot Spell Problems - Operations
Nuclear Power Plants in Japan - Historical Problems with Earthquakes & Other Problems
Nuclear Power Plants - Floating Types Planned Despite Weather Events & Tsunami Events from Earthquakes
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants Covered by Various Groups - Reports
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants - Fission & Fusion + MOX Fuel
Nuclear Power Plant Fuels - Uranium & Plutonium - Mining & Processing - Pollution & Health Issues
Nuclear Power Plants Waste & Transporation Issues
U.S. Nuclear Weapons - Facilities - Test Sites - Problems
Nuclear Power - U.S. Government Positions
U.S. Nuclear Power - War - Spaced-Based Weapons - Bombs
Nuclear Power Plant & Related Issues Search - March 9, 2010
"HANFORD SITE, Wash. – Seven decades after scientists came here during World War II to create plutonium for the first atomic bomb, a new generation is struggling with an even more daunting task: cleaning up the radioactive mess. The U.S. government is building a treatment plant to stabilize and contain 56 million gallons of waste left from a half-century of nuclear weapons production. The radioactive sludge is so dangerous that a few hours of exposure could be fatal. A major leak could contaminate water supplies serving millions across the Northwest. The cleanup is the most complex and costly environmental restoration ever attempted. And the project is not going well..." USA Today by Peter Eisler - January 18, 2012
C-SPAN2 June 16, 2011 - NRC Commissioners Discuss Nuclear Safety Report
U.S. Senate Hearing - Video
"...Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Chairman Gregory Jaczko testified before a Senate Committee today on nuclear safety reviews, two days after a House Committee investigated his management of the nuclear waste facility in Yucca Mountain.
In light of the nuclear crisis at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee held a hearing earlier on the agency's safety review procedure for U.S. nuclear power plants.At a recent Convention on Nuclear Safety, chairman Jaczko remarked “this review process provides us with an important venue to address the events in Japan and begin to formulate plans for short- and long-term cooperation,” he added that the report “continues to serve a critical purpose in generally advancing nuclear safety worldwide.”
Nearly three months since the Japanese earthquake and tsunami, the NRC continues to work on improving safety regulations for nuclear plants in the U.S. In mid-May, the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation made public inspection reports from U.S. nuclear power plants. NRC Chairman Jaczko testified alongside NRC Commissioners Kristine Svinicki, George Apostolakis, William Magwood and William Ostendorff. The hearing looks at Jaczko efforts to abandon the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository, the subject of a report by NRC’s inspector general released last week..."
JAPAN NUCLEAR CRISIS & CHERNOBYL ANNIVERSARY
MARCH 25, 2011 C-SPAN
Nuclear specialists talked about the impact of the nuclear plant crisis in Japan as a result of the country's 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami. Alexey Yablokov, who studied the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, said the situation in Japan was particularly dangerous because of the highly concentrated populations near that country’s damaged nuclear plant. He also talked about a new study on Chernobyl. It suggested that as many as 1 million people had died because of the explosion at the Soviet-era plant 25 years ago.
Please click on the image below to see the full size.
CBS News. States demand nuclear waste reform.
CBS 60 Minutes
Uploaded by Oct 24, 2010
Japanese artist Isao Hashimoto has created a beautiful, undeniably scary time-lapse map of the 2053 nuclear explosions which have taken place between 1945 and 1998, beginning with the Manhattan Project's "Trinity" test near Los Alamos and concluding with Pakistan's nuclear tests in May of 1998. This leaves out North Korea's two alleged nuclear tests in this past decade (the legitimacy of both of which is not 100% clear).
Each nation gets a blip and a flashing dot on the map whenever they detonate a nuclear weapon, with a running tally kept on the top and bottom bars of the screen. Hashimoto, who began the project in 2003, says that he created it with the goal of showing"the fear and folly of nuclear weapons." It starts really slow — if you want to see real action, skip ahead to 1962 or so — but the buildup becomes overwhelming.
"2053" - This is the number of nuclear explosions conducted in various parts of the globe.*
Profile of the artist: Isao HASHIMOTO
Born in Kumamoto prefecture, Japan in 1959.
Worked for 17 years in financial industry as a foreign exchange dealer. Studied at Department of Arts, Policy and Management of Musashino Art University, Tokyo.
Currently working for Lalique Museum, Hakone, Japan as a curator.
Created artwork series expressing, in the artist's view, "the fear and the folly of nuclear weapons":
"1945-1998" © 2003
"This piece of work is a bird's eye view of the history by scaling down a month length of time into one second. No letter is used for equal messaging to all viewers without language barrier. The blinking light, sound and the numbers on the world map show when, where and how many experiments each country have conducted. I created this work for the means of an interface to the people who are yet to know of the extremely grave, but present problem of the world."
Contact the artist:
Should you have any query regarding this artwork, please contact e-mail address below:
* The number excludes both tests by North Korea (October 2006 and May 2009).
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) United Nations
Fukushima Nuclear Accident Update Log - April 5 2011
Blowing the whistle on Vermont Yankee
The Burlington Free Press
Terri Hallenbeck, The Burlington Free Press, [Apr 28,2010]
"...Arnie and Maggie Gundersen came to the Statehouse last week hauling a poster-sized map that detailed the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant and the monitoring wells that dot the grounds.
Sitting before a legislative committee, Arnie Gundersen recounted the tritium levels found in each well and their proximity to the Connecticut River and to the plant’s functions.
A committee of legislators listened intently, thirsting for information as the search for a tritium leak at the Vernon plant headed into its second month. Later in the day, the Gundersens would pore over this information with another committee down the hall..." Read More Click Here http://www.fairewinds.com/content/blowing-whistle-vermont-yankee
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is investigating a radioactive release of Tritium into the Mississippi River from the Grand Gulf Nuclear Plant in Port Gibson. WJTV Jackson, Mississippi May 2, 2011 - There's no word on how much Tritium was pumped into the river or the origination of the source of the tritium. There has been a lot of flooding in the area and another nuclear power plant is nearby which could be the source of the tritium. See Video below.
Texas Drinking Water Makes Pipes & Plumbing Radioactive
May 18, 2011 KHOU 11 News Texas
"...HOUSTON—Radiation has contaminated the underground pipes, water tanks, and plumbing that provide drinking water for much of Central Texas and the famed Texas Hill Country, according to concerned city officials in the region who have tested the pipes with Geiger counters..."
"Texas Politicians Knew Agency Hid Amount of Radiation in Drinking Water"
May 21, 2011 - KHOU-TV Texas Special News Report & Video
"...Newly-released e-mails from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality show the agency's top commissioners directed staff to continue lowering radiation test results, in defiance of federal EPA rules. The e-mails and documents, released under order from the Texas Attorney General to KHOU-TV, also show the agency was attempting to help water systems get out of formally violating federal limits for radiation in drinking water. Without a formal violation, the water systems did not have to inform their residents of the increased health risk.
"It's a conspiracy at the TCEQ of the highest order," said Tom Smith, of the government watchdog group Public Citizen. "The documents have indicted the management of this commission in a massive cover-up to convince people that our water is safe to drink when it's not."
Full Report Here: http://www.khou.com/home/-Texas-politicians-knew-agency-hid-the-amount-of-rad...
Nebraska Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant-Flooding+Fire Mississippi River - Video
"Five O'Clock Shadow" with Robert Knight and Arnie Gundersen from Fairewinds Associates
Fire knocks out spent fuel cooling pool at nuclear plant near Omaha — Operating under heightened alert level because of nearby flooding on Missouri River. On June 6, 2011, the Fort Calhoun pressurized water nuclear reactor 20 miles north of Omaha, Nebraska entered emergency status due to imminent flooding from the Missouri River. A day later, there was an electrical fire requiring plant evacuation. Then, on June 8th, NRC event reports confirmed the fire resulted in the loss of cooling for the reactor's spent fuel pool.
Book: Area 51, An Uncensored History of America's Top Secret Military Base
Book TV - C-SPAN2 May 23, 2011 Program
Annie Jacobsen is a contributing editor at the Los Angeles Times Magazine. Her investigative reporting has appeared in The Dallas Morning News and The National Review.
Investigative reporter Annie Jacobsen presents a history of the military base Area 51, located in the Nevada desert. The author utilizes recently declassified documents, on-site reporting, and interviews numerous people who worked and lived at the base.
Science Video - Flying and Radiation Risk - Physicist Calls for Airline Industry to Educate Workers about Radiation Levels -
September 1, 2005 -Science Daily News — At the high altitudes and latitudes commercial airlines fly, crews are subjected to higher-than-normal radiation levels from the sun and cosmic rays. Physicist Robert Barish believes airline crew members are exposing themselves to more radiation than almost any other occupation and is calling for the airline industry to better educate workers about radiation.
MSNBC March 22, 2011 - California Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant
Rachel Maddow reports on the succession of human errors that has plagued PG&E's California's Diablo Canyon nuclear plant.
All types of problems include Earthquake Faults Old + New, financial costs related to these faults, construction costs $5 Billion, 1981 cost overruns retrofits $2.2Billion, 2008 new fault less than 1 mile from plant... emergency cooling pumps for 18 months-valves stuck for 1 1/2 years. No new seismic studies conducted in last few years.
See video here.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Review June16, 2011
Senate Committee Environment and Public Works - Chairman Senator Barbara Boxer
Members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission testified about safety at U.S. nuclear plants. Among the issues commission members discussed were the preliminary findings of a task force review of plant safety in the wake of the recent nuclear disaster in Japan, and how U.S. nuclear operators would handle natural disasters and the loss of power at their facilities.
June 23, 2011 Missouri River Rising
Rachel Maddow reports on the Fort Calhoun nuclear power station in Nebraska, which is threatened by the flooded Missouri River, and follows up on the latest news from the damaged Fukushima nuclear reactors in Japan. Many Plants in the United States are leaking Radioactive Tritium and one of them is Fort Calhoun in Nebraska.
Brian Willians NBC News June 28, 2011 - News Video
Nuclear Plants in Nebraska and Los Alamos Weapons Laboratory in New Mexico. Nuclear hazards discussed with regard to fires and flooding.
ABC News - June 28, 2011
Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory New Mexico - Forest Fires
Two Nebraska Nuclear Power Plants - Flooding Along Missouri River
What are the Dangers?
Japan Nuclear Disaster Update
Physicist Michio Kaku discusses the threat wildfires and
pose to the government lab.
ABC News - June 28, 2011
Nuclear Lab Threatened by Wildfires
Ryan Owens reports on the dangers posed by fires in New Mexico
Near the Los Alamos Nuclear Laboratory
NBC Nightly News - Los Alamos National Laboratory New Mexico
June 28, 2011 Video - Fire Problems-Evacuations-Long Running Problems with Safety Systems and nuclear waste stored at the site.
Radio Interview - Five o'clock Shadow Radio Program - Audio
June 10, 2011
Gundersen Discusses Level 4 Emergency Declared at the Ft. Calhoun Nuclear Plant in Nebraska
Smoke & Fire at Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant in Nebraska - Radio Interview
Fire Apparently Incapacitated Part of the Cooling System at Fort Calhoun. Minimized by the U.S. NRC. Flooding Issues at 2 Nuclear Power Plants in Nebraska. U.S. NRC Event Reports - Available Online June 8, 2011 Fire in West Switch Gear Room - Wires+Fuses+Switches - Off-site Assistance Called Halon injected into this room to put out fire...water is not used to put out the fire. Smoke is toxic and firemen could not get into the room-Eventually pumped smoke out.
What is a dam breaks upstream on the Missouri River or its Tributaries? This could turn into an inland Tsunami that could hit either Nuclear Power Plant. The water now flooding Fort Calhoun will last for a couple of months. This plant is still steaming and thus, there are pumps that are required to run for months and years to keep the nuclear core cool and the spent fuel rods cool. The pumps that failed were the ones providing water and power for keeping spent fuel rods cooled down. There are more than 20 years worth of nuclear fuel in the spent fuel pools.
LICENSED TO KILL
*"...The routine operation of many atomic power plants unnecessarily kills marine wildlife and ocean habitat. This is documented in a major report released February 22, 2001 ("Licensed To Kill: How the nuclear power industry destroys endangered marine wildlife and ocean habitat to save money") by Nuclear Information and Resource Service <http://www.nirs.org>, Safe Energy Communication Council and Standing for Truth About Radiation. The 137-page full report and accompanying 29 minute video focus on the industry’s evasive tactics used to avoid responsibility for the destruction of ocean habitat and marine species, with particular emphasis on endangered sea turtles, through the intake and discharge of as much as one million gallons of reactor coolant water per minute at 59 of the United States’ 103 operating reactors..."
Nuclear Power 101: Fairewinds Examines the Fundamental Advantages and Disadvantages of Splitting Atoms to Boil Water.
Ernie Gunderson July 23, 2011
Included in this presentation and PowerPoint is a discussion of how nuclear power plants work, how to cool a reactor during an accident, the effect of hot particles when inhaled, and concerns involving the long-term storage of nuclear waste. This presentation took place at the Nuclear Power Conference held at the University of Vermont July 23, 2011.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128170775 (Video and audio on website.)
Maggie Gundersen speaks at UVM regarding similarities between VY and Fukushima Daiichi - Maggie Gundersen, founder and president of the Burlington, VT-based Fairewinds Associates, a paralegal and expert witness firm specializing in issues of nuclear reliability issues, Jared Margolis, Attorney for the New England Coalition and Environmental Law professor at UVM and Chris Williams, organizer with the Vermont Citizens Awareness Network give a panel presentation for Vermont Student Towards Environmental Protection at the University of Vermont, Billings North Lounge, March 2012. - Filmed by CCTV, Mrs. Gundersen spoke about the similarities between Vermont Yankee, a GE Mark I boiling water reactor, and the reactors that suffered catastrophic containment failures at the Fukushima Daiichi facility in Japan a year ago. Note: Fairewinds President: Farm in Portland stopped producing food after radiation detected — “Very frightening what happened on West Coast” (VIDEO)
Title: Concerns Over Aging Nuclear Power Plants in the United States
Gundersen featured on CNN — NRC refuses to speak to network despite weeks of requests and showing up in person (VIDEO)
Source: CNN Video
Author: Amber Lyon
Date: February 15, 2012
C-SPAN | Newsmakers - Global Nuclear Security - April 6, 2012 Video
"...Foreign policy and nuclear proliferation specialists talked about the nuclear threats the U.S. faces around the world. Topics included the recent nuclear summit in Seoul, South Korea and Obama administration efforts..."
(Note the Presentation by Joseph Cirincione)
Senate Hears Recommendations on Siting Nuclear Waste Facilities - Senate Environment & Public Works Subcmte. Witness Panel - Washington, DC - C-SPAN Video - Thursday, June 7, 2012 "...The Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety held a hearing Thursday on "Recommendations For Siting of Nuclear Waste Storage Facilities" from the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future. Senators heard from two panels, the first of which includes Blue Ribbon Commission co-chair Brent Scowcroft and Per F. Peterson, a member of the commission and chairman of the Department of Nuclear Engineering at the University of California at Berkeley, and whose research interests focus on problems in energy and environmental systems and high level nuclear waste processing.
A second panel featured stakeholders from government agencies and nuclear industries and research labs. The commission, which issued its final report in January, is advocating for a consent-based approach to siting nuclear waste storage and management facilities, which deal with the nation's high-level nuclear waste and spent nuclear fuel from power plants. The strategy outlined in the Commission report contains three crucial elements: a consent-based approach for siting nuclear waste facilities, a new organization to oversee nuclear waste, and a new structure for the Nuclear Waste Fund to ensure that fees paid into are used for waste disposal. The Commission was specifically not tasked with rendering any opinion on the suitability of Yucca Mountain, proposing any specific site for a waste management facility, or offering any opinion on the role of nuclear power in the nation’s energy supply mix...According to the report, the United States currently has more than 65,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel stored at about 75 operating and shutdown reactor sites around the country. More than 2,000 tons are being produced each year. The DOE also is storing an additional 2,500 tons of spent fuel and large volumes of high‐level nuclear waste, mostly from past weapons programs, at a handful of government‐owned sites..."
May 15, 2012 - San Onofre Nuclear Power Plant Problems - Video & Transcript: "...Arnie Gundersen, Chief Engineer of Fairewinds, demonstrates what has happened inside the replacement steam generators at the site of the San Onofre nuclear generating station in San Diego, California. Arnie shows that steam generator tube vibrations have caused extensive damage due to design changes between the original and replacement generator tubes.
San Onofre’s Steam Generator Failures Could Have Been Prevented Video transcript
Arnie Gundersen: Hi, I am Arnie Gundersen from Fairewinds. Today, I am at the San Onofre nuclear plant that is in the background. San Onofre is presently shut down. It has steam generator leaks. I wanted to give this demonstration today to talk about what it is exactly that a steam generator does, and how they can leak.
This blue thing around me represents the key component inside the steam generator and it is called the tube sheet. It is 2 feet thick, solid steel, and 13 feet wide. So that is just about the shape and size of what I am standing inside of. Now this would be a solid piece of steel before it is fabricated; weighs about 100 tons, it is enormous.
First thing they do is they drill holes into this tube sheet. They drill 9,700 holes on this side and 9,700 holes on this side. What happens then is when they put the steam generator together, hot water comes from the nuclear reactor and that is symbolized by this orange pipe. So hot water would go through that. It is actually 32 inches in diameter and a quarter of a million gallons every minute comes in. It comes in the bottom and goes up through these tubes, crosses over, and comes down on this side. Now where I am standing is not the radioactive side. I am standing on the non-radioactive side. Radioactive water is inside these and hot steam and hot water is where I am standing. If you notice, these things are shaped like U's. That is why it is called a U-tube steam generator. The pipes come in, cross over, and come back in the shape of a U. We have modeled up 3 tubes here. In fact there would be 9,700 tubes on this side, and each one would cross over into 9,700 tubes on this side.
When San Onofre decided to rebuild their steam generators, they made a design change and I believe that it is that design change that is causing the tubes to fail inside. Right where I am standing, right in the middle of this tube sheet, down below was a massive pillar. It was called a stay cylinder. San Onofre decided to get rid of that massive pillar down below to cram more tubes into the steam generator. Instead of 9,300 they got 9,700 tubes. By removing the place right below me, more tubes meant they could get more heat out and more electricity out. But it also changed the flow inside the nuclear steam generator.
What is happening at San Onofre now is that these tubes are vibrating. They are colliding with the pieces of metal that are designed to keep them separated. The vibrating tubes are hitting each other and hitting the support place and in the process, it is denting the tubes. Some of the dents have gotten so bad that the pipe wall is completely worn away and the tube has to be plugged. We put these this far apart so we could show the U-tube shape of the tubes. In fact, they are incredibly close together and there is a quarter of a million gallons of water squirting between these tubes every minute: 9,700 tubes on this side, 9,700 tubes on the other side. And all of them have about a quarter of an inch of gap of water between them.
What has happened is that the tubes are vibrating and hitting each other. Where they are hitting each other, they are wearing thin. At San Onofre, the one that broke was because it was hitting another tube or it was hitting one of these tube support sheets. When that happens, not just one tube is damaged, but all the surrounding tubes are damaged as well.
Now the solution to this problem as far as San Onofre is concerned, is to plug these tubes. They would send people down below and put plugs in the bottom of these tubes. That would keep the radioactive water out of these tubes. But it does not stop the vibration, because on the side I am on, you have got non-radioactive water turning to non-radioactive steam up above. So this U-tube is actually much taller than I am. It would be up 20 feet and above me would be high pressure steam, but it would be non-radioactive. As long as these tubes do not leak, no radiation gets out. So the new steam generators with their crammed tubes, are banging into each other and banging into the supports. Again, there is all sorts of space in my design, but remember, there are 9,700 tubes inside those domes behind me in each of the steam generators. They are colliding with these plates and denting the tubes. The dented tubes are then leaking and the space that I am in, which would be non-radioactive, is becoming radioactive. That is what caused the unit to shut down in January. Radioactive steam from inside this pipe broke through and entered the non-radioactive side of the piping.
Now the problem at San Onofre was stopped because they shut down quickly. They were releasing a half a gallon a minute of radioactive steam. But inside this pipe, it is 2,200 pounds per square inch. Where I am standing it is 1,000 pounds per square inch. So there is a lot of pressure difference causing that steam to shoot out and in a very short time, if they do not shut down, that steam actually cuts these tubes and can cause a cascading problem, where one tube crashes into the next tube, crashes into the next tube. That is the most serious accident that could happen in the event of a tube failure at San Onofre. And it would require an evacuation of the people nearby. It would also challenge the emergency core cooling system. Because the emergency core cooling system has to make up for the water that is leaving the nuclear reactor and entering the non-radioactive areas.
So the solution at San Onofre is not to plug the tubes. Plugging the tubes stops the leaks, but it does not stop the vibration. The solution at San Onofre is to go back to the old design, to put that stay cylinder back in place so the vibration goes away and at that point they will have steam generators that last and are safe for the people that live near this plant.
(End of San Onofre Demostration Video)
Arnie Gundersen: The original steam generators at San Onofre were built by a company called Combustion Engineering. And they lasted 28 years before they were replaced. The new steam generators at San Onofre were built by Mitsubishi and they lasted 10 months. The good question to ask is, why? Fairewinds has been able to determine that the Mitsubishi design is entirely different than what the original design should have been in the Combustion concept.
Specifically, the tubes that go up and down are separated in the Combustion design by something called egg crates. On the Mitsubishi design, they are separated by something called broached tube support plates. We have a report on the website today that explains this in detail. But basically, what the Mitsubishi design has done is prevent the water from reaching the top of the steam generator. It is sort of like being strangled at the top and only steam is getting up there. In this environment, it causes the tubes to rattle. Not just a little bit, but so much so that they collide with each other.
All of this could have been avoided if Southern California Edison had made the decision to license these steam generators with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. If they had done that, the analysis would clearly have shown that the Mitsubishi computer codes were not designed for the kind of steam generator that was built at San Onofre.
So the lesson here is that Southern California Edison attempted to do what they called a like-for-like replacement of the steam generator. But the new generators were nothing like the original steam generators. Thank you for listening and we will keep you informed..." http://fairewinds.org/content/san-onofre-bad-vibrations
Barry Commoner on Nuclear Power - NYTimes Video "...Last Word: Barry Commoner - October 1, 2012By Sean Patrick Farrell
Dr. Commoner, an early environmentalist, warned of the dangers of nuclear weapons testing. He was an early champion of recycling, organic food and reducing fossil fuel use..." Strontium 90 & Other Issues - Lead to Worldwide Ban on Nuclear Testing
Worldwide Industrial Food & Nuclear Weapons (Red Thread Runs through everything we produce... food... breast milk... toxic chemicals)
Part of the Environmental Movement - Advocate for the environment.
Time to change the kitty litter! May 21st, 2014 - Video
"...CNN called Arnie Gundersen to learn about the use of kitty litter at the DOE’s Waste Isolation Pilot Project facility in New Mexico, which is being blamed for radiation leaks. Out with the new kitty litter, back to the tried and true..."