Group items tagged

An atomic safety panel will take another look at AmerGen Energy Co.'s plans for a 3-D analysis of a corroded radiation barrier at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Thursday ordered the dispute over whether the analysis would be adequate back to an Atomic Safety and Licensing Board panel within the agency.

The likely cost of electricity for a new generation of nuclear reactors would be 12-20 cents per kilowatt hour (KWh), considerably more expensive than the average cost of increased use of energy efficiency and renewable energies at 6 cents per kilowatt hour, according to a major new study by economist Dr. Mark Cooper, a senior fellow for economic analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School. The report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewables. Titled "The Economics of Nuclear Reactors," Cooper's analysis of over three dozen cost estimates for proposed new nuclear reactors shows that the projected price tags for the plants have quadrupled since the start of the industry's so-called "nuclear renaissance" at the beginning of this decade -- a striking parallel to the eventually seven-fold increase in reactor costs estimates that doomed the "Great Bandwagon Market" of the 1960s and 1970s, when half of planned reactors had to be abandoned or cancelled due to massive cost overruns.

Ratings Warning From Moody's Followed by Mothballing of New Reactor Plans in Texas and Ontario; Developments in Line with Cooper Report from June Projecting Trillions in Excess Costs for Nuclear, Compared to Combination of Renewables and More Efficiency. WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Three major developments in the nuclear power industry in late June underscore the key findings of the "The Economics of Nuclear Reactors," a report released on June 18, 2009 by economist Dr. Mark Cooper, a senior fellow for economic analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School. The Cooper report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewables. Available online at http://www.vermontlaw.edu/Academics/Environmental_Law_Center/Institutes_and_Initiatives/Institute_for_Energy_and_the_Environment/New_and_Noteworthy.htm, the Cooper analysis of over three dozen cost estimates for proposed new nuclear reactors shows that the projected price tags for the plants have quadrupled since the start of the industry's so-called "nuclear renaissance" at the beginning of this decade - a striking parallel to the eventually seven-fold increase in reactor costs estimates that doomed the "Great Bandwagon Market" of the 1960s and 1970s, when half of planned nuclear reactors had to be abandoned or cancelled due to massive cost overruns. Cooper said that three late June developments provide new evidence of the validity of the cost-related concerns documented in his report:

The four members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have overruled a panel of the agency's administrative judges on several key issues raised by opponents of the Crow Butte uranium mine, including a challenge to the legality of licensing a foreign owned company to extract radioactive material in the U.S. * Related Articles * Most Popular * Middle school students protest to show teacher support * NRC says Crow Butte's foreign ownership not an issue * Park vandalism could lead to nighttime closure * Fairgrounds safe for horses, Alliance vet says * Dr. Harry Holmberg dies at age 92 * Middle school students protest to show teacher support (726) * Park vandalism could lead to nighttime closure (417) * Local construction company owner charged with thefts (279) * Suspect ID'd, auto seized in Chadron armed robbery (251) * Activist says assault charge shows racism (223) * Chadron residents among those stung by Medicare snafu (202) * Maintenance code boards appointed (187) Ads by Yahoo! Top Whole House Arsenic Removal System Whole house arsenic water filtter system. Free Ship. On Sale 30% Off. www.equinox-products.com Trace Arsenic Analysis and Speciation Fast TAT and competitive prices for trace Arsenic Analysis and Arsenic Speciation in various matrices. www.appliedspeciation.com Cheap Flights To Chadron Get Cheap Flight Deals To Chadron. Compare Airfare & SAVE. www.TripMama.com In its May 18 ruling on issues raised regarding renewal of the license for the Crow Butte In Situ Leach (ISL) mining operation near Crawford, the NRC also dismissed an argument that the mine releases low levels of arsenic into drinking water supplies, thereby contributing to increased diabetes and pancreatic cancer on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, some 30 miles away. The NRC called that argument "speculative' and based on a study that doesn't show the mine causes any arsenic contamination. "There is nothing in the Arsenic Study

The carcinogenic effects of radiation exposure are most severe among infants and children. (NEW YORK) - Leukemia death rates in U.S. children near nuclear reactors rose sharply (vs. the national trend) in the past two decades, according to a recent study. The greatest mortality increases occurred near the oldest nuclear plants, while declines were observed near plants that closed permanently in the 1980s and 1990s. The study was published in the most recent issue of the European Journal of Cancer Care. The study updates an analysis conducted in the late 1980s by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). That analysis, mandated by Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA), is the only attempt federal officials have made to examine cancer rates near U.S. nuclear plants. U.S. Rep. Edward J. Markey (D-MA), a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said

"Even after billions of dollars are spent cleaning up the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, radioactive waste could threaten the Columbia River for thousands of years to come. A government analysis shows that hot spots of uranium, strontium 90 and other potential carcinogens could linger in Hanford's groundwater for nearly 10,000 years. The analysis is part of a 6,000-page document outlining the U.S. Department of Energy's options for dealing with leaky underground storage tanks. But that's a worst-case scenario, Department of Energy officials said Tuesday night. The goal is to ensure that groundwater leaving Hanford after the cleanup meets drinking water standards, they said. Officials faced a skeptical crowd at a public meeting in Spokane. "The impacts to the groundwater and the people who will use it are shockingly high," said Gerry Pollet, executive director of Heart of America Northwest, a Seattle-based Hanford watchdog group that advocates stricter cleanup standards. "Our grandchildren will be exposed to this. People will drink that groundwater. It's a valuable resource and it's only going to get more valuable.""

"Even after billions of dollars are spent cleaning up the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, radioactive waste could threaten the Columbia River for thousands of years to come. A government analysis shows that hot spots of uranium, strontium 90 and other potential carcinogens could linger in Hanford's groundwater for nearly 10,000 years. The analysis is part of a 6,000-page document outlining the U.S. Department of Energy's options for dealing with leaky underground storage tanks. But that's a worst-case scenario, Department of Energy officials said Tuesday night. The goal is to ensure that groundwater leaving Hanford after the cleanup meets drinking water … "

"Not only the pressure vessels, but the containment vessels of the Nos. 1 to 3 reactors at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant were probably damaged within 24 hours of the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, according to Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s analysis of the nuclear crisis. In a report on the analysis, the utility said it carried out minute calculations on internal pressure and other measurements in the nuclear reactors after the earthquake. The report was submitted to the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry's Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency on Monday night. TEPCO said it found that an isolation condenser, a type of emergency cooling device, did not work properly at the No. 1 reactor. This caused the core meltdown to progress until it damaged the bottom of the pressure vessel about 15 hours after the earthquake. Along with the meltdown, the temperature inside the steel containment vessel, which contains the pressure vessel, rose until it reached 300 C in 18 hours after the quake, much higher than 138 C the vessel was designed for. It is believed the internal temperature continued to rise after that. Containment vessels are designed for a much lower temperature and pressure than pressure vessels, which can be exposed to temperatures close to 300 C and pressure reaching 70 bars when a reactor is in operation."

It is great to read that several environmental groups are getting on board with the idea that more nuclear power construction has to be part of the mix if the nation is going to meet future energy needs while lowering greenhouse gas emissions. This newspaper is on record as supporting a revival of nuclear power, noting there is room for more reactors at Millstone Power Station in Waterford. An Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the Waxman-Markey energy bill passed in the House shows nuclear energy generation more than doubling by 2050, if it becomes law. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviewing 22 nuclear-plant applications.

It is great to read that several environmental groups are getting on board with the idea that more nuclear power construction has to be part of the mix if the nation is going to meet future energy needs while lowering greenhouse gas emissions. This newspaper is on record as supporting a revival of nuclear power, noting there is room for more reactors at Millstone Power Station in Waterford. An Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the Waxman-Markey energy bill passed in the House shows nuclear energy generation more than doubling by 2050, if it becomes law. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviewing 22 nuclear-plant applications.

It is great to read that several environmental groups are getting on board with the idea that more nuclear power construction has to be part of the mix if the nation is going to meet future energy needs while lowering greenhouse gas emissions. This newspaper is on record as supporting a revival of nuclear power, noting there is room for more reactors at Millstone Power Station in Waterford. An Environmental Protection Agency analysis of the Waxman-Markey energy bill passed in the House shows nuclear energy generation more than doubling by 2050, if it becomes law. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviewing 22 nuclear-plant applications.

It's essential for the full 3-D analysis of a corroded radiation barrier at the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant to be made public before officials decide whether to approve a 20-year license renewal, according to a local congressman. Moreover, all studies on Oyster Creek safety issues should be promptly released to the public "to ensure independent review and help improve public confidence" in U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission work and "the entire NRC relicensing process," according to a letter to the NRC from Rep. Christopher H. Smith, R-N.J.

A permit change at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant will allow the Department of Energy to eliminate continued sampling and analysis at 15 WIPP site locations. The New Mexico Environment Department approved the Class 3 permit modification, according to a news release. The DOE has sampled data at the 15 locations over the past decade, and all information has indicated that the areas pose no risk to human health or the environment. The locations include an evaporation pond, a material storage area and a number of mud pits constructed for exploratory boreholes.

In a response to the industry's exaggerated claims that renewed uranium mining would be a multi-billion dollar economic bonanza for New Mexico and the Grants area, the Law Center commissioned Dr. Thomas M. Power to evaluate the true economic impacts of uranium mining in New Mexico. The result is the only independently reviewed analysis of the subject in New Mexico entitled An Economic Evaluation of a Renewed Uranium Mining Boom in New Mexico.

DUBLIN, Ireland--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Research and Markets (http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c89774) has announced the addition of "U.S. Nuclear Power Industry Analysis" to their offering. Nuclear power is a type of nuclear technology involving the controlled use of nuclear reactions, usually nuclear fission, to release energy for work including propulsion, heat, and the generation of electricity. Nuclear energy is produced by a controlled nuclear chain reaction and creates heat - which is used to boil water, produce steam, and drive a steam turbine.

The groups fighting expansion of the nuclear South Texas Project want a detailed side-by-side comparison of how much it would cost to produce the same power with renewable resources such as wind and solar. They think such an analysis should be complete before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission considers granting a license for the multibillion-dollar plan to build two more reactors outside this community. This was among the arguments a consortium of environmental groups made to a panel of judges with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board at the second and final day of hearings on the project's permit application.

The likely cost of electricity for a new generation of nuclear reactors would be 12-20 cents per kilowatt hour (KWh), considerably more expensive than the average cost of increased use of energy efficiency and renewable energies at 6 cents per kilowatt hour, according to a major new study by economist Mark Cooper, Ph.D., a senior fellow for economic analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School. The report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewables.

The likely cost of electricity for a new generation of nuclear reactors would be 12-20 cents per kilowatt hour (KWh), considerably more expensive than the average cost of increased use of energy efficiency and renewable energies at 6 cents per kilowatt hour, according to a major new study by economist Mark Cooper, Ph.D., a senior fellow for economic analysis at the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School. The report finds that it would cost $1.9 trillion to $4.1 trillion more over the life of 100 new nuclear reactors than it would to generate the same electricity from a combination of more energy efficiency and renewables.

Mortality and cancer incidence were studied in the National Registry for Radiation Workers in, relative to earlier analyses, an enlarged cohort of 174 541 persons, with longer follow-up (to 2001) and, for the first time, cancer registration data. SMRs for all causes and all malignant neoplasms were 81 and 84 respectively, demonstrating a 'healthy worker effect'. Within the cohort, mortality and incidence from both leukaemia excluding CLL and the grouping of all malignant neoplasms excluding leukaemia increased to a statistically significant extent with increasing radiation dose. Estimates of the trend in risk with dose were similar to those for the Japanese A-bomb survivors, with 90% confidence intervals that excluded both risks more than 2-3 times greater than the A-bomb values and no raised risk. Some evidence of an increasing trend with dose in mortality from all circulatory diseases may, at least partly, be due to confounding by smoking. This analysis provides the most precise estimates to date of mortality and cancer risks following occupational radiation exposure and strengthens the evidence for raised risks from these exposures. The cancer risk estimates are consistent with values used to set radiation protection standards.

Uranium's long and winding history leaves a radioactive path in its wake. For anyone even the least bit connected with the world, you've probably heard of nuclear power - after all, it runs power plants, creates medical isotopes and even powers space probes. The history behind all of this is a fascinating one, detailing the first uses of the strange element that was first discarded as useless, misunderstood as a healing device (protip: radiation is not a very nice thing to bathe yourself in), and finally used as a hugely important source of energy. While Uranium isn't the be-all and end-all of our power problems like some would claim, it is a very good tool to use that has shaped the way our society has evolved, and the impacts of its introduction can't be ignored. It's a bit weighted towards America, completely ignoring some main points of the history (but as we know history is determined mostly by the victors who can change it to suit them better). Take a little time out of your afternoon, and give the full summary a read over at io9.

A sample taken from the west storm drain at Entergy's James A. Fitzpatrick nuclear power plant has tested positive for tritium, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Station management was notified Dec. 23 that a sample taken from the west storm drain tested positive for tritium. The sample results were confirmed at a level of 984 picocuries per liter of tritium. The sensitivity of the analysis is 800 picocuries per liter of tritium. The increase level in tritium, however, poses no health risk, officials state.

A sample taken from the west storm drain at Entergy's James A. Fitzpatrick nuclear power plant has tested positive for tritium, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Station management was notified Dec. 23 that a sample taken from the west storm drain tested positive for tritium. The sample results were confirmed at a level of 984 picocuries per liter of tritium. The sensitivity of the analysis is 800 picocuries per liter of tritium. The increase level in tritium, however, poses no health risk, officials state.

The U.S. Energy Department is trying to decide whether it should start shipping depleted uranium that was originally headed to Utah last fall. Federal stimulus money is paying for 15,000 barrels of uranium-enrichment waste from the Savannah River Project in South Carolina to be buried in the low-level radioactive waste site operated by EnergySolutions Inc. in Tooele County. But the Utah Radiation Control Board is months away from determining whether more DU, as the waste is often called, belongs in Utah. About 49,000 tons is already buried at EnergySolutions, but both state and federal regulators say a deeper technical analysis is necessary. Large amounts of highly concentrated DU becomes increasingly hazardous over the next million years.

The U.S. Energy Department is trying to decide whether it should start shipping depleted uranium that was originally headed to Utah last fall. Federal stimulus money is paying for 15,000 barrels of uranium-enrichment waste from the Savannah River Project in South Carolina to be buried in the low-level radioactive waste site operated by EnergySolutions Inc. in Tooele County. But the Utah Radiation Control Board is months away from determining whether more DU, as the waste is often called, belongs in Utah. About 49,000 tons is already buried at EnergySolutions, but both state and federal regulators say a deeper technical analysis is necessary. Large amounts of highly concentrated DU becomes increasingly hazardous over the next million years.

CPS Energy has received the contractually mandated cost estimate for proposed South Texas Project (STP) Units 3 and 4 from contractor Toshiba, however the utility will make no decisions on the project until rigorous analysis of price and methodology is completed. The cost estimate is structured in a range, and it will take CPS Energy staff several days to analyze the methodology behind the numbers and perform the necessary due diligence, said Jelynne LeBlanc-Burley, CPS Energy's acting general manager. "We are well aware of the confidentiality provision contained in our contract with Toshiba and NINA (Nuclear Innovation North America, a limited liability company comprised of Toshiba and NRG Energy)," said LeBlanc-Burley. "If the cost estimate is disclosed prematurely, it places our customers at risk. Our staff will evaluate the information from Toshiba, put it into context and brief our Board of Trustees as soon as possible. In turn, we will properly notify other key stakeholders including the San Antonio City Council."

CPS Energy has received the contractually mandated cost estimate for proposed South Texas Project (STP) Units 3 and 4 from contractor Toshiba, however the utility will make no decisions on the project until rigorous analysis of price and methodology is completed. The cost estimate is structured in a range, and it will take CPS Energy staff several days to analyze the methodology behind the numbers and perform the necessary due diligence, said Jelynne LeBlanc-Burley, CPS Energy's acting general manager. "We are well aware of the confidentiality provision contained in our contract with Toshiba and NINA (Nuclear Innovation North America, a limited liability company comprised of Toshiba and NRG Energy)," said LeBlanc-Burley. "If the cost estimate is disclosed prematurely, it places our customers at risk. Our staff will evaluate the information from Toshiba, put it into context and brief our Board of Trustees as soon as possible. In turn, we will properly notify other key stakeholders including the San Antonio City Council."