Group items tagged

It is with great disappointment that I read the very poorly written and even shorter on facts "editorial" you published today (Dec. 8). The tone of the editorial smacks of something written by either someone in the Clamshell Alliance or someone wholly uneducated and unacquainted with the facts, but I repeat myself. I'd like to correct a few errors, if I may.

It is with great disappointment that I read the very poorly written and even shorter on facts "editorial" you published today (Dec. 8). The tone of the editorial smacks of something written by either someone in the Clamshell Alliance or someone wholly uneducated and unacquainted with the facts, but I repeat myself. I'd like to correct a few errors, if I may.

Speaking at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) on Monday, experts revealed a troublesome fact about Chernobyl, the Ukrainian nuclear power plant that blew up in 1986. Recent measurements in the exclusion zone, where no humans can go without protective equipment, have revealed that the radioactive material that was spilled in the area was nowhere near the decay level that was predicted for it. In other words, the scientists are saying that it will take a lot more time for the land to be cleansed than originally believed, Wired reports. Previous estimates, based on the fact that the Cesium 137's half-life is 30 years, estimated that the restriction zone could be lifted, and then re-inhabited soon. But experiments reveal that the radioactive material is not decaying as fast as predicted, and scientists have no clue as to why this is happening. The April 26, 1986 accident was the largest nuclear accident in the world, and only a level 7 event on the International Nuclear Event Scale. Its fallout was made worse by the Soviet Union's attempt at covering up the incident, which saw a lot of people exposed to lethal doses of radiations.

Speaking at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) on Monday, experts revealed a troublesome fact about Chernobyl, the Ukrainian nuclear power plant that blew up in 1986. Recent measurements in the exclusion zone, where no humans can go without protective equipment, have revealed that the radioactive material that was spilled in the area was nowhere near the decay level that was predicted for it. In other words, the scientists are saying that it will take a lot more time for the land to be cleansed than originally believed, Wired reports. Previous estimates, based on the fact that the Cesium 137's half-life is 30 years, estimated that the restriction zone could be lifted, and then re-inhabited soon. But experiments reveal that the radioactive material is not decaying as fast as predicted, and scientists have no clue as to why this is happening. The April 26, 1986 accident was the largest nuclear accident in the world, and only a level 7 event on the International Nuclear Event Scale. Its fallout was made worse by the Soviet Union's attempt at covering up the incident, which saw a lot of people exposed to lethal doses of radiations.

In a rebuttal to recently retired Atomic Energy Commission Chief Anil Kakodkar's claims about success of India's 1998 thermo-nuclear explosions, a former senior nuclear scientist K Santhanam said Kakodkar's was "ignoring facts" and called him a liar.In an interview to a news channel on Sunday, Kakodkar had claimed that yield of thermo-nuclear explosions was more than 45 kilo tons and India had credible thermo-nuclear bombs in its arsenal. Santhanam, a senor nuclear scientist from Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was responsible for monitoring the 1998 Pokhran nuclear explosions. "Figures don't lie, but liars will figure. He chose to ignore facts for his own reasons," Santhanam said in an interview to an Indian news agency PTI on Monday in reply to Kadodkar's claims. "There are several inaccuracies in his (Kakodkar's) statement. The DRDO was a major partner in the 1998 tests and not what Kakodkar has claimed...that we only provided logistical support. That is very far away from truth," Santhanam said.

In a rebuttal to recently retired Atomic Energy Commission Chief Anil Kakodkar's claims about success of India's 1998 thermo-nuclear explosions, a former senior nuclear scientist K Santhanam said Kakodkar's was "ignoring facts" and called him a liar.In an interview to a news channel on Sunday, Kakodkar had claimed that yield of thermo-nuclear explosions was more than 45 kilo tons and India had credible thermo-nuclear bombs in its arsenal. Santhanam, a senor nuclear scientist from Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) was responsible for monitoring the 1998 Pokhran nuclear explosions. "Figures don't lie, but liars will figure. He chose to ignore facts for his own reasons," Santhanam said in an interview to an Indian news agency PTI on Monday in reply to Kadodkar's claims. "There are several inaccuracies in his (Kakodkar's) statement. The DRDO was a major partner in the 1998 tests and not what Kakodkar has claimed...that we only provided logistical support. That is very far away from truth," Santhanam said.

In order to participate as a party in the Yucca Mountain high-level nuclear waste repository licensing proceeding, an entity or person must be admitted to the proceeding by following the procedures of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's rules, at 10 CFR §2.309, which require a request for hearing, a petition to intervene, a demonstration of standing, and at least one admitted contention. At the close of the filing period, on December 22, 2008, a total of 318 contentions had been filed by 12 entities, including 229 from the State of Nevada, 24 from California, and 15 from Clark County. A contention is an issue of law or fact (in this case, possible scientific fact) that alleges the license application or Yucca Mountain Environmental Impact Statement (as adopted by NRC) does not meet statutory or regulatory requirements, and in the case of the license application "nonconformance would be contrary to providing reasonable assurance of adequate protection of the public health and safety." The NRC rule prescribes the format of contentions as seen below:

In order to participate as a party in the Yucca Mountain high-level nuclear waste repository licensing proceeding, an entity or person must be admitted to the proceeding by following the procedures of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's rules, at 10 CFR §2.309, which require a request for hearing, a petition to intervene, a demonstration of standing, and at least one admitted contention. At the close of the filing period, on December 22, 2008, a total of 318 contentions had been filed by 12 entities, including 229 from the State of Nevada, 24 from California, and 15 from Clark County. A contention is an issue of law or fact (in this case, possible scientific fact) that alleges the license application or Yucca Mountain Environmental Impact Statement (as adopted by NRC) does not meet statutory or regulatory requirements, and in the case of the license application "nonconformance would be contrary to providing reasonable assurance of adequate protection of the public health and safety." The NRC rule prescribes the format of contentions as seen below:

Stephen Chu's nomination as energy secretary may be good for Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, but how Hanford might fare under his leadership is tougher to predict. Scientists at national laboratories will "have a distinguished peer at the helm," President-elect Barack Obama said Monday as he formally announced Steven Chu as his pick for energy secretary. "His appointment should send a signal to all that my administration will value science, we will make decisions based on the facts and we understand that the facts demand bold action," Obama said during a news conference in Chicago.

So how is Steven Chu playing as the purported candidate for Department of Energy secretary? Before we look at the developing narrative, let's remember the lesson of John Ford's movie The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance. Here's the question: Did Senator Ransom Stoddard begin his sterling Senatorial career and usher in statehood for Arizona by shooting bad man Liberty Valance? After we learn the truth, a newspaper editor sagely concludes, "When the legend becomes fact, print the legend." He had in mind the George Washington-cherry tree kind of legend, but it works equally well with, say, the Al Gore-internet kind of legend. Once a legend develops, it can be devilishly hard to shake loose of it. And it can warp the truth rather severely. So let's see what legend is developing around Dr. Chu.

A recent fact-finding mission to an Ontario nuclear power plant by Prince Albert officials has got residents wondering about the possibility of one coming here. In a story published Monday by the Daily Herald, Prince Albert city council is reportedly considering whether the city should become the location of the first nuclear power plant in Saskatchewan. Mayor Jim Scarrow, along with chamber of commerce president Allan Hopkins, Director of Economic Development and Planning Joan Corneil, and SIAST Woodland Campus's director Larry Fladager, paid a visit to Bruce Power's facilities in Ontario as part of a fact-finding mission. Scarrow stressed that the trip was only to learn more about how such plants work, and that a plant couldn't be considered until they consult with the Prince Albert Grand Council and the province.

With the election over, let's use real numbers when discussing energy. Jim Barksdale, founding CEO of Netscape, preached "you can't manage what you don't measure." I agree. But in today's concerns about energy independence or security, numbers don't seem to matter. Examples abound from this election: 1) We're sending $700 billion abroad to buy imported oil. Fact: Our net cost of imported oil this year will be about $400 billion due to the midyear price spike. 2) We're dependent on the Middle East for our oil. Fact: We import oil from 60 countries; Canada and Mexico are our first and third largest suppliers. Persian Gulf suppliers provide less than 20 percent of imports; thus, we send about $5 billion a month to the gulf.

It is clear that we need to address our dependence on coal and foreign oil and all the ills - from lung disease to global warming - they cause. But the question begs, does nuclear power offer a safe, affordable domestic solution? Advertisement Unfortunately, the facts suggest otherwise. The industry is dependent on subsidies and is not economically viable. Nuclear waste is problematic at best. The technology is not safe despite billions of tax dollars spent on research to try to make it safe. The claims from nuclear energy's proponents have always been too good to be true. "Too cheap to meter" was the first. Inaccurate power projections led to TVA's first nuclear plant construction program in the 1970s and '80s, leaving more than $25 billion in debt, which Tennessee Valley residents are still paying. Current estimated cost for one new 1,200-megawatt reactor is $7.5 billion. From 1950 to 1999, federal subsidies totaled around $145 billion. Cleanups of radioactive federal Superfund' sites are expensive, difficult and proceeding slowly. The fact is that they may never be cleaned up.

As a Pittsylvania native and one who spent 40 years in the chemical industry, I have found it embarrassing to admit to friends that I knew very little about uranium, the element, and nothing about its source and processing. When it was announced that the largest deposit of uranium in the United States was discovered in Pittsylvania County, I was excited, as anyone with scientific curiosity should be. I had hoped factual details concerning this discovery, as well as some development plans, would be forthcoming in an understandable way. However, it seems that some newspapers rarely feel any obligation or responsibility to pass on scientific facts; residents seeking such information must find other venues. That's just what my family and I did, and a report of our experience may encourage others who are interested in such facts to do the same thing. The website for Virginia Uranium is www.virginiauranium.com, and it lists the company's contact number, 434-432-1065. Upon calling this number, I was told they welcomed visits at any time, but preferred scheduling visitors in groups. I telephoned six friends, who were free on short notice, and together we attended an informational presentation at VUI last week.

Don Gillispie's April 29 letter to the editor was breathtaking in its inaccuracies, misstatements, and flat out lies. If this is the best the chief executive officer of the company that hopes to jam a nuclear reactor in the heart of Elmore County farmland can offer, then the opponents of Alternate Energy Holdings, Inc., have grossly overestimated its challenge in fighting the reactor. Mr. Gillispie seems obsessed with stickers, having devoted much of his op-ed to who was wearing what kinds of stickers. It is well known in this community that Mr. Gillispie's green AEHI stickers were doled out to those who handed his company resumes or letters asking for jobs and being told to go inside to speak out in favor of the reactor in return. It is also well known in this community that the jobs they are seeking are illusory. Even in Mr. Gillispie's most fantastic imagination, no dirt will turn on the site for another seven to 10 years. Given the time it will take to identify a legitimate U.S. --certified reactor (he has none) and then to submit and process a power plant application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), there simply is no way it could happen sooner. The fact AEHI was trolling for job applications on April 22 before the County Commission hearing on the rezone application is the height of cynicism. If a generic department store were to come to Mountain Home and seek applications for a job at a store that would open in 2017, it would be laughed out of the county. The fact it's a nuclear reactor means it's no laughing matter.

"Two recent nuclear leaks expose the danger of overhyping a technology that is still not ready for prime time. There has been a recent bout of positive press for the hurting nuclear energy industry, with props given by the likes of Barack Obama and Bill Gates, causing some to call it a nuclear "comeback." And while I agree with both our president and our most famous billionaire that nuclear will at some point it the future be a big part of the solution, a spate of recent events has drawn attention to the fact that though it helps on the carbon front, nuclear power is still very dangerous business. Last year the Chalk River power plant in Ottowa sprung two leaks, spewing 7,000 liters of radioactive water per day into the Ottowa River and this month a similar mysterious leak at the Yankee Vermont plant is resulting in dangerous tritium contamination of the nearby Connecticut River. A full 25 percent of the 104 nuclear reactors in the U.S. have leaked tritium, a known carcinogen. Yes, these are old plants but they call attention to the fact when nuclear goes wrong it can go very wrong. Though there are some newer, safer next-generation nuclear technologies available, they are prohibitively expensive to bring online and still require highly radioactive fuel stocks. There are many exciting developments in nuclear R & D (see my visit to LANL) which make use of downgraded nuclear fuels, but they are in the early stages of development, and that means we're not likely to see them popping up in the landscape anytime in the near future. * Nuclear, Strike 1: TOXIC WASTE * Nuclear, Strike 2: EXCESSIVE COST * Nuclear, Strike 3: WATER DEMAND * The 6 myths of nuclear energy exposed"

France's Areva (CEPFi.PA) has staked its export growth on the EPR reactor and is hoping it will beat American rival Westinghouse to become the standard-bearer for a new generation of plants. Stocks But delays in building nuclear reactors, cost overruns and design concerns could undermine plans by the world's largest nuclear reactor builder to grab a leading share of the global atomic energy renaissance. Here are Key facts on the EPR:

France's Areva (CEPFi.PA) has staked its export growth on the EPR reactor and is hoping it will beat American rival Westinghouse to become the standard-bearer for a new generation of plants. Stocks But delays in building nuclear reactors, cost overruns and design concerns could undermine plans by the world's largest nuclear reactor builder to grab a leading share of the global atomic energy renaissance. Here are Key facts on the EPR:

"The debate over nuclear power in recent months has revolved around taxpayer backed loan guarantees for new nuclear projects. Not only has the President announced $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees for a two-reactor project in Burke County, Georgia, his budget proposal includes tripling the nuclear loan guarantee program from $18.5 billion to over $54 billion. Unfortunately, some groups have used this debate to disguise their anti-nuclear agenda in anti-loan guarantee rhetoric. The basic construct of their argument is that nuclear energy is so risky and so expensive that using government backed financing subjects the taxpayer to unreasonable risk. The problem is that they often not only misrepresent facts about loan guarantees and what risks they pose, but also about nuclear energy broadly to make their case. Misrepresenting the facts not only undermines the legitimacy of their argument but takes away from a very important debate over whether or not loan guarantees are an appropriate tool for financing new nuclear (or any other energy source) projects."

he BNP has said it is considering "legal avenues" after its leader was refused permission to visit the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant. Nick Griffin had wanted a fact-finding tour of the site, which is in his North West European Parliament constituency. But Sellafield Limited, the facility's operator, said it was concerned about security and possible demonstrations.

he BNP has said it is considering "legal avenues" after its leader was refused permission to visit the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant. Nick Griffin had wanted a fact-finding tour of the site, which is in his North West European Parliament constituency. But Sellafield Limited, the facility's operator, said it was concerned about security and possible demonstrations.

he BNP has said it is considering "legal avenues" after its leader was refused permission to visit the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant. Nick Griffin had wanted a fact-finding tour of the site, which is in his North West European Parliament constituency. But Sellafield Limited, the facility's operator, said it was concerned about security and possible demonstrations.

Self-luminous EXIT signs containing the radioactive gas tritium are widely used in a variety of facilities across the United States, such as public and private office buildings, theaters, stores, schools and churches - anywhere the public needs a rapid exit path. Those who possess tritium EXIT signs are general licensees of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or an Agreement State,1 and are subject to certain reporting and handling requirements, including proper disposal of unwanted or unused signs. Tritium EXIT signs pose little or no threat to public health and safety and do not constitute a security risk. However, the NRC requires proper accounting and disposal of all radioactive materials. Proper handling and accounting are important, because a damaged or broken sign could cause mild radioactive contamination of the immediate vicinity, requiring a potentially expensive clean up.

Terrie Barrie of the Alliance of Nuclear Worker Advocacy Groups circulated a Dec. 30 letter she received from Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada regarding the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. As for the earlier request he and other senators made for a comprehensive investigation of the federal program, Reid wrote, "I am pleased to let you know that GAO is giving priority status to our request. In fact, I was recently informed that the investigation is already under way, and I plan to closely monitor its progress." Reid said the findings of that GAO investigation would used for develop reforms of the program in the 111th Congress. He said he and Sen. Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico had recently asked NIOSH to establish a new online system to make it easier for claimants to check the status of their applications. "As a result of our persistence, NIOSH set up a special form at the following Web site: http://www2a.cdc.gov/ocas/status.html.

Facts about Exelon and NRG Energy. Exelon made an unsolicited $6.2 billion all-stock bid for NRG Energy. EXELON: _ Nation's top nuclear power operator with 17 reactors, representing approximately 20 percent of the U.S. nuclear industry's power capacity. _ Has 5.4 million election customers in northern Illinois and Pennsylvania. Also has 540,000 natural gas customers in the Philadelphia area. _ Reporting profit of $2.7 billion, or $4.06, from continuing operations on revenue of $18.9 billion in 2007. _ Based in Chicago.

Large-scale implementation of nuclear power cannot be the solution to the future energy and climate problems of the world. Costs, constraints on uranium supply and technological shortcoming, well known to the nuclear industry, undermine the case for a nuclear future. There are better and cheaper alternatives, starting with more efficient energy use, wind power and biomass. Some facts, technical dreams and misconceptions are discussed in this article, from a physical point of view.