Group items tagged

More trains filled with depleted uranium are coming to Utah. Even as state regulators consider a moratorium on new shipments of the radioactive material -- which becomes more hazardous over time -- the U.S. Department of Energy plans to ship another 14,800 barrels of it to the EnergySolutions Inc. disposal site in Tooele County. Part of the $1.6 billion in federal stimulus money for the Savannah River cleanup site in South Carolina will pay for rail cars filled with depleted uranium to be buried in Utah during the next 13 months. "This is exactly the situation we were hoping to prevent by asking the state Radiation Control Board to enact a moratorium on depleted uranium," said Christopher Thomas of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah.

More trains filled with depleted uranium are coming to Utah. Even as state regulators consider a moratorium on new shipments of the radioactive material -- which becomes more hazardous over time -- the U.S. Department of Energy plans to ship another 14,800 barrels of it to the EnergySolutions Inc. disposal site in Tooele County. Part of the $1.6 billion in federal stimulus money for the Savannah River cleanup site in South Carolina will pay for rail cars filled with depleted uranium to be buried in Utah during the next 13 months. "This is exactly the situation we were hoping to prevent by asking the state Radiation Control Board to enact a moratorium on depleted uranium," said Christopher Thomas of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah.

More trains filled with depleted uranium are coming to Utah. Even as state regulators consider a moratorium on new shipments of the radioactive material -- which becomes more hazardous over time -- the U.S. Department of Energy plans to ship another 14,800 barrels of it to the EnergySolutions Inc. disposal site in Tooele County. Part of the $1.6 billion in federal stimulus money for the Savannah River cleanup site in South Carolina will pay for rail cars filled with depleted uranium to be buried in Utah during the next 13 months. "This is exactly the situation we were hoping to prevent by asking the state Radiation Control Board to enact a moratorium on depleted uranium," said Christopher Thomas of the Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah.

- The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) today released the executive summary of a new report that should put an end to claims that new nuclear weapons are required to maintain a safe, secure and reliable nuclear arsenal, according to experts at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). "This new scientific report should be the final nail in the coffin for proposals to build new nuclear weapons," said Stephen Young, senior analyst in the Global Security Program at UCS. "The report finds that we can maintain our nuclear weapons indefinitely by simply continuing to do what we are already doing." The report, by a prominent, independent scientific panel called the JASON group, concluded that the United States can maintain current high levels of safety, security and reliability indefinitely without designing a new generation of warheads or testing current warheads. The panel found that the arsenal can be maintained by two existing programs: the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which monitors the arsenal for signs of aging, and the Life-Extension Program, which refurbishes existing warheads with new components.

- The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) today released the executive summary of a new report that should put an end to claims that new nuclear weapons are required to maintain a safe, secure and reliable nuclear arsenal, according to experts at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). "This new scientific report should be the final nail in the coffin for proposals to build new nuclear weapons," said Stephen Young, senior analyst in the Global Security Program at UCS. "The report finds that we can maintain our nuclear weapons indefinitely by simply continuing to do what we are already doing." The report, by a prominent, independent scientific panel called the JASON group, concluded that the United States can maintain current high levels of safety, security and reliability indefinitely without designing a new generation of warheads or testing current warheads. The panel found that the arsenal can be maintained by two existing programs: the Stockpile Stewardship Program, which monitors the arsenal for signs of aging, and the Life-Extension Program, which refurbishes existing warheads with new components.

Nuclear Power Industry New is a blog about utilities, companies, suppliers in the nuclear energy market. NRC Finalizes New Jersey Agreement To Regulate Certain Radioactive Materials NRC will transfer an estimated 500 licenses for radioactive material to New Jersey's jurisdiction The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has completed an agreement with New Jersey, under which the state will assume NRC's regulatory authority over certain radioactive materials. New Jersey becomes the 37th NRC Agreement State, effective Sept. 30. Under the agreement, the NRC will transfer to New Jersey the responsibility for licensing, rulemaking, inspection and enforcement activities for: (1) radioactive materials produced as byproducts from the production or utilization of special nuclear material (SNM - enriched uranium or plutonium); (2) naturally occurring or accelerator-produced byproduct material (NARM); (3) source material (uranium and thorium); (4) SNM in quantities not sufficient to support a nuclear chain reaction; and (5) the regulation of the land disposal of source, byproduct, and SNM received from other persons.

Nuclear Power Industry New is a blog about utilities, companies, suppliers in the nuclear energy market. NRC Finalizes New Jersey Agreement To Regulate Certain Radioactive Materials NRC will transfer an estimated 500 licenses for radioactive material to New Jersey's jurisdiction The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has completed an agreement with New Jersey, under which the state will assume NRC's regulatory authority over certain radioactive materials. New Jersey becomes the 37th NRC Agreement State, effective Sept. 30. Under the agreement, the NRC will transfer to New Jersey the responsibility for licensing, rulemaking, inspection and enforcement activities for: (1) radioactive materials produced as byproducts from the production or utilization of special nuclear material (SNM - enriched uranium or plutonium); (2) naturally occurring or accelerator-produced byproduct material (NARM); (3) source material (uranium and thorium); (4) SNM in quantities not sufficient to support a nuclear chain reaction; and (5) the regulation of the land disposal of source, byproduct, and SNM received from other persons.

A new report out today casts doubt on the ability of the nuclear industry to deliver its promised new reactors. French companies EDF and Areva, who are at the forefront of the new worldwide reactor design and building programme, have been making serious investments in foreign markets where they hope to build new reactors, including here in the UK. As a consequence they are heavily in debt. Today, EDF announced the issue of new bonds in an effort to raise fresh cash. With the outlook for new build looking increasingly uncertain, the future of both EDF and Areva is now also coming under scrutiny.

A new report out today casts doubt on the ability of the nuclear industry to deliver its promised new reactors. French companies EDF and Areva, who are at the forefront of the new worldwide reactor design and building programme, have been making serious investments in foreign markets where they hope to build new reactors, including here in the UK. As a consequence they are heavily in debt. Today, EDF announced the issue of new bonds in an effort to raise fresh cash. With the outlook for new build looking increasingly uncertain, the future of both EDF and Areva is now also coming under scrutiny.

For more than 20 years, the government's plan to dispose of highly radioactive spent fuel piling up at U.S. nuclear power reactors has been to haul it to Yucca Mountain and entomb it in a maze of tunnels. But this year, more than a decade before the first shipment was ever expected to arrive at the mountain, 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas, and years before a license could have been approved for the project, the Obama administration halted funding, saying the Nevada site was "not an option." That prompted a group of university experts on nuclear waste policy to explore another plan. That plan, they hope, will chart the course for a soon-to-be-chosen Department of Energy blue ribbon panel to follow as it sets out to develop a new national nuclear waste strategy.

Giant loan guarantees could stick taxpayers with the bill At a time of deep partisan and ideological divi -sion in Washington, there aren't many issues that bring together forces from across traditional divides. So when scholars at conservative think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and taxpayer groups such as the National Taxpayers Union agree with environmentalists on something, it's time to sit up and take notice. That's exactly what's happening on the issue of federal subsidies for new nuclear power plants. Fiscal conservatives know that nuclear subsidies are a potential multibillion dollar boondoggle, while environmentalists know that - even beyond the environmental and public safety threats posed by the reactors themselves - there are far better and much cheaper solutions to our energy and global warming challenges."

The name Poison Canyon offers a hint of what's faced by those trying to clean up abandoned uranium mines in the West. The area north of the village of Milan contains some of the 259 abandoned uranium sites in New Mexico that need cleanup. State officials are pressuring the federal government to direct more money to those areas because of their unique hazard of radioactivity. "In this case, a pile of rocks is more than just a pile of rocks," said New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division Director Bill Brancard. There are hundreds of thousands of safety issues at abandoned hardrock mines in 13 western states, according to the Government Accountability Office. Thousands of sites, many dating to the 19th century, also are considered environmentally damaged.

The name Poison Canyon offers a hint of what's faced by those trying to clean up abandoned uranium mines in the West. The area north of the village of Milan contains some of the 259 abandoned uranium sites in New Mexico that need cleanup. State officials are pressuring the federal government to direct more money to those areas because of their unique hazard of radioactivity. "In this case, a pile of rocks is more than just a pile of rocks," said New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division Director Bill Brancard. There are hundreds of thousands of safety issues at abandoned hardrock mines in 13 western states, according to the Government Accountability Office. Thousands of sites, many dating to the 19th century, also are considered environmentally damaged.

The name Poison Canyon offers a hint of what's faced by those trying to clean up abandoned uranium mines in the West. The area north of the village of Milan contains some of the 259 abandoned uranium sites in New Mexico that need cleanup. State officials are pressuring the federal government to direct more money to those areas because of their unique hazard of radioactivity. "In this case, a pile of rocks is more than just a pile of rocks," said New Mexico Mining and Minerals Division Director Bill Brancard. There are hundreds of thousands of safety issues at abandoned hardrock mines in 13 western states, according to the Government Accountability Office. Thousands of sites, many dating to the 19th century, also are considered environmentally damaged.

URGENT ACTION ALERT! Condemned by health and environmental groups across the country, GNEP means foreign nuclear waste imported and "reprocessed" in the USA. This is a national issue! We need a big national outcry!!! Washington, Oregon, Idaho, New Mexico, Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky, Illinois, South Carolina, and all our sister states! Cold War nuclear sites are thirty years behind on clean-up! NO foreign waste! Global Nuclear Energy Partnership In the dying throes of the Bush administration, one last environmental disaster is being foisted on the public. With GNEP, the Pacific Northwest, Hanford Nuclear Reservation and Idaho Falls, the Southwest and sites in the Eastern USA could all get a lot more nuclear waste (both from within and outside the country) and dirty nuclear waste 'reprocessing' plants, "recycling" reactors, and "advanced fuel cycle research facilities"-all verbal green-washings of very dirty processes. The Department of Energy (DOE) is holding public hearings on GNEP in November through early December, 2008, final hearing on December 9 in Washington DC in a rush to push this awful idea in under the wire. Thursday, November 20, 7:00 p.m. Hilton Garden Inn 700 Lindsay Boulevard Idaho Falls, IDAHO 83402 Tuesday, November 18, 7:00 p.m. Best Western Hood River Inn - Gorge Room 1108 East Marina Way Hood River, OREGON 97031 Monday, November 17, 7:00 p.m. Red Lion Hotel 2525 North 20th Avenue Pasco, WASHINGTON 99301 Monday, November 17, 7:00 p.m. Lea County Event Center 5101 North Lovington-Hobbs Hwy Hobbs, NEW MEXICO 88240 Tuesday, November 18, 9:00 a.m. Pecos River Village Conference Center Carousel House 711 Muscatel Avenue Carlsbad, NEW MEXICO 88220 Tuesday, November 18, 7:00 p.m. Eastern New Mexico University-Roswell Occupational Technology Center Seminar Room 124 20 West Mathis Roswell, NEW MEXICO 88130 Thursday, November 20, 7:00 p.m. Hilltop House Best Western 400 Trinity Drive (at Central) Los Alamos, NEW MEXICO 87544 Mon

New York utility regulators likely will not decide on power provider Entergy Corp.'s plan to spin off its wholesale nuclear power generators into a separate company until 2010. Advertisement New Orleans-based Entergy had hoped for a decision in November on whether it may place six reactors under a separate publicly traded company Enexus Energy Corp. But two administrative law judges for the state Public Service Commission have ruled that a determination still is needed on whether the new company will have the financial capability to run three of the units in New York: two at Indian Point in Buchanan and one at James A. Fitzpatrick in Oswego County. PSC staff has concerns that long-term unsecured bonds issued for the spinoff might result in a low Enexus bond rating, thus limiting the new company's financial capacity. The judges have proposed a schedule under which environmental issues dealing with the spinoff would be heard by the PSC in December, followed by a ruling in January. Entergy spokesman Michael Burns said if the deal is approved in January, the spinoff could occur in April.

New York utility regulators likely will not decide on power provider Entergy Corp.'s plan to spin off its wholesale nuclear power generators into a separate company until 2010. Advertisement New Orleans-based Entergy had hoped for a decision in November on whether it may place six reactors under a separate publicly traded company Enexus Energy Corp. But two administrative law judges for the state Public Service Commission have ruled that a determination still is needed on whether the new company will have the financial capability to run three of the units in New York: two at Indian Point in Buchanan and one at James A. Fitzpatrick in Oswego County. PSC staff has concerns that long-term unsecured bonds issued for the spinoff might result in a low Enexus bond rating, thus limiting the new company's financial capacity. The judges have proposed a schedule under which environmental issues dealing with the spinoff would be heard by the PSC in December, followed by a ruling in January. Entergy spokesman Michael Burns said if the deal is approved in January, the spinoff could occur in April.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering a request from New Jersey Gov. Jon S. Corzine to assume part of the NRC's regulatory authority over certain nuclear materials in the state. If the request is accepted, New Jersey will become the 37th state to sign such an agreement with the NRC. Under the proposed agreement, the NRC would transfer to New Jersey the responsibility for licensing, rulemaking, inspection and enforcement activities for: (1) radioactive materials produced as byproducts from the production or utilization of special nuclear material (SNM-- enriched uranium or plutonium); (2) naturally occurring or accelerator-produced byproduct material (NARM); (3) source material (uranium and thorium); (4) SNM in quantities not sufficient to support a nuclear chain reaction; and (5) the regulation of the land disposal of source, byproduct, and SNM received from other persons. If the proposed agreement is approved, the NRC would transfer an estimated 500 licenses for radioactive material to New Jersey's jurisdiction. New Jersey would retain regulatory authority over approximately 500 NARM licensees, including 300 who also hold NRC licenses. These licensees would have their NRC and New Jersey licenses combined into a single state license. In total, New Jersey would then have jurisdiction over approximately 700 licenses.

The governments new draft National Policy Statement on nuclear power, indicating which issues the new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) should take on board, and which it can ignore, contains this remarkable statement: "The Government is satisfied that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations. As a result the IPC need not consider this question." The draft Statement goes on to say that 'Geological disposal will be preceded by safe and secure interim storage'. So it seems, the waste issue is all in hand and we needn't bother too much about it, or any problems with the much more active spent fuel that the new reactors' high fuel 'burn up' approach will create. Despite the fact that the highly active spent fuel is to be kept on site at the plant for perhaps several decades, that is evidently not something IPC will have to consider in its assessment of whether the proposed plants can go ahead. Instead the IPC will just focus on any conventional local planning and environmental impact issues that may emerge in relation to the 10 new nuclear plants that the government has now backed.

The governments new draft National Policy Statement on nuclear power, indicating which issues the new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) should take on board, and which it can ignore, contains this remarkable statement: "The Government is satisfied that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations. As a result the IPC need not consider this question." The draft Statement goes on to say that 'Geological disposal will be preceded by safe and secure interim storage'. So it seems, the waste issue is all in hand and we needn't bother too much about it, or any problems with the much more active spent fuel that the new reactors' high fuel 'burn up' approach will create. Despite the fact that the highly active spent fuel is to be kept on site at the plant for perhaps several decades, that is evidently not something IPC will have to consider in its assessment of whether the proposed plants can go ahead. Instead the IPC will just focus on any conventional local planning and environmental impact issues that may emerge in relation to the 10 new nuclear plants that the government has now backed.

There's still nowhere to put that toxic waste Nuclear electricity is affordable and emission free People opposed to nuclear energy applications point to the high initial price tag of enormous nuclear generating facilities that can … read more provide enough reliable electricity for several million people; they often overlook the resulting low cost per unit of power when spread over that large market. There are 104 nuclear plants operating in the US today. Many of us who are old enough to remember the controversies surrounding their construction can remember how many times we were told that nuclear power plants are frighteningly expensive and that they always cost more than predicted. We even remember that electrical power prices often increased immediately after the plants went into operation due to the effect of adding those big, expensive plants into the utility rate base. What many people who consider "news" media to be their only information sources rarely understand, however, is that the 104 plants currently operating provide the US with 20% of its electric power at an average production cost of about 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour. They also do not understand that after a few decades of operation and revenue production, the initial mortgages on those plants are largely paid off. The best information of all, which is not really "news" and does not get regularly published on the front page, is that the plants still have at least 20 years of life remaining during which they can produce emission free, low cost power. The companies that own the plants and their stock holders understand the economics pretty well; that is why 18 applications for 25 new plants have been turned into the Nuclear Regulatory Commission already with more in the pipeline. All of the used fuel - what some people call waste - is being carefully stored in a tiny corner of the existing sites, just waiting to be recycled into new fuel. It still contains 95% of its initial potential energy, but

There's still nowhere to put that toxic waste Nuclear electricity is affordable and emission free People opposed to nuclear energy applications point to the high initial price tag of enormous nuclear generating facilities that can … read more provide enough reliable electricity for several million people; they often overlook the resulting low cost per unit of power when spread over that large market. There are 104 nuclear plants operating in the US today. Many of us who are old enough to remember the controversies surrounding their construction can remember how many times we were told that nuclear power plants are frighteningly expensive and that they always cost more than predicted. We even remember that electrical power prices often increased immediately after the plants went into operation due to the effect of adding those big, expensive plants into the utility rate base. What many people who consider "news" media to be their only information sources rarely understand, however, is that the 104 plants currently operating provide the US with 20% of its electric power at an average production cost of about 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour. They also do not understand that after a few decades of operation and revenue production, the initial mortgages on those plants are largely paid off. The best information of all, which is not really "news" and does not get regularly published on the front page, is that the plants still have at least 20 years of life remaining during which they can produce emission free, low cost power. The companies that own the plants and their stock holders understand the economics pretty well; that is why 18 applications for 25 new plants have been turned into the Nuclear Regulatory Commission already with more in the pipeline. All of the used fuel - what some people call waste - is being carefully stored in a tiny corner of the existing sites, just waiting to be recycled into new fuel. It still contains 95% of its initial potential energy, but

New WISPIRG report shows that dollar for dollar, a clean energy portfolio can produce more energy than nuclear power (Madison, WI) - With the state considering solutions to reduce our global warming pollution, a new WISPIRG report finds that renewable energy sources can produce far more electricity than nuclear plants for less money. Unfortunately, the nuclear industry has proposed thirty new reactors across the country at an estimated cost of $300 billion. "Taxpayers should not be subsidizing nuclear power when there are faster, cleaner, cheaper alternatives to meet our energy needs," said WISPIRG Advocate Kara Rumsey. Here in Wisconsin the nuclear industry is pushing to overturn a long-standing law that prevents new nuclear plants from being built unless the proposed plant is economically advantageous to ratepayers and there is safe and adequate disposal for radioactive waste.

"The nuclear industry claims that there is increased public support for nuclear power as a solution to climate change, and some members of Congress are arguing that massive incentives for new nuclear reactors are critical to passing a climate and energy bill. Today, the Obama administration is expected to propose tripling the amount of loan guarantees to the industry to $54 billion and there are proposals in Congress to add billions more through a new "clean" energy fund and other incentives to support nuclear power expansion. Where did all this support for new nuclear reactors come from? Let's follow the money. Growing support for new nuclear power comes after an extensive decade-long campaign in which companies and unions related to the industry have spent more than $650 million on lobbying and campaign contributions from 1999 through 2008, according to a new analysis by former Los Angeles Times reporter Judy Pasternak, now with the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University. In the first three quarters of 2009 alone, the nuclear energy industry spent $84 million lobbying Congress. "

UK Green Lights New Nuclear - Or Does It?  Green lighting new nuclear? - The UK government today announced a fast-track planning process for new nuclear power stations. 10 sites have been approved for possible development. The government is presenting today's announcement as providing the green light for a major new nuclear programme, which it says is needed to meet climate change and security of supply targets.

UK Green Lights New Nuclear - Or Does It?  Green lighting new nuclear? - The UK government today announced a fast-track planning process for new nuclear power stations. 10 sites have been approved for possible development. The government is presenting today's announcement as providing the green light for a major new nuclear programme, which it says is needed to meet climate change and security of supply targets.

The new U.S. missile shield plans present no risks for Russia, and favorable conditions are now emerging for bilateral dialogue, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Wednesday. U.S. President Barack Obama in September scrapped plans to deploy a radar in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland, due to a re-assessment of the threat from Iran. Moscow fiercely opposed the plans as a national security threat. "The new plan put forward by the Obama administration to replace the project to deploy the Third Missile Defense Site offers good conditions for dialogue, and according to our assessments, does not pose the risks that were generated by the Third Missile Defense Site project," Lavrov said. He added that the two countries would soon hold talks on missile defense. According to the Obama administration's new plan, land-based missile-defense shields will not be implemented before 2015. Sea-based defenses will be operating in the Mediterranean up to 2015.

The new U.S. missile shield plans present no risks for Russia, and favorable conditions are now emerging for bilateral dialogue, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Wednesday. U.S. President Barack Obama in September scrapped plans to deploy a radar in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland, due to a re-assessment of the threat from Iran. Moscow fiercely opposed the plans as a national security threat. "The new plan put forward by the Obama administration to replace the project to deploy the Third Missile Defense Site offers good conditions for dialogue, and according to our assessments, does not pose the risks that were generated by the Third Missile Defense Site project," Lavrov said. He added that the two countries would soon hold talks on missile defense. According to the Obama administration's new plan, land-based missile-defense shields will not be implemented before 2015. Sea-based defenses will be operating in the Mediterranean up to 2015.

Paul Dorfman is with the Nuclear Consultation Group and a senior research fellow at the University of Warwick. The opinions expressed are his own. "Justification" of new-build nuclear power is a high-level assessment of whether the benefits of building new nuclear plants outweigh the detriments. Once the justification decision has been taken it will be difficult if not impossible to re-open this major issue. And there are real problems - for example, information on how radiation-waste and radiation spent fuel from any new nuclear build could possibly be managed, or the health impact of radiation-discharges will not be fully assessed until after the "Justification" decision is taken. "Justification" of new-build nuclear power will be decided even before the new reactor design is assessed.

Lawmakers and state utility regulators are asking tough questions about a plan to spin off Vermont Yankee into a new company. They want to know if the new corporation is taking on too much debt. And they're asking whether the company will have enough money to make major repairs and dismantle the nuclear plant after it's shut down. VPR's John Dillon reports: (Dillon) First the background: Entergy, the Louisiana company that owns Vermont Yankee, wants to create a new company that would own the reactor in Vernon and five other nuclear plants. This new spin-off corporation is called Enexus. And it would control the part of Entergy's nuclear fleet that sells power to the wholesale market.

Lawmakers and state utility regulators are asking tough questions about a plan to spin off Vermont Yankee into a new company. They want to know if the new corporation is taking on too much debt. And they're asking whether the company will have enough money to make major repairs and dismantle the nuclear plant after it's shut down. VPR's John Dillon reports: (Dillon) First the background: Entergy, the Louisiana company that owns Vermont Yankee, wants to create a new company that would own the reactor in Vernon and five other nuclear plants. This new spin-off corporation is called Enexus. And it would control the part of Entergy's nuclear fleet that sells power to the wholesale market.

"There is growing anger at proposals to build a new nuclear power station on the site of the second-oldest wind farm in Britain. Wind farm climate change global warming The site is just 100 metres away from the Lake District border Situated just 100 metres from the Lake District border, the small community-owned Haverigg wind farm in Kirksanton is one of the most efficient in the country. The land has made the Government shortlist of 10 sites judged potentially suitable for new nuclear build. Wind farm co-owner, Colin Palmer, told Sky News the turbines would have to be demolished if the plans go ahead because of underground cables."