The nuclear option: Should the U.S. invest more, not less, in nuclear energy?

If the United States wants to go green, do we need to invest more in nuclear power — and not less? President Obama seems to think so. In February of 2010, he announced $8 billion in loan guarantees to build two nuclear power reactors in Georgia — the first to begin construction in this country in more than 30 years. This past spring, even after the nuclear disaster in Japan, he once again embraced nuclear power.

Is the president right to include nuclear energy as part of a broader strategy that also has to take into account the nation’s energy security, consumer costs and public safety? We visit Cambridge, Mass., and MIT, where Need to Know reporter Win Rosenfeld met recently with Dr. Richard Lester. He’s one of the nation’s most prominent advocates for nuclear power.

Watch the rest of the segments from this episode.

 

Comments

  • David Robinson

    we need to perfect Thorium (LFTR) nuclear  power –PBS needs to inform their listeners about the advantages of thorium over uranium power — Do your homework -The Thorium website on google has a wealth of information

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V426RP2TF62JJZMGB6WCIKH6O4 John

     

     

    TEPCO
    funds chair/professsorship at MIT — Nuclear researcher: “Nuclear researchers
    have a stake in reassuring the pubic that nothing bad is happening”

    http://enenews.com/tepco-funds-chairprofesssorship-at-mit-nuclear-researcher-nuclear-researchers-have-a-stake-in-reassuring-the-pubic-that-nothing-bad-is-happening

     

     

    Cesium contamination stretches to Japan’s west coast —
    Asahi: Over 30,000 Bq/m² in Nagano, 250 km from meltdowns (MAP)

     

    http://enenews.com/map-shows-cesium-contamination-stretching-japans-west-coast-30000-bqm-nagano-250-km-meltdowns-map

     

     

    ABC
    Australia: Former special adviser says Japan “too scared” to tell people the
    truth about Fukushima future

    http://enenews.com/abc-former-special-adviser-japan-scared-people-return-fukushima-govt-conveyed-truth

     

     

    New Gov’t Radiation Map Released: “Many people
    dismayed” — Contamination 50 miles NW of Tokyo in Gunma “looks worse than
    feared” (MAPS)

    http://enenews.com/new-govt-radiation-map-released-contamination-50-miles-nw-tokyo-gunma-looks-worse-feared-many-people-dismayed-maps

     

     

     

     

     

    Prime Minister Kan: I
    thought nuke mishap could destroy Tokyo

    http://enenews.com/prime-minister-kan-thought-nuke-mishap-could-destroy-tokyo

    http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2011090715968

    Kan said,
    “If the power company had pulled out of the facility and left nuclear fuel
    unattended, the cooling water would have dried out within dozens of hours and
    the meltdown of reactors would have occurred,” adding, “If this had been the case, radioactive
    materials several or even dozens of times as much as those leaked in Chernobyl
    would had leaked. The country was brought to the brink of collapse.”

    IT WAS THE CASE.    

    ALL THREE REACTORS DID MELT DOWN, ONE OR
    MORE MELTED OUT, AND ONE OR MORE ARE STILL FISSIONING. 

    According to news stories below and on the
    enenews.com website, the pipes broke and the Fukushima reactors were doomed to
    meltdown even before the tsunami hit, and the Japanese government leadership
    had that prediction handed to them right after the quake.

     

    Quake over twice as
    strong as North Anna nuke plant’s containment structure was designed to
    withstand: Feds

    http://enenews.com/just-in-feds-virginia-quake-more-than-twice-as-strong-as-north-anna-nuke-plants-containment-structure-was-designed-to-withstand

     

     

     

    U.S. Nuclear News Roundup: Ft. Calhoun close to shut
    down — Falsified tests in NY — North Anna restart to take months? — Leak in CT

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-news-roundup-ft-calhoun-downgrade-falsified-tests-ny-north-anna-restart-months

     

     

     

     

    Dr. Koide: Massive
    amounts of radioactivity may again be released from Fukushima — Mentions “steam
    explosion” from melted fuel hitting water

    http://enenews.com/dr-koide-massive-amounts-radioactivity-again-be-released-fukushima-mentions-steam-explosion-melted-fuel-hitting-water

     

    “Fukushima in
    recriticality”? — Iodine-131 detected in 4 locations: Tokyo, Iwate, Nagano,
    Niigata (CHARTS)

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-in-recriticality-iodine-131-detected-in-4-locations-tokyo-iwate-nagano-niigata

     

    Iodine-131
    now being detected in large amounts almost 200 km from Fukushima meltdowns September 7th, 2011 at 04:03 PM

    http://enenews.com/breaking-iodine-131-detected-large-amounts-almost-200-km-fukushima-meltdowns

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Plutonium-238,
    239, 240 detected at Fukushima playground on August 15 — TEPCO admits they
    consider it to be from triple meltdown

    http://enenews.com/plutonium-238-239-240-detected-fukushima-playground-august-15-tepco-admits-consider-be-triple-meltdown

     

    Mainichi:
    105 microsieverts per hour found outside no-entry zone

    http://enenews.com/mainichi-105-microsieverts-per-hour-found-outside-no-entry-zone

     

    *After
    Cleanup* High school: 7.9 microsieverts/hour — Day care center: 7.1
    microsieverts/hour

    http://enenews.com/after-cleanup-high-school-7-9-microsievertshour-day-care-center-7-1-microsievertshour

     

    Japan
    gov’t finds 165 locations over wide area with cesium-137 exceeding Chernobyl
    evacuation levels — Data shows radiation could be “spreading to other areas”

    http://enenews.com/japan-govt-finds-165-locations-wide-area-cesium-137-exceeding-chernobyl-evacuation-levels-data-shows-radiation-could-be-spreading-other-areas

     

    40-year-old
    Fukushima radiation worker dies of acute leukemia after working at plant for
    week — Checkup showed no prior health problems

    http://enenews.com/40-year-old-fukushima-radiation-worker-dies-of-acute-leukemia-after-working-at-plant-for-week-checkup-showed-no-prior-health-problems

     

    School playground
    staircase has radiation at 70 times maximum allowed, far from evacuation zone —
    Equal to 69 millisieverts per year

    http://enenews.com/school-playground-staircase-has-radiation-at-70-times-maximum-allowed-far-from-evacuation-zone-equal-to-69-millisieverts-per-year

     

    Report:
    76 trillion becquerels of Plutonium-239 released from Fukushima — 23,000 times
    higher than previously announced

    http://enenews.com/report-76-trillion-becquerels-plutonium-239-released-fukushima-23000-times-higher-previously-announced

     

    Independent:
    Why Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl; “Now the truth is coming out” — 72,000
    times worse than Hiroshima & 1 million+ cancer deaths, says professor

    http://enenews.com/independent-why-fukushima-is-worse-than-chernobyl-now-the-truth-is-coming-out-72000-times-worse-than-hiroshima-1-million-cancer-deaths-says-professor

     

    US nuke
    agency confirms “initial explosions at Fukushima were very likely ejections of
    core material”: Analyst (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nuke-agency-confirms-initial-explosions-fukushima-very-ejections-core-material-analyst-video

     

    300,000+ bq/m² of radioactive
    iodine deposited in areas near Tokyo before end of March: Japan study — Only
    includes I-131 (MAP)

     

    http://enenews.com/300000-bqm-radioactive-iodine-deposited-areas-tokyo-march-japan-study-only-includes-131-map

     

    Paper:
    Japan raising radiation limit to 20 millisieverts/year leads to 160,000
    lifetime cancers per million people

    http://enenews.com/paper-japan-raising-radiation-limit-20-millisievertsyear-leads-160000-lifetime-cancers-million-people

     

    Wired.com: Fukushima on
    the Mississippi? NRC says New Madrid fault “major area of concern” — 15 nuke
    plants in zone

     

    http://enenews.com/wired-com-fukushima-on-the-mississippi-nrc-says-new-madrid-fault-major-area-of-concern-15-nuke-plants-in-zone

     

    Bloomberg:
    ‘Hot Spots’ Spreading — Gov’t to check radiation up to 460 km from meltdowns

    http://enenews.com/bloomberg-hot-spots-spreading-govt-to-check-radiation-up-to-460-km-from-meltdowns

     

    Gundersen:
    Radioactive sulfur in California shows there were ongoing criticalities,
    recurring chain reactions (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/gundersen-radioactive-sulfur-detection-california-shows-ongoing-criticalities-recurring-chain-reactions-video

     

    Nuclear
    engineer: NRC now says reactors and containments have breached and released
    plutonium off-site — “Much worse” than if from spent fuel pools (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nrc-chunks-radioactive-materials-found-around-fukushima-reactor-cores-spent-fuel-pools-worse-sfps-nuclear-engineer-video

     

    Japan gov’t to finally
    admit indefinite forced depopulation of large zones around Fukushima plant

    http://enenews.com/japan-govt-finally-admit-indefinite-forced-depopulation-large-zones-around-fukushima-plant

     

    Tokyo-area
    soil testing finds radioactivity up to Chernobyl relocation levels — 919,000
    Bq/m² (MAP)

    http://enenews.com/tokyo-area-soil-testing-finds-radioactivity-at-chernobyl-relocation-levels-at-least-550000-bqm%c2%b2-map

     

    229 millisieverts/year
    of cumulative radiation in town outside exclusion zone — Exposure limit for
    ordinary people is 1 millisievert/year

    http://enenews.com/229-millisievertsyear-cumulative-radiation-town-exclusion-zone-exposure-limit-ordinary-people-1-millisievertyear

     

    Radioactive
    cesium now contaminating rice, boar meat — Both found outside Fukushima Pref.

    http://enenews.com/cesium-now-detected-in-rice-boars

     

    Fukushima
    worker on camera: “The holes and cracks in the ground are terrifying” (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-worker-camera-holes-cracks-ground-terrifying-video

     

    Fukushima mom comes to
    Portland: “10-year-old son started having symptoms — Nose bleeding and fevers”

     

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-mom-comes-to-portland-10-year-old-son-started-having-symptoms-nose-bleeding-and-fevers

     

    Report:
    Nuclear fuel fragments found over a mile away were “ejected from the reactor
    cores in those explosions” not spent fuel pools, according to NRC (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/report-nuclear-fuel-fragments-found-mile-away-ejected-reactor-cores-explosions-according-nrc-video

     

     

     

    Dr. Kodama: Tokyo
    radiation “continuously high” since raining on March 21

    http://enenews.com/dr-kodama-tokyo-radiation-continuously-high-raining-march-21-worse-recent-detection-extremely-high-radiation-levels-fukushima-plant

     

    Doctor
    near Tokyo attributes symptoms to radiation exposure: We have begun to see
    increased nosebleeds, stubborn cases of diarrhea, and flu-like symptoms in
    children

    http://enenews.com/doctor-tokyo-attributes-symptoms-radiation-exposure-begun-increased-nosebleeds-stubborn-cases-diarrhea-flu-like-symptoms-children

     

    10 trillion becquerels
    per hour of radiation currently being released from Fukushima plant: Researcher
    (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/10-trillion-becquerels-hour-being-released-fukushima-plant-researcher-video

     

    Highest
    Yet: 412 sieverts/hr in Reactor No. 1 dry well — Japan says ‘defective meter’

    http://enenews.com/highest-yet-412-sievertshr-in-reactor-no-1-dry-well-japan-says-defective-meter

     

    Fukushima
    plant worker: Even higher than 10,000 millisievert/hr at many spots in reactor
    buildings 1, 2 and 3

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-plant-worker-higher-10000-millisieverthr-many-spots-reactor-buildings-1-2-3

     

    Researcher:
    Tokyo sample had radioactivity levels higher than in Chernobyl exclusion zone —
    “There’s a very, very high level of contamination even as far south as Tokyo”
    (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/researcher-tokyo-sample-had-radioactivity-levels-higher-than-in-chernobyl-exclusion-zone-theres-a-very-very-high-level-of-contamination-even-as-far-south-as-tokyo-video

     

    Report:
    Gov’t source says “I’ve heard about the steam coming out from the ground, and I
    am concerned” — “Some kind of reaction may be occurring underground” writes
    plant worker

    http://enenews.com/report-govt-source-ive-heard-about-steam-coming-ground-concerned-kind-reaction-be-occurring-underground-writes-plant-worker

     

    Purged:
    Whistle-blowers who reported detection of neptunium-239 far from plant have TV
    show cancelled

    http://enenews.com/purged-whistle-blowers-who-reported-detection-of-neptunium-239-far-from-plant-have-tv-show-cancelled

     

    Report:
    Workers say ground under Fukushima plant is cracking and radioactive steam is
    coming up — Melted core may be moving out of building (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/very-serious-and-alarming-development-workers-say-ground-under-fukushima-plant-is-cracking-and-radioactive-steam-is-coming-through-melted-cores-may-be-moving-out-of-buildings-video

     

    Independent: The
    explosive truth behind Fukushima’s meltdown — New evidence suggests reactors
    doomed to fail

    http://enenews.com/telegraph-explosive-truth-behind-fukushimas-meltdown-new-evidence-suggests-reactors-doomed-fail

     

    186,000
    bq/kg of radioactive cesium found 100 km from Fukushima plant

    http://enenews.com/186000-bqkg-radioactive-cesium-found-100-km-fukushima-plant

     

    Nursery
    School: Geiger counter “nearly off the scale” near play equipment — Topsoil had
    already been replaced (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nursery-school-geiger-counter-nearly-off-the-scale-near-play-equipment-topsoil-had-already-been-replaced-video

     

    Rainout
    of hot particles from radioactive clouds to continue for another year — Not
    just in Pacific Northwest, says Gundersen (AUDIO)

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-clouds-rainout-hot-particles-continue-another-year-pacific-northwest-gundersen-audio

     

    Radioactive iodine found
    in 50 percent of children’s thyroids — Up to 35 millisieverts (35,000
    microsieverts)

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-iodine-found-in-50-percent-of-childrens-thyroids-up-to-35-millisieverts-35000-microsieverts

     

    Tweets
    from Japan: “When we wash their hair, it comes off in a clump — It is really
    scary”

    http://enenews.com/tweets-japan-when-wash-hair-comes-clump-really-scary

     

    NHK
    Special: Japan researchers found radiation levels exceeding most contaminated
    zone in Chernobyl called Red Forest (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nhk-special-researchers-find-radiation-levels-exceeding-contaminated-zone-chernobyl-called-red-forest-video

     

    Report:
    “Severe internal exposure” — 252,422 Becquerels of radioactive cesium detected
    in person outside evacuation zone (PHOTO)

    http://enenews.com/report-severe-internal-exposure-252422-becquerels-radioactive-cesium-detected-person-evacuation-zone-photo

     

    Report:
    17 microsieverts/hr detected on cars from Japan — Russia rejects shipment

    http://enenews.com/report-17-microsievertshr-detected-on-cars-from-japan-russia-rejects-shipment

     

    TEPCO
    funds chair/professsorship at MIT — Nuclear researcher: “Nuclear researchers
    have a stake in reassuring the pubic that nothing bad is happening”

    http://enenews.com/tepco-funds-chairprofesssorship-at-mit-nuclear-researcher-nuclear-researchers-have-a-stake-in-reassuring-the-pubic-that-nothing-bad-is-happening

     

    ABC: Japan’s nuclear
    agency hides children’s radiation results

    http://enenews.com/abc-japans-nuclear-agency-hides-childrens-radiation-results

     

    Egypt
    finds shipment from Japan with radioactive electric and mechanical instruments
    — Exceeded legal limit — Authorities trying to keep radiation from spreading

    http://enenews.com/egypt-finds-shipment-japan-radioactive-electric-mechanical-instruments-exceeded-legal-limit-authorities-trying-keep-radiation-spreading

     

    Panel:
    Nuke plant operator behind fake email campaign also destroyed documents sought
    by investigators about public support for MOX fuel

    http://enenews.com/nuke-plant-operator-behind-fake-email-campaign-destroyed-documents-about-public-support-mox-fuel

     

    New data
    shows Fukushima Daini nuke plant prepared to vent steam from all four reactors
    — Feared that containment vessels might be damaged by pressure

    http://enenews.com/new-data-shows-fukushima-daini-nuke-plant-prepared-to-vent-steam-from-all-four-reactors-feared-that-containment-vessels-might-be-damaged-by-pressure

     

    Report:
    Tokyo man tests positive for over 7,000 Becquerels of radioactive cesium during
    whole body counter check — Never went to Fukushima (RESULTS)

    http://enenews.com/tokyo-man-tests-positive-for-over-7000-becquerels-of-radioactive-cesium-during-whole-body-counter-check-never-went-to-fukushima

     

    NYT:
    Authorities hid radioactive plume forecasts to avoid evacuations, officials
    reveal — Mayor says akin to “murder”

    http://enenews.com/nyt-mayor-japan-govt-actions-akin-murder-authorities-hid-plume-forecasts-avoid-evacuations-officials-reveal

     

    “Most” of
    the fuel at Reactor No. 3 may have breached vessel after melting down twice

    http://enenews.com/fuel-reactor-3-breached-vessel-after-melting-down-again

     

    Japan
    nuclear expert: Massive “re-melting” occurred at Reactor No. 3 (DIAGRAM)

    http://enenews.com/japan-nuclear-expert-massive-re-melting-at-reactor-no-3-fuel-dropped-to-containment-vessel-diagram

     

    “Stone-cold
    evidence that earthquake testing at US plants has been faked” — MORE: “Four
    nervous whistleblowers ready to tell their horror stories”

    http://enenews.com/stone-cold-evidence-earthquake-testing-plants-faked-four-nervous-whistleblowers-ready-horror-stories

     

    Oklahoma
    City rain at 1.62 microsieverts per hour — “Dangerous Radiation Background”
    (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/oklahoma-city-rain-162-microsieverts-hour-dangerous-radiation-background-video

     

    Tweet: 2 sieverts per hour found at surface of water
    in basement — Worker says “outrageous” radiation level from melted-through fuel

     

    http://enenews.com/tweet-2-sieverts-per-hour-found-at-surface-of-water-in-basement-worker-says-outrageous-radiation-level-from-melted-through-fuel

     

    NRC commissioner:
    Fukushima was not unthinkable at all — The secret that everybody knows but
    nobody wants to say anything about

    http://enenews.com/nrc-commissioner-fukushima-unthinkable-all-secret-everybody-anything-about

     

    ABC
    affiliate: “New and amazing things” being uncovered every day at Fukushima nuke
    plant — “Deadly Easter eggs” generating radiation higher than 10 Sv/hr

    http://enenews.com/abc-affiliate-new-and-amazing-things-being-uncovered-every-day-at-fukushima-nuke-plant-deadly-easter-eggs-generating-radiation-higher-than-10-svhr

     

    Nuclear
    plant workers developed cancer despite radiation exposure below legal limit —
    As little as 5 millisieverts

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-plant-workers-developed-cancer-despite-radiation-exposure-below-legal-limit-as-little-as-5-millisieverts

    Localized
    criticality happening now: Blue flashing light over Fukushima — “Not good news”
    says Fox (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/localized-criticality-happening-now-blue-flashing-light-seen-over-fukushima-not-good-news-says-fox-video

     

    there are currently
    94 pages of news article synopses at this website

     

    the following
    page photo shows what in all likelihood was uranium and plutonium burning. 

    http://enenews.com/massive-black-cloud-coming-fukushima-1-atomic-plant-photo

    http://enenews.com/massive-black-cloud-coming-fukushima-1-atomic-plant-photo

    Up to 4,700 tons
    of nuclear fuel may have been involved in the 4 reactors and associated spent
    fuel storage pools.  Only 40% of ‘spent
    fuel’ is actually ‘used up’, 60% remains unused because the zirconium cladding
    becomes too damaged to use the rods for fuel.

     

     

     

    “Stone-coldevidence
    that earthquake testing at US plants has been faked” — MORE: “Fournervous
    whistleblowers ready to tell their horror stories”

    http://enenews.com/stone-cold-evidence-earthquake-testing-plants-faked-four-nervous-whistleblowers-ready-horror-stories

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V426RP2TF62JJZMGB6WCIKH6O4 John

     

     

    GE
    Hitachi: 35 U.S. reactors could fail during quake — Problem with control rods

    http://enenews.com/ge-hitachi-35-u-s-reactors-could-fail-during-quake-problem-with-control-rods

     

    Kyoto-area Professor: “I can’t believe this is going
    on! This is a nightmare” — “I’m just afraid this has dealt a near-fatal blow to
    Japan” — “Japan has lost its future” (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/professor-believe-going-nightmare-im-afraid-dealt-fatal-blow-japan-japan-lost-future-video

     

    Japan Gov’t: Plutonium
    will no longer be measured — Almost impossible for normal person to detect, as
    geiger counters are ineffective

    http://enenews.com/japan-govt-plutonium-will-longer-be-measured-almost-impossible-normal-person-detect-geiger-counters-ineffective

     

    Regrets: Mother finds 20
    times higher radioactivity than normal in child’s bedroom — “The national
    government and TEPCO kept saying it’s alright and I believed them”

    http://enenews.com/regrets-mother-finds-20-times-higher-radioactivity-normal-childs-bedroom-national-government-tepco-kept-alright-believed

    (0.95 microsievert/hour is 8.322
    millisieverts per year)

    Nuclear
    plant workers developed cancer despite radiation exposure below legal limit —
    As little as 5 millisieverts

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-plant-workers-developed-cancer-despite-radiation-exposure-below-legal-limit-as-little-as-5-millisieverts

     

     

    *After
    Cleanup* High school: 7.9 microsieverts/hour — Day care center: 7.1
    microsieverts/hour

    http://enenews.com/after-cleanup-high-school-7-9-microsievertshour-day-care-center-7-1-microsievertshour

     

    Radioactive iodine found
    in 50 percent of children’s thyroids — Up to 35 millisieverts (35,000
    microsieverts)

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-iodine-found-in-50-percent-of-childrens-thyroids-up-to-35-millisieverts-35000-microsieverts

     

     

    Professor
    in Japan: Gov’t blatantly under-reporting radiation data — “It will become
    common knowledge that the contamination has come far beyond what is being
    reported in the media” (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/professor-in-kyoto-japan-govt-blatantly-under-reporting-radiation-data-it-will-become-common-knowledge-that-the-contamination-has-come-far-beyond-what-is-being-reported-in-the-media-video

     

     

    Radioactivity up to 100
    trillion becquerels per liter in sludge at Fukushima plant: Kyoto nuke
    professor

    http://enenews.com/radioactivity-100-trillion-becquerels-liter-sludge-fukushima-plant-kyoto-nuke-professor

     

     

    Recriticality may be happening continuously”
    — Iodine-131 detected in Nagasaki, Miyagi (CHARTS)

    http://enenews.com/recriticality-be-happening-continuously-iodine-131-detected-nagasaki-miyagi-charts

     

    Highest Yet: 512 Sv/hr at
    Reactor No. 1 — Still reads ‘defective meter’ (CHART)

    http://enenews.com/highest-reactor-1-tops-500-svhr

     

    Newly released data shows
    Iodine-131 found multiple times in Ibaraki — 320 Bq/kg in Hitachi sludge,
    previous test had none (CHARTS)

    http://enenews.com/newly-released-data-shows-iodine-131-found-multiple-times-ibaraki-320-bqkg-takahagi-previous-test

    Cesium
    nearly doubles over past month in Bay Area milk — Now well above EPA’s maximum
    contaminant level

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-cesium-doubles-bay-area-milk-last-month-above-epas-maximum-contaminant-level

    (San Francisco Bay)  radioactive cesium half life 30 years

     

     

    Japan Professor: Gov’t
    afraid to tell truth — Radiation 10 times higher than officials claim on Sept.
    30 near Kyoto, 500 km from meltdowns

    http://enenews.com/radiation-10-times-higher-japan-govt-claims-sept-30-kyoto-500-km-meltdowns

     

    Paper: Japan raising
    radiation limit to 20 millisieverts/year leads to 160,000 lifetime cancers per
    million people

    http://enenews.com/paper-japan-raising-radiation-limit-20-millisievertsyear-leads-160000-lifetime-cancers-million-people

     

     

    Gov’t:
    Plutonium dose at 27 microsieverts in Namiemachi — Will remain “for about 50
    years” (MAP)

    http://enenews.com/govt-plutonium-27-microsieverts-namiemachi-will-remain-about-50-years-map

     

    Fukushima Part II? Tokyo
    to begin burning massive amounts of radioactive waste from disaster area —
    Burns will continue for at least 2.5 years, until March 2014 (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/tokyo-begin-burning-radioactive-waste-disaster-area-will-continue-march-2014-city-process-1-billion-pounds

     

    Recent
    US nuke headlines: Problems at nuke plants in Vermont, Michigan, South
    Carolina, Virginia… MORE

     

    http://enenews.com/recent-nuke-headlines-problems-nuke-plants-vermont-michigan-south-carolina

     

    Radioactive
    leak of unknown size at Georgia nuke plant — Raised water table in wells “about
    five feet” — Tritium over 200 times EPA limit

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-leak-unknown-size-georgia-nuke-plant-raised-water-table-test-wells-about-five-feet-radioactivity-200-times-epa-limit-move-nearby-river

     

    Michigan nuclear plant releasing
    radioactive steam into environment after unexpected shutdown

     

    http://enenews.com/michigan-nuke-plant-releasing-radioactive-steam-environment-after-unplanned-shutdown

     

     

    Mystery fire at Ft. Calhoun nuke
    plant: Disabled ability to cool spent fuel pool — Feds sending special team of
    inspectors to learn more — Reactor will not restart until cause determined

     

    http://enenews.com/mystery-fire-at-ft-calhoun-nuke-plant-disabled-ability-to-cool-spent-fuel-pool-feds-sending-special-team-of-inspectors-to-learn-more-reactor-will-not-restart-until-cause-determined

     

     

    U.S. Nuclear News Roundup: Ft.
    Calhoun close to shut down — Falsified tests in NY — North Anna restart to take
    months? — Leak in CT

     

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-news-roundup-ft-calhoun-downgrade-falsified-tests-ny-north-anna-restart-months

     

     

    SoCal
    reactors trip offline — Most extensive power outage in state history — Massive
    explosion heard near substation — First time entire system has been lost — 5
    million affected

    http://enenews.com/socal-reactors-trip-offline-most-extensive-power-outage-in-state-history-massive-explosion-heard-near-substation-first-time-entire-system-has-been-lost-5-million-affected

     

     

    Report: Manure with 255 CPM bought in
    Southern California (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/report-manure-255-cpm-bought-southern-california-video

     

     

    Officials issue “Code Red” warning of potential dam failure in Maryland —
    15 miles from nuke plant

     

    http://enenews.com/officials-issue-code-red-warning-of-potential-dam-failure-in-maryland-15-miles-from-nuke-plant

     

    “Stone-cold evidence that earthquake testing at US plants
    has been faked” — MORE: “Four nervous whistleblowers ready to tell their horror
    stories”

    http://enenews.com/stone-cold-evidence-earthquake-testing-plants-faked-four-nervous-whistleblowers-ready-horror-stories

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Wired.com:
    Fukushima on the Mississippi? NRC says New Madrid fault “major area of concern”
    — 15 nuke plants in zone

    http://enenews.com/wired-com-fukushima-on-the-mississippi-nrc-says-new-madrid-fault-major-area-of-concern-15-nuke-plants-in-zone

     

    Solar storms threaten nuke plants:
    Electric power outages could last “for years or even decades” — Risk
    significantly outweighs that of major earthquakes

    http://enenews.com/solar-storms-threaten-nuke-plants-power-outages-could-last-years-decades-risk-significantly-outweighs-major-earthquakes

     

     

    US nuke commission
    “essentially lied” about one of worst nuclear disasters in history near Los
    Angeles, up to 240 times Three Mile Island — 13 fuel rods melted with no
    containment (VIDEO)

     

    http://enenews.com/us-nuke-commission-essentially-lied-about-one-of-worst-nuclear-disasters-in-history-near-los-angeles-up-to-240-times-three-mile-island-13-fuel-rods-melted-with-no-containment-video

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V426RP2TF62JJZMGB6WCIKH6O4 John

    TEPCO
    funds chair/professsorship at MIT — Nuclear researcher: “Nuclear researchers
    have a stake in reassuring the pubic that nothing bad is happening”

    http://enenews.com/tepco-funds...

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_V426RP2TF62JJZMGB6WCIKH6O4 John

    Is handling and storing nuclear waste a lucrative business?  It must be.  Google ‘neutralizing radioactivity’ with ‘brown’s gas flame’.  Why have we never heard a peep from the nuclear industry about this?  How long until there’s a major EMP solar flare and numerous nuclear power plants melt down, and numerous spent fuel pools burn?  Over the whole world or even just over one region of it?   This is a real, known risk.  It should be called a likelihood.  How about a “Need To Know” story just on that certain eventuality.  What’d the old NRC say about that? 

    The federal government takes people’s wages, inflicts higher costs on everything, waters down the value of the money, borrows a whole bunch more, and then ‘guarantees’ loans to an industry, for an industry which also requires the government to underwrite it’s liability.  Every 25 years or so, a large geographic area is contaminated for generations, and a million people get cancer.  What’s so great about that industry? 

    Where the Hades are the owners of the stocks in this industry?  Are those profits worth destroying the earth?  Are there not better things in which to invest?  Don’t they care for their own children and grandchildren and the world in which they will grow up and live?  Where will the place of residence of the owners be, upon their passing on from this life?  What is said in Revelation about ’those who destroy the earth’?  What is the destiny? 

  • Gerard71gerard

    I hope the complete program will introduce the Integral Fast Reactor technology that the U.S. and Russia have demonstrated since the 1970′s. Fast Reactor technology employs a fast neutron spectrum capable of using our stockpile of spent nuclear fuel, depleted uranium, and yes, thorium as fuel. These reactors are inherently safe. A nuclear meltdown is only a risk for our aged fleet of what are called “thermal boiling water reactors, or thermal pressurized water reactors”; a sixty year old approach employing forty year old technology. If the nuclear plants at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima were of the Fast Reactor variety, inherent safety features would have shut down the reactors without need for any human interaction. No Accident. No meltdown. Really! This super safe approach has been successfully tested as recently as April, 1986 in the U.S. Experimental Breeder Reactor 2. South Africa, Russia, India, and China are all investing in Fast Reactor technology. The question is not weather we should invest in or phase out nuclear energy. Rather, we should quickly decommission all of our legacy “thermal” reactors and replace them with the new generation of inherently safe Fast reactors. If America took this seriously, its burdensome stockpile of spent nuclear fuel and depleted Uranium could be converted into electricity and process heat by newer Fast Reactors. Indeed, this supply of energy could replace the burning of 9 trillion barrels of oil.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Did you know that 100 times more radioactive poisons have been released into the atmosphere simply as a result of burning coal and oil than has ever been released into the environment by commercial nuclear energy? You probably did not because the coal and oil industry is not regulated by the NRC. Any fly ash pit at any coal plant reads higher on a Geiger counter than the outside of any U.S. nuclear power plant. Further, if there were an emp from the Sun large enough to shut down computers on Earth, millions of planes would fall out of the sky, billions of cars, trucks, trains, and tubes would crash, the electric grid and all dependent on it would crash, all satellites, gps, and information systems worldwide would crash. Then you would have to survive the riot of all riots. However, if you can bear all that i guess some radiation would really cramp one’s style. Of course many of the most advanced reactors in the world are not controlled via computer chip expressly to avoid any emp nuclear accidents. Billions are dying from non-nuclear poisons as a direct result from burning fossil fuels. Which industry makes profits from these deaths?

  • Gerard71gerard

    Big oil and Big coal have a greater stake in retarding the development of the Next Generation of nuclear energy. 

  • Gerard71gerard

    I hope the complete program will introduce the Integral Fast Reactor
    technology that the U.S. and Russia have demonstrated since the 1970′s.
    Fast Reactor technology employs a fast neutron spectrum capable of using
    our stockpile of spent nuclear fuel, depleted uranium, and yes, thorium
    as fuel. These reactors are inherently safe. A nuclear meltdown is only
    a risk for our aged fleet of what are called “thermal boiling water
    reactors, or thermal pressurized water reactors”; a sixty year old
    approach employing forty year old technology. If the nuclear plants at
    Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima were of the Fast Reactor
    variety, inherent safety features would have shut down the reactors
    without need for any human interaction. No Accident. No meltdown.
    Really! This super safe approach has been successfully tested as
    recently as April, 1986 in the U.S. Experimental Breeder Reactor 2.
    South Africa, Russia, India, and China are all investing in Fast Reactor
    technology. The question is not weather we should invest in or phase
    out nuclear energy. Rather, we should quickly decommission all of our
    legacy “thermal” reactors and replace them with the new generation of
    inherently safe Fast reactors. If America took this seriously, its
    burdensome stockpile of spent nuclear fuel and depleted Uranium could be
    converted into electricity and process heat by newer Fast Reactors.
    Indeed, this supply of energy could replace the burning of 9 trillion
    barrels of oil.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Actually, it would be far more lucrative to use our stockpile of nuclear waste and depleted uranium as fuel in the next generation of nuclear reactors, known to the educated specialists as Fast Neutron Spectrum reactors, a.k.a. Integral Fast Reactor, Traveling Wave Reactor, or Fast Breeder Reactor. Currently problematic commercial nuclear reactors use something called the Once Through Fuel cycle. This technique only uses 99% of the energy in uranium. America has 70,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel a.k.a. nuclear waste, and 700,000 tons of depleted uranium.
    This so called waste still retains 99% of the energy to be had, and it can be had if Fast Reactor Technology is adopted in America.

    One of the causes of continual worldwide recession and future military conflict will be the growing demand for diminishing fossil fuels. While we are sitting on enough nuclear weaponry to destroy life on Earth, America is stalled on the question of advancing clean safe nuclear energy. In the meantime, we let our ancient fleet of problematic 1950′s reactors become the reason we do not invest in or develop the safe reactors of tomorrow. I fear we will not progress much farther past Peak Oil without the help of the next generation of nuclear reactors to bridge the gap from fossil to wind and solar. We could fight a nuclear war over fossil fuels or win the peace with abundant, safe Fast Reactor Technology.

  • Hvacmach

    Nuclear is perhaps one of the first victims of the fossil fuel industry.  The basic design of reactors has been over regulated and mismanaged from the start.  Think you have never been near a powerful reactor that works, think again.  The Navy has a fleet of ships powered by nuclear that are clean, safe and efferent.  most of these ships are able to power a large city and often do so during disasters.  Civilian reactors are designed to not work, military reactors are designed to be safe powerful and cheap.  The difference is the civilian regulations and our partnership with the fossil fuel industry.

  • Gerard71gerard

    The navies of the world have advanced reactor technology decades ahead of our aged legacy commercial reactors. That is common knowledge. Unfortunately, to appreciate these differences one either has to have an advanced degree in nuclear physics or access to a secretive and exclusive education from within the military.

  • http://twitter.com/TearsInHeaven99 Midori Futabatei

    Dr. Helen Caldicott on Fukushima and the Perils of Nuclear Power
    http://www.linktv.org/video/6986/dr-helen-caldicott-on-fukushima-and-the-perils-of-nuclear-power

  • Malbiz1982

    i think a usa gov must be have this nuclear depend this activate war.
    http://www.1thinktodo.blogspot.com

  • Gina Mills

    If you say 100 times more radioactive poisoins have been released into the atmoshpere simply as a result of burning coal you could say that is a true statement only if your comparing an accident free nuclear power plant to coal plant. 

    However as soon as an accident takes place at a nuclear plant, it would release 100,000,000 more radiation than that coal plant. Because of the way the nuclear industry is accident prone, you show your clear bias for nuclear power by using such a misleading comparison. 

    Coal is bad generating more nuclear emissions than a accident free nuke plant, but understand human nature and mix that in across 600 plus nuclear plants and statistics will give you more accidents that in the long run will show nuclear energy is much more deadly than coal. 

  • DavidPMays

    When we look at all the damage that burning fossil fuels has caused to people and our environment, we did not shutdown oil consumption, we sought better ways to use the product.  We need the same attitude in nuclear energy.

  • Gina Mills

    For the Nuclear Industry led by the NRC to do that they first have to show they value human lives and shut down unsafe nuclear plants here in the US that should not be operating. Congress or a grass roots effort needs to eliminate the NRC powers and replace them with a more transparent organization. The NRC is facing a public relations problem based on the social trends. They have to be removed if you want progress on nuclear power.

  • http://www.dailyscrawl.com/ DailyScrawl

    Wait a minute. Chernobyl isn’t mentioned ONCE in a discussion about the environmental impact of nuclear power? From the IAEA website: “Some 150,000 square kilometres in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine are contaminated
    and stretch northward of the plant site as far as 500 kilometres. An
    area spanning 30 kilometres around the plant is considered the ‘exclusion
    zone’ and is essentially uninhabited.”

    Wind and solar are mentioned almost as an afterthought and not compared
    against nuclear power. Only fossil fuel energy is compared
    against it. Weak.

    Also, I want to know if Lester’s cost analysis includes the long-term investment of containing the growing amount of nuclear waste for thousands of years. Just because that cost may be managed by the government doesn’t remove it from the equation… and calculating the cost on a per-year basis may look disingenuously cheap, because management of that waste may need to continue for thousands of years after the plant itself is no longer needed.

    The potential terrorist threat is also not mentioned. Some nuclear waste is weapons grade uranium and is therefore a potential target for terrorists. There’s also the possibility of intentional sabotage to induce a meltdown. That might sound crazy, but, then again, so does hijacking planes to kamikaze them into buildings… and it only has to happen once.

    I think the greatest issue that nuclear power presents to us is this: It is very difficult for us to comprehend the numbers that we’re dealing with. Some nuclear waste is dangerous to humans for millions of years. Is our society really mature enough to think that long term?

  • http://www.dailyscrawl.com/ DailyScrawl

    Wait a minute. Chernobyl isn’t mentioned ONCE in a discussion about the
    environmental impact of nuclear power? From the IAEA website: “Some
    150,000 square kilometres in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine are
    contaminated
    and stretch northward of the plant site as far as 500
    kilometres. An
    area spanning 30 kilometres around the plant is considered the
    ‘exclusion
    zone’ and is essentially uninhabited.”

    Wind and solar are mentioned almost as an afterthought and not compared
    against nuclear power. Only fossil fuel energy is compared
    against it. Weak.

    Also, I want to know if Lester’s cost analysis includes the long-term
    investment of containing the growing amount of nuclear waste for
    thousands of years. Just because that cost may be managed by the
    government doesn’t remove it from the equation… and calculating the
    cost on a per-year basis may look disingenuously cheap, because
    management of that waste may need to continue for thousands of years
    after the plant itself is no longer needed.

    The potential terrorist threat is also not mentioned. Some nuclear waste
    is weapons grade uranium and is therefore a potential target for
    terrorists. There’s also the possibility of intentional sabotage to
    induce a meltdown. That might sound crazy, but, then again, so does
    hijacking planes to kamikaze them into buildings… and it only has to
    happen once.

    I think the greatest issue that nuclear power presents to us is this: It
    is very difficult for us to comprehend the numbers that nuclear power involved. Some nuclear waste is dangerous to humans for millions of years.
    Is our society really mature enough to think that long term?

  • Gerard71gerard

    1. Nuclear waste is actually nuclear fuel barely used. Any student of nuclear energy will tell you that we already have the technology to dispose of our nuclear waste stockpile, called Fast Neutron Spectrum Reactors, and generate enough energy to replace 9 trillion barrels of oil. The total radioactivity of this recycled “waste” can be brought to levels indistinguishable from background radiation within 300 years. Total volume of the resulting fission products is less than one percent of the original volume this waste occupies today.

    2. You are completely wrong about the difference between weapons grade uranium and nuclear waste. Weapons grade uranium is highly enriched, usually greater than 80% U235, the isotope that is used in bombs. Spent nuclear fuel, “waste” is at best 1.5% U235. Natural uranium is only .7% U235, while the rest is U238 and non fissile- and therefor not weapons grade.

    3. I think the greatest issue that nuclear power presents to us is this: It
    is very difficult for us to comprehend ……HOW TRAGICALLY UNINFORMED many are facing this issue.

  • Gerard71gerard

    HERE HERE!

  • Gerard71gerard

    I did not make a comparison between a faulty reactor and functioning coal plant. LETS COMPARE NUCLEAR ACCIDENTS TO THE TOTAL DAMAGE DONE BY COAL AND OIL.  There are actuarial equations comparing total accident frequency in both the nuclear industry and the fossil fuels industry. Coal and Oil are far more accident prone, and it would be difficult to count the deaths resulting from burning these poisons that are released into the environment. There have been countless accidents in coal and oil resulting in immediate death, and the total amount of carcinogins, toxins, poisons like carbon monoxide, sulfer dioxide, HAVE ALSO caused uncountable fatalities. Further, while radioactive contamination eventually diminishes, the damage done to the environment by burning oil and coal is permanent. Global Warming Anybody?

    Also, lets not make the mistake of thinking one dimensionally about nuclear energy. Nuclear waste and meltdowns are the results of 60 year old out dated technology, politics, and cold war needs, and are not inherent problems with all things nuclear. It has been proven that we can use our nuclear waste as fuel in super safe, meltdown-proof Fast Neutron Spectrum reactors. google it.

  • http://www.dailyscrawl.com/ DailyScrawl

    1. There is a difference between used nuclear fuel and the high-level waste that is generated. Yes, the nuclear fuel can be reprocessed, but there will always be the products of fission to be dealt with. The high-level waste cannot be reprocessed or used. It consists of some highly radioactive elements that remain dangerously radioactive for millions of years. Means of disposal exist, yes… “deep geologic placement,” i.e. throw it in a hole and forget about it for 10,000 to millions of years. Is it better to pollution of the air for hundreds to thousands of years or pollute the depths of the earth for thousands to millions of years? The question should be purely academic, because the technology currently exists to create energy without pollution altogether.

    Regarding fast reactors, yes, they may be a viable solution to nuclear waste concerns if used properly. But they’re not. They’re hardly being built and the technology is not being pursued in most countries because of costs. Nuclear proponents don’t care about the waste concerns and nuclear opponents don’t see the value of the steep costs when green alternatives offer even better environmental advantages with absolutely none of the risks.

    2. My apologies, I meant plutonium. Weapons grade plutonium contains more than 80% Pu239. Used fuel can contain that percentage if the irradiation period has been short.

    3. You will receive no further replies as I have identified you as a heavily-biased thread troll with an unpleasant attitude.

  • Meganvineyard83

    Read about the history of the construction of Chernobyl and also the structural defects.  Lets not forget either that the melt down was occurred during a test and not normal operating conditions.  I wonder how many people just here about the negative results of the melt down at Chernobyl and don’t read about the history of the plant.  Our plants are safer, especially the naval ones. Look up negative temperature coefficient of reactivity and you might understand how much reactor plants designs are different.

  • http://www.dailyscrawl.com/ DailyScrawl

    Fair points, although I do feel that Chernobyl is still relevant to a discussion about the environmental aftermath of a meltdown. I’ll read up on negative temperature coefficient, as you suggest, thanks.

  • Gerard71gerard

    how are my posts biased? i have left verifiable facts. google them. further, how polite is it to shut down a discourse by making personal judgements? 

  • Eddy

    Here in Texas we are in a long-term drought and the safety and operation of a nuclear power plant ensures that it is provided with enough water to operate.  Texas is also  the state that takes all of the other states in the U.S. A.’s nuclear waste for disposal.

  • http://twitter.com/junkyardnut Brett Kuntze

    There had been talks about sequestered carbon meaning  trapped carbon in the Earth like coal , oil, gas, etc and we did not include firewood as part of sequestered carbon simply because firewood is a recently sequestered carbon that came out of Earth into trees.. We continue to justify using firewood as a green source of energy which is blatantly wrong.. I treat firewood the same as coal or oil whatever..   Carbon issues will eventually be pushed aside as we will face growing threats of so called thermal emissions meaning that we are generating way too much heat with traditional energy. It can be compared to hot kitchens with no vent windows..  We combust carbon based energy and generate excess heat as byproduct.. Sure, we are cogenerating some of the excess heat but most of the heat escapes into the atmosphere and rasiing the temperature.. I think that thermal pollution already plays a bigger role than carbon in the global climate change. Carbon emissions has its own impacts like coral reef degradation while thermal emissions has different impacts. This is why solar energy and wind energy will emerge as the dominant sources of energy in the future..  We cannot keep growing carbon energy consumption indefiinitely.. Earth can only absorb so much heat and carbon from sequestered carbon and heat.. yes,, heat can be consdiered as sequestered as well. We are simply reflecting or capturing solar energy with no minus or plus effects on our enviroment. We are so obsesessed wtih electricity generatoin coming from the Sun while we still ignore the much superior heat generatoin coming from the Sun. We will learn how to bend sunlight to our great advantages.  Nuclear energy is a sequestered form of energy as well but it is not carbon, though.

  • Oldpinky

    Siemens (Interatom) was developing small pool reactors providing lithium fuel as i recall.  Germany discontinued nuclear but they sold some of these small nuclear plants and of course, the U.S. had lost all interest but then.  We should take another look at the advances in nuclear technology and terminate older plants.  Geology is always a consideration for nuclear — but so is hydro and other sources of power.  Diversified sources for energy should be the focus and nuclear right in the mix.

  • Gerard71gerard

    1. Please check on the history of fast reactors and how they work. they cannot melt down in the way that fukushima did. If your are interested in negative temperature void coefficients, it may be pleasant to also learn what happens to u235 in a graphite moderated gas cooled Fast Neutron reactor as it approaches temperatures that would cause a meltdown in a fukushima style reactor? The u235 approaches thermal levels near that of the fast neutron flux present in the fuel, as this occurs the macroscopic cross section for fission of U235 within the fast neutron flux diminishes to a point that will not sustained continued fission. The reaction slows down and the reactor cools itself down. This may sound like magic, but works much better.

    2. I did not get your point regarding your admitted mistake understanding the difference between SNF, DU and either weapons grade uranium or plutonium. I think you were pointing out that, “Some nuclear waste is weapons grade uranium and is therefore a potential target for terrorists.”

    so I think you were saying

    “Some nuclear waste is weapons grade PLUTONIUM and is therefore a potential target for terrorists.”  

    I think I agree with you here. Indeed, all of our thermal reactors and their associated spent fuel would make excellent targets for terrorists. This is why i am for the phasing out of the legacy reactors we have been using for the past 40 – 60 years.  All the more reason to invest in fast reactors, which shut themselves down safely following loss of coolant/coolant flow without SCRAM (emergency insertion of control rods. Terrorists cannot make a fast reactor melt down even if they destroy the plants infrastructure. No Chernobyl, No Fukushima. There would be some damage, but it would be thousands of times less damaging.

    In the 1970′s a fatal decision was made to abandon DOE funding and research for fast reactors. The reason why fast reactor technology seems so expensive is a result of licensing and insurance costs that are biased or politically aligned with the realities of 1950′s nuclear plants. Because of the tremendous size of these legacy plants, and the dangers that you have pointed out, licensing and insurance is exorbitantly applied to any new plant designs, no matter how much smaller or safer the fast reactors designs of today.

     But also, spent nuclear fuel has about 1% P239 and cannot itself be called weapons grade.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Bill Gates has argued that we will need Generation IV fast reactors to bridge the economic and technological hurtles holding us back on solar and wind. I am very excited about renewable sources, and see them as the end goal. China has the labor, research money, and foresight to be leading the world in wind and solar. How can we keep up?
    Importantly, China is also pouring tremendous resources into the next generation of Fast Reactors.

    One asset America has is a tremendous supply of Spent Nuclear Fuel (70000 tons) and Depleted Uranium (700000 tons). The best thing to do with this stuff is to use it up as fuel in Generation IV fast reactors. This nightmarish quantity of nuclear “waste” can be converted into enough energy to replace 9,000,000,000 barrels of oil (which is 4 times more oil than what is believed to be left in the planet). That energy could act as a sort of stimulant to our economy, pay for serious advances in wind and solar, and help free our economy from the stranglehold of paying more and more for everything on account of ever increasing oil prices.

    Also, if burning nuclear “waste” in Fast reactors becomes the safe approach, then it is possible to radically reduce the overall volume and radioactivity of the end fission products. Rather than having to baby sit 770000 tons of SNF and DU for 100,000 years, fast reactors can bring   the overall radioactivity to levels below background radiation within JUST 300 years.

  • Danapainterman

    they all say nuke plants are very safe but we still have unrecoverable mishaps, japan is an island they dont have to many places to go, and after all the suffering I dont think nuke power will be on the list for production of electric. its not over yet in japan. and the waste? what in the world we going to do with it, bury it? what if it gets into water table? its just no good, you dont get something for nothing theres always a catch like Radiation, sickness and death and a sterile
    waste land we need to treat the earth as though it the only one we have. Dana

  • Gerard71gerard

    Saudi Arabia pays U.S.Navy trained reactor operators several times more money than the same x-sailors would make working in our legacy reactors. Also, they are a big oil producer. Why not burn their own oil, because they make enough on selling us that oil.

    Like Texas, Saudi Arabia is in perpetual drought. Unlike us, Saudi Arabia not only produces much of their electricity via nuclear energy, Saudi Arabia also produces vast quantities of Clean, Clear Drinking Water using the SAME reactors to desalinate ocean water.

    In the U.S. future reactors could be designed for this dual use. Our present legacy reactors boil water to produce steam to power a steam turbine which in turn drives electrical generators. The Saudis modify this process to purify seawater by using heat from the reactor to boil seawater, producing steam to drive turbines, and then be condensed as drinking water.

    Future fast reactors could generate electricity and industrial process heat, and in the same process purify drinking water or desalinate seawater. In a sense, it is a waste not to design for this capability because legacy reactors boil and condense water as the working fluid already.

  • Gina Mills

    Yes coal I am sure is more accident prone but with nuclear just one accident makes you pay big time!  

    Also just how concerned are the people of Japan going to be about global warming as they are not able to grow there own food. Plus global warming it turns out is more due to the Sun and not man made. Other planets in the solar system have warming as well.

    You say ”radioactive contamination eventually diminishes”  do you realize what the half life is for some of these isotopes?

     I agree it has been proven that we can use our nuclear waste as fuel in super safe, meltdown-proof Fast Neutron Spectrum reactors. But the problem still remains with all the old reactors and poor handling of spent fuel pools.

    The 2011 accident in Japan makes it so I would never eat anything from Japan or seafood. Just think what would happen if Mexico had an accident and big release at their nuclear plant, I would never again get to drink Kahlua and Cream.

    Where ever the future accidents takes place as they will, that entire area food production and economy will go with it.

    It is the Human element that is what makes everything unsafe along with the corruption at the NRC and the EPA.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Dude, your concerns are spot on. Fukushima is a real disaster. It will take time to mend. I am all for getting rid of all Fukushima style reactors. But please know that nuclear meltdowns and nuclear waste are problems resultant from a legacy design approach. Little has changed for the past 60 years of commercial nuclear energy in the U.S. This outdated technology is as you say, dangerous.

    However the future could be very bright. Check out my posts regarding Fast Neutron Spectrum reactor. This technology uses up nuclear waste, produces 100 times more energy than that produced from the original nuclear fuel used in our legacy reactors, and are inherently incapable of melting down. Google the Experimental Breeder Reactor II, where all this was proven in the Eighties.

    We are undergoing a worldwide, unrecoverable disaster, that will create new wastelands and destroy ecosystems, and eventually kill millions if not already; it is called the burning of fossil fuels.

    peace

  • Gerard71gerard

    Thank You for responding. You are making me rethink my earlier comparison.

    YES, a nuclear accident is much worse than many oil or coal related accidents. Perhaps we
    should weigh the total accumulated damage caused by all coal and oil accidents against the total damage done all nuclear energy accidents? We should also consider all the damage done by the past century or more to the environment by the non-accidental, proper burning of fossil fuels.
    This can certainly muddy the water, because we are so use to the grim consequences of fossil fuels we almost don’t think of them. I am not just talking about claims of global warming. Cancer, COPD, Asthma, Emphysema, and so many other potentially fatal ailments are a direct result of burning fossils.
    I honestly would not know for sure which is worse, fossil fuels or our outdated legacy reactors.

    Also, our agricultural system uses oil to make fertilizer and natural gas to make pesticides. As these fuels become scarce, food shortages and fuel shortages will be one and the same.
    However, the process heat available from fast reactors can thermo-chemically produce hydrogen. This is good because one of the largest demands for hydrogen will be for its use in making fertalizer and pesticides without fossil fuels.

    An aside: regardless of the cause of global warming, it is going to seriously mess with our food supply.  Supposedly by 2030 or so, both Chocolate and Coffee will be on the endangered list as their local ecosystems change, leaving no suitable place on Earth for these delicate plants to grow.

  • Dangertree

    Japan’s plant was old and using Plutonium as their fuel source. The downblended uranium-foil available for power plants is nowhere near as toxic. Furthermore, modern reclaimation methods make recycling this material over and over again possible. Check out the innovations we have going on here in Oak Ridge, TN before you say no to nuclear power. I was a skeptic myself until I began working there.

  • Jeffgemutliche

    Your program glossed over “safe nuclear energy generation thorium reactors” (LFTRs)!  Current reactors can be retrofitted and new ones don’t need to be located near large bodies of water. Other commentors obviously are very knowledgable on the subject—you folks need to study the subject to the depth you get your knees wet with oil, then you’ll find the real reasons these types of reactors are willfully being ignored——it’s all about $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. I’d love to see you address that? 

  • http://twitter.com/buzzyquipsis PatsyT

    It is not Clean, Safe or Green.
    Clean Green Energy Plants do not blow up and spew toxic radiation all over the northern hemisphere.

    Why have they turned off the radiation detection on the west coast? 

    Jeremy Rifkin – Nuclear is dead – pardon the french at the start.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQ30mUl0stoAmory Lovins: Congressional testimony on energy solutions
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JkrvSaL7-w&list=FLRLljxWRdyWg6iL6vo51_SQ&index=4

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    The Japanses are worrying about
    1msv/year. Natural background in the US is 3.5msv/year. Modern
    chemical analysis is so powerful that we can detect any element in
    every rock. The Japanese are panicing over less than the natural
    background radiation.

    You
    did know that there is natural background radiation didn’t you?  
    How else would we date Egyptian mummies with the radioactive carbon
    they ate thousands of years ago? Of course it is not possible to be
    exposed to less radiation than the natural background where you live.

    Some
    background reading:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Background_radiation

    http://www.unscear.org/unscear/en/publications/2000_1.html

    EVACUATE
    DENVER!!!!

    If
    you live in Chernobyl the total radiation dose you get each year is
    390 millirem. That’s natural plus residual from the accident and
    fire. In Denver, Colorado, the natural dose is over 1000
    millirem/year. Denver gets more than 2.56 times as much radiation
    as Chernobyl! But Denver has a low cancer rate.

    Calculate
    your annual radiation dose:

    http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/dosechart/

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

     Instead of recent new builds of NPPs, look at “modular” meaning factory built, nuclear.   

    http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf33.html

    Does 5.5 cents per kilowatt hour seem high?  

     RECYCLE.   There is no such thing as “nuclear waste.”   It is fuel that is being wasted.

    “ENVIRONMENTALISTS FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY”

    book:  http://www.comby.org/livres/livresen.htm

    Review of this book by the American Health Physics Society 

    http://www.comby.org/media/articles/articles.in.english/HealthPhysics-NUC-July2002.htm

    http://www.ecolo.org

    http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/specialreports/buriedlegacy/s_87948.html

    Spent fuel is so valuable it gets “Stolen” by Israel.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    See:   http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/07/03/lacklustre-colorado-solar/

    Be sure to read the linked papers.   In the Arizona desert, solar has dropouts in mid day for no apparent reason.   The dropout occurs simultaneously over a triangle with 200 mile sides.   The fall time is as short as 10 seconds, which is too fast for anything but a battery or spinning reserve to fix.   Neither batteries nor spinning reserve is desirable.   Batteries would add $1000/month to your electric bill.   Spinning reserve burns almost as much coal [to boil water] as just using coal in the first place.

    Wind:  There are rare places where wind works locally, but to power, for example, all of Europe, all of Europe and all of Asia has to be linked into one very expensive grid.   You need the nameplate power times 4 spread over 12 time zones to get reliable power.   The line losses are huge unless you have a superconducting grid, and superconductors now available require liquid nitrogen cooling.   Very expensive.

    High temperature geothermal:  Would work in Japan but might cause a volcano to erupt.   Doesn’t work in Illinois.

    Reference:  “Power to Save the World; The Truth About Nuclear Energy” by Gwyneth Cravens, 2007   Finally a truthful book about nuclear power.   This book is very easy to read and understand.  Gwyneth Cravens is a former anti-nuclear activist.

    relatively low cost:  Page 211:   “In 2005, the production cost of electricity from nuclear power on average cost 1.72 cents per kilowatt-hour; from coal-fired plants 2.21; from natural gas 7.5, and from oil 8.09. 

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Why a Nuclear Powerplant CAN NOT Explode like a Nuclear Bomb:

    Bombs are completely different from reactors.   There is nothing similar about them except that they both need fissile materials.   But they need DIFFERENT fissile materials and they use them very differently.

    A nuclear bomb “compresses” pure or nearly pure fissile material into a small space.    The fissile material is either the uranium isotope 235 or plutonium.   They are the reduced bright shiny metals, not metal oxide.   If it is uranium, it is at least 90% uranium 235 and 10% or less uranium 238.   These fissile materials are metals and very difficult to compress.   Because they are difficult to compress, a high explosive [high speed explosive] is required to compress them.   Pieces of the fissile material have to slam into each other hard for the nuclear reactions to take place.   

    A nuclear reactor, such as the ones used for power generation, does not have any pure fissile material.   The fuel may be 0.7% to 8% uranium oxide 235 mixed with uranium 238 oxide [uranium rust].   A mixture of 0.7% to 8% uranium 235 rust mixed with uranium 238 rust cannot be made to explode no matter how hard you try.   A small amount of plutonium oxide mixed in with the uranium oxide can not change this.   Reactor fuel still cannot be made to explode like a nuclear bomb no matter how hard you try.   There has never been a nuclear explosion in a reactor and there never will be.   [Pure reduced  metallic uranium and plutonium are flammable, but a fire isn't an explosion.]   The fuel is further diluted by being divided and sealed into many small steel capsules.   The capsules are usually contained in steel tubes.   The fuel is further diluted by the need for coolant to flow around the capsules and through the core so that heat can be transported to a place where heat energy can be converted to electrical energy.   A reactor does not contain any high speed [or any other speed] chemical explosive as a bomb must have.   A reactor does not have any explosive materials at all.

    As is obvious from the above descriptions, there is no possible way that a reactor could ever explode like a nuclear bomb.   Reactors and bombs are very different.   Reactors and bombs are really not even related to each other.

    Reccomendation:  Nuclear power is the safest kind and it just got safer.   Convert all coal-fired power plants to nuclear ASAP.   See “Prescription for the Planet” by Tom Blees, 2008.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Brett Kuntze: “most of the heat
    escapes into the atmosphere and rasiing the temperature”

    That isn’t the way it works. CO2 in
    the air controls the temperature. All that heat readily escapes to
    the near absolute zero cold of deep space if the CO2 is low enough.

    Danapainterman & Gerard71gerard:
    Japan is suffering an imaginary problem. They are worried about
    less radiation than the natural background radiation. There is no
    way to avoid natural background radiation.

    Eddy: “in Texas we are in a
    long-term drought” No.

    You are experiencing the climate change
    that we have been warning you about. The drought is permanent.

    DailyScrawl: 3 reactors are still in
    operation at Chernobyl and people still live there. EVACUATE
    DENVER!!!!

    If
    you live in Chernobyl the total radiation dose you get each year is
    390 millirem. That’s natural plus residual from the accident and
    fire. In Denver, Colorado, the natural dose is over 1000
    millirem/year. Denver gets more than 2.56 times as much radiation
    as Chernobyl! But Denver has a low cancer rate.

    Calculate
    your annual radiation dose:

    http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/dosechart/

    The
    Average American gets 361 millirems/year. Smokers add 280
    millirems/year from lead210. Radon accounts for 200 mrem/year.

    http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/rp/factsheets/factsheets-htm/fs10bkvsman.htm

    http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/doses-daily-lives.html

    Although
    radiation may cause cancers at high doses and high dose rates,
    currently there are no data to unequivocally establish the occurrence
    of cancer following exposure to low doses and dose rates — below
    about 10,000 mrem (100 mSv). Those people living in areas having high
    levels of background radiation — above 1,000 mrem (10 mSv) per
    year– such as Denver, Colorado have shown no adverse biological
    effects.

    http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/bio-effects-radiation.html

    Calculations
    based on data from NCRP reports show that the average level of
    natural background radiation (NBR) in Rocky Mountain states is 3.2
    times that in Gulf Coast states. However, data from the American
    Cancer Society show that age-adjusted overall cancer death in Gulf
    Coast states is actually 1.26 times higher than in Rocky Mountain
    states. The difference from proportionality is a factor of 4.0. This
    is a clear negative correlation of NBR with overall cancer death. It
    is also shown that, comparing 3 Rocky Mountain states and 3 Gulf
    Coast states, there is a strong negative correlation of estimated
    lung cancer mortality with natural radon levels (factors of 5.7 to
    7.5).

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9753369

    All
    natural rocks contain most natural elements. Coal is a rock. The
    average concentration of uranium in coal is 1 or 2 parts per million.
    Illinois coal contains up to 103 parts per million uranium. Coal
    also contains the radioactive decay products of uranium. A 1000
    million watt coal fired power plant burns 4 million tons of coal each
    year. If you multiply 4 million tons by 1 part per million, you get
    4 tons of uranium. Most of that is U238. About .7% is U235. 4
    tons = 8000 pounds. 8000 pounds times .7% = 56 pounds of U235. An
    average 1 billion watt coal fired power plant puts out 56 to 112
    pounds of U235 every year. There are only 2 places the uranium can
    go: Up the stack or into the cinders.

    Since
    a reactor full fuel load is around 11 tons of 2% U235 and 98% U238,
    and one load lasts about 10 years, what one coal fired power plant
    puts into the air and cinders could fully fuel a nuclear power plant.

    Compare
    4 Million tons per year with 1.1 tons per year. 1.1 divided by 4
    Million = 2.75 E -7 = .000000275 =.0000275%. Remember that only 2%
    of that is U235. The nuclear power plant needs ~44 pounds of U235
    per year. The coal fired power plant burns coal by the trainload.
    The nuclear power plant consumes U235 in such small quantities yearly
    that you could carry that much weight in a briefcase.

    3.
    See the rest of Alex Gabbard’s article. U238 can be bred into
    Plutonium and Thorium can be bred into Uranium. We can fuel our
    nuclear power plants for CENTURIES just by extracting uranium and
    thorium from coal cinders and smoke.

    See:
    http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/coalmain.html

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    There is no such thing as nuclear “waste.”   It is perfectly good fuel for the IFR [Integral Fast Reactor] that is being wasted.   As for the fragments of atoms, they can be used to treat prostate cancer.   Please read “Prescr_iption for the Planet” by Tom Blees, 2008.   The IFR eats nuclear waste.

    “Power to Save the World; The Truth About Nuclear Energy” by Gwyneth Cravens, 2007

    book:  “Environmentalists for Nuclear Energy”

    http://www.comby.org/livres/livresen.htm

    See:  http://bravenewclimate.org

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Chernobyl:  Another expert wrote to me: “The reactor that had the accident at Chernobyl was very out-of-date (1st generation) design that has to be precisely controlled to prevent cooling water from boiling. Water carries away heat and moderates far better than bubbles, and as bubbles form in water, the reactor goes increasingly unstable. What caused Chernobyl to blow its top was residual water in the core suddenly going to high pressure steam and erupting into a steam explosion. Since the building top was simply resting by its weight on the walls, not a containment vessel at all, the steam explosion burped the top off its position allowing outside air in, subsequently igniting a carbon fire.”    The United States and other Western countries DO NOT now build and do not now posses or operate ANY reactors of such primitive design.   Nor do we allow containment buildings to have easily removable tops.   Containment buildings in the Western hemisphere are required to be pressure vessels.”
    The Chernobyl accident released only 200 tons of radioactive material, as much as a coal-fired power plant would release in 7 years and 5 months.   The Chernobyl accident had a shorter “stack” than coal-fired power plants.   The radioactive material was released in a short time at ground level.   That is why the Chernobyl accident had impact.   Only 52 people died at Chernobyl , mostly fire fighters, a hazardous job in any case.   The Three Mile Island incident did NOT release a noticeable amount of radiation into its neighborhood, it was just expensive to clean up the inside of the reactor.   Nobody died and nobody was injured at Three Mile Island.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    You are hopelessly ignorant of things nuclear.   Quit talking and go to college.   Get a degree in physics or nuclear engineering before writing any more.    The more radioactive something is, the SHORTER its half life.   Things that are radioactive for millions of years are not very radioactive.   Everything that is not radioactive is radioactive for all eternity.   Things that are very radioactive quit being radioactive quickly.   It is a reciprocal relationship.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    DailyScrawl:
    COAL pollution kills 24000 Americans every year: “Prescription
    for the Planet” by Tom Blees, 2008

    Coal
    kills 1 Million Chinese every year.

    “proliferation,”

    Power
    plants make Plutonium 240. Bombs require plutonium 239. The
    proliferation argument doesn’t work.

    “dirty
    bombs in the hands of terrorists,” Let me get this straight.
    You want the terrorist to dive into a pool of molten metal and swim
    down to the reactor vessel. Right? Why do you suppose you are not
    taken seriously?

    Wind and solar cannot replace coal.
    Nuclear can.

    “I do feel that” “Feel”
    is the problem. Quit feeling and start thinking. To think means
    to do math. Chernobyl is not relevant. Nuclear
    power is the safest kind, bar none, for everybody.

    Deaths
    per terrawatt year [twy] for energy industries, including

    Chernobyl.
    terra=mega mega [There are zero sources of energy

    that
    cause zero deaths, but not having the electricity causes the

    far
    more deaths because not having electricity is a form of poverty.]

    fuel………
    …fatalities… ..who……deaths per twy

    coal………6400……
    …workers………342

    natural
    gas..1200…..workers and public..85

    hydro……..
    .4000….. .public…….. …….883

    nuclear……..31……
    …workers………… ……8

    Nuclear
    power is proven to be the safest. Source: “The Revenge of
    Gaia” by James Lovelock page 102. As you can see,
    psychological problems are preventing the wider use of nuclear power.
    Chernobyl is included.

    I
    have no connection with the nuclear power industry. I have never
    had any connection with the nuclear power industry. I am not being
    paid by anyone to say this. My sole motive is to avoid death in the
    collapse of civilization and to avoid extinction due to global
    warming.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    There is no  impact of the March 2011 nuclear disaster in Japan on the food we eat here in the USA.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Dr. Helen Caldicott is a coal industry shill.   She is trying to get nuclear power plants replaced with coal fired power plants.   Chernobyl put as much radiation into the environment as a coal fired power plant does in 7 years and 5 months.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    You are wrong.   The Chernobyl accident/fire released as much radiation as a coal fired power plant does in 7 years and 5 months.
    http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/coalmain.html

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    You are wrong.   Actually read my other comments and web site.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Releases in 1982 from worldwide combustion of 2800 million tons of coal totaled 3640 tons of uranium (containing 51,700 pounds of uranium-235) and 8960 tons of thorium.
    http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/coalmain.html

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    EVACUATE DENVER!!!!

    If you live in Chernobyl the total radiation dose you get each year is 390 millirem.   That’s natural plus residual from the accident and fire.   In Denver, Colorado, the natural dose is over 1000 millirem/year.   Denver gets more than 2.56 times as much  radiation as Chernobyl!   But Denver has a low cancer rate.

    Calculate your annual radiation dose:

    http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/dosechart/

    The Average American gets 361 millirems/year.   Smokers add 280 millirems/year from lead210.   Radon accounts for 200 mrem/year.

    http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/rp/factsheets/factsheets-htm/fs10bkvsman.htm

    http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/doses-daily-lives.html

    Although radiation may cause cancers at high doses and high dose rates, currently there are no data to unequivocally establish the occurrence of cancer following exposure to low doses and dose rates — below about 10,000 mrem (100 mSv). Those people living in areas having high levels of background radiation — above 1,000 mrem (10 mSv) per year– such as Denver, Colorado have shown no adverse biological effects.

    http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/bio-effects-radiation.html

    Calculations based on data from NCRP reports show that the average level of natural background radiation (NBR) in Rocky Mountain states is 3.2 times that in Gulf Coast states. However, data from the American Cancer Society show that age-adjusted overall cancer death in Gulf Coast states is actually 1.26 times higher than in Rocky Mountain states. The difference from proportionality is a factor of 4.0. This is a clear negative correlation of NBR with overall cancer death. It is also shown that, comparing 3 Rocky Mountain states and 3 Gulf Coast states, there is a strong negative correlation of estimated lung cancer mortality with natural radon levels (factors of 5.7 to 7.5).

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9753369

    All natural rocks contain most natural elements.   Coal is a rock.   The average concentration of uranium in coal is 1 or 2 parts per million.  Illinois coal contains up to 103 parts per million uranium.   Coal also contains the radioactive decay products of uranium.   A 1000 million watt coal fired power plant burns 4 million tons of coal each year.   If you multiply 4 million tons by 1 part per million, you get 4 tons of uranium.   Most of that is U238.   About .7% is U235.   4 tons = 8000 pounds.   8000 pounds times .7% = 56 pounds of U235.   An average 1 billion watt coal fired power plant puts out 56 to 112 pounds of U235 every year.   There are only 2 places the uranium can go: Up the stack or into the cinders.

    Since a reactor full fuel load is around 11 tons of 2% U235 and 98% U238, and one load lasts about 10 years,  what one coal fired power plant puts into the air and cinders could fully fuel a nuclear power plant.

    Compare 4 Million tons per year with 1.1 tons per year.   1.1 divided by 4 Million = 2.75 E -7 = .000000275 =.0000275%.   Remember that only 2% of that is U235.   The nuclear power plant needs ~44 pounds of U235 per year.   The coal fired power plant burns coal by the trainload.   The nuclear power plant consumes U235 in such small quantities yearly that you could carry that much weight in a briefcase.

    3.   See the rest of Alex Gabbard’s article.   U238 can be bred into Plutonium and Thorium can be bred into Uranium.   We can fuel our nuclear power plants for CENTURIES just by extracting uranium and thorium from coal cinders and smoke.

    See:   http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/coalmain.html

  • Anonymous

    Nuke proponents, why won’t the free market insure these things? Why won’t the free market build nuke plants?

  • Anonymous

    Are you on the nuke dole?

  • Anonymous

    Are you on the nuke dole?

  • Anonymous

    Are you on the nuke dole?

  • Anonymous

    Are you on the nuke dole?

  • Anonymous

    Are you on the nuke dole?

  • Anonymous

    You’re on the nuke dole!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_KJ3XGZQGTDTB7YUEW36YAMEQ74 QuietStormX

    My Answer is, YES! I have no issue with it on bit. We just need something to do with the waste.

  • Anonymous

    Again, I ask, Nuke proponents, why won’t the free market insure these things? Why isn’t the free market investing in them?

  • http://growthisnotsustainable.blogspot.com/ Growth is not sustainable

    People act like CO2 is harmless waste. It is not. CO2 is an existential threat to civilization.

  • look forward

    Hundreds of years using fossil fuels has not eliminated the pollution.  A few decades of nuclear has shown some issues that can be overcome with the experience and technology we have now.  Quit using the emotion of accidents to block the solution to future energy needs.

  • Radioactive children

     

     

    TEPCO
    funds chair/professsorship at MIT — Nuclear researcher: “Nuclear researchers
    have a stake in reassuring the pubic that nothing bad is happening”

    http://enenews.com/tepco-funds-chairprofesssorship-at-mit-nuclear-researcher-nuclear-researchers-have-a-stake-in-reassuring-the-pubic-that-nothing-bad-is-happening

     

     

    Cesium contamination stretches to Japan’s west coast —
    Asahi: Over 30,000 Bq/m² in Nagano, 250 km from meltdowns (MAP)

     

    http://enenews.com/map-shows-cesium-contamination-stretching-japans-west-coast-30000-bqm-nagano-250-km-meltdowns-map

     

     

    ABC
    Australia: Former special adviser says Japan “too scared” to tell people the
    truth about Fukushima future

    http://enenews.com/abc-former-special-adviser-japan-scared-people-return-fukushima-govt-conveyed-truth

     

     

    New Gov’t Radiation Map Released: “Many people
    dismayed” — Contamination 50 miles NW of Tokyo in Gunma “looks worse than
    feared” (MAPS)

    http://enenews.com/new-govt-radiation-map-released-contamination-50-miles-nw-tokyo-gunma-looks-worse-feared-many-people-dismayed-maps

     

     

     

     

     

    Prime Minister Kan: I
    thought nuke mishap could destroy Tokyo

    http://enenews.com/prime-minister-kan-thought-nuke-mishap-could-destroy-tokyo

    http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2011090715968

    Kan said,
    “If the power company had pulled out of the facility and left nuclear fuel
    unattended, the cooling water would have dried out within dozens of hours and
    the meltdown of reactors would have occurred,” adding, “If this had been the case, radioactive
    materials several or even dozens of times as much as those leaked in Chernobyl
    would had leaked. The country was brought to the brink of collapse.”

    IT WAS THE CASE.    

    ALL THREE REACTORS DID MELT DOWN, ONE OR
    MORE MELTED OUT, AND ONE OR MORE ARE STILL FISSIONING. 

    According to news stories below and on the
    enenews.com website, the pipes broke and the Fukushima reactors were doomed to
    meltdown even before the tsunami hit, and the Japanese government leadership
    had that prediction handed to them right after the quake.

     

    Quake over twice as
    strong as North Anna nuke plant’s containment structure was designed to
    withstand: Feds

    http://enenews.com/just-in-feds-virginia-quake-more-than-twice-as-strong-as-north-anna-nuke-plants-containment-structure-was-designed-to-withstand

     

     

     

    U.S. Nuclear News Roundup: Ft. Calhoun close to shut
    down — Falsified tests in NY — North Anna restart to take months? — Leak in CT

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-news-roundup-ft-calhoun-downgrade-falsified-tests-ny-north-anna-restart-months

     

     

     

     

    Dr. Koide: Massive
    amounts of radioactivity may again be released from Fukushima — Mentions “steam
    explosion” from melted fuel hitting water

    http://enenews.com/dr-koide-massive-amounts-radioactivity-again-be-released-fukushima-mentions-steam-explosion-melted-fuel-hitting-water

     

    “Fukushima in
    recriticality”? — Iodine-131 detected in 4 locations: Tokyo, Iwate, Nagano,
    Niigata (CHARTS)

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-in-recriticality-iodine-131-detected-in-4-locations-tokyo-iwate-nagano-niigata

     

    Iodine-131
    now being detected in large amounts almost 200 km from Fukushima meltdowns September 7th, 2011 at 04:03 PM

    http://enenews.com/breaking-iodine-131-detected-large-amounts-almost-200-km-fukushima-meltdowns

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Plutonium-238,
    239, 240 detected at Fukushima playground on August 15 — TEPCO admits they
    consider it to be from triple meltdown

    http://enenews.com/plutonium-238-239-240-detected-fukushima-playground-august-15-tepco-admits-consider-be-triple-meltdown

     

    Mainichi:
    105 microsieverts per hour found outside no-entry zone

    http://enenews.com/mainichi-105-microsieverts-per-hour-found-outside-no-entry-zone

     

    *After
    Cleanup* High school: 7.9 microsieverts/hour — Day care center: 7.1
    microsieverts/hour

    http://enenews.com/after-cleanup-high-school-7-9-microsievertshour-day-care-center-7-1-microsievertshour

     

    Japan
    gov’t finds 165 locations over wide area with cesium-137 exceeding Chernobyl
    evacuation levels — Data shows radiation could be “spreading to other areas”

    http://enenews.com/japan-govt-finds-165-locations-wide-area-cesium-137-exceeding-chernobyl-evacuation-levels-data-shows-radiation-could-be-spreading-other-areas

     

    40-year-old
    Fukushima radiation worker dies of acute leukemia after working at plant for
    week — Checkup showed no prior health problems

    http://enenews.com/40-year-old-fukushima-radiation-worker-dies-of-acute-leukemia-after-working-at-plant-for-week-checkup-showed-no-prior-health-problems

     

    School
    playground staircase has radiation at 70 times maximum allowed, far from
    evacuation zone — Equal to 69 millisieverts per year

    http://enenews.com/school-playground-staircase-has-radiation-at-70-times-maximum-allowed-far-from-evacuation-zone-equal-to-69-millisieverts-per-year

     

    Report:
    76 trillion becquerels of Plutonium-239 released from Fukushima — 23,000 times
    higher than previously announced

    http://enenews.com/report-76-trillion-becquerels-plutonium-239-released-fukushima-23000-times-higher-previously-announced

     

    Independent:
    Why Fukushima is worse than Chernobyl; “Now the truth is coming out” — 72,000
    times worse than Hiroshima & 1 million+ cancer deaths, says professor

    http://enenews.com/independent-why-fukushima-is-worse-than-chernobyl-now-the-truth-is-coming-out-72000-times-worse-than-hiroshima-1-million-cancer-deaths-says-professor

     

    US nuke
    agency confirms “initial explosions at Fukushima were very likely ejections of
    core material”: Analyst (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nuke-agency-confirms-initial-explosions-fukushima-very-ejections-core-material-analyst-video

     

    300,000+ bq/m² of radioactive
    iodine deposited in areas near Tokyo before end of March: Japan study — Only
    includes I-131 (MAP)

     

    http://enenews.com/300000-bqm-radioactive-iodine-deposited-areas-tokyo-march-japan-study-only-includes-131-map

     

    Paper:
    Japan raising radiation limit to 20 millisieverts/year leads to 160,000
    lifetime cancers per million people

    http://enenews.com/paper-japan-raising-radiation-limit-20-millisievertsyear-leads-160000-lifetime-cancers-million-people

     

    Wired.com: Fukushima on
    the Mississippi? NRC says New Madrid fault “major area of concern” — 15 nuke
    plants in zone

     

    http://enenews.com/wired-com-fukushima-on-the-mississippi-nrc-says-new-madrid-fault-major-area-of-concern-15-nuke-plants-in-zone

     

    Bloomberg:
    ‘Hot Spots’ Spreading — Gov’t to check radiation up to 460 km from meltdowns

    http://enenews.com/bloomberg-hot-spots-spreading-govt-to-check-radiation-up-to-460-km-from-meltdowns

     

    Gundersen:
    Radioactive sulfur in California shows there were ongoing criticalities,
    recurring chain reactions (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/gundersen-radioactive-sulfur-detection-california-shows-ongoing-criticalities-recurring-chain-reactions-video

     

    Nuclear
    engineer: NRC now says reactors and containments have breached and released
    plutonium off-site — “Much worse” than if from spent fuel pools (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nrc-chunks-radioactive-materials-found-around-fukushima-reactor-cores-spent-fuel-pools-worse-sfps-nuclear-engineer-video

     

    Japan gov’t to finally
    admit indefinite forced depopulation of large zones around Fukushima plant

    http://enenews.com/japan-govt-finally-admit-indefinite-forced-depopulation-large-zones-around-fukushima-plant

     

    Tokyo-area
    soil testing finds radioactivity up to Chernobyl relocation levels — 919,000
    Bq/m² (MAP)

    http://enenews.com/tokyo-area-soil-testing-finds-radioactivity-at-chernobyl-relocation-levels-at-least-550000-bqm%c2%b2-map

     

    229 millisieverts/year
    of cumulative radiation in town outside exclusion zone — Exposure limit for
    ordinary people is 1 millisievert/year

    http://enenews.com/229-millisievertsyear-cumulative-radiation-town-exclusion-zone-exposure-limit-ordinary-people-1-millisievertyear

     

    Radioactive
    cesium now contaminating rice, boar meat — Both found outside Fukushima Pref.

    http://enenews.com/cesium-now-detected-in-rice-boars

     

    Fukushima
    worker on camera: “The holes and cracks in the ground are terrifying” (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-worker-camera-holes-cracks-ground-terrifying-video

     

    Fukushima mom comes to
    Portland: “10-year-old son started having symptoms — Nose bleeding and fevers”

     

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-mom-comes-to-portland-10-year-old-son-started-having-symptoms-nose-bleeding-and-fevers

     

    Report:
    Nuclear fuel fragments found over a mile away were “ejected from the reactor
    cores in those explosions” not spent fuel pools, according to NRC (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/report-nuclear-fuel-fragments-found-mile-away-ejected-reactor-cores-explosions-according-nrc-video

     

     

     

    Dr. Kodama: Tokyo
    radiation “continuously high” since raining on March 21

    http://enenews.com/dr-kodama-tokyo-radiation-continuously-high-raining-march-21-worse-recent-detection-extremely-high-radiation-levels-fukushima-plant

     

    Doctor
    near Tokyo attributes symptoms to radiation exposure: We have begun to see
    increased nosebleeds, stubborn cases of diarrhea, and flu-like symptoms in
    children

    http://enenews.com/doctor-tokyo-attributes-symptoms-radiation-exposure-begun-increased-nosebleeds-stubborn-cases-diarrhea-flu-like-symptoms-children

     

    10 trillion becquerels
    per hour of radiation currently being released from Fukushima plant: Researcher
    (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/10-trillion-becquerels-hour-being-released-fukushima-plant-researcher-video

     

    Highest
    Yet: 412 sieverts/hr in Reactor No. 1 dry well — Japan says ‘defective meter’

    http://enenews.com/highest-yet-412-sievertshr-in-reactor-no-1-dry-well-japan-says-defective-meter

     

    Fukushima
    plant worker: Even higher than 10,000 millisievert/hr at many spots in reactor
    buildings 1, 2 and 3

    http://enenews.com/fukushima-plant-worker-higher-10000-millisieverthr-many-spots-reactor-buildings-1-2-3

     

    Researcher:
    Tokyo sample had radioactivity levels higher than in Chernobyl exclusion zone —
    “There’s a very, very high level of contamination even as far south as Tokyo”
    (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/researcher-tokyo-sample-had-radioactivity-levels-higher-than-in-chernobyl-exclusion-zone-theres-a-very-very-high-level-of-contamination-even-as-far-south-as-tokyo-video

     

    Report:
    Gov’t source says “I’ve heard about the steam coming out from the ground, and I
    am concerned” — “Some kind of reaction may be occurring underground” writes
    plant worker

    http://enenews.com/report-govt-source-ive-heard-about-steam-coming-ground-concerned-kind-reaction-be-occurring-underground-writes-plant-worker

     

    Purged:
    Whistle-blowers who reported detection of neptunium-239 far from plant have TV
    show cancelled

    http://enenews.com/purged-whistle-blowers-who-reported-detection-of-neptunium-239-far-from-plant-have-tv-show-cancelled

     

    Report:
    Workers say ground under Fukushima plant is cracking and radioactive steam is
    coming up — Melted core may be moving out of building (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/very-serious-and-alarming-development-workers-say-ground-under-fukushima-plant-is-cracking-and-radioactive-steam-is-coming-through-melted-cores-may-be-moving-out-of-buildings-video

     

    Independent: The
    explosive truth behind Fukushima’s meltdown — New evidence suggests reactors
    doomed to fail

    http://enenews.com/telegraph-explosive-truth-behind-fukushimas-meltdown-new-evidence-suggests-reactors-doomed-fail

     

    186,000
    bq/kg of radioactive cesium found 100 km from Fukushima plant

    http://enenews.com/186000-bqkg-radioactive-cesium-found-100-km-fukushima-plant

     

    Nursery
    School: Geiger counter “nearly off the scale” near play equipment — Topsoil had
    already been replaced (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nursery-school-geiger-counter-nearly-off-the-scale-near-play-equipment-topsoil-had-already-been-replaced-video

     

    Rainout
    of hot particles from radioactive clouds to continue for another year — Not
    just in Pacific Northwest, says Gundersen (AUDIO)

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-clouds-rainout-hot-particles-continue-another-year-pacific-northwest-gundersen-audio

     

    Radioactive iodine found
    in 50 percent of children’s thyroids — Up to 35 millisieverts (35,000
    microsieverts)

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-iodine-found-in-50-percent-of-childrens-thyroids-up-to-35-millisieverts-35000-microsieverts

     

    Tweets
    from Japan: “When we wash their hair, it comes off in a clump — It is really
    scary”

    http://enenews.com/tweets-japan-when-wash-hair-comes-clump-really-scary

     

    NHK
    Special: Japan researchers found radiation levels exceeding most contaminated
    zone in Chernobyl called Red Forest (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/nhk-special-researchers-find-radiation-levels-exceeding-contaminated-zone-chernobyl-called-red-forest-video

     

    Report:
    “Severe internal exposure” — 252,422 Becquerels of radioactive cesium detected
    in person outside evacuation zone (PHOTO)

    http://enenews.com/report-severe-internal-exposure-252422-becquerels-radioactive-cesium-detected-person-evacuation-zone-photo

     

    Report:
    17 microsieverts/hr detected on cars from Japan — Russia rejects shipment

    http://enenews.com/report-17-microsievertshr-detected-on-cars-from-japan-russia-rejects-shipment

     

    TEPCO
    funds chair/professsorship at MIT — Nuclear researcher: “Nuclear researchers
    have a stake in reassuring the pubic that nothing bad is happening”

    http://enenews.com/tepco-funds-chairprofesssorship-at-mit-nuclear-researcher-nuclear-researchers-have-a-stake-in-reassuring-the-pubic-that-nothing-bad-is-happening

     

    ABC: Japan’s nuclear
    agency hides children’s radiation results

    http://enenews.com/abc-japans-nuclear-agency-hides-childrens-radiation-results

     

    Egypt
    finds shipment from Japan with radioactive electric and mechanical instruments
    — Exceeded legal limit — Authorities trying to keep radiation from spreading

    http://enenews.com/egypt-finds-shipment-japan-radioactive-electric-mechanical-instruments-exceeded-legal-limit-authorities-trying-keep-radiation-spreading

     

    Panel:
    Nuke plant operator behind fake email campaign also destroyed documents sought
    by investigators about public support for MOX fuel

    http://enenews.com/nuke-plant-operator-behind-fake-email-campaign-destroyed-documents-about-public-support-mox-fuel

     

    New data
    shows Fukushima Daini nuke plant prepared to vent steam from all four reactors
    — Feared that containment vessels might be damaged by pressure

    http://enenews.com/new-data-shows-fukushima-daini-nuke-plant-prepared-to-vent-steam-from-all-four-reactors-feared-that-containment-vessels-might-be-damaged-by-pressure

     

    Report:
    Tokyo man tests positive for over 7,000 Becquerels of radioactive cesium during
    whole body counter check — Never went to Fukushima (RESULTS)

    http://enenews.com/tokyo-man-tests-positive-for-over-7000-becquerels-of-radioactive-cesium-during-whole-body-counter-check-never-went-to-fukushima

     

    NYT:
    Authorities hid radioactive plume forecasts to avoid evacuations, officials
    reveal — Mayor says akin to “murder”

    http://enenews.com/nyt-mayor-japan-govt-actions-akin-murder-authorities-hid-plume-forecasts-avoid-evacuations-officials-reveal

     

    “Most” of
    the fuel at Reactor No. 3 may have breached vessel after melting down twice

    http://enenews.com/fuel-reactor-3-breached-vessel-after-melting-down-again

     

    Japan
    nuclear expert: Massive “re-melting” occurred at Reactor No. 3 (DIAGRAM)

    http://enenews.com/japan-nuclear-expert-massive-re-melting-at-reactor-no-3-fuel-dropped-to-containment-vessel-diagram

     

    “Stone-cold
    evidence that earthquake testing at US plants has been faked” — MORE: “Four
    nervous whistleblowers ready to tell their horror stories”

    http://enenews.com/stone-cold-evidence-earthquake-testing-plants-faked-four-nervous-whistleblowers-ready-horror-stories

     

    Oklahoma
    City rain at 1.62 microsieverts per hour — “Dangerous Radiation Background”
    (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/oklahoma-city-rain-162-microsieverts-hour-dangerous-radiation-background-video

     

    Tweet: 2 sieverts per hour found at surface of water
    in basement — Worker says “outrageous” radiation level from melted-through fuel

     

    http://enenews.com/tweet-2-sieverts-per-hour-found-at-surface-of-water-in-basement-worker-says-outrageous-radiation-level-from-melted-through-fuel

     

    NRC commissioner:
    Fukushima was not unthinkable at all — The secret that everybody knows but
    nobody wants to say anything about

    http://enenews.com/nrc-commissioner-fukushima-unthinkable-all-secret-everybody-anything-about

     

    ABC
    affiliate: “New and amazing things” being uncovered every day at Fukushima nuke
    plant — “Deadly Easter eggs” generating radiation higher than 10 Sv/hr

    http://enenews.com/abc-affiliate-new-and-amazing-things-being-uncovered-every-day-at-fukushima-nuke-plant-deadly-easter-eggs-generating-radiation-higher-than-10-svhr

     

    Nuclear
    plant workers developed cancer despite radiation exposure below legal limit —
    As little as 5 millisieverts

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-plant-workers-developed-cancer-despite-radiation-exposure-below-legal-limit-as-little-as-5-millisieverts

    Localized
    criticality happening now: Blue flashing light over Fukushima — “Not good news”
    says Fox (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/localized-criticality-happening-now-blue-flashing-light-seen-over-fukushima-not-good-news-says-fox-video

     

    there are currently
    94 pages of news article synopses at this website

     

    the following
    page photo shows what in all likelihood was uranium and plutonium burning. 

    http://enenews.com/massive-black-cloud-coming-fukushima-1-atomic-plant-photo

    http://enenews.com/massive-black-cloud-coming-fukushima-1-atomic-plant-photo

    Up to 4,700 tons
    of nuclear fuel may have been involved in the 4 reactors and associated spent
    fuel storage pools.  Only 40% of ‘spent
    fuel’ is actually ‘used up’, 60% remains unused because the zirconium cladding
    becomes too damaged to use the rods for fuel.

     

     

     

    “Stone-coldevidence
    that earthquake testing at US plants has been faked” — MORE: “Fournervous
    whistleblowers ready to tell their horror stories”

    http://enenews.com/stone-cold-evidence-earthquake-testing-plants-faked-four-nervous-whistleblowers-ready-horror-stories

     
    Yeah, right, we should build more reactors.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Radioactive children

     

     

    GE
    Hitachi: 35 U.S. reactors could fail during quake — Problem with control rods

    http://enenews.com/ge-hitachi-35-u-s-reactors-could-fail-during-quake-problem-with-control-rods

     

    Kyoto-area Professor: “I can’t believe this is going
    on! This is a nightmare” — “I’m just afraid this has dealt a near-fatal blow to
    Japan” — “Japan has lost its future” (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/professor-believe-going-nightmare-im-afraid-dealt-fatal-blow-japan-japan-lost-future-video

     

    Japan Gov’t: Plutonium
    will no longer be measured — Almost impossible for normal person to detect, as
    geiger counters are ineffective

    http://enenews.com/japan-govt-plutonium-will-longer-be-measured-almost-impossible-normal-person-detect-geiger-counters-ineffective

     

    Regrets: Mother finds 20
    times higher radioactivity than normal in child’s bedroom — “The national
    government and TEPCO kept saying it’s alright and I believed them”

    http://enenews.com/regrets-mother-finds-20-times-higher-radioactivity-normal-childs-bedroom-national-government-tepco-kept-alright-believed

    (0.95 microsievert/hour is 8.322
    millisieverts per year)

    Nuclear
    plant workers developed cancer despite radiation exposure below legal limit —
    As little as 5 millisieverts

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-plant-workers-developed-cancer-despite-radiation-exposure-below-legal-limit-as-little-as-5-millisieverts

     

     

    *After
    Cleanup* High school: 7.9 microsieverts/hour — Day care center: 7.1
    microsieverts/hour

    http://enenews.com/after-cleanup-high-school-7-9-microsievertshour-day-care-center-7-1-microsievertshour

     

    Radioactive iodine found
    in 50 percent of children’s thyroids — Up to 35 millisieverts (35,000
    microsieverts)

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-iodine-found-in-50-percent-of-childrens-thyroids-up-to-35-millisieverts-35000-microsieverts

     

     

    Professor
    in Japan: Gov’t blatantly under-reporting radiation data — “It will become
    common knowledge that the contamination has come far beyond what is being
    reported in the media” (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/professor-in-kyoto-japan-govt-blatantly-under-reporting-radiation-data-it-will-become-common-knowledge-that-the-contamination-has-come-far-beyond-what-is-being-reported-in-the-media-video

     

     

    Radioactivity up to 100
    trillion becquerels per liter in sludge at Fukushima plant: Kyoto nuke
    professor

    http://enenews.com/radioactivity-100-trillion-becquerels-liter-sludge-fukushima-plant-kyoto-nuke-professor

     

     

    Recriticality may be happening continuously”
    — Iodine-131 detected in Nagasaki, Miyagi (CHARTS)

    http://enenews.com/recriticality-be-happening-continuously-iodine-131-detected-nagasaki-miyagi-charts

     

    Highest Yet: 512 Sv/hr at
    Reactor No. 1 — Still reads ‘defective meter’ (CHART)

    http://enenews.com/highest-reactor-1-tops-500-svhr

     

    Newly released data shows
    Iodine-131 found multiple times in Ibaraki — 320 Bq/kg in Hitachi sludge,
    previous test had none (CHARTS)

    http://enenews.com/newly-released-data-shows-iodine-131-found-multiple-times-ibaraki-320-bqkg-takahagi-previous-test

    Cesium
    nearly doubles over past month in Bay Area milk — Now well above EPA’s maximum
    contaminant level

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-cesium-doubles-bay-area-milk-last-month-above-epas-maximum-contaminant-level

    (San Francisco Bay)  radioactive cesium half life 30 years

     

     

    Japan Professor: Gov’t
    afraid to tell truth — Radiation 10 times higher than officials claim on Sept.
    30 near Kyoto, 500 km from meltdowns

    http://enenews.com/radiation-10-times-higher-japan-govt-claims-sept-30-kyoto-500-km-meltdowns

     

    Paper: Japan raising
    radiation limit to 20 millisieverts/year leads to 160,000 lifetime cancers per
    million people

    http://enenews.com/paper-japan-raising-radiation-limit-20-millisievertsyear-leads-160000-lifetime-cancers-million-people

     

     

    Gov’t:
    Plutonium dose at 27 microsieverts in Namiemachi — Will remain “for about 50
    years” (MAP)

    http://enenews.com/govt-plutonium-27-microsieverts-namiemachi-will-remain-about-50-years-map

     

    Fukushima Part II? Tokyo
    to begin burning massive amounts of radioactive waste from disaster area —
    Burns will continue for at least 2.5 years, until March 2014 (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/tokyo-begin-burning-radioactive-waste-disaster-area-will-continue-march-2014-city-process-1-billion-pounds

     

    Recent
    US nuke headlines: Problems at nuke plants in Vermont, Michigan, South
    Carolina, Virginia… MORE

     

    http://enenews.com/recent-nuke-headlines-problems-nuke-plants-vermont-michigan-south-carolina

     

    Radioactive
    leak of unknown size at Georgia nuke plant — Raised water table in wells “about
    five feet” — Tritium over 200 times EPA limit

    http://enenews.com/radioactive-leak-unknown-size-georgia-nuke-plant-raised-water-table-test-wells-about-five-feet-radioactivity-200-times-epa-limit-move-nearby-river

     

    Michigan nuclear plant releasing
    radioactive steam into environment after unexpected shutdown

     

    http://enenews.com/michigan-nuke-plant-releasing-radioactive-steam-environment-after-unplanned-shutdown

     

     

    Mystery fire at Ft. Calhoun nuke
    plant: Disabled ability to cool spent fuel pool — Feds sending special team of
    inspectors to learn more — Reactor will not restart until cause determined

     

    http://enenews.com/mystery-fire-at-ft-calhoun-nuke-plant-disabled-ability-to-cool-spent-fuel-pool-feds-sending-special-team-of-inspectors-to-learn-more-reactor-will-not-restart-until-cause-determined

     

     

    U.S. Nuclear News Roundup: Ft.
    Calhoun close to shut down — Falsified tests in NY — North Anna restart to take
    months? — Leak in CT

     

    http://enenews.com/nuclear-news-roundup-ft-calhoun-downgrade-falsified-tests-ny-north-anna-restart-months

     

     

    SoCal
    reactors trip offline — Most extensive power outage in state history — Massive
    explosion heard near substation — First time entire system has been lost — 5
    million affected

    http://enenews.com/socal-reactors-trip-offline-most-extensive-power-outage-in-state-history-massive-explosion-heard-near-substation-first-time-entire-system-has-been-lost-5-million-affected

     

     

    Report: Manure with 255 CPM bought in
    Southern California (VIDEO)

    http://enenews.com/report-manure-255-cpm-bought-southern-california-video

     

     

    Officials issue “Code Red” warning of potential dam failure in Maryland —
    15 miles from nuke plant

     

    http://enenews.com/officials-issue-code-red-warning-of-potential-dam-failure-in-maryland-15-miles-from-nuke-plant

     

    “Stone-cold evidence that earthquake testing at US plants
    has been faked” — MORE: “Four nervous whistleblowers ready to tell their horror
    stories”

    http://enenews.com/stone-cold-evidence-earthquake-testing-plants-faked-four-nervous-whistleblowers-ready-horror-stories

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Wired.com:
    Fukushima on the Mississippi? NRC says New Madrid fault “major area of concern”
    — 15 nuke plants in zone

    http://enenews.com/wired-com-fukushima-on-the-mississippi-nrc-says-new-madrid-fault-major-area-of-concern-15-nuke-plants-in-zone

     

    Solar storms threaten nuke plants:
    Electric power outages could last “for years or even decades” — Risk
    significantly outweighs that of major earthquakes

    http://enenews.com/solar-storms-threaten-nuke-plants-power-outages-could-last-years-decades-risk-significantly-outweighs-major-earthquakes

     

     

    US nuke commission
    “essentially lied” about one of worst nuclear disasters in history near Los
    Angeles, up to 240 times Three Mile Island — 13 fuel rods melted with no
    containment (VIDEO)

     

    http://enenews.com/us-nuke-commission-essentially-lied-about-one-of-worst-nuclear-disasters-in-history-near-los-angeles-up-to-240-times-three-mile-island-13-fuel-rods-melted-with-no-containment-video

     

    Hey TEPCO apologists, your industry is a welfare bum relying on government handouts stolen from hard-working citizens, whom you don’t give a damn about and kill with cancer everyday.  If it weren’t for your masters’ news media ownership and control, NOBODY but those on the nuclear teat suck would be for nuclear power.  It’s only a matter of time until your industry wipes out a few US states.  When that happens, considering American behavior these days, there will be mobs stringing you up from electric poles. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Radioactive children

    30 million people in Tokyo alone would beg to differ with you.

  • Radioactive children

    People are still eating Chernobyl, and TMI, and the emissions from every nuke plant in the US, and from Simi Valley, and from Fukushima, and will be for generations.

  • Radioactive children

    A few decades of nuclear have shown that with a certain frequency a large geographic area is routinely rendered uninhabitable for people.

  • Radioactive children

    Nuclear power plants rely on news blackouts and coverrups to remain in business.  We came too close to losing the Corn Belt last June.  If the public, or when, the public finally finds out just what nuclear power means in terms of risk and the every-25-years-or-so ruination of a large geographic area and cancer deaths measured by millions, it’s going to be the end of the industry.

  • Radioactive children

    Hey guy, why don’t you put your body where your mouth is?  Why don’t you move to Fukushima Prefecture if it isn’t all that bad there?

    Why don’t you stay there long enough to be pissing radioactive urine, your lungs are fibrosing from heavy particles, and your joints are getting arthritic from Strontium?

    Why don’t you drink the water, eat the food, and sleep in a radioactive house over there?

    Do all this before you tell us how safe nuclear power is.

  • Radioactive children

    How ignorant you are, and how arrogant.  Japan is essentially destroyed and you tell us nuclear power is safer than living in Colorado?  When a plant melts down in your neighborhood someday, are you going to sing the same honeysweet syrupy song about nuclear power?  No, you’re going to evacuate, and be like the farmers in Japan, the main thought of which is on their mind, “If only it weren’t for the nuclear plant.”

  • Radioactive children

    How idiotic.  Plutonium bomb fuel is born in reactors.  A prompt criticality blew up reactor 3, originating in the spent fuel pool, though the NRC itself said 3 ejected core material.  No nuclear power plant is safe.  When a coal plant has a problem, a boiler explodes, no big deal.  When a nuclear plant melts down, the neighbhoring area for hundreds of miles is contaminated forever.  You expect us to just accept that, after Chernobyl, Fukushima (1-6), covered up Simi Valley, covered up extent of TMI, and all the routine murdering emissions of nuclear power plants against babies, children, and women around every plant?

    What is this, an elementary primer in the safety of nuclear  power, written by an 8th grader, or someone who majored in the wrong field?

  • Radioactive children

    Why don’t you talk about solar flares, like the one in the 1870′s?  And how even the NRC now recognizes this as a real risk, with a real likelihood of affecting reactors?  How such an event could put dozens of reactors in meltdown?  An EMP flare, would be bad enough, but like Fukushima, adding multiple meltdowns to a giant quake and devasting tsunamis just makes it impossible to deal with. 

    You think nuclear power is safe?  Don’t you see that the seeds of our own destruction are sown in 104 reactors around this country, and probably 1.5 times as many spent fuel pools, which are subject to EMP, even just from a solar flare?

    Are backup generators even EMP proof?

    And do you think, if you read accounts of the 1811/1812 series of New Madrid Fault Zone quakes, that the reactor at Memphis or the ones elsewhere in the Zone will survive?  Can you even imagine backup generators remaining in the upright position?  Or their diesel fuel tanks? Or the pipelines, bridges, roads, and runways by which fuel might be delivered?

    Can you tell us if North Anna’s undeground pipes survived?

    Can you tell us what really happened at the Fort Calhoun spent fuel pool?

  • Radioactive children

    What your treasured industry needs is to have the US government liability backing rug pulled out from it, then it needs regular repeated use of Brown’s Gas flame to clean its messes up.

  • Radioactive children

    By the way you can take your global warming one-world-government worship and get out of this country.

  • Anonymous

    Nice piece.  Glad you talked to an opponent, not just the pro-nuke Dr. Lester.

    The main argument that was advanced by Dr. Lester is that we need nuclear power to move away from fossil fuels in the short term, because it will take a while to ramp up solar and wind.

    This seems ridiculous to me.  If nuclear power is known for anything, it is known for its long lead times (typically over 15 years).

    Why not, then, put incentives in place to expand wind and solar by 50% per year, and to provide better solutions to the intermittency problem (which I was surprised Dr. Lester didn’t mention)?

    Moreover, nuclear energy, when the entire lifecycle is considered, is not carbon free.  One analysis I read put nuclear at 1/3 the carbon emissions of traditional power plants.

    Furthermore, Dr. Lester implied that nuclear energy is a good deal, just expensive up-front.  This does not appear to be the case, judging from the history of the industry and the frequent rate-payer bailouts of failed nuclear power schemes.  The following analysis puts the cost of new nuclear energy at 25-30 cents per KWH, not including distribution to customers:
    http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/nuclear_power.html

    Who needs nuclear energy and its destructive mining, as well as its safety, health and security liabilities?

  • Gina Mills

    This is just one of many sources I have that RADIATION is in the food we eat.

    http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/node/2174

    Can you provide a source that can refute the Berkley study?

    Radiation is in  our food from Japan and you are in denial or you are being paid to make posts as part of the disinformation.

  • Gina K Mills

    You are making a lot of false statements about what the people in Japan are faced in terms of radiation that they are being exposed.

    It is a joke to here you say “Japanses are worrying about 1msv/year”.

    I could provide endless links to news sites showing they have readings higher than what you post.

    I guess your working for the government of japan as part of the social media campaign to sweep the radiation problem under the table.

  • Gina K Mills

    “Asteroid Miner”, I thoght your working for the government of japan as part of the social media campaign to sweep the radiation problem under the table but now I am thinking your just a pro nuke advocate because the Japanese would not hire and train someone who would make so many mistakes in posting information.

  • Gina K Mills

    I tried to verify your sources that you provided in the link but the link is broken. Can you repost the information you have that shows total radiation released into the environment from Japan accident 2011 is going to be less than a coal plant.

    Japan accident released huge amounts of radiation, it is a joke you would attempt such a stupid comparison and really think the readers here are stupid enough too believe that a coal plant is releasing more radiation than the accident in Japan. Making it a big lie does not make it true.

    I thought you were a paid nuke consultant who is posting here but your so sloppy with trying to pitch the oppisite spin I instead peg you as a stupid pro nuker in love with there position and close minded. Your fact management is horrible, people see you as stupid because they know what is going on in Japan and you don’t because your to busy watching TV shows and MSN.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    The long lead times for nuclear power are due to one thing: NIMBYism. Almost no one but unemplyed workers want a nuclear power plant around. Look at what became of SHoreham. I suspect that if this recession goes on  long enough and oil prices go up again,(and again…) many localities will  fight over who gets a nuclear plant near their community. The people will look and se how safe they are and they will bid against each other for them.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    You do, Nuclear power does not blow the tops of entire mountains off and push them into local rivers. Nuclear power foes not vent burning methane or unburned  methane into the air making even hydro fracturing an incredibly destructive and environmentally toxic proposition, Nuclear power won’t poison the NY State water table by injecting poisonous fluids into water bearing rock that leak into aquifers.
       Nuclear power and mining are so safe compared to oil, gas and coal mining ans use, that I can only assume you are a writer or worker for a hydrocarbon producer.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    Ignorant and brutal stupidity seems to be a side effect of the desire to drill for oil and blow up mountains to burn the coal.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    Crap. If you could see what a veritable paradise the Pripyat area has become since the people left after the Soviet accident, you’d be amazed. (It is true that the Soviets made the world’s worst and most dangerously run nuclear reactors.) However, if America, German, France and Britain don’t build them; China, and Russia will. Does that prospect make you feel safer?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    American investors don’t like the odds of building nuclear power plants because too many ignorant yahoos throw their votes against them. It will become easier as America becomes poorer but , today, too many viciously ignorant Americans can’t tell the difference between civilian nuclear power generation and a pile of hydrogen bombs.
       Free marketeers hate spending money to convince stupid people of things they should already know: that nuclear power is safe; it will not blow up; it won’t melt down through the center of the earth and come up in Peking, etc., etc. . . .
       After paying to convince people of these things dozens of times only to be rebuffed; wouldn’t you be leery?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    I will come over in my black helicopter to pick you up as I leave.I probe deep!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    “Brown’s gas” is a myth invented by junior high school dropouts who don’t understand chemistry. Whenever you see “Brown’s gas” someone is thinking about free energy for libertarians and perpetual motion.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    Your ignorance is obvious. Explosions such as the one you describe might,(if one actually occurred), are the result of hot metal causing water to superheat, breaking steam down into component gases. Recombination and accidental ignition of such H2 + 2O2 would create a small explosion which would also produce more water.
    Heating pools do not go “critical” and explode with amazing multi kiloton violence and destruction. It ain’t even possible.
       No wonder we Americans are the butt of the world. We can’t tell a gas explosion from an atomic bomb!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_HZBRYNNNY75ZVEBKQ6VW4FNNAQ brutus

    I am surprised you dare go out in sunlight, considering the hard radiation you are exposed to.
    Indeed, Three mile Island was the worst of a couple of dumb accidents in the US. But that was it.
         It was a partial meltdown. But  no more than hydrogen gas escaped and some H2+O2 mixed and ignited and exploded a bit, but the plant was successfully sealed. End of case.
    Accidents happen. We are humans and therefore fallible. But the lesson learned is that complex machines are only as safe as the people who run and control them.

  • Gerard71gerard

    You are absolutely right about the Chernobyl reactor lacking a proper containment building. Also, you are again right about the amount of radioactive materials released into the environment by burning coal. Thanks. I understand that the uranium deposited in the fly ash left over by burning coal is actually worth more than the coal burned in creating that ash. Further, there is significant quantities of thorium present in coal. Thorium is a great fuel source for Fast Neutron Spectrum Reactors, a proven technology that could be fast tracked.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Which proves that journalists don’t know anything about it and get confused.   So what else is new?

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Are you making up the enews yourself?

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    There is no such thing as a “nuke dole.”   I have never received a single penny from the nuclear power industry.   My nuclear experience is with the Department of the Army as a civilian scientist on the testing side of nuclear weapons.   

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    That is nonsense.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Awesome!

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Generation 4 reactors shut down by laws
    of physics.   Human fallibility can’t make them melt down.
    Trying to make them melt down doesn’t even work. Answering
    “Radioactive children” may be pointless. Just flag them.
    Radioactive children may be playing games or is clearly irrational.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    I am not working for anybody right now.   I am retired from the US government.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    It is clearly Japan’s irrational fear of radiation that killed those old people who were evacuated from Fukushima.   The reactor did not harm them.   

    If I lived at Fukushima, and my house had not been damaged by the tsunami, I would not evacuate.  The radiation from the reactor has not exceeded natural background radiation in many inhabited places on Earth.  

    book:  ”Power to Save the World; The Truth About Nuclear Energy” by Gwyneth Cravens, 2007   Gwyneth Cravens is a former anti-nuclear activist.

    Page 77:   Natural gas contains radon, a radioactive gas.

    Page 98:   There is a table of millirems per year from the 

    background in a list of inhabited places.   

    Chernobyl:  490 millirem/year

    Guarapari, Brazil:  3700 millirem/year   [=3.7 rem]

    Tamil Nadu, India:  5300 millirem/year    [=5.3 rem]

    Ramsar, Iran:  8900 to 13200 millirem/year   [=8.9 to 13.2 rem]

    All are natural except for Chernobyl.

    In Denver, Colorado, the natural dose is over 1000 millirem/year.   Denver gets more than 2.56 times as much  radiation as Chernobyl!   But Denver has a low cancer rate.

    Calculate your annual radiation dose:

    http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/dosechart/

    The Average American gets 361 millirems/year.   Smokers add 280 millirems/year from lead210.   Radon accounts for 200 mrem/year.

    http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/rp/factsheets/factsheets-htm/fs10bkvsman.htm

    http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/doses-daily-lives.html

    Coal contains:   URANIUM, …. Thorium, ….   There is so much of these elements in coal that cinders and coal smoke are actually valuable ores.   We should be able to get all the uranium and thorium we need to fuel nuclear power plants for centuries by using cinders and smoke as ore.      See:

    http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/coalmain.html

    Are you working for the coal industry or Koch oil company?

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Are you working for the fossil fuel industry?

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Calculate your annual radiation dose:

    http://www.ans.org/pi/resources/dosechart/

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Sorry, that was aimed at daily scrawl.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Look up “Natural Background Radiation” in wikipedia.    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_background_radiation

    While you are at Wikipedia, look up “radioactive carbon dating” and “Becquerel”.   You get 100 to 400 times as much radiation from a coal fired power plant as from nuclear.   But that is still LESS than  NATURAL BACKGROUND RADIATION.   Coal has a bonus:   Coal contains not only uranium and all of its decay products, coal also contains arsenic.   See:
    http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/coalmain.htmlAlso look up “radioactive carbon dating” of ancient mummies and other objects.Check the half life of radioactive iodine.   It is only 8 days.   There is no radiation in your food from Fukushima.Gina Mills is working for the coal industry.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Power plants make Plutonium240.   Plutonium240 [from power plants] makes bombs that the Department of Defense [DOD] doesn’t want.   They fizzle, yielding only 200 tons equivalent.   Not worth bothering with.   Bad for logistics.  DOD wants only light efficient Pu239 bombs that make big booms.  DOD makes its own Pu239.   Pu239 is hard to make and requires a specialized [short cycle] reactor.   Since ANY plutonium bomb [implosion device] requires technology that is beyond most countries, the technology is also beyond all non-countries.   A 200 ton equivalent explosion would be easier to make with a chemical explosive like RDX.

    U235 bombs are far easier to make than Pu bombs.   Notice that Iran seems to be working on a U235 bomb, not a plutonium bomb.   Iran doesn’t have the technology for a plutonium bomb.   U235 can be used in a simple gun-type device.

  • Anonymous

    You paint solar, wind, geothermal, and other alternative energy proponents as naive, pie-in-the-sky dreamers. Nuclear power has had over half a century of MASSIVE GOVERNMENT investment over every stage of it’s life cycle. When will the cold, calculating, realists, such as private investors and insurers
    warm up to this technology? In short, when will it make money?

  • endlesslyScrolling

    Please try and collapse your posts a little more.  The endless spaces between paragraphs makes your posts impossible to read.  It also makes reading the entire thread much more unpleasant.  Just tighten it up please.

  • Anonymous

    Thanks for helping to make my point.

  • Anonymous

    As I thought, you work for government. Nuclear power can’t and won’t ever stand on it’s own 2 feet, EVER.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    The ORNL [Oak Ridge National Laboratory] link keeps getting messed up.   You have to call the librarian again.   The paper is also available at http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com
    “Coal Combustion:  Nuclear Resource or Danger” by Alex Gabbard.

    Gina K. Mills should quit using the word “stupid.”   

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Some time in the 2050s, under BAU [if we keep on burning coal] agriculture will collapse and civilization will collapse.   The population will collapse from 7 or 9 Billion to less than 1 Million, maybe to zero.

    I agree with GERARD71GERARD.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    The professor at MIT will continue to get his salary regardless.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Downloaded
    from: http://www.ornl.gov/ORNLReview/rev26-34/text/coalmain.html

    Over
    the past few decades, the American public has become increasingly
    wary of nuclear power because of concern about radiation releases
    from normal plant operations, plant accidents, and nuclear waste.
    Except for Chernobyl and other nuclear accidents, releases have been
    found to be almost undetectable in comparison with natural background
    radiation. Another concern has been the cost of producing electricity
    at nuclear plants. It has increased largely for two reasons:
    compliance with stringent government regulations that restrict
    releases of radioactive substances from nuclear facilities into the
    environment and construction delays as a result of public opposition.

    Partly
    because of these concerns about radioactivity and the cost of
    containing it, the American public and electric utilities have
    preferred coal combustion as a power source. Today 52% of the
    capacity for generating electricity in the United States is fueled by
    coal, compared with 14.8% for nuclear energy. Although there are
    economic justifications for this preference, it is surprising for two
    reasons. First, coal combustion produces carbon dioxide and other
    greenhouse gases that are suspected to cause climatic warming, and it
    is a source of sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides, which are harmful
    to human health and may be largely responsible for acid rain. Second,
    although not as well known, releases from coal combustion contain
    naturally occurring radioactive materials–mainly, uranium and
    thorium.

    Former
    ORNL researchers J. P. McBride, R. E. Moore, J. P. Witherspoon, and
    R. E. Blanco made this point in their article “Radiological
    Impact of Airborne Effluents of Coal and Nuclear Plants” in the
    December 8, 1978, issue of Science magazine. They concluded that
    Americans living near coal-fired power plants are exposed to higher
    radiation doses than those living near nuclear power plants that meet
    government regulations. This ironic situation remains true today and
    is addressed in this article.

    The
    fact that coal-fired power plants throughout the world are the major
    sources of radioactive materials released to the environment has
    several implications. It suggests that coal combustion is more
    hazardous to health than nuclear power and that it adds to the
    background radiation burden even more than does nuclear power. It
    also suggests that if radiation emissions from coal plants were
    regulated, their capital and operating costs would increase, making
    coal-fired power less economically competitive.

    Finally,
    radioactive
    elements released in coal ash and exhaust produced by coal combustion
    contain fissionable fuels
    and much larger quantities of fertile materials that can be bred into
    fuels by absorption of neutrons, including those generated in the air
    by bombardment of oxygen, nitrogen, and other nuclei with cosmic
    rays; such fissionable and fertile materials can be recovered from
    coal ash using known technologies. These nuclear materials have
    growing value to private concerns and governments that may want to
    market them for fueling nuclear power plants. However, they are also
    available to those interested in accumulating material for nuclear
    weapons. A solution to this potential problem may be to encourage
    electric utilities to process coal ash and use new trapping
    technologies on coal combustion exhaust to isolate and collect
    valuable metals, such as iron and aluminum, and available nuclear
    fuels.

    Makeup
    of Coal and Ash

    Coal
    is one of the most impure of fuels. Its impurities range from trace
    quantities of many metals, including uranium and thorium, to much
    larger quantities of aluminum and iron to still larger quantities of
    impurities such as sulfur. Products of coal combustion include the
    oxides of carbon, nitrogen, and sulfur; carcinogenic and mutagenic
    substances; and recoverable minerals of commercial value, including
    nuclear fuels naturally occurring in coal.

    Coal
    ash is composed primarily of oxides of silicon, aluminum, iron,
    calcium, magnesium, titanium, sodium, potassium, arsenic, mercury,
    and sulfur plus small quantities of uranium and thorium. Fly ash is
    primarily composed of non-combustible silicon compounds (glass)
    melted during combustion. Tiny glass spheres form the bulk of the fly
    ash.

    Since
    the 1960s particulate precipitators have been used by U.S. coal-fired
    power plants to retain significant amounts of fly ash rather than
    letting it escape to the atmosphere. When functioning properly, these
    precipitators are approximately 99.5% efficient. Utilities also
    collect furnace ash, cinders, and slag, which are kept in cinder
    piles or deposited in ash ponds on coal-plant sites along with the
    captured fly ash.

    Trace
    quantities of uranium in coal range from less than 1 part per million
    (ppm) in some samples to around 10 ppm in others. Generally, the
    amount of thorium contained in coal is about 2.5 times greater than
    the amount of uranium. For a large number of coal samples, according
    to Environmental Protection Agency figures released in 1984, average
    values of uranium and thorium content have been determined to be 1.3
    ppm and 3.2 ppm, respectively. Using these values along with reported
    consumption and projected consumption of coal by utilities provides a
    means of calculating the amounts of potentially recoverable breedable
    and fissionable elements (see sidebar). The concentration of
    fissionable uranium-235 (the current fuel for nuclear power plants)
    has been established to be 0.71% of uranium content.

    Uranium
    and Thorium in Coal and Coal Ash

    As
    population increases worldwide, coal combustion continues to be the
    dominant fuel source for electricity. Fossil fuels’ share has
    decreased from 76.5% in 1970 to 66.3% in 1990, while nuclear energy’s
    share in the worldwide electricity pie has climbed from 1.6% in 1970
    to 17.4% in 1990. Although U.S. population growth is slower than
    worldwide growth, per capita consumption of energy in this country is
    among the world’s highest. To meet the growing demand for
    electricity, the U.S. utility industry has continually expanded
    generating capacity. Thirty years ago, nuclear power appeared to be a
    viable replacement for fossil power, but today it represents less
    than 15% of U.S. generating capacity. However, as a result of low
    public support during recent decades and a reduction in the rate of
    expected power demand, no increase in nuclear power generation is
    expected in the foreseeable future. As current nuclear power plants
    age, many plants may be retired during the first quarter of the 21st
    century, although some may have their operation extended through
    license renewal. As a result, many nuclear plants are likely to be
    replaced with coal-fired plants unless it is considered feasible to
    replace them with fuel sources such as natural gas and solar energy.

    As
    the world’s population increases, the demands for all resources,
    particularly fuel for electricity, is expected to increase. To meet
    the demand for electric power, the world population is expected to
    rely increasingly on combustion of fossil fuels, primarily coal. The
    world has about 1500 years of known coal resources at the current use
    rate. The graph above shows the growth in U.S. and world coal
    combustion for the 50 years preceding 1988, along with projections
    beyond the year 2040. Using the concentration of uranium and thorium
    indicated above, the graph below illustrates the historical release
    quantities of these elements and the releases that can be expected
    during the first half of the next century, given the predicted growth
    trends. Using these data, both U.S. and worldwide fissionable
    uranium-235 and fertile nuclear material releases from coal
    combustion can be calculated.

    Because
    existing coal-fired power plants vary in size and electrical output,
    to calculate the annual coal consumption of these facilities, assume
    that the typical plant has an electrical output of 1000 megawatts.
    Existing coal-fired plants of this capacity annually burn about 4
    million tons of coal each year. Further, considering that in 1982
    about 616 million short tons (2000 pounds per ton) of coal was burned
    in the United States (from 833 million short tons mined, or 74%), the
    number of typical coal-fired plants necessary to consume this
    quantity of coal is 154.

    Using
    these data, the releases of radioactive materials per typical plant
    can be calculated for any year. For the year 1982, assuming coal
    contains uranium and thorium concentrations of 1.3 ppm and 3.2 ppm,
    respectively, each typical plant released 5.2 tons of uranium
    (containing 74 pounds of uranium-235) and 12.8 tons of thorium that
    year. Total U.S. releases in 1982 (from 154 typical plants) amounted
    to 801 tons of uranium (containing 11,371 pounds of uranium-235) and
    1971 tons of thorium. These figures account for only 74% of releases
    from combustion of coal from all sources. Releases in 1982 from
    worldwide combustion of 2800 million tons of coal totaled 3640 tons
    of uranium (containing 51,700 pounds of uranium-235) and 8960 tons of
    thorium.

    Based
    on the predicted combustion of 2516 million tons of coal in the
    United States and 12,580 million tons worldwide during the year 2040,
    cumulative releases for the 100 years of coal combustion following
    1937 are predicted to be:

    U.S.
    release (from combustion of 111,716 million tons):Uranium:
    145,230 tons (containing 1031 tons of uranium-235)
Thorium: 357,491
    tons
Worldwide
    release (from combustion of 637,409 million tons):
Uranium:
    828,632 tons (containing 5883 tons of uranium-235)
Thorium:
    2,039,709 tons

    Radioactivity
    from Coal Combustion

    The
    main sources of radiation released from coal combustion include not
    only uranium and thorium but also daughter products produced by the
    decay of these isotopes, such as radium, radon, polonium, bismuth,
    and lead. Although not a decay product, naturally occurring
    radioactive potassium-40 is also a significant contributor.

    According
    to the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements
    (NCRP), the average radioactivity per short ton of coal is 17,100
    millicuries/4,000,000 tons, or 0.00427 millicuries/ton. This figure
    can be used to calculate the average expected radioactivity release
    from coal combustion. For 1982 the total release of radioactivity
    from 154 typical coal plants in the United States was, therefore,
    2,630,230 millicuries.

    Thus,
    by combining U.S. coal combustion from 1937 (440 million tons)
    through 1987 (661 million tons) with an estimated total in the year
    2040 (2516 million tons), the total expected U.S. radioactivity
    release to the environment by 2040 can be determined. That total
    comes from the expected combustion of 111,716 million tons of coal
    with the release of 477,027,320 millicuries in the United States.
    Global releases of radioactivity from the predicted combustion of
    637,409 million tons of coal would be 2,721,736,430 millicuries.

    For
    comparison, according to NCRP Reports No. 92 and No. 95, population
    exposure from operation of 1000-MWe nuclear and coal-fired power
    plants amounts to 490 person-rem/year for coal plants and 4.8
    person-rem/year for nuclear plants. Thus, the population effective
    dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear
    plants. For the complete nuclear fuel cycle, from mining to reactor
    operation to waste disposal, the radiation dose is cited as 136
    person-rem/year; the equivalent dose for coal use, from mining to
    power plant operation to waste disposal, is not listed in this report
    and is probably unknown.

    During
    combustion, the volume of coal is reduced by over 85%, which
    increases the concentration of the metals originally in the coal.
    Although significant quantities of ash are retained by precipitators,
    heavy metals such as uranium tend to concentrate on the tiny glass
    spheres that make up the bulk of fly ash. This uranium is released to
    the atmosphere with the escaping fly ash, at about 1.0% of the
    original amount, according to NCRP data. The retained ash is enriched
    in uranium several times over the original uranium concentration in
    the coal because the uranium, and thorium, content is not decreased
    as the volume of coal is reduced.

    All
    studies of potential health hazards associated with the release of
    radioactive elements from coal combustion conclude that the
    perturbation of natural background dose levels is almost negligible.
    However, because the half-lives of radioactive potassium-40, uranium,
    and thorium are practically infinite in terms of human lifetimes, the
    accumulation of these species in the biosphere is directly
    proportional to the length of time that a quantity of coal is burned.

    Although
    trace quantities of radioactive heavy metals are not nearly as likely
    to produce adverse health effects as the vast array of chemical
    by-products from coal combustion, the accumulated quantities of these
    isotopes over 150 or 250 years could pose a significant future
    ecological burden and potentially produce adverse health effects,
    especially if they are locally accumulated. 
    article continueselectric power production in the
    foreseeable future, the potential impact of long-term accumulation of
    by-products in the biosphere should be considered.

    ……..
    article continues ………….

  • Anonymous

    You pie in the sky, naive, dreamers pushing nuclear power have had 60+ years of MASSIVE GOVERNMENT involvement at every stage of it’s life cycle to convince the cold, calculating, realists of the private sector such as investors and insurers of the viability of this technology.  These things can’t, and won’t, make money.

    Solar, wind, geothermal, etc, DO have private investors and insurers, even with failures such as Solyndra. If they received the SAME government help as nuclear power have had, we’d be A LOT further along.

    P.S. Yes, “Asteroid Miner” IS/WAS on the nuke dole as a civilian scientist with the Army testing weapons. I suspect most of the quite intelligent backers of nuclear energy commenting here such as “Brutus” also worked for the government in some capacity. Other, modern,  REALLY commercially viable, alternative energy sources could really use their know how to advance humankind. Let’s hope we can stop wasting their intelligence.

  • crtvthnkr

    No we do not need to build any new nuclear power plants. It has been proven more than a few times that a nuclear power plant can not be made earthquake proof. Nuclear power plants and mother earth – a deadly combination.

  • Anonymous

    No, it’s real, and I agree with the sentiment. But it’s annoying to scroll through.

  • http://www.xenra.com YouTube to MP3

    True, there isn’t any needs for it. 

  • Anonymous

    Wow… I can’t believe 3 people ‘liked’ your response.

    Where in my post did I advocate for fossil fuels?  What I advocated was expanding wind and solar.  

    I have nothing to do with the hydrocarbon industry.

    I am totally against “fracking,” mountaintop-removal mining, tar sands operations, deep offshore drilling, drilling in sensitive areas, and “clean” coal.

    Wind, solar and geothermal, are the way to go (combined with major efforts on efficiency and restructuring our economy so it isn’t so dependent on endless consumption of unnecessary goods).

    It’s amazing how rude and loose with accusations people can be on-line.

  • Anonymous

    No doubt, a large portion of long lead-times is related to the public’s distrust of nuclear power, but who can blame them, with the nuclear industry’s shameful history of putting profits before safety?  Here are a few relevant articles:

    The Associated Press investigation of the NRC:
    http://www.daily-chronicle.com/2011/06/19/ap-investigation-nuke-regulators-weaken-safety-rules/apifk9v/
    GAO Report – Nuke Plant Leaks Hard to Detect:
    http://www.thedailytimes.com/Focus/story/Reaction-to-AP-investigation-reveals-GAO-report-that-leaks-at-nuke-sites-difficult-to-detect-id-012994
    UCS Report on Near Misses in 2010:
    http://theweek.com/article/index/213335/americas-nuclear-near-misses-top-7-screw-ups
    NRC Finds Disaster Plan Problems at U.S. Nuke Plants:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/13/business/energy-environment/13nuke.html?_r=2&smid=tw-nytenvironment&seid=auto
    U.S. Nuke Plants Leaking Radioactive Material:
    http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/us-nuclearfacilities-tritium-radioactivematerial/2011/06/21/id/400741
    A Quarter of U.S. Nuke Plants Leaking:
    http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/02/08/205465/a-quarter-of-u-s-nuclear-plants-leaking-radioactive-tritium/
    U.S. Nuclear Plants and Fault Lines – It Can Happen Here:
    http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2010/02/08/205465/a-quarter-of-u-s-nuclear-plants-leaking-radioactive-tritium/
    Mapping of Nuclear Facilities with Respect to Fault Lines:
    http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/nuclear-power-and-earthquake-zones-overlap-in-the-us

    Moreover, the lead-time issue is more complicated than you allege, as even Dr. Lester admits, as in this paper titled “MIT-IPC-Energy Innovation Working Paper 09-002” he co-authored at MIT in 2009:
    http://tinyurl.com/6azl7ls

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    OUR NUCLEAR FUTURE: 

    THE PATH OF SELECTIVE IGNORANCE 

    by Alex Gabbard 

    Metals and Ceramics Division 

    Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

    Oak Ridge, TN 

    Abstract

    Well-established trends in world energy consumption indicate long-term commitments to combustion of fossil fuel1. Industrialized nations are currently the major users of coal, but early in the 21st century a shift in usage is predicted such that today’s developing countries will be the primary users. For example, China has large reserves of coal and currently accounts for about 24% of world combustion with plans to increase its consumption to eight times more than 1990 combustion by the year 20202. Global coal resources are projected to provide about 1500 years supply at the current use rate3. Current US energy policy favors fossil fuel for large base-load electric power production, and almost 90% of the coal consumed in the US today is burned at electric power utilities4. Global coal production will continue to exceed the US rate by more than a factor of five5.

    While effects of fossil fuel combustion continue to be studied and debated, US environmental protection and reclamation law, resource conservation and recovery law, along with energy conservation law, pose conflicts in policy direction that selectively ignore various consequences. Although chemical effects of compounds of carbon, nitrogen and sulfur released during coal combustion dominate environmental studies and debates, releases of other constituents such as arsenic, mercury, lead and similar toxins, along with radioactive materials and nuclear fuels, constitute additional topics of interest. Many indicators; suggest that trends in fossil fuel consumption are at odds with the purpose of these laws and their philosophies of supporting ecologically sustainable technologies for the future.

    Background

    Elemental analysis of coal from around the world reveals that it can be composed of as many as 73 elements6. When coal is mined and burned, these long buried elements are released directly into the biosphere. As combustion increases, the quantities of these elements increase in direct proportion. While concerns about fossil fuel combustion has centered primarily on carbon, sulfur and nitrogen compounds, the quantities of radiological and toxicological components are not trivial and are among topics discussed herein.

    For example, 1991 global coal production was 5,100 million tons, up 50% from 1973, and continues to rise. US production that year was 996 million tons7. Analysis of coal reveals significant quantities of radioactive species, including uranium and thorium, that are long-lived parents in natural radioactive decay chains. Coal also contains potassium-40, and each radionuclide in coal accumulates in the atmosphere as a result of combustion. According to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) data8, coal contains an average of about 2.08 parts per million (ppm) of uranium, 4.58 ppm thorium and 0.054 ppm potassium-40. Although small concentrations, these components are significant when the vast quantity of coal mined and burned is considered, and more so when collected over a long period of time9.

    Radioactive material flowing from a coal fired utility is a function of the quantity of material originally in the coal. Analysis of US coal samples shows that many deposits contain far higher concentrations than IAEA average values. For example, J. F. Facer showed in a 1979 US Dept. of Energy (DOE) report that some US coal contains in excess of 103 parts per million of uranium10. Consequently, deposits of coal with this concentration release more than 200 tons of uranium per 1000 N We/year compared to approximately 8 tons/year using IAEA average value data. However, the USEPA concluded in its 1984 report, “Background Information Document (Integrated Risk Assessment); Final Rule for Radionuclides”, that coal wastes constitute no significant integrated riskl1. Extensive studies, such as the report by Beck et al12 in 1980, “Perturbations on the Natural Radiation Environment Due to the Utilization of Coal as an Energy Source,” provided analytical data supporting the EPA position.

    In addition to radiological material, elemental analysis of coal for other constituents illustrates that it is a rich source of valuable metals. Table 1 is a summary of 40 elements giving estimated values for annual US utility combustion. While the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) addresses issues of conserving natural resources, the vast quantities of mineral wealth in coal are rarely addressed. Coal “wastes” are not considered “resources”.

    Consequences

    The influence of current environmental, energy and resource conservation laws have little effect on preventing the accumulation of the vast array of coal-borne material in the biosphere. Quantities of by-products released from coal combustion are sufficient to present environmental, resource, energy and economic issues. For example, using 1991 production figures cited above and assuming that all the coal mined that year was burned somewhere, IAEA average concentration data indicates that at least 10,600 tons of uranium, 23,400 tons of thorium, and 275 tons of K-40 were released into the global biosphere that year alone. Summing over a century spanning 1937 to 2037, a length of time that places us currently at more than 60% through, indicates that in the US, as much as 232,400 tons of uranium, 572,000 tons of thorium and 6,030 tons of K-40 will be introduced into the biosphere during that time, mostly during the latter half. Global accumulation of these long-lived radioactive species is predicted to exceed 1 million tons of uranium, 2.8 million tons of thorium and more than 30,000 tons of K-40 by the year 2037.

    Natural uranium contains fissionable isotope U-235 at about 0.7%. U-235 is the nuclear fuel in commercial reactors. Release of U-235 into the biosphere over the specified century totals more than 9,400 tons of this single isotope. As 2% enriched commercial reactor fuel, this quantity of U-235 equals more than 471,000 tons of nuclear fuel, the equivalent of 15,700 reactor loads of 30 tons each. Consequently, the fissile component of the uranium in coal constitutes an enormous quantity of resource energy that is never recognized as a hazard nor utilized as a fuel. Comparing energy values, this amount of U-235 when fissioned equals more than 4.6 billion tons of coal, worth about $78 billion. This wasted energy is the result of selectively ignoring the potential resources of coal. Further, this quantity of fissile material poses nuclear proliferation issues because the material is within the boundaries of any country with coal sources and combustion facilities.

    Like the more common isotope U-238, thorium-232 is non-fissile but is breedable to produce fissionable nuclear fuel as isotope U-233. This process can occur in nuclear reactors and involves addition of a neutron to the nucleus of a non-fissile isotope that then becomes fissile. Because the ratio of combustion-to-fissile energy is approximately 1:5million per unit of matter, the fission energy contained in the quantities of these isotopes of uranium and thorium exceed the energy value of the coal itself and indicate that vast quantities of energy are routinely wasted with coal combustion.

    The radioisotopes in coal constitute a continuing source of radioactive released into the biosphere. Estimates of average contributions total about 4.3 micro-Curies per ton13. Thus, combustion of 5,100 million tons of coal in 1991 released about 22,000 Curies of radioactivity that year alone. Since one Curie equals 3.7 x 1010 nuclear disintegrations each second, this quantity of radioactivity is quite large. Integrated over the century in question, coal combustion is predicted to release at least 480,000 Ci of radioactivity in the US and more than 2.7 million Curies world-wide by the year 2037.

    Table 2 summaries a US Dept.. of Commerce study conducted in 1975 that compared stack emissions from three types of coal fired utilities14. Exhausted fly ash ranged from 2.9 million lbs/year from the electrostatic precipitator station studied to 97 million lbs/year from a cyclone type plant burning lignite coal. Most US power plants are modern with facilities to minimize release of fly ash However, over time, increasing quantities of lignite are predicted to be burned due to reduction in reserves of higher grade coal. Lignite is a high moisture soft coal with constituent concentrations far exceeding higher grades at less than half the energy content.

    Modern electrostatic precipitator plants are capable of operating at greater than 99.5% collection efficiency but can still release 35 lb/year of uranium as just one component in almost 3 million tons of ash vented through stacks. In addition to this radiological species, all the radon in coal is released during combustion. An estimate for average Rn-222 release is about 2 Curies/year for each 1000 MWe coal fired facility15. Though much larger in total quantity, Radon-220 from the Thorium chain has a half-life of 55 seconds and may not make it out of the stack. Materials of all types not exhausted up the stack are collected in ash ponds and waste areas at the facility.

    Coal fired electric power utilities are generally in close proximity to large population centers. Thus, exposures to the surrounding populace can be far higher than from equivalent nuclear power plants, by a factor of 100 as shown in one study16. The quantity of coal required to produce 1000 MWe, about 4 million tons each year, contains about 0.22 tons of the radioisotope K-40. Integrating over the century between 1937 and 2037 indicates that millions of Curies of long-lived radioactive isotopes in the uranium and thorium series, along with potassium-40, will be added to the biosphere by the later date. Quantities of radiological species released beyond the year 2037 are bounded only by the quantity of coal burned.

    Most of the exposure to human beings from natural radioactivity is caused by the mobility of radon. Radon found in the atmosphere is produced largely from the uranium-238 series (Fig. 3) as radioisotope Rn-222. The effects of radon are said to range from insignificant (Beck, et al. Ref. 12) to significant. Bernard Cohen at the University of Pittsburgh compares coal power with nuclear power saying, “If one considers the very long-term effects of radiotoxicity, coal burning is a major killer and nuclear power is a major lifesaver.”16

    Because radon isotopes result from radioactive decay of uranium and thorium, the quantity of radon in the atmosphere increases with increased combustion. One consequence of radon in the biosphere is the increase of radioactive daughters such as those detected in consumer products.  For example, radon decay radioisotopes of bismuth, lead and polonium have been detected in tobacco smoke. The dose rate to smokers produced by this radioactivity has been estimated for 1 .5 pack/day cigarette smokers to range from 1,300 milli-rem/year to 16,000 milli-rem/year17. The first figure is almost 4 times greater than the total whole body dose rate from natural background radiation. The latter figure is over 44 times greater.

    For comparison, the maximum exposure from ionizing radiation for nuclear industry workers permitted by DOE guidelines is 5000 mill-rem/year. Current nuclear industry guidelines using the philosophy of “As Low As Reasonably Achievable” (ALARA) have targeted no more than 500 milli-rem/year dose rate per worker. Thus, the 1.5 pack/day smokers among the approximately 50 million smokers in the US willingly expose sensitive portions of their bodies to at least 2.6 times ALARA goals and perhaps 32 times the exposure permitted nuclear industry workers.

    Table 3 illustrates the naturally occurring radioactive decay chains of uranium and thorium. The quantities of each isotope at any time are functions of original quantities and time since release. Note that radiotoxicity is, generally, associated with half-life. The shorter the half-life, the higher the radiotoxicity. For example, radium-224 originating in the thorium chain is more radiotoxic than radium-226 originating in the thorium-238 chain, and both isotopes are more radiotoxic than plutonium-239. Even though more radiotoxic than plutonium, note that EPA’s assessments of the radiological aspects of coal combustion have concluded that health risks are minimal.

    More Considerations

    Not only does coal contain vast quantities of untapped energy, It also contains similarly vast quantities of useful metals. IAEA data lists aluminum concentration in coal at 26,400 ppm. Thus, worldwide flow of aluminum with the coal produced in 1991 was more than 136.6 million tons that year alone. Magnesium? At 3,419 ppm, in excess of 17.4 million tons of this metal were also in the coal flow streams that year, along with 6.3 million tons of titanium (1,242 ppm), 232,000 tons of vanadium (45.5 ppm) and other useful elements that were simply exhausted as coal waste, whether useful or harmful.

    The latter group includes arsenic, cadmium, mercury, selenium, zinc and other elements in a variety of molecular forms. Based on lAEA data, global additions of these elements via coal combustion during 1991 were 25,500 tons of arsenic, 2,040 tons of cadmium, more than 5,000 tons of mercury, 23,200 tons of selenium, 34,700 tons of zinc and so on for each element in coal.

    Adding release quantities for 100 years of steadily increasing coal combustion indicates that a broad range of exhaust constituents go well beyond atmospheric warming, acid rain and ozone depletion, such as the addition of 3.2 million tons of arsenic predicted to be added to the biosphere during that time.

  • Gerard71gerard

    If you really like green technology, you should look into Fast Nuclear Reactors.
    People who are against nuclear often do not have access to accurate
    information about advances in nuclear energy, and for many it is not
    their fault.

    The dirty and scary nuclear energy of today can be replaced by super safe Fast Reactors, which actually uses nuclear waste from our present day reactors for fuel. No mining of any new uranium need take place. Plus, our 770,000 ton stockpile of SNF and DU could be converted into electricity and industrial heat; enough to displace the burning of 9,000,000,000 barrels of oil. This is the only way to really get rid our nuclear waste stockpile. I am 100% for renewables, but abandoning nuclear will leave us stuck with our 770,000 ton stockpile of SNF and DU for the next 100,000 years or more. Further, massive energy, money, and stimulus to our economy could come from using Fast Reactors to dispose of nuclear waste; all of which could be invested in green technology.

    The question should not be “nuclear yes or no.”
    The question should be WHICH nuclear energy.

    I had hoped the complete program will introduce the Integral Fast Reactor
    technology that the U.S. and Russia have demonstrated since the 1970′s.
    Fast Reactor technology employs a fast neutron spectrum capable of using
    our stockpile of spent nuclear fuel, depleted uranium, and yes, thorium
    as fuel. These reactors are inherently safe. A nuclear meltdown is only
    a risk for our aged fleet of what are called “thermal boiling water
    reactors, or thermal pressurized water reactors”; a sixty year old
    approach employing forty year old technology. If the nuclear plants at
    Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima were of the Fast Reactor
    variety, inherent safety features would have shut down the reactors
    without need for any human interaction. No Accident. No meltdown.
    Really! This super safe approach has been successfully tested as
    recently as April, 1986 in the U.S. Experimental Breeder Reactor 2.
    South Africa, Russia, India, and China are all investing in Fast Reactor
    technology. The question is not weather we should invest in or phase
    out nuclear energy. Rather, we should quickly decommission all of our
    legacy “thermal” reactors and replace them with the new generation of
    inherently safe Fast reactors. If America took this seriously, its
    burdensome stockpile of spent nuclear fuel and depleted Uranium could be
    converted into electricity and process heat by newer Fast Reactors.
    Indeed, this supply of energy could replace the burning of 9 trillion
    barrels of oil.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Wrong. Lets not put the cart before the horse.

    Please see what is possible:

    I hoped the complete program will introduce the Integral Fast Reactor
    technology that the U.S. and Russia have demonstrated since the 1970′s.
    Fast Reactor technology employs a fast neutron spectrum capable of using
    our stockpile of spent nuclear fuel, depleted uranium, and yes, thorium
    as fuel. These reactors are inherently safe. A nuclear meltdown is only
    a risk for our aged fleet of what are called “thermal boiling water
    reactors, or thermal pressurized water reactors”; a sixty year old
    approach employing forty year old technology. If the nuclear plants at
    Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima were of the Fast Reactor
    variety, inherent safety features would have shut down the reactors
    without need for any human interaction. No Accident. No meltdown.
    Really! This super safe approach has been successfully tested as
    recently as April, 1986 in the U.S. Experimental Breeder Reactor 2.
    South Africa, Russia, India, and China are all investing in Fast Reactor
    technology. The question is not weather we should invest in or phase
    out nuclear energy. Rather, we should quickly decommission all of our
    legacy “thermal” reactors and replace them with the new generation of
    inherently safe Fast reactors. If America took this seriously, its
    burdensome stockpile of spent nuclear fuel and depleted Uranium could be
    converted into electricity and process heat by newer Fast Reactors.
    Indeed, this supply of energy could replace the burning of 9 trillion
    barrels of oil.

  • Gerard71gerard

    You are partially correct. We should not build any more of our present day reactors, called Light Water Reactors. We have stayed with the same wasteful and dangerous designs for the past 60 years. These should have been replaced in the 1970′s with reactors that cannot melt down like Fukushima.

    It has been proven that newer nuclear reactors, called Fast Reactors, are incapable of melting down. They also use our nuclear waste as fuel, there by getting rid it.
    If you have an appetite for learning something new, read some of my posts about the differences between our ancient yet still operating reactors and the new nuclear energy.

    Global warming  and Mother Earth – a deadly combination.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Adults do not begin a discourse by disrespecting another point of view.

    You need to read my posts about the real reason nuclear energy has suffered from lack of backing; because Big Fossils, their bankers, insurers, lobbyists, and bought politicians have suppressed clean nuclear energy. Everything wrong with our 60 year old reactors; meltdown, waste, cost are all the consequences of Big Fossils fear of competition, greed, and abject disregard for the damages caused by this corruption. We could have all kinds of green energy, but this also has been crushed by Big Fossils. We already have reactors that are 100 times more efficient, uses nuclear waste as fuel (getting rid of that major drawback to our legacy reactors), and cannot melt down. Check out Fast Nuetron Spectrum reactors, or fast breeder reactors, or travelling wave reactors, or fast integral reactors.  But these have been repressed in order to benefit Big Fossils.

    Lets not be hypocritical. Big Fossils gets billions in govt taxpayer subsidies. This money is then used to prevent govt from giving the same help to renewables or to help develop Safe nuclear energy.

  • Griff

    And the nuclear industry wonders why it has a PR problem! brutus is about as typical as gets for an industry mouthpiece. It’s all us ignorant, unwashed peasants holding up Utopia. We should all know about the nuclear fuel cycle and the atomic weight of uranium, or whatever it is they do all day.

    But they forget one thing, us peons pay the bills and vote. They screwed up at TMI, Shoreham, and elsewhere and us “stupid people” people put the brakes on any new construction for 30 years! Want to go another 30 brutus?

  • Griff

    I can never remember which is the umbrella one-world govt. group. Is it the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Queen of England, or Zionists? Thanks,  I’m trying to get an head start for the re-education camps. brutus, can I have a ride?

  • george

    You should tell that to your nuclear proponent buddies. Rude SOB’s who use every synonym for stupid if you propose alternatives to nuclear power.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner
  • Gerard71gerard

    Is this a PBS sponsored forum? Is SOB appropriate? I never hear that term on PBS. As far as I can tell, I have no nuclear buddies on this forum who could be described Rude SOB’s.

    I am in favor of green alternatives.
    Including shutting down all our Fukushima style of reactors. However you cannot get rid of all the left over SNF and DU without the help of the next generation of nuclear reactors; which consumes nuclear waste and produces energy. These are called Generation IV, Fast Breeder Reactors. Because these reactors use a fast neutron flux, as opposed to the thermal flux used in Fukushima style reactors, Fast reactors can generate 100 times more energy from SNF than thermal flux designs.

    There is a world of difference between our Legacy, 60 year old Generation III reactors and the reactors of tomorrow. Ironically, we could have adopted Fast Reactors commercially 30 years ago, which means we could have shut down our Fukushima style reactors 30 years ago. This is too bad. Fast reactors, as far back as 1986, are proven to be immune to meltdown and major loss of containment; see the Experimental Breeder Reactor II.

    Given that we can get centuries worth of energy by burning our SNF and DU in Fast reactors, and that by doing so we avoid having to burn 9,000,000,000 barrels of oil, is this not a GREEN ALTERNATIVE? Further, would not this stimulate our economy enough to make truly epic investment in wind and solar technologies?

  • Gerard71gerard

    Dole means doing and learning nothing while getting paid by the govt.

    People who work as scientists are neither learning nothing nor doing nothing.
    A few centuries of burning fossil fuels have shown that with a certain frequency billions of peoples’ own bodies become uninhabitable as cancer, copd, emphysema, asthma, mercury poisoning take over. 

  • Gerard71gerard

    george, why so heated?

     We should have shut down our Light Water Reactors 30 years ago. We should not have extended their lifetime another 30 years. They should have been replaced by Fast Breeder Reactors similar to the Experimental Breeder Reactor II. These designs are 100 times more efficient. In 1986 it was demonstrated that these designs are inherently safer and cannot suffer a Fukushima style meltdown. Finally these designs can use and dispose of 99% of the nuclear waste left over from our legacy reactors.

    Therefor, abandoning nuclear energy is not the way to go for several GREEN reasons.
    By putting on the brakes 30 years ago, you prevent any progress. This is like saying “my dog is not yet potty trained, so lets not train it at all and leave it in its immature state.” Then when you do have a mess, you say “lets just kill the dog.”

    Who benefited by abandoning new nuclear in the 1970′s? The same people who made us wait this long for an electric car, the same people who took solar panels off the White House, the same people advocating American military presence in the Middle East?
    Peace be with thee.

  • Gerard71gerard

    I will pray for you.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Good comment.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Asteroid knows of what he speaks.
    Big Fossil gains the most by strangling new nuclear development.

    Big Fossil is mortified by the prospect of the American market embrasing Fast Breeder reactor technology. If the average Joe knew that we have centuries of energy just sitting in SNF and DU stockpiles, waiting to be liberated by meltdown-proof Fast Reactors, they would demand every oil and coal plant be replaced with fast reactors.

    How do You know this new nuclear will not be able to stand on its own?

  • Gerard71gerard

    Super Awesome and accurate post!
    The uranium in coal is worth more than the coal itself.
    Therefor, The fly ash piles are a valuable resource.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Absolutely.

  • Gerard71gerard

    the next generation of nuclear is Clean, Safe and Green.

    Just imagine, meltdown-proof reactors that eat up nuclear waste and get 100 times more energy  from that fuel than was generated from its use in our presently 60 year old designs. We have had this technology for too long without anyone in the mainstream knowing about it.

    old nuclear should be dead, new nuclear should already be here.

  • Gerard71gerard

    John, please check to see if there is a problem with your keyboard. The space or return key may be getting stuck. Otherwise, i hope it is not just poor form.

  • Gerard71gerard

    I think Light Water reactors do produce P239 from fast neutron capture of U238. SNF usually has 1% P239.

  • Gerard71gerard

    I hope I am one of those knowledgeable folks. UP with Fast Breeder Reactors, especially the Gas Cooled Modular designs as helium and nitrogen are much safer than lead-bismuth, sodium, or liquid metal fuel designs. I really like General Atomics’ EM2.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Why not build ones house next to a coal plant, close to the radioactive fly ash pit, under the toxic and radioactive smoke in a community known for lung cancer, all cancers, asthma, copd, emphysema, mercury poisoning…?

    Millions die a year as a result of burning coal. Where is the money solar and wind. Why are not the big banks and big insurers behind these technologies? For the same reason they are against new, clean, safe, and 100 times more efficient nuclear-waste eating Generation IV nuclear reactors.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Why is PBS allowing posters to post rude character attacks.

    Look in your rear view mirror.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Actually, the professor at MIT is really helping the anti nuclear argument. How so? By not taking the chance to tell the audiene about the benefits of new Fast Breeder reactor designs in opposition to our legacy Light Water Reactors.
    Bury waste deeper? Ha!
    Fast Breeder reactor designs can devour 99% of our nuclear waste from Light Water Reactors.
    They also produce 100 times more energy from the original Light Water Reactor fuel.
    Safely; no risk of a Fukushima style accident.

    I dare anyone to read up on Light Water Reactors vs Fast Breeder reactor designs.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Peace, please. Lets not call each other stupid. I am neither a paid consultant nor are my posts sloppy.  Fukushima is a problem. Pointing out the real effects of coal seem to only be a means of comparing the two disaster types; accidental nuclear contamination vs. fossil fuels contamination.

    Further, I thought I offered You a good explanation of the benefits of Fast Spectrum breeder reactors, the reasons why we should shut down old legacy Light Water reactors, and get rid of our nuclear waste in the process. Safely.

    What went wrong at Fukushima is exactly why we need to transition to Fast Spectrum breeder reactors.

  • Anonymous

    False, they literally can’t give these plants away:

    “When the UK began privatizing utilities, it’s nuclear reactors “were so unprofitable they could not be sold”. Eventually in 1996, the government gave them away. But the company that took them over, British Energy,
    had to be bailed out in 2004 to the extent of 3.4 billion pounds.”

  • Anonymous

    From the International Atomic Energy Agency:

    “The main consequence of the Chernobyl accident is thyroid cancer in children”

    From The World Health Organization:(2005) “According to the Chernobyl Forum, some 4000 cases of thyroid cancers have occurred.” (so far)

    Now, you nuclear proponents, some insulting everyone’s intelligence. This technology is not harmless. These are REAL numbers. 

    You don’t understand human psychology. When you say, “There’s nothing to see here!” That just makes us wonder even more what the hell you’re hiding.  You are afraid of what we’ll find.

  • Anonymous

    Sounds pie-in-the-sky to me – industry hype.

    If it’s such a great idea, then its proponents should have little trouble securing private financing.

    The history of nuclear power has not been pretty.  It’s proven inordinately expensive and risky, and nuclear firms have consistently put profit ahead of the public interest.  I prefer to go with renewables.  Wind energy already is competitive with fossil fuels, even without taking externalities into account.  Solar and geothermal are making great strides.

    We don’t need nuclear power.

  • Anonymous

    No, I’m not wrong.

    I made two points:
    1.  The nuclear industry has consistently put profits ahead of safety; and
    2.  Long lead-times are only partly related to the NIMBY phenomenon.

    Both of these are true.

    Why should we trust the nuclear industry now?

    At a minimum, if their latest, hyped technologies are so great, they should be able to secure full private financing, including liability insurance.  They shouldn’t need public subsidies.

    The bottom line is:  why take such a risk on an historically expensive, risky form of energy delivered by untrustworthy corporations, when cheaper, safer, renewable energy sources are at hand?

  • Anonymous

    Nothing is perfectly harmless. That’s not a reasonable standard.

    Energy Source Death Rate (deaths per TWh)

    Coal – world average 161 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
    Coal – China 278
    Coal – USA 15
    Oil 36 (36% of world energy)
    Natural Gas 4 (21% of world energy)
    Biofuel/Biomass 12
    Peat 12
    Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
    Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
    Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
    Hydro – world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
    Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)
    http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

  • Anonymous

    Yes! That’s better!

    However, even from your post, there was this from a more recent study just from Chernobyl from The Union of Concerned Scientists that would throw a monkey wrench in those deaths/TWh:

    “…based on the data given below, 53,000 and 27,000 are reasonable estimates of the number of excess cancers and cancer deaths that will be attributable to the accident, EXCLUDING thyroid cancers. (The 95% confidence levels are 27,000 to 108,000 cancers and 12,000 to 57,000 deaths.) In addition, as of 2005, some 6,000 thyroid cancers and 15 thyroid cancer deaths have been attributed to Chernobyl. That number will grow with time.

    Much lower numbers of cancers and deaths are often cited, but these are misleading because they only apply to those populations with the highest radiation exposures, and don’t take into account the larger numbers of people who were exposed to less radiation.”

    And, also, you are NOT applying for a license to retrofit or build, but if you were, I wouldn’t have the ability to question you in this way. Again, from the Union of Concerned Scientists:

    “The NRC recently REMOVED the public’s (taxpayer’s) right of discovery and cross-examination during hearings on renewals of existing power plant licenses and applications for new ones, precluding meaningful public participation.”

    So, even though I may be PAYING for the plant, I have no right to question if or how it’s constructed.

    Also, a comment below cited South Africa’s nuclear power. You may find this interesting.

    Break-In at Nuclear Site Baffles South Africa – New York Times

  • Gerard71gerard

    Everything I have posted is true. If you are skeptical, please wiki the topic. However, you may not understand all the science; because if you did you would understand. While I am All for wind and solar, these technologies cannot dispose of our nuclear waste stockpile. China, India, Russia, Italy, South Africa, and France seem to have the backing. Lack of backing in America is a result of Big Fossil successful effort to repress the technology.

    You state that wind energy is already as competitive as coal. Prove it.  Why are we not shutting down all of our coal and oil plants and ramping up wind? Where is all this commercial and investor support?  The vast private money is deeply committed to Big Fossils, who control the private insurance and private investment. All you have to do is research the history of the topic.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Again the lack of funding comes from Big Fossil influence; the folks with the greatest capacity to strangle Generation IV designs, and the most to lose if they are developed commercially. There is plenty of backing for this technology in countries that are Wise enough to look forward.
     
    Both your arguments are cases of blaming the victim. We have been stuck with the older and scarier nuclear energy for the last  60 years because Big Fossil Fuels have manipulated insurance law, politicians, banks and insurers. Their intent was to freeze nuclear energy in its adolescence, so that rare accidents and nuclear waste become the reason to shut down all nuclear. This is common sense. Read the history.

    Further, I am an advocate of replacing our Light Water reactors with Generation IV designs. What went wrong with our 60 year old nuclear approach is not evidence of what can go wrong with Generation IV designs. It is the exact opposite.

    Generation IV designs are not pie in the sky.
    Generation IV designs can dispose of our nuclear waste. Therefor, instead of paying to guard nuclear waste for the next 100,000 years, Generation IV designs save money.
    Generation IV designs can produce enough energy to replace 9,000,000,000 barrels of oil (four time more oil than is believed by scientists to be left still in the Earth) from our stockpile of SNF. 9,000,000,000 barrels of oil, at say $80 per barrel, leaves us with $720,000,000,000. THAT is how much money Big Fossil stands to lose if Generation IV designs become industrialized. It is more than enough to buy all the Solar, Wind, and Geothermal as we need.

    Every other country with nuclear experience is investing in Generation IV designs except America, (and now Germany) is going forward with Generation IV designs.

    Generation IV designs are the only means of A) getting rid of our nuclear waste, B) Replacing Big Fossils, C) providing the bridge energy until wind, solar, geothermal  become more economically viable, and D) do all this without risk of meltdown.

    Without Generation IV designs, you have to transition directly from fossils to wind solar etc. The problem with this is it leaves us burning the remaining fossil fuels, fighting over remaining fossil fuels, and push Global Warming further along.

  • Gerard71gerard

    There have been no thermonuclear explosions at Fukushima or even Chernobyl.

    Yes, plutonium is made in reactors. However you don’t seem to know the difference between our Legacy 60 year old reactors and the Blanket Breeder reactors. Blanket breeder reactors are used by defense contractors and the military to create the plutonium for nuclear bombs.
    A commercial nuclear plant is a Thermal Light Water Reactor, which is not designed to produce any significant amount of plutonium. Indeed, spent nuclear fues from these reactors may contain only 1% plutonium; which is as far away from weapons grade as one can get. Further, one would have to chemically reprocess all the fuel in the core, extract all the plutonium, and then process it into a metallic core, build a bomb with the precise critical geometry, etc. to produce a thermonuclear explosion.

    I think you need to stop trashing other points of view with your 8th grade idiocy.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Try making an argument with English and all the facts.

  • Gerard71gerard

    I am worried about your focus exclusively on what is wrong with nuclear and blind to what is right about the NEXT Generation IV designs. All your complaint about nuclear only describes our 60 year old designs. Flawed old designs are not evidence for abandoning nuclear energy, but rather the reasons why we should embrace perfected Generation IV designs.

    The crux of Need To Know’s broadcast is to lead the audience away from nuclear by not introducing the meltdown-proof, 100 times more efficient, nuclear waste destroying Generation IV designs.

  • Gerard71gerard

    you said “Regarding fast reactors, yes, they may be a viable solution to nuclear waste concerns if used properly. But they’re not.” How do you know they are not? Just because they are not the present standard does not mean they cannot be used to get rid of our nuclear waste.

    Just because Generation IV designs can only get rid of 99% of our waste does not mean we should not use them. If you are bothered by the 1% fission products, wouldn’t you be more bothered by having to sit on 99 times that much waste if it is not recycled this way?

    Nuclear proponents DO care about the waste concerns, given that Generation IV designs use up our SNF, and DU as fuel.

    Furher, the fission products can be transmuted in specialized accelerators, or vitrified with Borated glass.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Awesome post.

  • http://www.dailyscrawl.com/ DailyScrawl

    Apologies, quick clarification, and ONLY a clarification: I meant that they’re not being used properly (they’re hardly being used at all, globally), not to say that they’re not a viable solution.

  • Gerard71gerard

    why not viable?

  • Gerard71gerard

    prove it

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Make that crude oil.   Crude oil contains BENZENE and the benzene is sure to give you cancer.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Why
    terrorists can’t rob radioactive materials from nuclear reactors

    Suppose
    a gang of terrorists tries to do a bank robbery type of operation
    against a nuclear reactor. What problems do they encounter that
    they wouldn’t when robbing a bank?

    1.
    There is no nuclear fuel within reach of any human.

    2.
    The fuel is inside a containment building that is harder to
    penetrate than a bank vault.

    3.
    The fuel is inside a machine that was not made for human access.
    Fuel isn’t something in a fuel tank that the reactor takes some of
    each minute. The fuel is an internal component of the engine.
    Stealing fuel is more like stealing a piston out of an engine than
    siphoning gasoline out of a gas tank. The robbers would be like
    somebody trying to steal a piston out of an engine in a busy Wal-Mart
    parking lot, not like somebody trying to steal a cell phone out of an
    unlocked car in a dark alley. Fuel is removed and replaced in a
    reactor atmost once a year and often only once every 10 years. The
    volume of the fuel doesn’t change as it is used.

    4.
    The fuel is not like money in several ways:

    a.
    The fuel is radioactive enough to kill the robbers immediately.

    b.
    The fuel is far too heavy for the robbers to carry.

    c.
    The fuel is sealed in steel capsules inside steel rods inside the
    reactor core inside a coolant system, etc.

    d.
    the temperature of the fuel is more than hot enough to burn them.

    e.
    If they got the fuel out, they would have to carry it in lead
    containers that would weigh many tons.

    f.
    etc.

    To
    get fuel out, the reactor must first be shut down. The robbers
    don’t know how. The reactor must be allowed to cool. Cooling
    takes time, like days. The fuel can only be removed by a robot.
    The robot may not be present. The robbers don’t know how to operate
    the robot. The robbers don’t have a way to move fuel rods out of
    the containment building. The robbers would have to have a big
    truck with a lead container to carry the fuel in. Big trucks are
    not good getaway vehicles, especially when heavily loaded.

    IF
    the robbers knew how to do all of the required jobs, it would still
    take them weeks to rob a reactor. Don’t you think somebody would
    notice when the people who work at the reactor didn’t come home for a
    few weeks? Do you think the cops and the army are going to give the
    robbers weeks? The result of such an attempted robbery would be
    robbers killed by bullets. Guards are not needed. Fences are not
    needed. Guards and fences are there purely because paranoid people
    want them there. Terrorists can’t steal fuel out of a nuclear
    reactor.

    The
    above is for the old generation 2 reactors. Generation 4 reactors
    would be even more difficult to steal fuel from. In any case,
    people would notice right away when the power went off.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    The Soviet Union built ~136 primitive reactors without containment buildings.   ~135 are still in use.   They are copies of the first reactor ever built with a heat transfer system [water] added.   The first reactor ever built was built and dismantled in 1944.   It was never intended to be used for anything but an experiment.

  • http://clearnuclear.blogspot.com Asteroid Miner

    Global Warming [GW] is caused by CO2 which is caused 40% by burning COAL.   The sun is not causing GW.   Go to http://www.realclimate.org and subscribe.   Also search for sun in the search thing in the upper right.   We have had a solar minimum for several years.

  • Gerard71gerard

    The Green party has been doing work of Big Fossils. Eco-friendly organizations have increasingly turned people against nuclear by raising fears of the radiation released by operating Light Water Reactors, leading to freezes on upgrading nuclear technology and backing for cleaner greener nuclear advances. Further, by hyping minute releases of radiation, profitable reactors forced to reduce production, or undergo politically motivated shut down periods, drive up costs. These costs would have been avoided if Big Fossils were not behind the hysteria and political lobbyists driving up costs of nuclear.
    By using the radiation released by from properly functioning Light Water Reactors as an excuse to down nuclear energy, one misses two important points. Radiation released from Light Water Reactors is indistinguishable from background radiation. This is enforced by the NRC. However, any Coal fired power plant also releases radiation in the form of uranium and thorium. IF Coal and Oil power plants were kept to the same strict nuclear emissions standards applied to Light Water Reactors, most (all?)  Coal fired plants and many oil plants would have to be shut down.

     The “unprofitable” arguement fails for another serious reason. It is presently very unprofitable for nuclear energy to have to guard and secure its nuclear waste; of which we have 70,000 tons of high level Spent Nuclear Fuel, and 700,000 tons of Depleted Uranium left over from our Light Water Reactors. This cost is often used as an argument against nuclear; with the conclusion being that nuclear is too expensive. This conclusion is dangerous because it ignores Generation IV Fast Reactors; which can convert 90% of our nuclear waste into vast quantities of energy. These safer designs (Proven in 1986 Experimental Breeder Reactor II) can save us the costs of guarding and disposing our SNF and DU with conventional means; processing and geological. Further, because Generation IV Fast Reactors can get 100 times more energy from the same SNF than produced from the original Nuclear Fuel (low enriched uranium about 1.5% to 5% U135) when first used in a Light Water Reactor, Fast reactors would be many times more profitable than present day, legacy Light Water Reactors. Also, because these designs are inherently safe, insurance costs and license costs SHOULD be much lower. Yet by applying Light Water Reactor license and insurance costs to newer Fast Reactor technologies, cost is artificially driven up. Lets not blame the victim of the “too costly” argument.

    Overall strategy of Big Fossils is to politically and economically strangle nuclear competition.

  • Gerard71gerard

    As long as the cold, calculating, realists, such as private investors and insurers, are behind the Big Fossil = Big Money equation, Big Fossil’s Big Money will keep on strangling new nuclear.
    Already proven Generation IV Fast Reactors are 100 times more efficient, and 100 times more profitable than legacy 60 year old legacy Light Water Reactors.  They are immune to Fukushima style melt down, and can get rid of more than 90% of our SNF stockpile.  Big Fossil is terrified of this competition. Shouldn’t they be? How about you?

  • Gerard71gerard

    The same effect occurs with U238, P239, and other fissionable actinides. I should have added that.

  • Anonymous

    “Germany’s solar panels produce more power than Japan’s entire Fukushima complex”
    16

    by Christopher Mims

    22 Mar 2011 12:52 PM

    Germany is the world leader in installed solar photovoltaic panels —
    and they also just shut down seven of their oldest nuclear reactors.
    Coincidence? Maaaaybe… Anyway, it’s worth noting that just today,
    total power output of Germany’s installed solar PV panels hit 12.1 GW –
    greater than the total power output (10 GW) of Japan’s entire 6-reactor nuclear power plant.

    Grist.org

  • Gerard71gerard

    Solar is great, yes. Yet, can these solar panels get rid of 99% of our nuclear waste by converting it into energy in Fast Breeder Reactors; without risk of meltdown? As I am 100% for green energy I am all for solar and wind. Yet, Where-in-America is the market, investors, and insurers for Solar? If Germany can do it, why not America? I understand that President Obama is taking heat for the $500,000,000 federal funding package for Solindra’s Failed Solar Boondoggle. Folks complain about the notion of federal backing for safe Generation IV nuclear, or even for the building of two new Light Water Reactors in Georgia, and they also don’t seem to like federal backing for companies like Solindra. If America wanted to, Generation IV reactors could already be converting our 770,000 ton supply of Spent Nuclear Fuel and Depleted Uranium into enough energy to replace  the burning of 9,000,000,000 barrels of Oil. If one is truly GREEN, you cant afford to ignore the new Generation IV Fast Reactors. German, Russian, Indian, and Chinese energy corporations have been developing Generation IV Fast Breeder Reactors since the 1970′S (Even earlier in Russia). (Chernobyl was a Generation II design, and should have been shut down).  We already have enough SNF and DU to last for centuries, if transmuted or fissioned in Generation IV Fast Breeders. These same designs can also help with nuclear weapons proliferation, as weapons grade uranium and plutonium can also be used as fuel. This could really stimulate the economy and make Solar and Wind more possible. As the cost of everything rises as Fossil Fuels diminishes, it becomes harder to put economic muscle behind solar in America, which is one partial reason we are not seeing big support for wind and solar in America without a lot of federal aid. So if it is o.k. to send federal money to Green solar and wind, would it not also be a good idea to put money behind Generation IV nuclear?
    Also remember that Germany is a Social Democracy with much more taxes and government regulation of business than in America. They also have a Green party unlike anything in the American puppet show.

    Germany Should shut down their old reactors, and replace them with Fast Breeder Reactors.
    Germany has experience with Generation IV Fast breeder reactors, and Siemens sells Generation IV Fast Breeder Reactor  to the rest of the developed world; the very same Generation IV Liquid Sodium Fast Reactor that was shut down in Germany in response to Fukushima was built by Siemens because they intend to sell Generation IV Fast Breeder Reactors far into the future.  If a company like Siemens can build and sell Generation IV reactors, I guess the argument that Generation IV is too expensive and unprofitable is clearly not really true. So they must be profitable after all.

    Folks who say the lead time for Fast Reactors is 20 _ 30 years are not paying attention to the rest of the developed world. Siemens builds and and intends to sell Generation IV Fast Breeder Reactors.

    Also, Here is poor China’s Generation IV program:

    China began research on fast neutron breeder
    reactors in the mid- and late-1960s . During its basic research period from 1965
    to 1987, China’s research focused on fast reactor technology such as fast
    reactor physics, thermodynamics, sodium technology and small sodium facility.
    During this initial period about 12 experimental setups were established, and
    one sodium loop was constructed. This included a 50 kg 235U zero-power neutron
    setup. On June 28 June 1970, this device reached criticality.  The
    engineering goal for the applied basic research phase of China’s FBR
    program (1987-1993)  was to successfully construct a 65 MWt (25 MWe)
    experimental fast reactor.  Further developments were made in sodium
    technology, fuel and materials, fast reactor safety, and reactor design. A
    preliminary foundation for a fast reactor design was established, and
    approximately 20 experimental setups and sodium loops were built.

    Currently, the initial experimental validation phase focused on sodium loop
    technology. Two sodium loops were imported form Italy:  ESPRESSO (sodium
    flow rate 110 m3/h, maximum sodium temperature 650oC) and CEDI (sodium flow rate
    320 m3/h, maximum sodium temperature 650oC.)   The primary conceptual
    design was completed in 1992 and the final design  was completed in 1994. 
    To test the concept of the design, a zero-power simulation experiment was
    conducted at the Physics and Dynamics Engineering Institute in Russia.  
    It was not until January 1998 that construction work  began on the
    country’s first fast neutron reactor.  The
    China Institute of Atomic Energy (CIAE) , in cooperation
    with the Beijing Institute of Nuclear Engineering, is constructing the FBR with
    Russian technical assistance.  On 8 September 1999, Russian Prime Minister
    Vladimir Putin signed a Cabinet ordinance to cooperate with China in the
    construction of a FBR.  The draft agreement was approved by the Russian
    Cabinet on 22 April 2000.

    Under China’s national high tech “863″ project, a pilot commercial station,
    is being built in Fangshan county near Beijing.  According to the
    Xinhua News Agency,  it is scheduled to be operational by 2003. 
    China’s original plans included building a 65 MWth (20-25 MWe) experimental
    reactor by the year 2000 at a cost of about $103 million.  China plans to
    use this reactor to provide the technical foundation for its long-term program
    of commercial FBR development.
    In December 2003, German Chancellor Gerhard
    Schröder and a large business delegation including
    Siemens CEO Heinrich von Pierer visited China. 
    During this visit, delegation members discussed the
    possibility of China’s import of Siemen’s Hanau Fuel
    Element Factory, a mothballed mixed oxide (MOX) fuel
    fabrication plant.  The plant was reportedly
    intended to generate the fuel necessary to power China’s
    planned fast breeder reactor. 

    Here is poor India’s Generation IV Fast reactor program: January  2010 (LAST YEAR)

    India’s prototype fast breeder reactor, due to
    go critical next year, paves the way for the country’s ambitious plans
    for nuclear energy. By Baldev Raj, S.C. Chetal and P. ChellapandiA
    fast neutron spectrum reactor has the flexibility to operate as breeder
    to achieve net creation of transuranics, as convertor to balance the
    transuranic production and consumption and as transmuter to convert the
    long lived minor actinides and other radioisotopes to short lived ones.
    These features enable uranium to be used 60 times more efficiently,
    reduce the toxicity of high-level waste and time it takes for the waste
    to reach natural radiation levels. Therefore, several fast reactors have
    been built and operated worldwide, accumulating about 390 reactor-years
    of operating experience to date.

    Fast breeder reactors (FBR)
    will be essential if India is to achieve its target of a 25% (300GW)
    nuclear share by 2050, given its limited uranium resources. FBRs will
    play a role in the second phase of India’s Three Stage Nuclear Power
    Programme, formulated by Dr. Homi Bhabha. Stage one involves the
    deployment of natural uranium pressurized heavy water reactors. It will
    be followed by concurrent deployment of FBRs burning plutonium to breed
    U-233 from thorium. The FBRs will be followed, in the third stage, by
    Advanced Heavy Water Reactors (AHWRs) capable of utilizing India’s
    abundant thorium resources.

    If China, Russia, Germany, France, India, South Africa, and America have all successfully been developing Fast Breeder Reators as far back as the 1960′- 1970′s, What possible reason would explain America abandoning its advanced Generation IV Fast Reactors while the rest of the big guys on the block are moving forward? Siemens isn’t opposed to helping the rest of the world get Generation IV Fast Breeder Reactors, neither are German stock holders of Siemen’s. The Fukushima accident is tragic. An ACCIDENT WITH GENERATION III Light Water Technology like Fukushima should not become the reason to abandon the nuclear-waste-eating, melt-down-proof, vastly more efficient Generation IV technology. China and India are not making any mistakes by going ahead with Fast Breeders. Given that America has a history of being the largest buyer of oil in the free world, America has its political and social momentum wraped up in trying to burn the last of the Fossil Fuels before it will take seriously Solar, Wind, or Generation IV Fast reactors seriously; which is why our own successful Experimental Breeder Reactor II was shut down for no sound reason.

    GGGeneratioGGeneration IV nuclear.

  • Gerard71gerard

       Can these solar panels produce this energy when the Sun is down? Can they provide this peak 12.1 GW all day and all night long? If Germany is so far ahead with solar, then they stand to profit from solar technology. I say go for it, I love solar and wind alternatives. However, if Germany is committed to selling solar worldwide, would it not be a great sales ploy to shut down their nuclear in the wake of Fukushima? It is a great publicity stunt. Hypocritically, they unfortunately also shut down Siemens’ Generation IV  Liquid Metal Fast Breeder reactor. This is funny because Siemens is ACTIVELY selling Generation IV reactor technology to China, and around the world. Comercially, Germany is not really planning to abandon Generation IV Fast Breeder Technology; as Siemens is a German, yet international corporation capable of doing whatever it wishes in open markets around the world; regardless of the motives in mainstream German politics. Germany is selling and investing in Generation IV Fast Reactors through Siemens.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Because it is not a free market in America. India, China, Russia, France, Germany (through Siemens) have all decided that they DO have a market free enough to invest in Generation IV Fast Breeder Reactor technology. There are markets capable of making Generation IV reactors not only insurable, but profitable. Unlike Fukushima, a Light Water Generation III design, Fast reactors use up and gets rid of 99% of the waste left over from Fukushima style reactors. In America we have 770,000 tons of waste left over from our Fukushima style reactors. If the American market was behind Gen. IV reactors, we could produce enough electricity and industrial heat to replace the burning of 9 trillion barrels of oil; an asset worth an unfathomable $720,000,000,000 at $80/Barrel. In America, the plan was to replace all our Fukushima style reactors with Generation IV technology as far back as the 1970′s. However, for some reason, politics and Big Fossils shut those hopes down. Instead another 30 years were added to the lifetime of our 60-yr old, Fukushima style designs. Lack of insurers is a political mechanation benefiting Big Fossil fuels. Up until recently, America has been the biggest consumer of Fossil Fuels since World War II. Is it not probable that Big Fossils would manipulate law to prevent licensing of Any nuclear energy; prevent insurers from backing any new nuclear; fund unrealistic scare tactics to hobble Generation III nuclear. Fukushima is the greatest thing possible for those invested in the continued use of fossil fuels.

    Also, there is the same type of fishy ecconomic repression applied to Wind and Solar alternatives in America. While artificial lack of insuring new nuclear in America benefits Big Fossils, so does the low power-density to costs-ratio become the excuse as to why the same money is not behind investing in Solar or Wind in America. It is not profitable enough, and there is too much influence of the Big Fossils in American politics, regulation, and licensing. Otherwise, given how much the general public knows about the disadvantages of Big Fossils (cancer, pollution, tendency to fight wars over oil, and its ever diminishing supply drivind up the cost of everything and thus ensuring economic recession, etc) why would not the big energy companies and their big banker and insurer friends not be selling all of us on just Wind and Solar, etc?

    Importantly, many American companies are trying to commercialize Generation IV fast reactors. However they are running into problems with outdated Govt. licensing law. In the 1950′s our commercial nuclear energy policy was put into place. These policies were aimed at regulating Generation II & III commercial reactors. These designs have been all but frozen as the state of the industry has not been allowed to change with the times. Generation II & III designs have high insurance costs partially because of the mammoth size of the original design plans. These were all very big reactors requiring big investment, insurance, and licensing. As TMI occured, Big Fossil lobbyists used TMI to prevent licensing for new plants; and used the perceived danger to commercially increase costs of nuclear operations by increasing insurance costs.

    However, American licensing and insurance regulations based on Generation III designs are  being deceptively applied to Generation IV designs. This is wrong because Generation IV designs are safer than Generation III reactors by several orders of magnitude; they use the natural laws of physics to INHERENTLY make impossible the meltdown accidents of Fukushima; and therefor the insurance should be several orders of magnitude less expensive. Given that Generation IV Fast reactors REVERSE the nuclear waste problem by actually using nuclear waste left over from our Fukushima Gen-III type reactors as its fuel supply, and reduces the total radiological burden of guarding this waste from more than 100,000 years to just under 300 years, there is no argument that nuclear waste need drive up the cost of licensing and insuring Generation IV reactors. Again another reason why the insurance and licensing laws are being misapplied to any new American development of Fast Reactors. In addition, Fast Reactors are a lot smaller in general when compared to Gen-III and Gen-II commercial reactors in America, yet the insurance and licensing treats smaller safer Gen-IV Fast reactors as if they were actually much larger, more dangerous, extremely wasteful Generation III designs; 60 year old nuclear dinosaurs. That is why these designs do not flourish in America. Watch out though, India, China, Russia and many important players see the value of Generation IV Green nuclear as a compliment to Wind and Solar. Countries that invest in Gen IV Fast Reactors will experience less global recession caused by ever diminishing oil supplies, and will be in a better position to afford the infrastructure and investment needed to make solar and wind more economically viable.

  • Gerard71gerard

    Really, Google India’s, Russia’s, China’s, history with Fast Generation IV reactors. China has already operated successfully 2 prototype Generation IV Fast Reactors, and is building 10 full scale Generation IV reactors. India has a history of using fast reactors and India’s Three Phase nuclear program uses fast reactors to breed vast quantities of U233 from their abundant supply of Thorium232. The Thorium Fast Breeder reactors are exceptionally efficient, can use for fuel spent nuclear fuel from Gen III Light Water reactors, and are incapable of melting down. Even Germany, despite reaction to Fukushima, is working with and selling Generation IV enabling technology to the rest of the developed world.

    America is being left in the dust. Big clouds of Fossil Fuel dust.

  • Animals370

    You all seem to forget that solar energy is to expensive to produce compared to the cheap nuclear which has very few accidents despite what people say, in fact its actually deadlier to work in a flour mill than a nuclear plant due to grain explosions.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Alex-Cannara/100000432287226 Alex Cannara

    The reason we have so great a problem, worldwide, with emissions is that our own government didn’t listen effectively to the report JFK requested and got 49 years ago last month…
    http://tinyurl.com/6xgpkfa

    If that report had been followed, we’d have already had no US power generation by fossil fuels, or even by water-cooled reactors (Fukushima…) by 2000.

    So, our government, especially Congress, paid lip service to civilian nuclear power and concentrated on Cold-War weapons.

    “Nuclear power” isn’t just old, inefficient reactors as we still use — in the 1940s it was well known that other paths were possible.  Oak Ridge Labs actually designed, built & ran such reactors for some years in the 1960s, but again, research funds disappeared in the Nixon administration. 

    So here we are, screwed up as usual by the folks we elect — we elect, remember that when being critical.

    The scientists who knew how to build safe nuclear power that would last thousands of years, weren’t dumb or evil, and fortunately, the Chinese aren’t either — just this year the Chinese Academy of Sciences has allocated $1B to complete our 1960s R&D (now public) by 2020.

    Want to continue our foolishness and have to buy our own work back from the Chinese when we realize all the ‘renewables’ ain’t gonna cut the mustard?
    http://www.thoriumremix.com/2011
    http://tinyurl.com/25mgqkd
    http://www.thoriumenergyalliance.com  http://www.itheo.org

    http://energyfromthorium.com/2011/01/30/china-initiates-tmsr/#comments
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/01/china_thorium_bet/
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/8393984/Safe-nuclear-does-exist-and-China-is-leading-the-way-with-thorium.html

    Feel free to call & get involved in adjusting our flawed course that endangers hundreds of millions around the world via emissions they didn’t create.

    Dr. A. Cannara
    650-400-3071