— Stranded spent nuclear fuel with nowhere to go: spent fuel factoids to ponder

admin , , ,

From Ecological Options Network / No Nukes California
Compiled byJames Heddle, Mary Beth Brangan – EON

A view of the dry spent fuel storage facility in the foreground as surfers ride the waves at San Onofre State Beach, CA, April 21, 2022. Credit: Allen J. Schaben/Getty Images

Stranded Spent Nuclear Fuel with Nowhere to Go – A Clear & Present Threat to National Security

A string of pellets cased in the zircalloy cladding is called a fuel rod. Source

It is usually 4-5 meters long. Each rod contains 350-400 pellets. Source

Credit: world-nuclear.org

A human being standing close to an unshielded hot fuel rod would receive a lethal dose of radiation in just minutes. Source

Ten years after removal of spent fuel from a reactor, the radiation dose 1 meter away from a typical spent fuel assembly exceeds 20,000 rems per hour. A dose of 5,000 rems would be expected to cause immediate incapacitation and death within one week. Source

Each fuel assembly contains 179-264 rods. Source

Holtec canisters each contain 37 fuel assemblies.

Photo: holtecinternational.com

Each canister contains more highly radioactive Cesium-137 than was released from Chernobyl. Source

Even a microscopic through-wall crack will release millions of curies of radiation into the environment states Dr. Kris Singh, President and CEO of Holtec. Source

The San Onofre ISFSI houses 73 vertical Holtec canisters. Source

Another 50 Areva NUHOM canisters sit in a separate, horizontal dry storage facility nearby on-site. Source

These containers do not have NRC approval for transport.

In any case, the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board reports that this spent fuel will not be cool enough to move until the year 2100.

These canisters have a manufacturer’s ‘guarantee’ for only20 years.

Some canisters like these have been shown to fail in less than 20 years. Source

Some of the horizontal canisters at San Onofre are already 20 years old. Source

No Federal central repository for high level radioactive waste now exists, nor is likely to any time soon.

About 88,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel from commercial reactors remain stranded at reactor sites, and this number is increasing by some 2,000 metric tons each year. These 77 sites are in 35 states and threaten to become de facto permanent disposal facilities. A proposed new generation of SMRs will produce even more, more toxic forms of waste. Source

Any Questions?

Mary Beth Brangan and James Heddle Co-Direct EON, the Ecological Options Network.. The EON feature documentary S.O.S. – The San Onofre Syndrome – Nuclear Power’s Legacy will be released later this year.

https://nonukesca.net/of-hot-rods-and-tin-cans/

— Oppose Kings Bay Nuclear Trident base in Georgia — sign on letter due July 23, comments due July 24

admin , ,

From Nuclear Watch South

Dear Friends,

Nuclear Watch South invites all U.S. based organization and individuals
to sign the comments pasted below. Turn around time is tight!! The
Navy’s deadline to submit comments is Monday, July 24.

Send sign-ons to to Glenn Carroll atom.girl@nonukesyall.org by midnight
Sunday, July 23

Please include your name, title, organization, city, state or for
individuals your name, city and state.

We ask you to please circulate this sign-on opportunity widely! Nuclear
Watch South has traditionally focused on environmental concerns and is
not as well connected to the peace community as many of you!

The draft EA can be found here:
https://www.nepa(dot)navy(dot)mil/Current-Projects/Aircraft-Home-Basing-Ship-Homeporting/Columbia-Class/Documents/

You  may submit comments here:
https://www.nepa(dot)navy(dot)mil/Current-Projects/Aircraft-Home-Basing-Ship-Homeporting/Columbia-Class/Public-Commenting/

The Navy’s Environmental Assessment is narrow and concerned with
expanding Kings Bay Trident base to accommodate the new Columbia class
submarines, part of the nuclear weapons modernization program. Nuclear
Watch South has taken NEPA’s requirements to look at all impacts
seriously and is demanding a full EIS to include studying the impacts on
the North Atlantic right whales, whose Georgia birthing waters were only
first discovered as the Navy was displacing these creatures to the open
Atlantic Ocean by constructing Kings Bay. We bring the U.N. Treaty on
the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons into the mix, and challenge the Navy
to contemplate that the environmental impact of nuclear weapons is,
ERRR, wholesale environmental destruction!

We invite U.S.-based organization and individuals to sign on to the
following comments on the draft EA:

July 24, 2023

Ms. Sara Goodwin
code: EV22.SG
6506 Hampton Blvd
Norfolk, VA 23508-1212

COMMENTS ON COLUMBIA CLASS HOMEPORTING EA | KINGS BAY TRIDENT SUBMARINE
BASE

Dear Ms. Goodwin,

Thank you for granting the request by Nuclear Watch South and others for
a deadline extension on the Columbia Class Homeporting Environmental
Assessment for Kings Bay Trident Submarine Base in the Cumberland Sound
near St. Marys, Georgia. The original deadline was June 25, 2023. We
requested a 90-day extension of which you granted 30 days for a July 24,
2023, deadline.

Nuclear Watch South (formerly Georgians Against Nuclear Energy) is
drafting these comments and inviting additional signatories. Nuclear
Watch South is a grassroots, direct action, environmental nonprofit
based in Georgia since 1977. The Kings Bay Trident nuclear submarine
base near St. Marys, Georgia, deploys enough nuclear firepower to
destroy all life on Earth. The environmental impact of Kings Bay is
planetary. Nuclear Watch South invites all U.S.-based organizations and
individuals to co-sign these comments.

BACKGROUND AND HISTORY OF KINGS BAY

Georgia’s 100 miles of Atlantic Ocean coastline is a globally unique,
fertile, and fragile marshland environment of barrier islands,
freshwater tidal forests, maritime forests, and endangered longleaf pine
forest. Georgia’s vast salt marshes support a staggering diversity of
plant and animal life nurturing the eggs and hatchlings of countless sea
creatures and providing significant nesting and migration habitat for
200 bird species.

Kings Bay, near the Georgia-Florida state line is home base for six
Trident submarines and deploys 25% of the U.S. nuclear arsenal. A
Trident submarine is the most expensive and deadly nuclear weapons
system on Earth. The only other nation to possess a similarly powerful
system is the United Kingdom, a longtime United States ally. The Trident
has been controversial since its inception as it upsets the so-called
MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) power balance, fueling a dangerous
and costly international arms race.

The Navy conducted an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in 1977 when
Kings Bay Naval Submarine Base was first proposed. The EIS was performed
to fulfill environmental and public accountability requirements of the
newly instituted National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) of 1969.
In 1979, construction began on Kings Bay. In 1984, it was first
discovered that the base had unwittingly intruded upon the (previously
unknown and apparently only) birthing waters for the critically
endangered North Atlantic right whales in the Cumberland Sound.

Kings Bay base began operations in 1989. The Soviet Union dissolved in
1991. At the same time, the U.S. nuclear weapons manufacturing complex
occupying vast reservations in more than a dozen states from Washington
to South Carolina was shuttering its reactors and facilities amidst
revelations of widespread nuclear contamination and vast inventories of
poorly managed radioactive wastes. The nuclear weapons complex suddenly
and belatedly became subject to environmental law and NEPA has since
proved to be a difficult filter through which to permit new nuclear
weapons manufacture. For example, the U.S. Department of Energy and
National Nuclear Security Agency have failed in five attempts over the
past 30 years to establish a plutonium pit production facility at the
Savannah River Site (SRS) on the South Carolina/Georgia state line
(Savannah River.

Nuclear weapons manufacturing has languished since 1990 in all
nuclear-armed nations and limited nuclear treaties have greatly reduced
nuclear stockpiles. All nuclear testing ceased in 1992. Trident
submarines now carry fewer nuclear weapons, but each Trident submarine
currently can deploy the explosive power of 1,825 Hiroshimas.

In 2021, the U.N. ratified the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear
Weapons, presently counting 68 nations as parties. The treaty begins by
expressing the parties’ concern for “the catastrophic humanitarian
consequences that would result from any use of nuclear weapons, and
recognizing the consequent need to completely eliminate such weapons,
which remains the only way to guarantee that nuclear weapons are never
used again under any circumstances.” This landmark, game-changing Treaty
sets forth as international law that it is illegal to “develop, test,
produce, manufacture, otherwise acquire, possess or stockpile nuclear
weapons or other nuclear explosive devices.”

The North Atlantic right whale population rebounded from near extinction
when hunting the whales was outlawed in 1935. The whales encountered new
hazards, however, with the industrialization of shipping and fishing.
Ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear are held responsible for
mortality events which are now decimating the whale population. The
current population of the critically endangered North Atlantic right
whale has crashed to fewer than 350 animals. National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) estimates 50 births per year are
required to avoid extinction of these ancient, magnificent marine
mammals. In 2022, only 15 North Atlantic right whales were born. _No
environmental study has ever been conducted of the impact of the North
Atlantic right whales’ protected birthing waters being occupied by the
massive Kings Bay naval station._

Continue reading →

— My Humboldt Diary — exposé by nuclear whistleblower

admin , , , , ,

My Humboldt Diary: A True Story of Betrayal of the Public Trust is a must-read exposé by whistleblower and former nuclear worker Bob Rowen documenting PG&E’s practices at Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant near Eureka, California and retaliation against workers and others who raised safety issues, and the contamination from the plant, still unaddressed today.

“This book — My Humboldt Diary: A True Story of Betrayal of the Public Trust — is more than a telling of the story about PG&E’s Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant. It is Bob Rowen’s account of what happened during his Humboldt Bay ordeal that turned him against nuclear power, caused him to become disenchanted with America’s system of justice, and made him realize how powerful and sinister America’s nuclear juggernaut truly is. His Diary explains why we must not allow even one more nuclear power plant to be built.”

PG&E / U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (predecessor of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission) claimed:
   “Nuclear energy is safe, clean, and economical.”

The Pacific Gas and Electric Company also claimed:
  “Everything we’ve done at Humboldt Bay has been in a fishbowl.”

Author Bob Rowen says, “Nothing could be further from the truth!”

“My Humboldt Diary reveals the all too often intertwined nefarious behavior of corporate America and government. It provides historical knowledge for understanding the horrible legacy of the ill-fated Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant. PG&E’s Humboldt Bay nuclear facility cost $33 million to build. The plant operated for a total of 13 years with many shutdowns during its operating life. The cost of decommissioning the plant is now approaching a BILLION dollars with no real end in sight.”

This stunning book is now in its second printing.

$15.99

Order today at https://myhumboldtdiary.com/order-now.html

https://myhumboldtdiary.com/index.html

Interviews with whistleblowers on Humboldt Bay:

https://healfukushima.org/2023/01/25/former-humboldt-bay-nuclear-plant-technician-pgampes-safety-problems-and-retaliation/
Bob Rowen interview

https://healfukushima.org/2023/01/25/nuclear-accident-at-pgampes-humboldt-bay-nuclear-plant-whistleblower-presents-the-evidence/
Scott Rainsford interview

https://healfukushima.org/2023/02/15/pge-humboldt-nuclear-power-plant-accident-the-cover-up/
Scott Rainsford interview – longer video

https://healfukushima.org/2023/01/25/humboldt-bay-problems-continue-pgampe-retaliates-against-decommissioning-expert/
Darrell Whitman interview

— DOE nuclear waste siting: ‘Consent-based’ or bribery?

admin , , ,

‘ From Beyond Nuclear

June 11, 2023

The US Department of Energy on June 9 announced it will direct $26 million to “groups of university, nonprofit, and private-sector partners” who will help communities decide that they want to be the recipients of the country’s irradiated reactor fuel.

Having abjectly failed to find any safe, long-term radioactive waste management “solution” — possibly because there is none — while also failing to halt the production of nuclear waste, the DOE has now moved to what it calls “consent-based siting”.

The DOE’s interpretation of this term is that the recipients of the $26 million will “work with communities interested in DOE’s community-centered approach to storing and disposing of spent nuclear fuel.” In addition they would “ensure transparency and local support.”

But if past examples are any indicator, the “consenting” communities are likely to be those most deprived of resources, especially Indigenous communities and communities of color, who may feel pressured to accept the DOE largesse along with the fatal outcomes of living alongside high-level radioactive waste.

While U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm, insists that “it is vital” that “DOE works to be good stewards of the nation’s spent nuclear fuel,” the end result is more likely to be dumping radioactive waste on communities whose “consent” and willingness is driven by economic hardship.

energy(dot)gov/articles/doe-awards-26-million-support-consent-based-siting-spent-nuclear-fuel

https://beyondnuclear.org/consent-based-or-bribery/

— Despite scientific evidence and public opposition, Japan to start ocean wastewater discharge from Fukushima on June 12

admin , , , , , , , ,

TEPCO admitted that tritium (radioactive hydrogen) cannot be removed from the wastewater.

“When tritium gets inside the body, it’s at least as dangerous as any of the other radionuclides. And in some cases, it’s more than double as dangerous in terms of the effects of the radiation on the genetic material, on the proteins.”

— Timothy Mousseau, professor of biological sciences at the University of South Carolina,

From China Global Television Network

June 11, 2023

Japan plans to start sending seawater in an underwater tunnel built to release nuclear-contaminated water into the ocean from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant on June 12, local media reported on Friday citing news from the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO).

According to TEPCO, the tunnel has been filled with about 6,000 tonnes of seawater this week for a two-week test before releasing the nuclear-contaminated water from the plant to a point about one kilometer offshore.

Japan is likely to officially begin its plan to dump the nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean as early as the beginning of July. So far, the implementation of Japan’s plan still needs to await the outcome of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) meeting in late June.

In spite of the damage to the marine ecology and environment, Japan unilaterally pushed forward the discharge plan and constantly made excuses for its claim that “nuclear wastewater is safe.”

However, the content of Cs-137 (a radioactive element that is a common byproduct in nuclear reactors) in the marine fish caught in the harbor of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is 180 times that of the standard maximum stipulated in Japan’s food safety law, according to a statement released by the Chinese embassy in Japan on Monday, referring to data from a report released by TEPCO.

It also pointed out that there are more than 60 radionuclides, including tritium, carbon-14, cobalt-60, strontium-90 and iodine-129, in the nuclear-contaminated water. Some long-lived nuclides may spread with ocean currents and result in a bioconcentration effect, which will increase the total amount of radionuclides in the environment and cause unpredictable hazards to the marine ecosystem and human health. 

Continue reading →

— Global Times uncovers more lies on Japan’s move to dump wastewater; ‘unacceptable’ experiment with Earth’s future, says senior expert

admin , , , , , , ,

From Global Times

Xu Keyue and Xing Xiaojing
May 19, 2023

Although Japan suffered a lot from the atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII as well as the Fukushima nuclear accident in March 2011, the Japanese government has seemingly failed to learn from history and insists on dumping nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the sea. The plan has continued to arouse opposition and skepticism at home and abroad.

Japanese lawmakers and international nuclear experts said in recent exclusive interviews with the Global Times that they are opposed to the dumping plan, stressing that this disposal is not the only way to deal with the nuclear-contaminated wastewater, and it is unacceptable to experiment with the future of the Earth.

Public opposition and recourse to the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Law of the Sea can be regarded as effective ways to prevent the Japanese government from insisting on pushing forward with the plan.

“I oppose the discharge of Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea,” Junichi Tamatsukuri, Japanese lawmaker in Ibaraki Prefecture, told the Global Times.

Two nuclear accidents have occurred in and around his prefecture. The first was the Tokaimura critical nuclear accident in a small fuel preparation plant operated by JCO (formerly Japan Nuclear Fuel Conversion Co) in September 1999. The second was the Fukushima nuclear accident in March 2011. The two accidents severely affected the local economy, with consumers worried that food produced in Ibaraki contained radioactive substances that could harm their health. Many people have stopped visiting Ibaraki out of safety concerns.

“Local people from all walks of life have been working hard for years to recover from the economic losses caused by the two accidents,” Tamatsukuri said. “If the nuclear-contaminated wastewater from Fukushima is released into the sea this time, many industries such as fishing, agriculture, industry and tourism in Ibaraki Prefecture will be affected,” the lawmaker said.

Shaun Burnie, a senior nuclear expert at the Japan office of the international environmental organization Greenpeace, told the Global Times that the Japanese government and TEPCO have failed to explain their scientific justification for the discharge plan and have so far ignored the opposition of communities in Fukushima – especially the fishing communities.

Organically bound tritium (OBT) in the contaminated water is a “particular concern, because the amount to be discharged is on a vast scale,” said the expert who has been working on nuclear issues for nearly 40 years and radioactive waste discharge for more than 30 years.

“The Japanese government and TEPCO have deliberately miscommunicated on the risks of radionuclide tritium,” Burnie said. “They only focus on the external hazards, but the problem with tritium is when it is inside plants or seaweed, animals, fish or shellfish and humans,” Burnie said.

The scientific literature shows OBT has the potential to bio-accumulate and even potentially bio-magnify – as a slow energy radionuclide, when tritium is inside cells it can repeatedly damage the DNA structure. In this way, tritium is a much more dangerous radionuclide than the Japanese government and TEPCO have claimed, Burnie warned.

Continue reading →

— Global Times: Detailed evidence exposes Japan’s lies, loopholes in nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping plan

admin , , ,

From Global Times

June 5, 2023
By Huang Lanlan

As the date for Japan’s planned dumping of nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the ocean approaches, a Pandora’s Box threatening the global marine ecosystem is likely to be opened. 

The Japanese government announced its decision on April 13 to release the nuclear-contaminated wastewater from the storage tanks at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the sea. Starting from 2023, the discharge is scheduled to last about 30 years. This decision has garnered widespread attention and sparked great concern across the globe.

While Japanese authorities are busy colluding with some Western politicians in boasting about the discharge plan, Fukushima residents, international experts in ecology, and various stakeholders around the world have kept calling for Japan to reconsider and modify its flawed plan.

Japan’s attempt to “whitewash” the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater release plan failed again at the Group of Seven (G7) summit in May. The joint statement of the summit did not explicitly state nor allude to the G7 members’ “welcome” of the current dumping plan due to strong opposition. Instead, it only reiterated support for the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) review of Fukushima’s treated water release.

An insider familiar with Japan’s dumping plan recently told the Global Times that he has many concerns and doubts about the plan. The insider provided detailed evidence exposing Japan’s lie that whitewashes its dumping plan. He also revealed many loopholes in the plan that the Japanese government and Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) have refused to talk about or even deliberately concealed from the public.

All provided evidence considered, it is apparent that, currently, Japan is incapable of properly handling the nuclear-contaminated wastewater dumping. The toxic wastewater processed by the Japanese side cannot currently meet international discharge standards, and the country’s reckless behavior, if not stopped and corrected in time, may cause irreparable damage to the global ecosystem.

“There are still many unresolved issues with the source terms of the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater,” the insider said. 

“If the Japanese government and TEPCO continue to have their own way, it may cause improper discharge of nuclear-contaminated water, and that must be taken seriously,” he noted, calling on the two sides to be open, transparent, and honest in solving the problem.

Disappointing data monitoring

Japan’s current plan of releasing nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea, though superficially reasonable at first glance, cannot hold up to close scrutiny. Its monitoring on the source terms of the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater is incomplete, and the data it collects is likely unreliable, observers told the Global Times.

In February 2022, the IAEA Task Force released its first report, the IAEA Review of Safety Related Aspects of Handling ALPS-Treated Water at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station. The report clearly stated that the Task Force “commented on the importance of defining the source term for the discharge of ALPS (Advanced Liquid Processing System) treated water in a sufficiently conservative yet realistic manner.” 

Source terms of contaminated water include the composition of radionuclide and the activity of simulation of nuclides dispersion. As the premise of marine environmental monitoring, the accuracy and reliability of the source term-related data is crucial. However, Japan’s data statistics and monitoring on the source terms are disappointingly full of loopholes. 

Firstly, the types of radionuclides that TEPCO monitors are relatively few, making it far from being able to reflect the correct radionuclide dispersion in the contaminated wastewater.

The Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater, coming from the wastewater which was directly in contact with the core of the melted reactor, theoretically contains all the hundreds of types of radionuclides in the melted reactor, such as fission nuclides, a uranium isotope, and transuranic nuclide.

But TEPCO at first only listed 64 types of radionuclides including H-3 and C-14 as a (data) foundation for the works including monitoring and analysis, emission control, and environmental impact assessment. These 64 radionuclides did not include the uranium isotope and certain other α-nuclides, which have long half-lives while some are highly toxic.

TEPCO’s exclusion of the radionuclides mentioned above has greatly compromised the effectiveness of its monitoring work, as well as the credibility of its environmental impact assessment result, the insider stressed.

As for sampling and monitoring, TEPCO initially only sampled and monitored nine nuclides in the nuclear-contaminated water except tritium, including Cs-134, Cs-137, Sr-90, C-60, Sb-125, Ru-106, I-129, Tc-99, and C-14 (as well as gross α and gross β).

“TEPCO’s plan of only monitoring a few types of radionuclides is unscientific,” the insider told the Global Times.

Later, during the review process of the IAEA Task Force in 2022, TEPCO changed the number of radionuclide types it was monitoring and analyzing to 30, and then decreased it to 29 this year. This is far from enough to provide a complete assessment of the extremely complex nuclides in the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater.

Secondly, there are missing activity concentration values for multiple radionuclides in TEPCO’s monitoring scheme.

TEPCO’s public report on the 64 radionuclides only provides activity concentration values for 12 radioactive nuclides other than tritium, while over 50 other nuclides do not have specific activity concentration values. The report, while only offering gross α and gross β values, doesn’t disclose the respective concentration levels of many highly toxic radionuclides in the Fukushima nuclear-contaminated wastewater, such as Pu-239, Pu-240 and Am-241. 

“[TEPCO’s] current plan only monitors some of the nuclides and the gross α and gross β values, which cannot accurately indicate the fluctuations or changes in the activity of each nuclide after treating the contaminated wastewater due to the fluctuation of the nuclide source term composition,” said the insider. 

This operation of TEPCO has largely increased the uncertainty of the [nuclide] source item information of the nuclear-contaminated wastewater, and thus greatly increases the difficulties of making subsequent monitoring plans and marine ecological environmental impact assessment, he added.

Thirdly, TEPCO didn’t make conservative assumptions in many aspects of its monitoring data, and some of the assumptions it made were somewhat “negligent.”

In the process of treating the nuclear-contaminated wastewater, the slight particle shedding of chemical precipitants and inorganic adsorbents in the ALPS may cause some radionuclides to exist in a colloidal state, the insider explained.

Therefore, TEPCO’s assumption that all nuclides in nuclear-contaminated wastewater in the ALPS are water-soluble is obviously invalid, said the insider. “TEPCO should scientifically and comprehensively analyze whether colloidal nuclides are present in the nuclear-contaminated wastewater based on the long-term operation experience of its ALPS system,” he noted.

Continue reading →

— Tell U.S. Senators to Stop S.1111: The ADVANCE Act of 2023 

admin , , ,

From NIRS.org

Take a stand against a new bill that keeps US taxpayers on the hook for the full costs of nuclear disasters and promotes nuclear energy worldwide. S. 1111, the ADVANCE Act of 2023, is a comprehensive pro-nuclear bill that includes a host of provisions propping up the nuclear industry, including renewing the Price-Anderson Act. 

The most dangerous aspect of the bill is the renewal of the Price-Anderson Act, a 1957 law which caps the industry’s liability for nuclear disasters at only $13 billion. The Price-Anderson Act makes US taxpayers liable for the full costs of nuclear disasters – which could run into the hundreds of billions of dollars – and exempts the insurance industry from covering homeowners and businesses for damages from those disasters. 

The nuclear industry claims that nuclear energy has an impeccable safety record and that the new “advanced” reactors under development are  “inherently safe” and disaster-proof. If that’s true, they shouldn’t need taxpayers to continue being their insurance company.

The provisions included in S. 1111 would deepen the radioactive waste crisis and waste federal dollars on nuclear development, Let your Senators know that S. 1111 is bad news for US taxpayers and further entrenches the status quo of dirty, dangerous, and expensive nuclear power in the country and abroad.

Tell your U.S. Senators to Protect Taxpayers from the High Costs of Nuclear Power and STOP S.1111

To send a letter to your senator at https://nirs.salsalabs.org/S1111ADVANCEACTSenateAlertMay2023/index.html

Text of letter (which you can personalize)

Please oppose S. 1111, the ADVANCE Act of 2023. S. 1111 keeps US taxpayers on the hook for the full costs of nuclear disasters by renewing the Price-Anderson Act and provides for comprehensive support for the nuclear industry.

The most dangerous aspect of the bill is the renewal of the Price-Anderson Act, a 1957 law which caps the nuclear industry’s liability for nuclear disasters at only $13 billion. The Price-Anderson Act makes US taxpayers liable for the full costs of nuclear disasters – which could run into the hundreds of billions of dollars – and exempts the insurance industry from covering homeowners and businesses for damages from those disasters.

The nuclear industry claims that nuclear energy has an impeccable safety record and that the new “advanced” reactors under development are “inherently safe” and disaster-proof. If that’s true, they shouldn’t need taxpayers to continue being their insurance company.

S. 1111 is bad news for US taxpayers and further entrenches the status quo of dirty, dangerous, and expensive nuclear power in the country and abroad. Nuclear power is not a solution to the climate crisis. In fact, investments in nuclear power take away from desperately-needed development of a clean, just, and affordable energy system. S. 1111 is a costly distraction from climate solutions and a just transition. Please oppose S. 1111 and stop the unwieldy, unsafe, expensive, and internationally unstable advancement of nuclear power. Above all, don’t perpetuate the insurance fraud of the Price-Anderson Act by renewing the law and burdening taxpayers with the full brunt of nuclear disaster costs.

Thank you.

– – – –

https://nirs.salsalabs.org/S1111ADVANCEACTSenateAlertMay2023/index.html

For other news updates, go to NIRS.org

— California: Oppose AB 65 allowing small modular nuclear reactors

admin

AB 65L Energy: nuclear generation facilities.
https://legiscan.com/CA/bill/AB65/2023

From Mothers for Peace and NIRS

On Monday, April 10, 2023, the California Assembly Committee on Natural Resources held a hearing on AB 65, a bill that would overturn California’s longstanding ban and open the state up to massive amounts of new nuclear waste. The bill would allow the construction of “small” modular reactors (SMRs) – reactors that have higher risks and produce more waste than conventional reactors – and would direct the Public Utilities Commission to create a plan to increase nuclear power generation in the state.

The bill failed, but it was granted reconsideration.

Since 1976, California’s Nuclear Safeguards Act has barred new nuclear plants unless and until there is a permanent solution for the disposal of the radioactive waste produced by reactors, which is dangerous for ten thousand generations. Today, there is still no such solution for this extremely toxic waste. Nonetheless, AB 65 seeks an exemption to California’s nuclear ban, allowing many new nuclear power plants to be built and setting the stage for a nuclear power resurgence in California.

>> Urge your state senator and assemblymember to oppose AB 65.

https://nirs.salsalabs.org/AB65Californiaalert4523/index.html

https://mothersforpeace.org/take-action-now-to-oppose-ab-65/

— Paper: Advanced transmutation process and its application for decontamination of radioactive nuclear wastes, Michrowski and Porringa

admin , , , , , ,

Complete paper

Proceedings of Congress 2000

University of Alberta

Edmonton, May 29-30, 2000

Advanced transmutation process

and its application for the decontamination of radioactive nuclear wastes

Andrew Michrowski [1] and Mark Porringa [2]

Abstract: There are deviations to the standard model of radioactive atomic nuclei decay reported in the literature. These include persistent effects of chemical states and physical environment and the natural, low-energy transmutation phenomena associated with the vegetation processes of plants. The theory of neutral currents is proposed by Nobelist O. Costa de Beauregard to account for the observed natural transmutations, also known as the Kervran reaction. “Cold fusion” researchers have also reported anomalies in the formation of new elements in cathodes. This body of knowledge provides the rationale for the observed and successful and developed advanced transmutation processes for the disposal of nuclear waste developed by Yull Brown involving a gas developed by him with a stoichiometric mixture of ionic hydrogen and ionic oxygen compressed up to 0.45 MPa. The radioactivity in samples decreases by up to 97%, rapidly, simply and at low cost.

– – –

[1] President, The Planetary Association for Clean Energy, Inc, 100 Bronson Avenue, #1001, Ottawa, Ontario K1R 6G8, Canada. (613) 236-6265; fax: (613) 235-5876.

[2] Zeropoint Research, RR#1, Deep River, Ontario K0J 1P0, Canada. (613) 584-2960; fax: (613) 584-4616

For more information: https://pacenetwork.org/