A group of nuclear power experts and former regulators from 11 nations, responding to Japan's nuclear disaster, is calling for "stress tests" on the world's reactors to determine their ability to withstand extreme earthquakes, flooding or other natural disasters that strike singly or in combination.

In a letter to the International Atomic Energy Agency in advance of the IAEA meeting later this month on the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the 17-member ad hoc group also urges that safety requirements for new nuclear plants be reviewed. The evaluations must ensure that backup cooling systems for reactors and spent fuel pools can operate for a long time in "blackout" conditions, where on-site and off-site power is cut off.

"We urge greater use of politically independent, multinational design reviews for future plants. ... The benefits of this approach have been demonstrated in the aircraft industry," the letter says.

"You have to move the safety envelope," said Roger Mattson, former leader of the U.S. task force that investigated the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979, and an organizer of the group issuing the letter. "You have to take these severe accidents into account and do more to prevent the very low-probability events."

In addition to Mattson and Ashok Thadani, former director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission office of research, the group's members include Sam Harbison, former chief inspector of the U.K. Nuclear Installations Inspectorate; Jukka Laaksonen of Finland, chairman of the Western European Nuclear Regulators' Association; M.R. Srinivasan, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission of India; and Victor Sidorenko, former deputy minister of nuclear power for the Soviet Union and Russia.

Peer reviews of developing nations
The letter's signatories direct part of their agenda toward nations whose nuclear programs are starting or accelerating. China, India and several Persian Gulf nations lead that list.

"Such countries must demonstrate their ability to uphold high international standards" on nuclear plant safety, security and non-proliferation, the letter signers say. The IAEA should consider a system of compulsory peer reviews of nuclear plant operators and national nuclear regulatory organizations, they add.

The letter also sets a demanding agenda for the U.S. nuclear industry.

Stress tests or safety audits of U.S. reactors should consider the hazards from severe natural disasters that are currently considered too unlikely to warrant mandatory regulation of the emergency equipment and procedures that would be called into play, the letter authors say.

Older nuclear plants require a particularly critical review to determine what "backfit" additions of safety measures are required, they say. If these improvements are not "reasonably achievable," then older plants should be allowed to operate for a limited grace period before being permanently shut down, the letter says.

As an example of a strategic backfit, Mattson cited France's requirement of backup generators that would be powered by excess steam from reactors during emergencies to deliver electricity to crucial pumps and monitoring instruments.

"Governments and regulators should exercise great care in permitting any extension of the operating life of the oldest nuclear power plants still in operation that were built to the easier safety standards," the letter says. "Continued operation of a few of the oldest plants for a few more years should not be allowed to jeopardize the continued operation of newer and safer plants in the longer term.

"Even if there are legal complications involved, we find it difficult to justify significant differences in general safety objectives for new and existing plants."

Proof needed of regulatory independence
Mattson said the group believes its recommendations will be considered by the IAEA ministerial meeting on the Japanese crisis that begins June 20 in Vienna.

1 Comments

1. 1. Asteroid Miner 02:00 AM 6/3/11

   Nuclear power plants are too safe. ALL sources of electricity should be held to the same standard. Coal kills 26000 Americans and 1 Million Chinese every year. Coal puts 100 to 400 times as much radiation into the air as nuclear reactors are allowed to. Wind turbines can kill people by falling on them, by flinging ice, by workers falling off, etc.
   
   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.
   
   The only deaths at Fukushima Daiichi were from the tsunami.   None were from the reactor or radiation.   Several workers got the equivalent of a sunburn on their ankles.   They would not have gotten sunburns on their ankles if they had worn galoshes.
   
   The power plant at Fukushima Daiichi survived the earthquake and a 46 foot high wall of water. You couldn't do that. American containment buildings are even stronger.
   Definitions of “survived” The containment buildings are largely intact and the radiation leakage is below the natural background level averaged over a year. That is very good for being hit with a 46 foot tall wall of water. Why does jumping off a tall bridge kill you? Because water hits you like concrete if you are moving fast. The tsunami was going 500 miles per hour in the open ocean. When you jump off a bridge, your terminal velocity is 200 mph.
   
   Coal contains: URANIUM, ARSENIC, LEAD, MERCURY, Antimony, Cobalt, Nickel, Copper, Selenium, Barium, Fluorine, Silver, Beryllium, Iron, Sulfur, Thorium etc.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this