Progress Energy's H.B. Robinson nuclear plant
Image: Image courtesy of CPL
President Obama responded to Japan's nuclear reactor crisis yesterday by asking the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to make a comprehensive safety review of U.S. nuclear plants to assess their ability to withstand natural calamities.
Speaking at the White House, NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko said yesterday the study would be made. He repeated his statements this week that the commission considered the 104 U.S. nuclear plants to be secure, but the evidence from Japan's devastating reactor damage would be the basis for a new review.
"We're going to take a look at what happened, we're going to do a systematic and a methodical review of the information, and if we need to make changes to our program, we'll make changes to our program," Jaczko said. "But I want to emphasize and stress that we have a very robust program where we look at the safety and the security of our nuclear facilities on a minute-by-minute basis. "
Today, Japan's Self-Defense Force units shot water from fire trucks at the Unit 3 reactor at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, hoping to raise water levels in the unit's spent fuel cooling pool and prevent more radiation leaks from overheated fuel rods. More dousing operations would occur today, authorities said.
The chief of staff of the Air Self-Defense Force, Shigeru Iwasaki, said the SDF crews were exposed to no more than several millisieverts of radiation during the operation, levels that he said would not prevent continued attempts to cool the reactor, NHK reported. However radiation levels were registered elsewhere in the complex, up to 20 millisieverts per hour at some points, the news service said. Japan's science ministry said today that relatively high radiation levels were detected about 30 kilometers northwest of the plant.
The Los Angeles Times reported that the spent fuel pool in Unit 4 appears to have been damaged, possibly by the force of the earthquake, which could have led to leaks of the protective water cover that keeps spent fuel from overheating. The newspaper quoted an unnamed U.S. utility official as saying that water sprayed into the pool was disappearing faster than could be explained by evaporation.
A critical step in the weeklong battle is scheduled tomorrow, when Tokyo Electric Power Co. said it hoped to restore outside electric power to two of the crippled reactor units to see whether normal cooling of reactor cores and spent fuel pools could be restored at Units 1 and 2.
U.S. experts have said the resumption of cooling operations offers the best hope for containing radioactive releases of steam and gas at the complex, but it is not yet known whether hydrogen explosions and damage to reactor cores will permit this to happen.
Tokyo Electric Power, owner of the Fukushima Daiichi plant, said today it had shelved plans to build a new nuclear reactor in Aomori Prefecture. At 1,380 megawatts, it would have been Japan's largest.
Separately, owners of the 104 U.S. commercial nuclear power plants announced yesterday they will inspect their units to verify each company's ability to maintain safe reactor operations if confronted with natural disasters, fires, aircraft impact and explosions that go beyond the threats that plants are designed to withstand.
"We can do the best planning and analysis, and we can never guarantee zero risk, and we need to be prepared," Anthony Pietrangelo, chief nuclear officer of the Nuclear Energy Institute, told reporters. He said lessons from the Japanese reactor crisis will be studied. "We will learn from them. We will get that operating experience. We will apply it and try to make our units even safer than they are today."
The question of the safety of U.S. nuclear plans was also the subject of a report issued yesterday by the Union of Concerned Scientists, authored by David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer who heads UCS's nuclear safety program. The report reviewed 14 significant safety-related events that triggered special oversight by NRC in 2010.
Some demands for a temporary shutdown
Lochbaum's report highlighted three cases in which NRC inspectors pursued problems to secure fixes and three cases with problems NRC overlooked or dismissed, it said.
"The chances of a disaster at a nuclear plant are low," the UCS report said. But it added the severe accidents at Three Mile Island in 1979 and Chernobyl in 1986 "occurred when a handful of known problems—aggravated by a few worker miscues—transformed fairly routine events into catastrophes."
The new inspection program by the nuclear operators follows demands from some members of Congress for a temporary shutdown and inspection of older U.S. plants, particularly the 23 reactors with the same reactor models present in the crippled Fukushima Daiichi complex.
See what we're tweeting about
8 Comments
Add CommentAs recovery efforts continue it has become obvious the the earthquake itself caused no significant damage. It was graft and corruption that allowed normal anti tsunami measures to be bypassed that caused the problem. Saving a coupla nickels by putting the diesels and fuel in the way of a Tsunami that was 100% probable given the geological history of the area was something only a corrupt liaison between businessmen and regulatory bureaucrat with a gambling habit would undertake.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI would hope we have no such issues in the US.
While modern Gen III reactors would have survived corruptions best efforts, it will be really hard to restart the nuke renaissance with the massive nobrain greenie backlash sure to occur.
Perhaps now somebody (hello Dr. Chu are you listening?) will now get behind the Molten Salt Reactor.
David LeBlanc at the U of Ottawa has redesigned the Molten salt reactor which would resolve all safety and cost issues with nuclear. This tech was actually build and ran in a reactor for many years - even flown around on an airplane. By using existing nuclear waste for fuel it could power the world for hundreds of years.
All it needs is $5B, 5 years, and a place to build em , and factory produced units would be streaming out fast enough to eliminate fossil fuels in 5 years.
Big Oil knows this and has purchased the politicians (yes Dr, Chu we know) to make sure no development happens. Even Bill Gates can't find a place to build to his derivative TerraPower unit.
The Chinese at least have seen the light and are starting a MSR program.
The horrible tragedies in Japan should be responded to by every nation on Earth which has the expertise and resources to do so. The fact is, no place on Earth is immune to natural disasters of that magnitude or greater. Americans must band together to make sure that greedy dirty energy companies can't keep us vulnerable to added threats to our lives and health in order to maximize their windfall profits.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe nuclear emergencies and natural gas and oil fires in Japan should be an object lesson, and dire warning, to every nation. This is why it is of utmost urgency to convert the world's energy systems to TRULY clean, safe, abundant, inexhaustible and FREE energy sources, such as Wind, Sunshine, Geothermal Heat, Tidal/River Flows and Hydrogen/Oxygen extracted from Water using electricity from those sources.
If you think massive conversion to clean energy would be "too expensive", I have 2 questions for you:
1) In your cost/benefit analysis, how do you value the lives of nuclear plant radiation victims, coal miners, drilling rig workers, billions of sea creatures and the millions of people who die from pollution-caused illnesses?
2) If we fail to restore and protect the ONLY known natural life-support system in the Universe, how will you justify that failure to your gasping, wheezing Great-Grandchildren, and what do you think the money saved will be worth to THEM?
If Japan's energy came from self-renewing energy sources, there would be no oil and gas fires or nuclear emergencies adding to the other crises they are facing.
"We will learn from them"? Don't need a rocket scientist or a multi-million dollar study to tell you need to have fail-safe backups of the backups!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe only question should be as clearly seen in Japan - what are the contingency plans if one backup fails - is there another backup in place to continue basic uninterrupted operation?
I think its a good idea.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisbut god knows when,where and how strong an earthquake will be. prevention is ALWAYS better than cure
What about FUSION? Why don't start to be serious- investment, dollars, euros,etc- with fusion reactors? Fision reactors are powerful but dirty and very problematic if accidents. We need a Manhattan Project like for fusion. Or, at least, some funding for the future. Europe is building the ITER More fusion projects please! Sooner or later, it will work.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTrue.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIn addition, now Tokyo region experience everyday threats of power cuts in electricity.
Tokyo needs around 60 million watts at most while the current power plants can supply only 30 million watts.
What if you rely too much on nuclear reactors?
Even if they stop safely in an emergent situation,
how society can work until the reactors are recovered
Your comment is non-sensical. By using nuclear waste we can create a clean energy.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTheres nothing clean about nuclear waste and its transportation.
m..."spent nuclear fuel" can be recycled....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this