{"id":4186,"date":"2020-12-30T08:57:16","date_gmt":"2020-12-30T08:57:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.radiofree.org\/?p=144650"},"modified":"2020-12-30T08:57:16","modified_gmt":"2020-12-30T08:57:16","slug":"inviting-nuclear-disaster","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2020\/12\/30\/inviting-nuclear-disaster\/","title":{"rendered":"Inviting Nuclear Disaster"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Photograph Source: Brad.K \u2013 CC BY 2.0<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Nuclear power plants when they began being constructed were not seen as running for more than 40 years because of radioactivity embrittling metal parts and otherwise causing safety problems. But in recent decades, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has extended the operating licenses of nuclear power plants from 40 years to 60 years and then 80 years, and is now considering 100 years.<\/p>\n

\u201cIt is crazy,\u201d declares Robert Alvarez, a former senior policy advisor at the U.S. Department of Energy and a U.S. Senate senior investigator and now senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies and is an author of the book Killing Our Own: The Disaster of America\u2019s Experience with Atomic Radiation.<\/em><\/p>\n

\u201cNo reactor in history has lasted that long,\u201d commented Alvarez. The oldest nuclear power plant in the U.S. was Oyster Creek, five miles south of Toms River, New Jersey, which opened in 1969 and was shut down 49 years later in 2018.<\/p>\n

The move is \u201can act of desperation in response to the collapse of the nuclear program in this country and the rest of the world,\u201d he declares.<\/p>\n

The nuclear industry and nuclear power advocates in government are \u201cdesperately trying to hold on,\u201d says Alvarez. With hardly any new nuclear power plants being constructed in the U.S. and the total number down to 94, they seek to have the operating licenses of existing nuclear power plants extended, he says, to keep the nuclear industry alive.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s a sign of \u201cthe end of the messy romance with nuclear power.\u201d<\/p>\n

The NRC will be holding a webinar on January 21 to consider the extending of nuclear plant operating licenses to 100 years. As its announcement is headed: \u201cPUBLIC MEETING ON DEVELOPMENT OF GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS TO SUPPORT LICENSE RENEWAL FOR 100 YEARS OF PLANT OPERATION.\u201d<\/p>\n

Nuclear power plant construction has been in a deep depression for some time. Vogtle Units 3 and 4 in Georgia are \u201cthe first new nuclear units built in the United States in the last three decades,\u201d notes on its website<\/a> Georgia Power, one of the companies involved in that project. The cost projection in 2008 to build the two nuclear plants was $14.3 billion. \u201cNow, updated estimates put the total project cost at roughly $28 billion,\u201d states<\/a> Taxpayers for Common Sense, and construction is more than five years behind schedule.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not just the gargantuan price of nuclear power, and the preferability economically today of green, renewable energy led by solar and wind. Nuclear plant construction in the U.S. and much of the world has been in the doldrums because of the Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear power plant catastrophes. People not only don\u2019t want to waste their money\u2013they don\u2019t want to lose their lives to nuclear power.<\/p>\n

\u201cThere is no empirical evidence\u201d to support the notion that nuclear plants can have a century-long life span, says Alvarez. There \u201cis no penciling away the problems of age\u201d of nuclear power plants which operate under high-pressure, high-heat conditions and are subject to radiation fatigue. \u201cThe reality of wear-and-tear can\u2019t be wished away.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWho would want to ride in a 100 year-old car?\u201d he asks.<\/p>\n

Paul Gunter, director of the Reactor Oversight Project of the organization Beyond Nuclear, says: \u201cThe new construction of nuclear power plants is proving to be more expensive and more dubious than ever before. So, the nuclear industry and the NRC are in the process of developing a plan to get these existing aging and inherently dangerous machines to run for 100 years.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThis raises all kinds of problems that have never been addressed,\u201d says Gunter.<\/p>\n

And the NRC and the U.S. Department of Energy don\u2019t want to address them.<\/p>\n

Gunter points to what happened to a report which the NRC commissioned the DOE\u2019s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to make. \u201cThe federal laboratory was contracted by the NRC to develop the criteria and guidance document to address and close numerous \u2018knowledge gaps\u2019 in the license renewal safety review process to provide the \u2018reasonable assurance\u2019 that the reactors could be operated reliably and safely into the license extension period,\u201d relates Gunter. The 2017 report raised many significant issues regarding extending the operating licenses of nuclear plants.<\/p>\n

The report is titled \u201cCriteria and Planning Guidance for Ex-Plant Harvesting to Support Subsequent License Renewal.\u201d<\/p>\n

It \u201cwas publicly posted by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to its website in December 2017,\u201d relates Gunter, \u201cas well as to the websites of the Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information and the International Atomic Energy Commission\u2019s International Nuclear Information System.\u201d<\/p>\n

But then Gunter attended a public meeting at the NRC\u2019s headquarters in Rockville, Maryland on September 26, 2018 on operating license extensions \u201cand I started asking questions citing the report\u201d of the year before. The NRC officials there \u201cwere quite surprised.\u201d<\/p>\n

And the NRC \u201cwiped all three websites of the report.\u201d<\/p>\n

The NRC was to repost the report, but it was then \u201cscrubbed clean of dozens of references to safety-critical knowledge \u2018gaps\u2019 pertaining to many known age-related degradation mechanisms described in the original published report,\u201d says Gunter. \u201cThe NRC revision also scrubbed Pacific Northwest National Laboratory findings and recommendations to \u2018require\u2019 the harvesting of realistic and representative aged materials from decommissioning nuclear power stations\u2014base metals, weld materials, electric cables, insulation and jacketing, reactor internals and safety-related concrete structures like the containment and spent fuel pool\u2014for laboratory analyses of age degradation. The laboratory analyses are intended to provide \u2018reasonable assurance\u2019 of the license extension safety review process for the projected extension period.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, Beyond Nuclear had downloaded and saved a copy of the original report which you can view here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

And you can view what Gunter terms the \u201csanitized version\u201d of the report which has the same title but is dated March 2019. It\u2019s here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The omissions start with what is headed \u201cAbstract\u201d in the original 2017 report. The \u201cAbstract\u201d states: \u201cAs U.S. nuclear power plants look to subsequent license renewal (SLR) to operate for a 20-year period beyond 60 years, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry will be addressing technical issues around the capability of long-lived passive components to meet their functionality objectives. A key challenge will be to better understand likely materials degradation mechanisms in these components and their impacts on component functionality and safety margins. Research addressing many of the remaining technical gaps in these areas for SLR may greatly benefit from materials sampled from plants (decommissioned or operating). Because of the cost and inefficiency of piecemeal sampling, there is a need for a strategic and systematic approach to sampling materials from structures, systems and components in both operating and decommissioned plants.\u201d<\/p>\n

But in the 2019 version of the report, this \u201cAbstract,\u201d among other material, is gone.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, says Gunter, it is the practice of the nuclear industry as part of decommissioning nuclear power plants \u201cto knock these plants down and bury them as quickly as they can\u201d and \u201cignore having critical post-mortem autopsies.\u201d Components of the plants are not studied to determine the extent of wear including \u201chow radiation affects concrete and impacts on what had been inaccessible areas of the plants.\u201d Not being done are analyses of the impacts of embrittlement of metals notably on the reactor pressure vessel caused by radiation exposure, as well as \u201cextreme temperatures and vibration.\u201d The industry resistance, he said, is based on the cost of such examinations. Further, there \u201care 600 miles of electrical cable in a typical nuclear power plant\u201d which energize control monitors and other components. Cabling and its \u201cinsulation and jacketing\u201d are also not being inspected but \u201cburied with the plant.\u201d Overall, the \u201creal world effects of aging\u201d are not being gauged, says Gunter. And the original Pacific Northwest National Laboratory report, he emphasizes, would \u201crequire\u201d this be done.<\/p>\n

The first nuclear power plants given permission by the NRC to operate for 60 years were, in 1999, the two Calvert Cliffs plants located on the western shore of Chesapeake Bay near Lusby, Maryland 45 miles southeast of Washington D.C. Most U.S. nuclear power plants are now licensed to operate for 60 years.<\/p>\n

The first U.S. nuclear power plant to have their operating licenses extended to 80 years were, in 2019, Florida Power & Light\u2019s Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 near Homestead, Florida, 25 miles south of Miami.<\/p>\n

The Associated Press conducted \u201ca yearlong investigation of aging issues at the nation\u2019s nuclear power plants\u201d and, in an article in June 2011 by Jeff Donn, reported: \u201cRegulators contend that the 40-year limit was chosen for economic reasons and to satisfy safety concerns, not for safety issues. They contend that a nuclear plant has no technical limit on its life. But an AP review of historical records, along with an interview<\/a> of an engineer who helped develop nuclear power, shows just the opposite: Reactors were made to last only 40 years. Period.\u201d<\/p>\n

Further, the piece\u2014\u201dAging Nukes: NRC and industry rewrite nuke history\u201d\u2014said \u201cthe AP found that the relicensing process often lacks fully independent safety reviews. Records show that paperwork of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission sometimes matches word-for-word the language used in a plant operator\u2019s application.\u201d<\/p>\n

Getting operating license extensions \u201cis a lucrative deal for operators,\u201d said AP.<\/p>\n

Priscilla Star, director of the Coalition Against Nukes, said of extending the operating licenses of nuclear power plants to 100 years: \u201cThere is no sane argument to perpetuate the lifespan of our already decrepit nuclear reactors other than the NRC seeking to perpetuate the endless profits to its licensees.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cAll kinds of technical foul-ups occur in the daily operations of a nuclear power plant,\u201d she continued. \u2018It\u2019s a crapshoot running any of them safely on any given day because human error plays such a big part of operational safety. More frequent cyber hacking will also put hs at greater risk if this form of energy production is not abolished in favor of renewables. It\u2019s time for a presidential administration to curb the noblesse oblige appetite of the NRC and once and for all consider it unsafe and unsound as a regulatory agency putting profit before public safety.\u201d<\/p>\n

What the NRC has also done extending nuclear power plant licenses to 60 and then 80 years is to allow the plants to be \u201cuprated\u201d to generate more electricity\u2014to run hotter and harder increasing the chance of accidents. It is asking for nuclear disaster.<\/p>\n

The late Alvin M. Weinberg, long-time director of Oak Ridge National Laboratory and a major promoters nuclear technology, in 2004 published an essay<\/a> in the journal Technology in Society<\/em> titled: \u201cOn \u2018immortal\u2019 nuclear power plants.\u201d  He wrote about that a nuclear power plant could operate \u201c100 years or more.\u201d Earlier Weinberg coined the term<\/a> \u201cnuclear priesthood\u201d for scientists being in a leading role in what he called the \u201cFaustian bargain\u201d of using nuclear power.<\/p>\n

The link to the 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. NRC webinar on January 21 is on its announcement which states that the \u201cNRC is seeking public dialogue.\u201d The meeting\u2019s agenda on the announcement lists several time segments for \u201cOpen Discussion\u2026Including General Public.\u201d The announcement is here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n

This post was originally published on Radio Free<\/a>. <\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Photograph Source: Brad.K \u2013 CC BY 2.0 Nuclear power plants when they began being constructed were not seen as running for more than 40 years because of radioactivity\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":253,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[22,4],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4186"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/253"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4186"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4186\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4187,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4186\/revisions\/4187"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4186"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4186"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4186"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}