Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

October 19, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nuclear Power Rejected in UN Climate Report, and by COP26 Climate Change Conference

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2021

The August 2021 report from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has rejected nuclear power for any role in confronting the crisis. Nuclear News online says about the report that “nuclear power is barely mentioned and when it is, its negative effects on climate and environment are made clear.” The UN’s 3,000-page analysis warns of possible radiation disasters and says the rapid warming of surface waters may cause shutdowns because reactors can “be challenged when using warmer river waters for cooling.” Meanwhile, the World Nuclear Association has complained in a letter that every application made by nuclear groups for exhibits at the UN’s 26th Conference of the Parties on Climate Change (COP26), being held in Glasgow, Scotland in November, had been rejected. The complaint was laughed off by some. “Having failed with its ridiculous claim that nuclear is cheap, the latest wheeze from the nuclear industry is to tell us that nuclear reactors are the answer to climate change,” said Richard Dixon, director of Friends of the Earth Scotland. “With renewables and energy efficiency cheaper and quicker to build and run than nuclear, [lobbyists] have already lost this argument and should have no place to spout their lies at COP26.”

— The Ferrett (Scotland), Aug. 19; and NuclearNews.net, Aug. 10, 2021

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

October 19, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Hurricane Cut Off-site Power to Louisiana Reactor

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2021

On Saturday, August 28, just before hurricane Ida slammed into Louisiana with winds reaching 153 mph, operators of the Waterford 3 nuclear reactor in Killona, 25 miles west of New Orleans, shut the reactor down as a precaution. Then Sunday, August 29, when Ida crashed ashore, the electric grid went down cutting off electricity to 830,000 homes and to the Waterford reactor. “Plant power is being provided via emergency diesel generators,” the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said. Off-site electric power is required by reactors during shutdowns to prevent overheating, reactor meltdowns, and a major radiation release. This is because electric pumps circulate cooling water through both the extremely hot reactor core and the pool that cools the extremely hot waste fuel rods. Entergy Nuclear Inc. maintained cooling water circulation by using emergency electric generators, but these back-up systems don’t always prevent disaster. The emergency generators in Fukushima, Japan were all destroyed by the earthquake and the tsunami that led to simultaneous meltdowns of three separate reactors. On August 31, Entergy also suffered “a major loss of communications capability …between the NRC and the [reactor] Control Room,” the NRC reported, and the Emergency Notification System (ENS) was completely lost for 30 minutes. Full ENS communications weren’t restored for nearly six hours. Off-site power was not restored to the reactor until 11:45 p.m. Tuesday, August 31. — Sacramento Bee, Aug. 31; and NRC Event Reports 55435, 55436, and 55443 for Aug. 30 and 31, 2021

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

October 19, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Fukushima Waste Water Update

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2021

Tokyo Electric Power Co. said in August that it intends to use an underground piping system to pump radioactive waste cooling water into the Pacific Ocean. The government’s April decision allowing Tepco to disperse the pollution into the public commons over the next several decades caused an international uproar, with some countries promising to fight the decision in the United Nations, the World Court or perhaps the World Trade Organization. Nuclear watchdogs warned that Tepco’s use of underground pipes to disperse the contaminated waste water allows the dumping to be unregulated and difficult to monitor. — The Guardian, Aug. 26; & Agence France-Presse, Aug. 26, 2021

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

October 19, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Wisconsin Reactors Set to Receive Second  License Extension, Allowing 80-Year Run 

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2021
Christine Manwiller 

NextEra Energy, owner of two nuclear power reactors at Point Beach on Lake Michigan, has filed to extend their operating licenses by 20 more years. The reactors, 51 and 49 years old, are already operating well past their original 40-year limit.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has a history of “rubber stamping” such license extensions. Between 2000 and 2017, the agency approved 61 reactor license extensions and denied none. Point Beach, in 2005, already got a 20-year extension from the NRC, and it’s expected that the second will be approved in spite of public opposition.

Furthermore, the NRC granted NextEra a 17% “power uprate” request in 2011, which allows Next- Era to push the Point Beach units harder than ever, in spite of their age.

The threat of a 40-year-old machine running for 80 years has sparked protest by those living nearby and watchdog groups. Physicians for Social Responsibility-Wisconsin filed a formal petition with the NRC on behalf of residents and a hearing on the license application was granted.

Unsafe operations at Point Beach are numerous and some could have devastating consequences for the Great Lakes. https://nukewatchinfo.org/unsafe-operations-routine-at-point-beach/

One of the more serious problems with the reactors is degraded fuel cladding. “Cladding” is the zirconium tube that holds the uranium fuel in bundles inside the reactor core. This metal becomes brittle after years of bombardment by the neutrons created by the uranium’s chain reactions. According to Arnold Gundersen, a nuclear engineer and former reactor operator, the Point Beach reactors “do not meet basic licensing requirements.” He goes on to say, “Point Beach is the worst neutron-embrittled reactor pressure vessel in the country, at risk of fracturing like glass in an emergency.” The issue of cladding degradation was brought to the NRC in 2007, but 14 years later it has not yet acted on the proposed rule making.

Other concerns raised by the petition are environmental. Lake Michigan is already showing symptoms of climate chaos from increased rainfall, temperatures, and shoreline development. Point Beach adds to these issues, taking in over 800 million gallons of water per day. Most of this water is returned to the lake, now heated, killing aquatic organisms, and adding hot water to an environment already out of balance.

As if these reasons are not enough to shut down Point Beach, the argument that keeping the reactors functioning would be good for Wisconsin’s economy is flimsy. The cost of electricity produced by Point Beach is high; currently at $55.82 per megawatt hour, a cost that will increase to $122.45 by 2033. This is 63% higher than the average wholesale price for electricity in the area, and much higher than renewables.

What will it take to get the NRC to deny a reactor license extension? Critics of nuclear energy hope to find out soon.

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter

October 19, 2021 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Retirement-Age Point Beach Reactors Court Disaster with Sirens Off, Engines Racing

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2021
 By John LaForge

A change to “emergency response” has been made at the old Point Beach nuclear reactors south of Green Bay. The operator, NextEra Energy Point Beach, has turned off the site’s disaster warning sirens. No more will the familiar wail warn of potentially catastrophic radiation releases or spills from the two reactors — which are 51 and 49 years old.

The siren system has been replaced with what’s called “IPAWS” for Integrated Public Alert and Warning System. NextEra says on its website, “The emergency alert system will broadcast official information on local radio stations. Alerts will be sent to your cell phone. If you have functional needs or do not own a cell phone, contact your emergency management agency to be registered for notification and assistance.”

That is, the system sends disaster warnings only to radios and cell phones. Are yours always on all night? Without sirens to wake sleeping nearby populations in the event of an overnight reactor disaster, potential victims can pretend that accidents only happen in daytime.

A quick search reveals:

  • the 1986 Chernobyl explosions and meltdown began at 1:23 a.m.
  • the 1979 Churchrock, New Mexico, uranium mine waste spill — the largest accidental radioactive material release in US history — broke at 5:30 a.m.
  • the Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, partial meltdown in 1979 started at 4:00 a.m.

Michael Keegan of Don’t Waste Michigan is a close watchdog of Point Beach and the 28 other reactors on the Great Lakes. He wrote in an email to Nukewatch, “If they can afford them, I sure hope everyone has their TV, radio, computer, or cell phone on in the middle of the night when the [IPAWS] alarm is sounded.”

The “bathtub curve” is derived from a tub’s cross-sectional shape. It’s a graphic representation of the failure rate of machines or technologies over the system’s operational life. The curve illustrates three periods: 1) the high failure rate of start-ups known as early failures; 2) the reduced failure rate of mid-life, known as random failures; and 3) an increasing failure rate due to aging known as wear-out failures. Failures and accidents during the wear-out period become increasingly more likely with age.

Paul Gunter, at Beyond Nuclear in Takoma Park, Maryland, specializes in reactor hazards and operations. He wrote in an email, “Removing the audible stationary sirens from within the emergency planning zone will significantly diminish the reactors’ early warning notification system and the radiological defense-in-depth strategy.”

Gunter points to the “bath tub curve” depicting failure rates over time in systems from toasters to nuclear reactors. “At startup, high rates of failures result from design flaws, mis-assembly and defects. A period of stable operations ensues, but over time, the aging of systems, structures and components leads to material degradation and a steeper rate of failures,” Gunter wrote.

In 2005, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission granted NextEra’s request to give the old reactors 20-year license extensions, letting them rattle and hum until they’re 60. In November 2020, NextEra applied for a second extension that, if granted, would allow its two reactors to churn out radiation until they’re 80 years old. Adding even more risk to the reactors’ “golden years,” NRC in 2011 approved a 17 percent increase in power output from both units. These changes to original design and engineering limits are akin to dear old gramps gunning the engine of his vintage jalopy with the lousy breaks, racing down main street and running red lights with the whole family involuntarily along for the ride.

Tragic warning from Germany

Germany’s deadly flooding in July with at least 210 fatalities is a tragic example of how retiring warning sirens can be catastrophic.

In some towns sirens failed when the electricity grid crashed, and elsewhere there were no sirens at all, the Los Angeles Times reported July 24. (“Residents of flood-stricken German towns say they got inadequate warning of deluge”) The German daily Badische Neueste Nachrichten reported August 6 that sirens were removed in many places or weren’t working. There had been some 80,000 sirens across Germany when the Cold War ended, but in the 1990s the federal government handed responsibility over sirens to local communities and, in cost-cutting steps, thousands of them, many in the flooded areas, then halted their regular maintenance or removed sirens altogether. In 2015, Germany’s Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance said only 15,000 sirens still existed, Germany’s N-TV reported July 9.

Second only to the endless hazards of radioactive waste, disaster response preparedness has always been the bane of nuclear power systems — the only industrial machines required to have evacuation plans prior to start-up. Taking down warning siren systems only increases the likelihood of catastrophe. Running old reactors harder and without sirens amounts to reckless endangerment.

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • …
  • 94
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch