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

January 18, 2024 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Owners Want Monticello Reactor to Run 80 Years

By John LaForge

The 52-year-old Monticello nuclear reactor on the Mississippi River in Minnesota, 38 miles northwest of Minneapolis, is owned by Xcel Energy and operated by Northern States Power.

Fired up in 1971, the General Electric Mark I boiling water reactor is identical to the three Fukushima-Daiichi reactors in Japan that suffered complete core meltdowns and four hydrogen explosions in March 2011, leading to the worst accidental radiation releases in history. (Fukushima is often called the second worst nuclear reactor disaster after Chernobyl, but releases of cesium-137 to the ocean from Fukushima far surpass those of Chernobyl.)

In January 2023, Xcel applied to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a second extension to its operating license which, if granted, would allow the unit to run for 80 years. The first extension was granted in 2006, allowing the jalopy to generate radioactive waste until 2030, when it will be 60. Monticello’s second request, called a Subsequent License Renewal Application, or SLRA, is now in progress, and the NRC, like a rubber stamp, has granted nearly every license extension request it has ever entertained.

The process is complex. After the application is submitted, a License Renewal Process and Environmental Scoping meeting is held; then the NRC conducts an Environmental Review, followed by a Site Environmental Audit which was completed in August 2023. Then a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is issued (scheduled for Feb. 24, 2024), at which point interested parties and the public have 90 days to submit comments on the relicensing proposal. A public meeting is then held to discuss the Draft SEIS, and then a Final SEIS is issued. Lastly, the NRC issues a decision. The over-worked citizenry can be excused for not keeping up with this voluminous bureaucratic charade, something the industry desperately counts on.

The risks of operating large power reactors long past their designed retirement date is illustrated by what’s called the “bathtub curve.” The curve is a schematic description of when, and how likely, major accidents with machinery can be expected due to long-lasting wear-and-tear. (See diagram)

The “bathtub curve” is a schematic description of when major accidents with complicated machinery can be expected. Most occur early on in a machine’s life, and then toward the end of it after years of wear-and-tear.

The curve shows that in the life of complicated machines like nuclear reactors, accidents often occur early on — due to extreme heat, heavy vibrations, untested electronics, valves, welds, and associated equipment. After the early mishaps and mistakes there is often a period of time when the number of unplanned events decreases, followed by a steady state of proper operation. Then, in later years, the effects of aging damage the reliability of parts and equipment, especially those subject to decades of intense heat, vibration, corrosion, and — in the case of nuclear reactors — neutron bombardment and its “embrittlement” of metal parts and structures.

Because of the recent leak of contaminated wastewater from corroded and failed underground piping, the “effects of aging” are given a lot of attention in Xcel’s license extension application. An October 23 letter by the NRC says its staff participated in a “hybrid audit” of Monticello August 1-3, 2023, and a “virtual audit” August 15-17, 2023. The two audits were required as part of the license renewal application.

Venting is not always good for you

Following the audits, the NRC sent an October 23, 2023 memo to Xcel titled “Requests for Confirmation of Information.” The18-page memo notes that Monticello, “is currently constructing a groundwater remediation storage pond to store the tritiated groundwater that is being collected in response to the tritium leak. The water will either be reused in plant systems or be evaporated from the pond. If pond evaporation is implemented, it will be the third gaseous point for tritium at the plant.”

The public may not realize that radioactive waste gases are routinely released from the reactor to the environment, and that the new holding pond will constitute the third venting point, albeit by evaporation.

Page 6 of the NRC memo says the reactor “currently has two locations of gaseous radioactive effluent discharge: 1. the off-gas stack; and 2. the reactor building ventilation exhaust, both of which are also monitored…. It is an unfortunate fact of nuclear power reactors, that to moderate the operational temperature, pressure, and performance of essential mechanisms, the venting and discharge of radioactive materials to the environment is required. So much for “clean power.”

The October 23 memo also instructed Xcel to provide the NRC with a long list of reports including: “The source, volume, and activity of tritium and other radionuclides (if applicable) released, including how these values were estimated;” “Data that confirm the extent or absence of other radionuclides in groundwater following the November 2022 release;” and “A map showing the location of the holding tank that spilled on May 21, 2023, and estimates of the volume spilled and the tritium activity concentration of the holding tank at the time of the spill.”

How much radiation was released?

The Monticello reactor was forced to make an unplanned shut down in March this year, after Xcel admitted that one or two underground pipes had been corroded and gone un-inspected long enough to leak 400,000 gallons of radioactively contaminated wastewater into the ground. (See Fall 2023 Quarterly.)

The company said last summer that the leaked coolant contained 5 million picocuries-per-liter of radioactive tritium, the radioactive form of hydrogen. A picocurie is a small amount of radioactivity, but 5 million picocuries-per-liter is a very high concentration of tritium.

The 400,000 gallons is equal to 1,514,000 liters. If these 1.5 million liters of radioactive wastewater contained (as Xcel said) 5 million picocuries of tritium-per-liter (5,000,000 X 1,500,000 liters), then approximately 7.57 trillion picocuries of tritium were leaked to groundwater near the Mississippi River. This is equal to 7.57 curies of tritium, and a curie is a very large amount of radioactivity. (The partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 is officially reported to have vented 15 curies of radioactivity and is considered one of the worst radiation accidents in U.S. history.)

Dr. Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, says in his new book Exploring Tritium’s Dangers, “one teaspoon of tritiated water would contaminate about 100 billion gallons of water to the U.S. drinking water limit….” We are left to wonder about the vast volume of groundwater that’s been contaminated with Monticello’s 400,000 gallons of tritiated water.

Repaired pipes same as the leaking pipes

Answering questions from the NRC about its extended license application, Xcel wrote on October 13 that it must demonstrate to the NRC that it is “managing the effects of aging,” and in particular must investigate the function “of structures and components” that the NRC has said “require review.” Monticello’s leaking pipes fit this bill.

The company notes that “New and replacement coatings for underground components” must meet required standards, and Xcel reported that “Existing coatings for underground components at MNGP [Monticello] were installed per site design specifications.”

This claim is dashed by the sentence that follows it: “Site design specifications did not require coatings on underground components…” So, the replacement pipes were uncoated like the originals, and yet the company dares to ask permission to push the reactor’s operating life another 28 years, until 2050. What could go wrong?

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

November 1, 2023 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

No Accident: Japan’s Planned 40-Yr Dispersal of Radioactive Wastewater

Hydrogen explosions blew apart four of the six reactor containment buildings at Fukushima-Daiichi in March 2011.
Editorial
By John LaForge

On August 24, Japan began pumping millions of gallons of stored radioactive wastewater into the Pacific Ocean from Tokyo Electric Power Company’s (Tepco’s) devastated triple reactor meltdown site at Fukushima-Daiichi.

The deliberate contamination of the public commons — no accident this time — is a license to kill, a criminally reckless endangerment of sea life and an attack on the food web. Yet the 1992 ban on ocean dumping of radioactive waste applies only to barrels thrown from ships, not liquids sent into the sea through pipes. Further, the Law of the Sea allows victims to bring legal action only after an alleged harm has occurred, and then puts the burden of proof on victims to show that their illness(es) were caused by a particular radioactive poison.

The terrible Fukushima earthquake-tsunami-meltdowns of March 2011 have forced Tepco, owner of the three ferociously radioactive masses of melted uranium/plutonium fuel, to continuously pour cold water onto the unapproachable wreckage. Combined with rivers of groundwater that gush through quake-smashed cracks in the reactors’ foundations, another 130 tons of water every day becomes poisoned with radioactive uranium, cobalt, strontium, cesium, plutonium, and more.

While mainstream media regularly report that Tepco’s Advanced Liquid Processing System (ALPS) has removed all the radioactive elements except for tritium, the system has been a nearly complete failure since at least 2018. The New York Times reported August 21, 2023, that, “According to Tepco’s website, just 30 percent of the approximately 473,000 tons of water in the tanks have been fully treated to the point that only tritium remains.”[1]

“This water is contaminated with such radionuclides as cesium-137, carbon-14, tritium (some of which will form the more dangerous ‘organically bound tritium’), strontium-90, cobalt-60, iodine-129, plutonium-239, and more than 50 other hazardous radionuclides,” reported Rick Steiner, a marine biologist in Anchorage and former University of Alaska professor of marine conservation, in the Anchorage Daily News.[2]

Spewing radioactivity is routine, if unknown

It’s no surprise that reactor-friendly governments such as the United States, France, and the UK, and the International Atomic Energy Agency (whose mission is to promote nuclear reactor proliferation), have given Japan’s oceanic pollution scheme their seal of approval. All of them have repeatedly declared that dumping radioactive wastes into public water bodies is standard industrial practice and legal. With straight faces, the authorities chant in unison that reactor operations contaminate the environment with radioactive liquids all day, every day, and this is somehow intended to demonstrate that such contamination is natural and the danger of chronic, low-dose exposure “negligible.”

At La Hague, France, and at Sellafield, England, giant radioactive waste processing systems produce millions of gallons of highly radioactive liquids, and for decades both have pumped radioactive materials directly into the North Sea (from France) and the Irish Sea (from England). Dr. Chris Busby, scientific secretary of the European Committee on Radiation Risk, has studied internal radioactive contamination and has found cancer clusters among children along the Irish seacoast.

Scientists, ecologists, medical authorities, environmentalists, historians, and oceanographers have repeatedly pointed out that there are practical alternatives to Japan’s dumping scheme, and that nothing positive can result from adding more radioactive pollution to the environment.

The nuclear industry and its government protectors manage this legalized dispersal of gaseous, liquid and solid radioactive wastes using bailouts, bribes, and winks, and approvals from captured regulatory agencies. Radioactive polluters also depend on the lengthy “latency period” — years or decades between one’s radioactive contamination and the appearance of cancer, heart disease, etc. — which produces untold numbers of victims the world over. The nuclear industry can depend on the fact that the odds of losing a radiation damage lawsuit are between a slim chance and a fat chance.

The British Medical Journal, on August 16, published news of yet another study that has found that exposure to low levels of radiation is more harmful than scientists previously thought. Dozens of studies have made exactly the same finding since the beginning of the nuclear age. Some examples include:

• “Risk of cancer death after exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation underestimated, suggests nuclear industry study,” British Medical Journal, Aug. 16, 2023.

• “Even low-level radioactivity is damaging, scientists conclude,” Science Daily, Nov. 13, 2012.

• “With New Data, a Debate on Low-Level Radiation,” New York Times, July 19, 2005.

• “Study: No Radiation Level Safe,” AP, June 29, 2005.

• “Study: Even Low-Dose Radiation is Dangerous,” Reuters, Oct. 9, 1997.

• “Radiation health effects understated, study shows,” Minneapolis Star-Tribune, July 25, 1995.

• “Researcher discovers greater radiation risk,” Milwaukee Journal, Dec. 9, 1992.

• “Radiation risks may be more than believed,” Los Angeles Times, March 20, 1991.

• “Higher Cancer Risk Found in Low-Level Radiation,” New York Times, Dec. 20, 1989.

Scientists: Little known about wastes’ effects

The U.S. National Association of Marine Laboratories released a statement in December 2022 saying it was not convinced by Japan’s data. Marine biologist Robert Richmond, from the University of Hawaii, told the BBC on August 26: “We’ve seen an inadequate radiological, ecological impact assessment that makes us very concerned that Japan would not only be unable to detect what’s getting into the water, sediment and organisms, but if it does, there is no recourse to remove it … there’s no way to get the genie back in the bottle.”

And biology professor Timothy Mousseau at the University of South Carolina, author of an exhaustive review of existing studies on tritium, told The National Observer, that tritium “has been insufficiently studied to be making hard promises about the long-term safety of this kind of release.” Mousseau went on, “We don’t actually really understand what the potential ramifications of a massive point source of tritium will be on the natural environment.”

The Japanese government and Tepco hope that their global dispersal of meltdown cooling water will save the industry enough money that it can stay afloat amid the astronomical, ever-rising costs of post-Fukushima liability and disaster response. But August’s launch of Japan’s globalized pollution solution raises the chaos and deadliness of reactor operations to new heights, while the authorities claim that nothing needs to be done about nuclear reactor risks.

—

Notes

[1] New York Times, “Japan to Release Treated Water from Ruined Nuclear Plant Despite Concerns,” August 21, 2023.

[2] Anchorage Daily News, “U.S. must urge Japan not to release Fukushima wastewater into the sea,” April 25, 2021.

[3] British Medical Journal, “Risk of cancer death after exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation underestimated, suggests nuclear industry study,” August 16, 2023.

[4] The Mainichi, “Researchers develop technology to remove radioactive tritium from water,” August 28. 2018.

[5] National Observer, “As Japan releases Fukushima wastewater into the ocean, a fallout of fear follows,” August 31, 2023.

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

November 1, 2023 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Florida Gov. Approves Radioactive Mining Waste in Road Building

By Lindsay Potter

In June, Florida governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill allowing road construction using radioactive phosphogypsum, which the EPA says contains appreciable quantities of uranium and radium-226. The production of one ton of phosphoric acid for fertilizer generates over five tons of radioactive phosphogypsum waste, which is stored in 25 large, open air “gypstacks,” that cause hazardous runoff and water pollution. As the radioactivity decays it releases radon gas, the second-leading cause of lung cancer, responsible for 21,000 lung cancer deaths every year in the U.S., according to the EPA. In 2021, a breach at the Piney Point phosphate mine spilled 215 million gallons of toxic water into Tampa Bay, leading to a red tide event and giant fish kill, and a $3 million cleanup. The EPA banned use of phosphogypsum for decades, though DeSantis wants to exploit an exemption for “research.” Attorney Elise Bennett of the Center for Biological Diversity, said the Florida law is a “reckless handout to the fertilizer industry” that “opens the door for dangerous radioactive waste to be dumped in roadways … under the [cover] of a so-called feasibility study that won’t address serious health and safety concerns.”

— CBS News and NPR, June 30, 2023

Gypstacks. Photo: discovermagazine.com

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

October 23, 2023 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Cancer Spike Near Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. in Tenn.

First in-depth report near NFS facility finds dramatic rises in Unicoi County death rates
By the Radiation and Public Health Project

Since the 1990s, death rates for cancers and other causes in Unicoi County, Tennessee increased dramatically, according to a new report.

Photo Credit: Radiation and Public Health Project

Prior to the late 1990s, Unicoi County death rates were about equal to the overall U.S. rate. But by the most recent period available (2019-2020), the county rate exceeded the national rate by the largest proportion in the past fifty years, specifically:

– 44% higher for all-cause mortality

– 61% higher for premature mortality (age 0-74)

– 39% higher for all-cancer mortality

The report says that the release of radioactive chemicals to the environment by the Nuclear Fuel Services (NFS) facility may play a large role in the local health decline. The NFS complex is situated in Erwin, Tennessee in Unicoi County. “No other risk factor, such as access to health care, personal health practices, or poverty appears to have changed much,” said report author Joseph Mangano of the Radiation and Public Health Project. Since its 1959 startup, it has generated enriched uranium fuels for naval and civil nuclear power reactors. NFS releases a portion of this uranium and other radioactive elements into local air and water. “NFS sits within the limits of Erwin, Tenn., next to homes, churches, and businesses. It has had numerous spills, releases, and violations,” says Barbara O’Neal, co-founder of Erwin Citizens Awareness Network (ECAN), which commissioned the study.

Prior to the new report, the only national study of cancer near U.S. nuclear installations was conducted by the National Cancer Institute in 1990. That study did not include NFS.

The new report further identified a growing county-national gap in death rates for infants and children. In the most recent period analyzed, the death rate for children in Unicoi County exceeded the U.S. national rate by nearly 40%. ECAN co-founder Trudy Wallack told Joe Mangano of Radiation and Public Health: “as a resident of Greeneville, the protection and safety of the Nolichucky River stands paramount to my community and others. This river serves as the key source for our drinking water as well as family recreation and water sports. It is my hope that my contribution to this study will provide critical information regarding health…to all those who care and are asking questions.”

The full report can be found on the Radiation and Public Health Project web site: www.radiation.org.

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

October 23, 2023 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Illinois Governor Vetoes Dangerous Nuclear Moratorium Repeal Bill

Photo Credit: Chicago Tribune.
Reprinted from NEIS Press Release

On August 11, Illinois’ Democratic Governor J.B. Pritzker vetoed a bill to repeal the state’s 1987 nuclear construction moratorium. The law was introduced partly as a promotion of so-called “next-generation” nuclear reactors. “Had it passed, this bill would not only have removed all prohibitions for generating even more high-level radioactive wastes with no disposal method in place (Illinois currently ‘hosts’ roughly 11,000 tons of orphaned waste reactor fuel), it would have opened the door to more nuclear reactors, which could have had devastating effects on the renewable energy goals championed in the 2021 Climate and Equity Jobs Act,” said David Kraft, Director of the Chicago-based Nuclear Energy Information Service.

According to sources from the governor’s office, “The bill is vetoed because the vague definitions in the bill will open the door to the proliferation of large-scale nuclear reactors that are so costly to build that they will cause exorbitant ratepayer-funded bailouts. Additionally, it provides no regulatory protections or updates to address the health and safety of Illinois residents who would live and work around these new reactors.”

— NEIS press release, & CapitolFax.com, Aug. 11, 2023

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste, Renewable Energy

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • …
  • 69
  • 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