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 11, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Will Radioactive Fracking Wastewater Get in Your Veggies? Some States Say “Maybe”

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2020
By Elena Hight

As temperatures continue to rise across the globe, states like New Mexico and California are facing increasing strains on already stretched water supplies. Looking for new ways to meet water needs, some states have started researching other uses for the millions of gallons of wastewater generated by hydraulic fracturing.

Every year, the US oil and gas industry produces about 772 million gallons of this wastewater, which the industry calls “produced water.” Depending on the geological formations surrounding the fracking site, some of this wastewater contains significant levels of radioactive materials and other toxic metals, including lead, uranium, and radium among others. This toxic wastewater is often pumped back into the ground via “disposal” or “injection” wells, or placed in on-site evaporation or seepage pits. Some states have also started using the water in other ways: to drill more wells, to spray on icy roads, and to irrigate crops.

An unlined oil wastewater pit in Kern County, Calif. A new report by two environmental organizations documents the risks of using unlined pits for fracking wastewater disposal. Credit: Clean Water Action

These other uses, along with the lack of research on the potential dangers of recycling contaminated water, have alarmed academics, environmentalists, and community members who have raised concerns over the unknown chemistry of the water, lack of data about the water’s treatability, and the potential risk to public health and the environment. Even in areas where the wastewater is less radioactive, spillages have resulted in serious environmental problems, including the contamination of food and livestock in areas around the spill.

Most recently, New Mexico’s Oil Conservation Division proposed new rules to the 2019 Produced Waters Act, that clarify the definition of produced water as well as the agency’s ability to regulate its use within the oil and gas industry. In response to the new rules, a coalition of environmental and indigenous groups wrote a letter strongly opposing the new rules, saying in part, “The Oil Conservation Division’s rules appear to set the stage for a more insidious plan to allow companies to dump their toxic waste into our environment.” Despite the opposition, the new rules were adopted, and New Mexico continues to pursue alternative uses for “produced water.” The state legislature has even given New Mexico State University a $100 million grant to study the treatment and reuses of the wastewater, including its use in agriculture.

Ultimately—while states may seek solutions for the disposal of fracking wastewater, which poses risks to food production, the environment, and people’s health—only a just transition to alternative energy and a ban on the use of fracking can safeguard communities from harm.

—Elena Hight is a PhD candidate in sociology at the University of Wisconsin.

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Flooding Jeopardized the Public and a Small Reactor in a Dow Chemical Town

By Diane Nahas
Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

On May 19, after a torrential rainstorm, the Edenville and Sanford hydroelectric dams along the Tittabawassee River in central Michigan, two hours northwest of Detroit, collapsed causing flooding in the city of Midland, engulfing a Dow Chemical site which houses a nuclear research reactor, homes of thousands of local inhabitants, and the city’s sewage system. The river crested at a record 35 feet on May 20 in the 500-year flood. The city went under an estimated nine feet of water. Michigan’s Governor Gretchen Witmer declared an emergency and 11,000 residents were evacuated.

Part of the massive damage included floodwaters entering the containment ponds of the Dow Chemical factory, where waste from its Superfund cleanup is held from production of Saran Wrap, styrofoam, Agent Orange and mustard gas. This provoked fears about the floodwaters reaching the nuclear reactor or breaching the walls of the pond and further contaminating the Tittabawassee River, which eventually runs into Lake Huron.

Dow filed a Notification of Unusual Event with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission which states, “The reactor was in a shutdown condition at the time of the event…due to Covid-19.” The nuclear gauges at the reactor are Category 3 radioactive materials, which are sealed radioactive sources that could be fatal upon exposure for periods of days to weeks, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

—Midland Daily News, May 20; NRC May 19, 2020; Dow Chemical Company, Mar. 10, 2017

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

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Help Keep Radioactive Waste Out of Regular Landfills

By Nuclear Information and Resource Service
Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

Right now, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is planning a very dangerous change to the way radioactive waste from nuclear power is handled, creating a fictitious and deceptive name for nuclear reactor waste. Despite being extremely dangerous to human health and the environment, the NRC is trying to downplay Very Long-Lasting Waste by telling the Very Large Lie it is supposedly only “very low level”—or VLLW.

It is not. Disregarding the danger, the NRC proposes to allow regular landfill operators to dispose of this radioactive waste. The proposal would almost certainly result in more widespread radioactive waste leaks into our water, air, crops, and communities.

So-called VLLW is not clearly defined in law but includes extremely dangerous, long-lasting radioactive waste. The NRC claims only very “low levels” of radioactive waste would be disposed of with regular trash, but there is no safe level. Under the NRC’s proposed radiation exposure allowances, one in every 500 people will get cancer if exposed over their lifetimes.

Powerful players in the nuclear industry are pushing for this change because deregulating this waste would save them millions of dollars. Tell the NRC and your members of Congress: Protect public health, not the industry’s shareholders.

The NRC is taking this action behind the backs of the public, under the cover of the COVID-19 crisis, deregulating tons of radioactive waste without nearby communities knowing about it or having a say in it. Stand up to the nuclear industry and its friends at the NRC by telling them and your members of Congress not to dump radioactive waste in our landfills.

NIRS has updates about this issue at NIRS.org, or call (301) 270-6477.

—Diane D’Arrigo, May 28, 2020

Filed Under: Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nuclear Reactors & the Quaky, Rising Sea

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

Forty percent of the world’s nuclear reactors sit on coastlines, vulnerable to multiple climate catastrophes. With sea levels expected to rise 3.28 feet or more by 2100, reactors like St. Lucie in Florida, don’t have a chance. Operators of Florida’s Turkey Point reactor intend to run it for 80 years. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission claims that rising sea levels and their effect on Turkey Point are “outside the scope of the agency.” Thus, in granting an extended operating license to Turkey Point, rising sea levels don’t even figure.

Fukushima stands as the case study of Reactors v. Ocean. Site of the world’s only triple meltdown, caused by an earthquake and its follow-on tsunami, Fukushima still spews radiation into the Pacific daily, nine years after it began. According to the Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity, coastal areas report an increase in cesium-137 from Fukushima, first detected 100 miles off the California coast in 2014. Today, of the 56 reactors currently under construction, 93% face the fury of rising tides and ever-more-severe hurricanes, cyclones, and typhoons. Unfortunately, China, Indonesia, and East Asia continue to build and host the reactors most at risk, since these regions are the most and first affected by the Earth’s warming.

As the nuclear industry continues to blunder ahead building new reactors and operating old ones on vulnerable seafronts, coastal communities continually face Fukushima Roulette.

—Climate News Network, Feb. 14, 2020; Bloomberg, Apr. 19, 2019; Beyond Nuclear, Sept. 19, 2019; Woods Hole Oceanographic, <cmer.whoi.edu>

 

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

August 1, 2020 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Radioactive Fracking Waste Under a Weakened EPA

Radioactive waste from fracking is being dumped into landfills and used to remove ice from roads. Source: Oil Change International
By Elena Hight
Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2020

In early 2020, Justin Nobel published an exposé in Rolling Stone on what he called “America’s Radioactive Secret.”⁠ This secret is the trillions of gallons of fracking wastewater that pour from oil and gas wells each year and make their way along national highways to injection wells and landfills throughout the country.

While some of this waste comes from the mixture of water, sand, and chemical that is injected thousands of feet into the Earth’s surface to release fossil fuels trapped in hard shale formations,⁠ some of it is radioactive brine. Brine is salt water that is trapped, along with oil and gas, in deep aquifers. Depending on the geological formation, this brine often contains heavy metals and Naturally Occurring Radioactive Materials, including lead, uranium, and radium among others.⁠ While government organizations and industry leaders claim that the radioactivity levels of the brine are insignificant, Nobel says the amount of radium from the Marcellus Shale—a major source of natural gas extracted through fracking which runs beneath Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio, and West Virginia—“averages around 9,300 picocuries per liter, but has been recorded as high as 28,500.” These amounts are hundreds to thousands of times above the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s safety standards.

This waste, which contaminates everything and everyone it touches, is either injected back into the ground or dumped in the landfills or waterways of unsuspecting communities. Sometimes, the brine is even sprayed on local roads to prevent icing. Oil and gas workers, already exposed to a number of dangerous chemicals, are often untrained and unprepared to deal with the radioactive waste that they carry, and the scale that builds up on the trucks, pipes, and equipment can expose them to hundreds of thousands of picocuries per liter(pCi/L) of radiation. The Environmental Protection Agency’s Maximum Contaminant Level is 5pCi/L.

Because of exemptions from the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, there are not many federal regulations on either the wastewater or the wastewater injection wells, leaving a patchwork of state-by-state regulations (some stringent, some alarmingly lenient). In Pennsylvania, this wastewater has even been dumped into local creeks and rivers with minimal treatment⁠, exposing thousands to contaminated drinking water.

Even before the coronavirus, President Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency tried to lift what few policies⁠ were in place to protect local waterways from insufficiently treated wastewater,⁠ but the latest move to completely suspend enforcement of all environmental laws tops all that. As thousands of people die from the government’s inept response to coronavirus, Trump is putting other lives at risk by allowing big polluters free license to do damage to land, water, and people.

—Rolling Stone, Jan. 21, 2020; American Chemical Society, July 12, 2017; Connecticut General Assembly Office of Legislative Research Report, 2013

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

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • …
  • 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