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 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Nukewatch Plans Truck Watch to Alert Public to Radioactive Transport Dangers 

Nukewatch Quarterly Fall 2015
This map shows likely radwaste transport routes if an “interim” high-level radioactive waste storage facility were built at the Waste Control Specialists site in western Texas. The routes would be similar if the waste site proposed by Holtec International, just across the state border in New Mexico, is approved. Graphic modified from the Nuclear Information and Resource Service.

This fall, Nukewatch staffers will hit the road with our Geiger counter and begin tracking private contractors hauling low-level waste, checking for radiation leaking near our public highways. Nukewatch will use the results of their research to alert the public and inform a campaign against upcoming consolidated waste storage proposals that would require a massive increase in the cross-country transport of decades’ worth of waste or “spent” reactor fuel rods.

We know private haulers are already trucking military and other low-level radioactive waste across the country; currently, it’s going to the only open storage facility in the US, the private waste dump operated by Waste Control Specialists (WCS) in western Texas. But it now seems likely that soon, the Department of Energy will begin moving the 75,000 metric tons, and counting, of spent reactor fuel—that continues to pile up at the country’s 99 operating reactors, at 61 sites spread across 30 states—to a centralized, “interim” storage facility.

This kind of radioactive transport would be on a scale we’ve never seen before—and so would the associated risks. We feel it is time to prepare for action. People need to know about the existing risks of radioactive transports so we can mobilize against a centralized waste storage plan that would move high-level spent fuel rods through our backyards as well. We need to get more information about the private contractors that are hauling radioactive cargo, where they’re traveling, how much radiation is leaking from them, and what else those same contaminated trucks are carrying—so we can alert the public.

The government has plenty of short-term financial incentive to permit a consolidated, high-level storage site for waste reactor fuel. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act requires the Department of Energy to provide long-term disposal of reactor waste from private utilities in a centralized facility that was supposed to be ready in 1998. In 2000, reactor operators began suing the federal government for damages associated with the costs of onsite storage of the waste fuel rods and other high-level waste—that the government promised to handle for them. By the end of the 2014 fiscal year, the government had already paid out some $4.5 billion in these waste storage settlements. Two private companies are now vying for the lucrative privilege of providing “interim” storage for all of this reactor waste, until a more “permanent” solution can be found.

A truck operated by private contractor Visionary Solutions, LLC (based in Oak Ridge, TN), prepares to haul radioactive waste over public highways from the Los Alamos National Laboratory weapons production site to the private Texas waste dump operated by Waste Control Specialists. Starting in 2012, contractors at Los Alamos packed up to 5,565 radioactive waste barrels with volatile, organic kitty litter and then shipped many of them (incorrectly labeled) on trucks like this one to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico, for storage. So far, one of those barrels has exploded underground at WIPP, contaminating more than 20 workers and shuttering the facility in February of 2014. Luckily, none of the mispackaged barrels exploded while in transit.

One of these is WCS (in partnership with French nuclear giant AREVA), which plans to submit an application for an independent spent fuel storage installation license by April 2016, for its site in Andrews County, Texas; so far this site is only permitted to manage “low-level” waste disposal. The other waste site, proposed by Holtec International, is just across the border in New Mexico, where the multi-national has partnered with regional economic development moguls on an offer to store waste reactor fuel with “no technical limit on the facility’s storage capacity.” The opening of either facility would not only put these highly radioactive fuel rods on the roads; it would also give the nuclear energy industry a green light to keep rickety old reactors online and keep producing more and more deadly waste.

Nukewatch has a long history of alerting the public to the dangers of radioactive transports. In the 1980s we organized more than a dozen H-bomb Truck Watches with groups from more than 32 states. We taught people how to recognize the nuclear weapons transport trucks in their backyards. Dedicated Nukewatch volunteers followed weapons convoys for days on end, sometimes at high speed and through dangerous weather conditions. In 1987, we compiled reports from our staff and volunteers to publish a map of the weapons truck routes in the United States that helped activists mobilize local resistance to the nuclear bombs in their midst. We also reported on little-known accidents, like the November 16, 1996 crash in Nebraska, where a truck carrying two warheads went off the road around 1:00 a.m. during a blizzard.

We keep track of many issues related to nuclear weapons, power, and waste, and we feel strongly that now is the time for us to focus on alerting the public to the dangerous radioactive waste shipments traveling—sometimes unmarked—through our neighborhoods across the country. With decades of experience identifying, publicizing, and resisting radioactive transports, we are in a unique position to take on this increasingly urgent issue. We hope you will help us by supporting this important campaign, and we look forward to providing updates in our next newsletter. —Nukewatch Staff

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

July 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Wasting New Mexico: State Invites High-Level Reactor Waste as Energy Department Eyes Carlsbad’s Contaminated WIPP Site for Plutonium Disposal

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2015
By Arianne Peterson 

In an April 10 letter, New Mexico Governor Susana Martinez urged the US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz to move forward with plans to establish a “consolidated interim storage facility in southeastern New Mexico.” The proposed site would hold the nuclear power industry’s ever-growing legacy of reactor fuel rods and other high-level radioactive waste, which the government projects will reach 141,000 metric tons based on current reactor licenses. Since the rise of nuclear energy in the 1970s, the US government has promised to find a permanent, safe solution for disposing of its deadly by-products—but so far, the Energy Department has failed to find a viable option, and decades’ worth of discarded fuel rods have remained at reactor sites throughout the country.

New Mexico’s interim storage proposal would require transporting this dangerous reactor waste from more than 60 sites dispersed across the country to the state’s southeastern corner. The waste would remain at the site for 100 years, or ostensibly until a more permanent solution is found. The global energy company Holtec International and a private regional company called the Eddy Lea Energy Alliance have signed a Memorandum of Agreement to partner in the venture. The site they have identified is near Carlsbad, just 12 miles from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) radioactive waste repository. WIPP has been closed since February 2014 when an underground barrel explosion there contaminated 22 workers and caused an above-ground release of radioactive particles.

Holtec would be responsible for designing, licensing, building, and operating the new facility using a scaled-up version of its HI-STORM UMAX (for Holtec International Storage Module Underground Maximum Capacity) underground dry-cask storage design. This design has not yet been successfully implemented anywhere in the world; Holtec will hold an “inaugural loading campaign” later this summer at the Callaway nuclear power facility in Missouri, where its first HI-STORM UMAX casks will be filled with radioactive waste. Holtec claims “there is no technical limit on the [planned New Mexico] facility’s storage capacity,” implying that the dump would accommodate all current reactor waste—and encourage the industry to keep producing more.

More plutonium headed to WIPP? 

While Governor Martinez invites waste from the rest of the country’s nuclear power facilities for storage at Holtec’s proposed site (New Mexico doesn’t actually have any commercial reactors of its own), the federal government is considering the contaminated, shuttered WIPP facility just down the road as a final resting place for 34 metric tons of surplus weapons-grade plutonium. On May 9, the Energy Department released a report identifying WIPP as a lower-cost alternative to the proposed mixed oxide (MOX) nuclear program, which was supposed to convert weapons plutonium into commercial reactor fuel. Taxpayers have already spent $4.4 billion on construction of the MOX facility at Savannah River in South Carolina; a division of the French nuclear giant Areva has benefitted from the design contract. Watchdog groups have long derided the project— which is over-budget and behind schedule, suffering from poor management and a lack of oversight.

The May Energy Department report projected the final cost of the MOX program to be at least $47.5 billion, a price government officials admit the country cannot afford. Sending the plutonium to WIPP would be far less expensive—and so far, it’s the only other option they’ve studied. Of course, the WIPP plan would first require that the shuttered site be reopened; it would also necessitate an amendment to the Land Withdrawal Act, which governs WIPP’s operations, to allow for more plutonium disposal. An Energy Department report on further plutonium disposal options is due out in September.

Meanwhile, WIPP remains closed, with clean-up expected to require several years and $550 million. In April, the ad hoc Accident Investigation Board appointed by the Energy Department issued its final report on the barrel explosion, which it termed “preventable.” The report blames the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), where contractors packed the volatile drum, and the Energy Department itself for mismanagement and negligence, including failure to listen to worker concerns—such as reports of foam and neon smoke emanating from drums. The Board’s investigation confirmed that a highly combustible combination of nitrate salts and organic cat litter in the improperly packed, improperly labeled barrel was the direct cause of the explosion.

State settles with Energy Department over violations 

Because of the WIPP disaster, the Energy Department reduced the bonuses (monetary incentives above and beyond operating costs) for its contracted operators at WIPP and LANL in 2014. The New Mexico Environment Department threatened to levy more than $150 million in fines against the federal government for permit violations and other failures that caused the contamination, but the state recently accepted a settlement of just $73 million in federal dollars earmarked for highway improvements and other infrastructure projects around the WIPP and LANL.

Greg Mello of the watchdog Los Alamos Study Group expressed concern that the settlement does not actually address the problems that led to the leak. “I’m a little flabbergasted … that the state would negotiate what the money is used for. … What does that have to do with [the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act] violations? It seems like an entirely different sphere.” Mello argues that the projects, which are directly related to maintenance and operations of the federal Energy Department facilities, should be part of a regular budget rather than the result of a settlement for environmental permit violations. New Mexico’s Environment Department Secretary Ryan Flynn reported that lobby groups for local contractors, who will benefit from the projects, “heavily influenced the settlement.”

New Mexico’s radioactive burden 

Radioactive contamination is not a new problem for New Mexico. In addition to the Los Alamos facility, the state is also home to the Sandia National Laboratories; both labs were established in the 1940s to develop the first atomic bombs and are still active in nuclear weapons research. The White Sands Missile Range, including the site of the first nuclear bomb test, occupies over 3,000 square miles in the southern part of the state. Uranium mining has left a terrible radioactive legacy on the western New Mexico portion of the Navajo Nation, with 450 abandoned mines and eight former mills—three of which are designated Superfund sites—contaminating countless acres and tens of millions of gallons of groundwater.

On the east side of the state, Urenco USA opened a uranium enrichment facility in 2010. Just yards away from the Urenco facility, on the Texas side of the border, Waste Control Specialists (WCS) operates the nation’s only private low-level radioactive waste dump. In a February bid that could put it in competition with Holtec and WIPP, WCS announced plans to apply for a permit to store high-level waste, including reactor fuel rods and plutonium-contaminated military waste. No matter which company or government contractor ends up profiting from the nation’s nuclear legacy, odds seem good that New Mexico will bear the brunt of the country’s nuclear waste burden.

—Aiken Standard, May 20; Santa Fe New Mexican, May 1; Holtec Highlights, Apr. 30 & May 4; Albuquerque Journal, Apr. 17; Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Jan. 18, 2015; Truthout, Feb. 20, 2014

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

July 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Sanctions Halt  Offshore Drilling Near Radioactive Dumps —for Now

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2015
By Kelly Lundeen 

US and European Union sanctions on Russia have forced our own ExxonMobil out of an offshore Arctic drilling deal with Russia’s state-owned oil company Rosneft. The company’s macabre plans would result in drilling next to an area used as a Soviet nuclear waste dump site for decades. The Kara Sea has so far been the loser in a battle between those who want to exploit its underwater gas and oil, and those who want radioactive waste materials removed and the ecologically delicate waters protected from the perils of drilling. However, the sanctions—resulting from Russia’s incursions in Ukraine—have left the world’s top oil-producing nation alone in the Arctic without its corporate partner, ExxonMobil, upon whom it depended for necessary extraction infrastructure. 

In 2014, prior to enactment of sanctions, ExxonMobil and Rosneft began drilling the first well in the Kara Sea, but Exxon had to abandon its plans for partnering with the Russian firm when sanctions took effect. In January, without Western technology and capital, Rosneft announced that drilling would come to a halt for the 2015 season due to lack of a platform. It is currently seeking one from alternate contractors. Rosneft expects to resume drilling next year and hopes that consumer production will begin as early as 2020. 

So, how is it possible that nuclear submarines, reactors, and waste containers were secretly dumped in the sea through the 1990s? This was common for dozens of countries until the 1972 London Convention banned marine disposal of radioactive and other wastes. Unfortunately, the Soviet Union did not become party to the Convention until the late ‘80s, and did not stop dumping until the early ‘90s. 

Is offshore drilling next to a radioactive waste dump really all that dangerous? Not according to Exxon and Rosneft, especially when the reserves are estimated to contain the equivalent of nearly five years of global oil consumption. Following a study on the radioactive waste site, Rosneft and ExxonMobil stated they “are confident that we can safely drill in the Kara Sea and avoid hazards from radioactive materials on the seabed.” The nuclear waste disposed of is known to include 14 reactors, 19 ships carrying solid waste, high-level radioactive waste fuel and 17,000 containers whose radioactive contents is unknown. 

To help sink the containers carrying radioactive waste, the Soviets followed another norm of the era by shooting holes in them, and there is evidence of leakage from the some of the containers. But the most potentially disastrous object left at the bottom of the Kara Sea is the K-27 nuclear submarine, scuttled in 1981. In 1968, nine sailors were killed in the ship by a leak in the reactor. This nuclear submarine was carrying highly enriched uranium when it was dumped. The corrosion of the propulsion reactor, which occurs naturally under water, could reportedly lead to an atomic chain reaction that would affect an area beyond just the Arctic. 

Norway, along with Germany and other Western governments driven to protect its neighboring Barents Sea, has been trying to help Russia clean up the radioactive wastes in the area for a decade. The Russian government however has no definite plans to completely remove the nuclear-powered submarines or other wastes. This is no easy feat, as shown by the CIA’s 1974 Project Azorian, in which an attempt to recover a submarine from a seabed resulted in two thirds of the sub breaking off. 

At least temporarily, the dump site will be left to its own natural deterioration without the assistance of offshore drilling in the nearby waters. While economic sanctions provide temporary relief from drilling, the long-term problem of cleaning up remains an unresolved issue. And it is not a matter of whether or not there will be large-scale radioactive leak, but of when. 

—Reuters, Apr. 9, 2015; Moscow Times, Nov. 13, 2014; New York Times, Oct. 29, 2014; BBC, Jan. 25, 2013; Bloomberg, Sept. 25, 2012

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

July 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

North Dakota Suffering Wastewater Spills

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2015

A case in point was the nearly three million gallons of fracking waste that spilled in January 2015 from a North Dakota pipeline.

The large spill of what the industry and North Dakota state officials repeatedly refer to as “saltwater”—from a ruptured pipeline—was reportedly the largest of its kind in North Dakota history.

No ordinary saltwater, the brine is up to eight times saltier than seawater. The waste, which leaked about 15 miles from the city of Williston, was being vacuumed up by the pipeline’s operator, Summit Midstream Partners.

Last year, scientists published several peer-reviewed papers on the hazardousness of what’s in drilling wastewater. One report found unsafe levels of barium, hexavalent chromium, copper, mercury, arsenic and antimony in the liquid. Another reported that the chemicals used in fracking, which show up in the wastewater, could potentially threaten reproductive and developmental health.

The Grand Forks Herald reported Jan. 21, 2015 that the last spill of such magnitude was in 2006, when another pipeline rupture poured at least 1 million gallons of wastewater into Charbonneau Creek near Alexander. —JL

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

July 15, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Is Fracking Wastewater More Radioactive Than Scientists Thought?

Nukewatch Quarterly Summer 2015
By Sara Jerome, WaterOnline

Fracking wastewater may be more radioactive than researchers previously believed.

A new study shows that “commonly used testing methods may underestimate the total radioactivity of wastewater produced by gas wells that use hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to tap the Marcellus Shale,” according to a report in Science, a publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

The study, published in April in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, states that “current assessments of the radioactivity concentration in liquid wastes focus on a single element—radium. However, the use of radium alone to predict radioactivity concentrations can greatly underestimate total levels.”

The study says that predicting radioactivity of fracking wastewater requires “an understanding of the geochemistry, decay properties, and ‘in-growth kinetics’ of radium and its decay product radionuclides.”

The study called for policy changes. “The findings suggest government agencies should consider retooling some testing recommendations and take a fresh look at possible worker exposure to potentially harmful waste, the authors say. But some outside researchers are skeptical that the laboratory study reflects real-world conditions,” Science reported.

Environmentalists have long been drawing attention to the danger of radioactive oil-and-gas wastewater. Abigail Dillen, the Vice President of Litigation at the environmental law firm Earthjustice, called it a “slow burn” sort of problem.

“It’s just cloudy-looking water, hundreds of billions of gallons of which are disposed every year. Though it usually contains chemicals, heavy metals, and radioactive material, it doesn’t look like much. It’s usually stored in dormant pits or injected underground. So unless something drastic happens, pollution usually accumulates, slowly seeping into soil and groundwater, instead of happening all at once,” the website ThinkProgress reported.

—Sara Jerome is a WaterOnline contributing writer and has covered business, technology, and regulation for the Financial Times Group, National Journal, and The Hill.

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

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • …
  • 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