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
    • Workshops
  • Donate

June 13, 2017 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Government “Low-balls” Likelihood and Radiation Effects of Reactor Waste Fuel Fires — Study

A radiation disaster, worse than the 2011 Fukushima-Daiichi catastrophe in Japan, could hit the United States because of ignored risks, according to a startling new study from Princeton University. The US Nuclear Regulatory Agency (NRC) has greatly underestimated the risk of major radiation releases from a reactor waste fuel fire. Such reactor fuel fire could erupt in the event of a “station blackout”—the loss of off-site and emergency electric power—and the consequent boiling off of cooling water in waste fuel pools.

The wrecked waste fuel pool at Japan’s Fukushima-Daiichi reactor No. 3, pictured in March 2013, two years after hydrogen explosions destroyed its outer shell. 

Frank von Hipple, a nuclear security expert at Princeton, and the historian Michael Schoeppner, are the study’s coauthors. The dispersed radioactive contamination from such a fire “would be an unprecedented peacetime catastrophe,” the authors conclude in their paper.

Von Hipple and Schoeppner argue that the NRC’s gross minimization of risk is the result of corporate and political interference. “The NRC has been pressured by the nuclear industry, directly, and through Congress, to low-ball the potential consequences of a fire because of concerns that increased costs could result in shutting down more nuclear power plants,” von Hipple told Science Daily. “We’re talking about trillion-dollar consequences,” he said.

Waste uranium fuel rods, often called “spent fuel,” are kept in cooling pools near reactors for several years. Although still very hot, they can then be moved into so-called “dry cask” storage. While nuclear reactors themselves have emergency, back-up generators to circulate cooling water inside the “reactor core” (these generators were wrecked at Fukushima), US waste fuel pools do not have back-up, emergency  power. The pools are especially vulnerable to station blackouts.

Cooling pool water is normally pumped from a nearby lake, river or sea, and must constantly circulate and cover the waste fuel, which is the hottest and most radioactive material in the commercial nuclear industry. (Waste fuel from Navy propulsion reactors is reportedly more deadly.) Any loss of on-site electric power—like happened at Fukushima—can stop cooling water circulation, causing the water to boil away, and expose the fuel rods. Such loss of coolant can ignite a fuel fire and cause catastrophic amounts of radiation to be released.

Waste Fuel Fire Barely Avoided in Fukushima

 The world watched dreadfully in March 2011 as the station blackout at Fukushima-Daiichi threatened to cause this sort of fuel fire. The earthquake and tsunami cut off all cooling water-pumping and circulation. At a congressional hearing March 16, 2011, six days into the triple meltdowns, the head of the NRC, Gregory Jaczko, said in a Congressional hearing in Washington that all the water was gone from one of Fukushima’s waste fuel pools. Although Jaczko was mistaken, the nightmare was possible, likely even, and observers counted the hours until cooling water boiled off and a fuel fire would ignite.

An in-tact cooling pool in Japan, with one “assembly” of waste fuel rods being moved in the 20-foot covering of water which keeps the hot irradiated uranium from catching fire.

The NRC has estimated, for example, that a major waste fuel pool fire at the Peach Bottom station in Pennsylvania would force the evacuation of 3.46 million people from 12,000 square miles, reports Richard Stone writing in Science magazine May 24. But the Princeton researchers, who say they used a better computer modeling system, estimate that such a disaster would force 18 million people to evacuate from the surrounding 39,000 square miles.

Von Hipple’s and Schoeppner’s report followed, by only one week, a study from the US National Academies of Sciences that urges the United States to make improvements at its waste fuel pools. The NAS’ study recommends that the NRC and reactor operators upgrade monitoring of the waste pools—most do not even have a waste pool water-level monitor in the operator control rooms!—and improve the means of topping up water levels during an accident.

Another way to reduce the risk of waste fuel fires is to hurry the transfer of fuel from the cooling pools to dry casks. “As recently as 2013, the NRC concluded that the projected benefits do not justify the roughly $4 billion cost of a wholesale transfer. But the national academies’ study concludes that the benefits of expedited transfer to dry casks are five-fold greater than NRC has calculated,” Stone reported in Science.

The paper, “Nuclear safety regulation in the post-Fukushima era,” was published May 26 in Science. —John LaForge

Filed Under: Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste, Weekly Column Tagged With: fukushima, NRC, nuclear, nuclear power, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, radiation, radioactive waste

October 7, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Lake Superior Barrel Dump

Barrel Dump Scandal
Murky As Ever

By John LaForge

A lot has been written about the 1,448-plus barrels of toxic and probably radioactive wastes that were dumped into Lake Superior by the U.S. Army (Corps of Engineers).

You can get a very good, 100-page compilation of news accounts and analysis in Duluth for less than the cost of dinner and a movie. It’s a good read if your stomach can handle official graft, military contractor fraud, nighttime mobster-like “cement shoe treatment” of deadly industrial trash, and blunt bureaucratic dismissals of precautionary alarms.

The general public might want to know why no agency, corporation or individual has ever been held accountable for the illegal dumping; why the full extent of the dumping has never been detailed; why the contents of the barrels has never been fully made known; and why “the mystery of radioactive waste is still out there,” as Ron Swenson, of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency’s (MPCA’s) barrels investigation and oversight unit once said.

The wastes came from the Twin Cities Army Ammunition Plant (TCAAP), Minnesota’s largest Superfund site, which at the time was run by Honeywell, Corp.

For four years, between 1959 and 1962, barrels containing benzene, PCBs, lead, cadmium, barium, hexavalent chromium and most likely radioactive materials were rolled off barges into the lake at spots all along the north shore. One of the seven acknowledged dump sites (there are more) is within a mile of Duluth-Superior drinking water intake — just northeast of Brighton Beach. Three of the dump sites, including the water intake site, and another declared to encompass 75 square miles, are federally designated Superfund Sites (see: http://cqs.com/super_mn.htm, p.3 of 12).

In February, State Representative Mike Jaros wrote to the U.S. Senate and House urging that sediment testing be conducted prior to any moving of the aging barrels. In March the Save Lake Superior Association resolved unanimously to urge that all these barrels be removed and safely shipped to a hazardous waste containment site.

This would be a prudent thing to do — unless the 45-year-old barrels are weakened, broken open or leaking. After exhuming only nine barrels in 1990, the agencies responsible for protecting the environment dismissed the threat posed by the chemicals. ”We don’t believe there’s any short-term threat to human health,” said Ron Swenson of the MPCA.

This “think about it later” rationale for ignoring the threat raises more questions than it answers. As the MPCA’s Ron Swenson admitted in 1991, “What this means in the long term for public health, for the lake’s ecosystem … we still haven’t determined.” On April 16, Carl Herbrandson of the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) reported to researcher Dan Conley that the MDH had “decided to write a health consultation about what we know related to the barrels in Lake Superior and any potential health concerns.”

This report has yet to be issued, but the Army has already reached its own conclusions. In 1990, Corps spokesman Ken Gardner had the nerve to say to the Duluth News Tribune, “I’m sure if you got a few feet away from the barrels you wouldn’t find any traces of any of the chemicals … there is no public health threat.”

The Corps might be “sure,” but it appears to have lied about the barrels more than once. It first said there was nothing dangerous in them. It even produced several affidavits from former workers who swore they put “metal shavings” into the barrels.

The Corps told the MPCA in 1976 that there were only seven dump sites. However, Bob Cross of the MPCA’s spills unit told the St. Paul Pioneer in 1992 that a Corps supervisor had said that there were at least 16 dump sites.

On January 18, 1995 then Superior, now Duluth, Mayor Herb Bergson threatened to sue the Corps, the MPCA and Honeywell over a cleanup. No law suit ever materialized. Today, only the Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa and Mike Jaros appear committed enough to protecting the drinking water to confront the barrel issue directly. Red Cliff is pursuing removal of some barrels under its own authority as a sovereign nation.

The Army, Honeywell, the EPA, and the MPCA must be compelled do their legal duty. They must see to it that the water is protected from the cancer-causing materials in their degrading barrels.

To insure public and environmental safety, the responsible parties must be required to: 1) fund an independent scientific confirmation of the presence or absence of radioactive materials in the barrels, to identify and characterize the specific contents of the barrels, and to publicly identify their locations, 2) fund an investigation into the state of the barrels’ decay and the contamination, if any, of surrounding sediment, and 3) fund a barrel dump remediation program that does not threaten to contaminate drinking water sources – even if this means extending the water intake point away from the barrels.

Mayor Bergson complained in 1995 that, “The contents of at least 1,448 barrels are still unknown to the public,” and that “The location of many of the barrels is still unknown.”

Twelve years later, it’s about time for answers.


 

Lake Superior Barrel Dump Radiation:

“Cover Up” Allegation Made By Submarine Captain On its April 12, 1995 broadcast, KBJR TelevisionChannel 6 News (Duluth, Minnesota), interviewed Captain Harold Maynard, the submarine operator who went down to investigate one of the dump sites with his K-350 submersible, its mechanical arm, lights and communication system. To this day, Capt. Maynard alleges a “cover up” of the presence of radiation in the barrel site he examined. News Anchors Dave Jensch and Michelle Lee introduced the subject of the barrels and reporter (now News Director) Barbara Reyelts questioned Capt. Maynard. Surface tender ship operator Mike Stich of Hazard Control (Now All Safe) has corroborated Capt. Maynard’s statements. Capt. Maynard (Ret.) spoke with Nukewatch from his home in New York on May 9, 2008. He said that from inside his submarine, a Corps of Engineers’ Geiger counter registered radiation near one barrel, that the tether securing his sub to a surface ship was contaminated and made the Corps’ Geiger counter click, that the Corps of Engineers’ Bob Dempsey “has been denying that ever since,” and that Mr. Dempsey would not allow him to return with his sub to same place to verify his reading.

Transcript of KBJR-TV newscast, April 12, 1995:

  News Anchor MICHELLE LEE: Did the Army Corps of Engineers ignore and cover-up findings of radioactivity in the Lake Superior mystery barrels?
  News Anchor DAVE JENSCH: Environmentalists say “Yes,” and State and federal officials say “No.” The submarine captain who first took the readings says the whole thing has become a big cover-up.
  LEE: Channel 6 News tracked him down in New York and Barbara Reyelts brings us his story.
  Reporter BARBARA REYELTS: It was October 15, 1990. The Army Corps of Engineers had hired Harold Maynard and his submarine to probe the bottom of Lake Superior for barrels. From his home in New York, Captain Maynard tells us [that] as a precaution on that dive, he took onboard a Geiger counter provided by the Corps of Engineers.
  MAYNARD: … as I turned toward the barrel, about thirty feet off the bottom, I got a nuclear Geiger counter went off, started clickin’. I turned towards the barrel and when I got almost to the barrel it went off again. It was clickin’ again; low level.
  REYELTS: When Maynard resurfaced, Corps officials went over his sub with a Geiger counter. Maynard said it went off as it moved over the line that tethered the sub to surface craft.
  MAYNARD: When he got near that tether with that Geiger counter, it took off. It went right up the line. You could hear it rattling, click, click, click, click, click.
  REYELTS: Jack [Bob] Dempsey of the Army Corps went back down with Captain Maynard to read the levels himself. In a telephone interview, he tells us:
  DEMPSEY: We anchored ourselves as close to the same spot as possible for a good hour … But we could never repeat Mr. Maynard’s readings.
  REYELTS: But Maynard says the Corps refused to go back to the spot where the radioactivity was detected.
  MAYNARD: The nuclear readings that I got, the low-level ones, were in the south of this barrel field. They wouldn’t let me go back there again. They kept me to the north and to the east.
  CHUCK WILLIAMS, (then director of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency): Uh, as far, uh, as, uh, these stories, you know, I started to get really tired of it.
  REYELTS: Chuck Williams, Director of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, admits they got a radioactive reading, but says the whole thing is being blown out of proportion.
  WILLIAM S: I think that he, uh, yah, is mistaken. And if he’s willing step forward and, uh, umm, uh, and show us the documentation, uh, we’ll certainly take a look at it. But I don’t think he can do that.
  REYELTS: Maynard says that he has done it. He says he signed a sworn affidavit saying that he encountered radioactive levels while scanning the mystery barrels. Now, he says the whole thing is making him mad.
  MAYNARD: When it [the report] came back and said that the Corps had denied any reading, [that] really upset me, ‘cause now one of us is a liar, and I got no reason to lie.
  REYELTS: Duluth environmentalists brought the issue before the city council this week, and at the upcoming agenda session councilors will take a deeper look. In Duluth, Barbara Reyelts, Channel 6 News.
  MICHELLE LEE: It’s estimated it would cost 12 million dollars to bring up the remaining fourteen-hundred-plus barrels.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uUk9jcmEv_Y


Contact us for related articles and information.

 

Filed Under: Lake Superior Barrels Tagged With: lake superior, radioactive waste

October 7, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Radiation Exposure

radioactive wasteRadiation is a daily fact of life. It is all around us. Since radiation is naturally occurring, there should be no need to be concerned about radiation. Right? Wrong.

While radiation is indeed a fact of life, there is no such thing as a “safe” dose of radiation exposure other than that which is in fact naturally occurring. Uranium exposed though the process of mining is not naturally occurring once it is removed from the ground.

Radiation is emitted when elements break down into simpler and more stable elements. It is also created as a byproduct when certain isotopes — especially uranium and plutonium — are split apart artificially in nuclear weapons and nuclear power reactors.

There are three primary forms of radiation. Alpha radiation is the least dangerous and damaging — so long as material that’s emitting alpha radiation isn’t ingested. Alpha radiation travels slowly and is easily blocked by skin or clothing. Humans are harmed by alpha radiation only if they ingest the material — for example, by eating an apple or other radioactively contaminated material or by having the contamination enter our blood stream via an open wound.

Beta radiation is a more serious threat to humans and other life forms. It has one hundred times the penetrating power of alpha radiation and is also far more ionizing (i.e., it changes the substance with which it comes into contact). It is still possible to stop beta radiation with simple measures such as aluminum foil, but still quite dangerous to the health and wellbeing of humans, especially if ingested.

Gamma radiation is by the far the most dangerous radiation. It penetrates deeply into surfaces and causes great damage very quickly, changing the structure (or killing) the cells with which it comes into contact. One need not worry about having to ingest a contaminated substance in order to be gravely harmed by gamma radiation.

So, when you hear someone say that radiation is all around us and therefore it is not necessary to worry about radiation — ask them exactly what form of radiation they are talking about.

In addition to the type of radiation that is emitted, each radioactive substance has a half-life, the length of time it takes to decay into another element. All elements strive for stability and are constantly working towards becoming stable. Elements do this by shedding off neutrons or protons (or sometimes adding them), trying to find a balance in their existence. This process creates radiation — energy-that radiates outward. Ultimately, even if it takes millions of years, the element becomes stable and stops decaying.

You can think of it as being a rubber ball bouncing on a floor. You throw the ball up into the air. Its highest level is its life. It then falls to the floor (decaying), hits the floor and bounces back up. Gravity being what it is, it bounces to exactly half the height it originally achieved — that’s the ball’s half-life. It keeps doing this until it finally reaches the point where its bounce is either so minimal that it is unobservable or the ball comes to rest on the floor.

Through this whole process, the ball is sending out waves of air — that’s the radiation. Imagine that some waves of air are simply air molecules. They arrive at you and bounce off, with no damage done — that’s the alpha radiation. Some air waves though, carry small specks of sand with them. These specks hit you and you feel discomfort. Perhaps a few enter your eye and you feel pain and discomfort. Some might enter your mouth and, as they accumulate, begin to affect your ability to breath. This is the beta radiation reaching you. And then there are the pebbles that are carried in the air waves. These strike your face and you begin to bleed. A few enter your mouth and block your air passage immediately, keeping you from breathing. This is the gamma radiation that is causing immediate damage when it touches you.

No matter how you cut it, radiation causes damage. Even when used for medical purposes, radiation causes damage (e.g., the use of radiation to treat cancer by destroying the cancerous cells). The mining of uranium and its use in the nuclear power and nuclear weapons industries (as well as in the manufacture of depleted uranium weapons) brings the radioactive substances to the surface, creates fissile materials, and exposes us, animals and other living things to radiation that otherwise would rightfully be buried and contained deep underground where it can do no harm.

Filed Under: Radioactive Waste Tagged With: radiation, radioactive waste

October 7, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Radioactive Waste

Radioactive Waste

Radioactive waste originates with nuclear power, weapons, industry and nuclear medicine. It comes from uranium mining, reactor fuel fabrication and fuel reprocessing. Nuclear waste is radioactive and by nature, dangerous. It can be called “low-level, transuranic, intermediate-level or high-level depending on the country and agency categorizing the isotopes, or a label may depend on the radioactivity per mass or volume, or for what the element can be used. It can be long-lived or short-lived depending on the half-life, or the amount of time half of the isotope’s energy disintegrates. A half-life can be seconds or millions of years and the faster it decays, the more radioactive it will be. Radioisotopes are unstable configurations of elements in decay and through the decay process, radiation is emitted. Many radionuclides decay into other radioactive elements. Isotopes may be a gas, solid or liquid. Hundreds of human-made isotopes are created in nuclear reactors. Some waste can be handled by humans and some solely by robots.

Nuclear waste has been chucked into ravines, buried in shallow graves, stored in underground caverns, left to blow with the wind, thrown overboard into the sea, smelted in scrap yards and has been making its way, in increasing amounts, into our environment since its use for weapons and power became a focus for nations around the world.

Exposure to certain levels of radioactive waste may cause serious harm or death. The effect of exposure depends on the isotope and decay mode of an element. Cesium-137 is water soluble and can pass through the body and exit in urine causing less damage than iodine-131 which tends to lodge in the thyroid gland and continuously emits harmful beta and gamma radiation into surrounding tissue.

The U.S. Department of Energy estimates that 108 sites nationwide are contaminated with enough radioactive waste as to be unusable for the foreseeable future. The Oak Ridge nuclear weapons production site contained 167 poisoned areas. While “clean up” is taking place, clean up means packaging and re-dumping in another location.

Radioactive waste has been filtered into industry and used for such things as the irradiation of food to kill pathogens, those harmful and useful to humans and industry has created radioisotope thermoelectric generators or RTH batteries for space craft.

Radioactive waste is a lethal by-product and the wisest path to take is to stop producing it.

Contact us for related articles and information.

Filed Under: Radioactive Waste Tagged With: radioactive waste

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Facebook

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
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • 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

© 2023 · Nukewatch