Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...
Comments
OK...
How close did the Davis-Besse nuclear power station come to blowing its reactor vessel head on the shores of Lake Erie just twenty miles from Toledo, Ohio?
Dum-de-dum-dum, dum-de-dum,
Dum-de-dum-de-dum-deeee-dum-dum.
Times up.
As close as two months of continued ongoing corrosion which had already eaten a cavity 6 3/4 inches deep into the carbon steel base metal exposing the balloning and cracking stainless steel inner liner.
Yes... (Applause)
I'll try Davis-Besse again and jeopardize surpassing Price Anderson...
OK...What reactor containment component was found to be so undersized at Davis-Besse, as at other pressurized water reactors, that the debris field created by this screaming jet stream from ruptured pressure vessel would have clogged it and prevented the recycling of the emergency core cooling system?
Dum-de-dum-dum...
I got... the containment sump screen...
Yes!!!! (Applause)
Paul, NIRS
What fraction of the September 11th attack force does the NRC's security cost curtailing DBT cover under its adversary characteristics?
Answer: TIME Magazine June 20, 2005.
"I'll take Nuclear Power Plants for $1,000 Alex"
Alex:
"This anti-nuclear organization often distorts the truth of nuclear power with poor information and bad scare tactics."
Player 1, 2, and 3 all buzz in with Player 1 just beating the other two.
Player 1:
"What is the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS)?"
Alex:
"Correct for a thousand."
You are absolutely right about Davis Besse. For the industry it wasn't a great reflection on the benefits of nuclear power.
However, you need to recognize that Davis Besse isn't the only nuclear reactor in the U.S. and the world. There are 103 operating reactors in the U.S. and the only instances of which nuclear power posed a possible threat to the public were TMI and Davis Besse. And there isn't any evidence of the public being harmed in both cases. It should be noted that those reactors make up only 1% of the nuclear industry.
So to say that nuclear power is unsafe, unreliable and a threat to the public, you have to have more than TMI and Davis Besse which there aren't in the U.S.