Skip to main content

Tuesday Afternoon Update

By

From NEI's Japan Earthquake launch page:

UPDATE AS OF 3 PM EDT, TUESDAY, MARCH 29:

Plutonium found in five soil samples at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant complex originated from uranium fuel at the plant, Tokyo Electric Power Co. has determined. The level of radiation from the plutonium is not considered dangerous to human health.

The company on March 28 said that some of the plutonium—which is at a very low level—could have been the result of fallout from atomic weapons tests during the Cold War.

Fresh water is being injected into reactors 1, 2 and 3 to cool fuel in the reactors. Workers have switched from diesel fire pumps to temporary electric pumps to move water into the reactors. U.S. Navy barges filled with fresh water have arrived at the site with much-needed supplies of fresh water to pump into the reactors and used nuclear fuel storage pools.

TEPCO also continues to clean contaminated water from the basements of the turbine buildings at the three reactors. The water is being pumped into the main condenser for each reactor. Workers also are working to drain water remaining at unit 4.

As reported earlier, radioactive water has been found in concrete-enclosed channels that hold piping and cables outside of the reactor 1, 2, and 3 turbine buildings. TEPCO is assessing the best way to remove the water from these structures. None of the trenches empty directly into the sea near the Fukushima plant.

NEI’s Pietrangelo Briefs Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee

Tony Pietrangelo, NEI senior vice president and chief nuclear offer, briefed members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on events in Japan and steps U.S. companies are doing to ensure safety and emergency preparedness at nuclear energy facilities. To watch video of Pietrangelo’s briefing, click here and go to the 94 minute mark.

Labels:

Comments

jimwg said…
I compliment Mr. Pietrangelo for artfully correcting Sen. Franken. Re: Evacuation. I would recommend that the NCR use the same mass evacuation plans which would/must be used in the event of a virulently lethal biological warfare agent/microbe release in an urban environment. Surely there are contingencies for that -- right? What agency would be responsible for such a critical mass evacuation plan in a world of terrorism and super-lethal engineered biologics?

James Greenidge
March 29, 2011 at 5:00 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...
6 comments
Read more

Nuclear Utility Moves Up in Credit Ratings, Bank is "Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy"

By
Some positive signs that nuclear utilities can continue to receive positive ratings even while they finance new nuclear plants for the first time in decades: Wells Fargo upgrades SCANA to Outperform from Market Perform Wells analyst says, "YTD, SCG shares have underperformed the Regulated Electrics (total return +2% vs. +9%). Shares trade at 11.3X our 10E EPS, a modest discount to the peer group median of 11.8X. We view the valuation as attractive given a comparatively constructive regulatory environment and potential for above-average long-term EPS growth prospects ... Comfortable with Nuclear Strategy. SCG plans to participate in the development of two regulated nuclear units at a cost of $6.3B, raising legitimate concerns regarding financing and construction. We have carefully considered the risks and are comfortable with SCG’s strategy based on a highly constructive political & regulatory environment, manageable financing needs stretched out over 10 years, strong partners...
Post a Comment
Read more