Skip to main content

Wednesday Update

By

From NEI’s Japan micro-site:

NRC Staff Proposes Priorities for Post-Fukushima Actions

October 5, 2011

Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues

  • A U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff paper that prioritizes recommendations from the near-term post-Fukushima task force was released today. The document, which will be the basis for an Oct. 11 commission briefing, divides the recommendations into three “tiers.” The briefing will be webcast
  • Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency has ordered Tokyo Electric Power Co. to provide safety guidelines for its work to stabilize the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear energy facility. The agency said the main objective should be to prevent additional discharges of radioactive material and to reduce radiation levels at the plant over the next three years.
  • A reactor at the Genkai nuclear energy facility in western Japan shut down safely Tuesday because of abnormalities in the turbine generator steam condenser, a non-safety-related component. The operator of the plant, Kyushu Electric Power Co., reported no injuries and no change in radiation levels near the facility.
  • The government of Fukushima Prefecture has begun to train workers who will clean areas contaminated with radioactive material from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear energy facility. The two-day technical seminars are scheduled in various locations around the prefecture. Ten seminars are scheduled through the end of the year.
  • The Japanese government will check radiation levels in five municipalities outside the 12-mile no-entry zone around Fukushima Daiichi. On Friday, the government lifted its evacuation advisory for the municipalities, which are located between 12 and 18 miles from the nuclear energy facility. Decontamination continues in the areas and residents have not returned to their homes.

Media Highlights

  • U.S. nuclear energy facilities are built to withstand earthquakes, floods, hurricanes, tornadoes and other extreme natural events, Tony Pietrangelo, NEI’s senior vice president and chief nuclear officer, writes in a Real Clear Energy column. The comments also are posted on NEI’s Safety First website.

Upcoming Events

  • NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko will speak on lessons learned from Fukushima Oct. 24 at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C. Details are on the AAAS website.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
This post is absolutely correct. The fuel in the reactor spent fuel pools at Fukushima was never at any risk. Even with the massive hydrogen explosions in Units 1, 3, and 4, the spent fuel pool walls were sufficiently thick that the pools remained leak tight, with plenty of water inventory.

But the lack of instrumentation to measure and monitor the water level created unnecessary uncertainty about the status of the pools, and the concern about the potential for damage to the spent fuel led to resources being diverted to spray water into the pools, and to the unnecessary NRC recommendation for a 50-mile evacuation distance for U.S. citizens.

There were a number of "technical experts" with anti-nuclear positions who were interviewed by the media during the early phases of the accident who made a lot of incorrect claims about what was happening during the accident. This type of disinformation is very damaging, and that's why the NRC's decision to put improved spent fuel pool instrumentation at the top of the list is exactly the right thing to do.
October 7, 2011 at 11:39 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

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...
7 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