Tuesday Morning Update

UPDATE AS OF 8:30 A.M. EDT, TUESDAY, APRIL 12:

Japan’s nuclear safety agency has raised the crisis level of the Fukushima Daiichi accident from 5 to 7 on the seven-level International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale. The new rating puts the Japanese incident on the same level as the 1986 Chernobyl accident—even though Japanese authorities estimate that radiation released at Fukushima is only 10 percent of the amount released from the Ukrainian plant.

The new level designates Fukushima as a “major accident,” up from an “accident with wider consequences.” Level 7, the highest on the scale, describes an event with “a major release of radioactive material with widespread health and environmental effects requiring implementation of planned and extended countermeasures," according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, which sponsors the ratings.

For the new rating, the Japan Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency combined the accidents at reactors 1, 2 and 3 as a single event. Previously, separate level 5 ratings had been applied to each reactor. The earlier level 3 rating (“serious incident”) still applies to reactor 4.

Japanese authorities may revise the INES rating at the power plant as more information becomes available.

Comments

Cyril R said…

Actually Fukushima released 3 to 6 percent of Chernobyl.

http://uvdiv.blogspot.com/2011/04/fukushima-rated-ines-level-7.html

What matters much more is the dose, not the release. For example reprocessing plants routinely release more radiation than Fukushima, La Hague emits a Fukushima every two to four years. Because the nuclides are all noble gasses that just float away in the atmosphere, the dose is tiny so has no effect on public health.

April 12, 2011 at 9:31 AM

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

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...

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

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

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog