When you really look at nuclear power it becomes obvious that we are being misled by our government about the safety of the industry. Consider these five nuclear plant disasters: Chernobyl, Fukushima, Kyshtym USSR, Windscale UK and Three Mile Island in the USA. If that is not enough to scare you what about the recent Fort Calhoun (near Omaha, Neb.) nuclear power plant’s “catastrophic loss of cooling” reported by the IAEA? And how about the aging U.S. nuclear plants that are leaking radioactive Tritium into the ground water as reported by the Government Accountability Office and released by two democratic Representatives (Edward Markey of Massachusetts and Peter Welch of Vermont). Just for thought ... Japan will not recover from Fukushima in your lifetime or in 50 lifetimes. If you are disturbed by this let your government know how you feel.
Peter Houston
Merrifield
Comments (8)
Add commentTry a little knowledge.
The Russian reactors bore no relation to our commercial reactors. Windscale was a British weapons plutonium producing reactor which had nothing to do with commercial power plants. Chernobyl was also an unsafe Russian military design on which the operators were running a dangerous experiment. Fukushima's plants are commercial BWRs similar to Monticello, but we don't have 50 foot tsunamis.
The world has 430 commercial nuclear reactors which have operated safely for decades, like our 3 in Minnesota which operate safely and cleanly.
All commercial reactors, especially BWRs(about 27% of our plants), produce some tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. It's a small molecule which can travel to the discharge water. That discharge water has been tested a number of times and never found to be a hazard to human health.
Some countries, like Mr Houston, are panicking and halting new nuclear. Big mistake. Most are not as nuclear is the only effective and clean substitute for coal. We have 104 safe reactors, and we need 100 more. You can run them for 2 cents/kwh including fuel.
Relax Mr Houston. Coal dust kills; nuclear plants don't.
Rolf Westgard
3 Mile Island
The meltdown in Unit 2 at 3 Mile Island resulted from a combination of maintenance failure and operator error. The accident also caused improvements to be made in the instrumentation and training in all our nuclear plants. There were no injuries from the incident, although the reactor was a very expensive mess.
The adjacent reactor #1at 3 Mile Island subsequently set a record by running continuously every minute for nearly 2 years before a halt for refueling and maintenance. That reactor has been granted a 20 year extension to run for at least 60 years. So far 66 of our reactors have been granted 20 year extensions by the NRC. When properly maintained it is now expected that many of these units will go for 80 years.
One of the largest solar energy facilities has 2600 solar panels on the roof of the Minneapolis Convention Center. That $3 million+ system is expected to produce 750,000 erratic kwh per year. The Prairie Island nuclear plant near Red Wing produces that much power in 55 minutes. And it does it night and day, rain or shine, calm or windy.
An investigation by AP found
An investigation by AP found that many American nuclear plants repeatedly failed to meet safety standards. Then in order for them to be re-licensed the safety standards were reduced. Thus re-licensing is not proof of safety.
We don't have tsunamis here in MN but are we positive that no other crisis (tornado or manmade) can't stop the flow of cooling water?
Are there backups to backups or has capitalism trumped safety like it did in Japan?
Importance of maintenance
What trumped in Japan was an unprecedented 46 foot tsunami over a 19 foot sea wall. Should it have been planned for? Probably.
General statements by AP reporters who wouldn't know tritium from table salt don't mean much to some of us. Preventive maintenance IS critical in a big power plant, whether it's nuclear, coal or whatever. I only know about Minnesota's nuclear reactors. Everywhere you go in them the emphasis is on safety and reliability. That's why one of the reactors at Prairie Island set a record for operating every second non-stop for nearly two years.
That's pretty hard to do if you have hundreds of defective pumps, valves, screens, and fittings with 4 small house sized turbines turning at 60 times per second.
As to "stopping" the "flow of cooling water", it has to flow out - back into the river. It is not a hazard to human health or the fish. Some fish get mashed on the intake screens - a problem for all power plants that draw millions of gallons of water. It is minimized by closed circulation cooling systems that reduce the intake requirement.
REW
mashed fish
So, the truth finally comes out. Fish is actually afraid he'll be mashed if we allow nuclear to go forward.
I guess we can't really fault him. He's already been sucked into a liberal mindset that is afraid of everything.
Go eat some Lutefisk, Fish.
"Japan will not recover from
"Japan will not recover from Fukushima in your lifetime or in 50 lifetimes."
Yes they will, and already are.
Maintaining perspective
The quake and tsunami has killed at least 25,000 and done enormous property damage. The property damage will apparently include 4 multi billion dollar nuclear power plants. There are major continuing costs to reach final and safe decommissioning of those reactors.
But at this point no one has died from the Fukushima nuclear accidents, and it is quite possible that no one ever will. There could be an increase in cancer rates in the area. At this point there is no way to tell.
Cheap reliable energy?
"The property damage will apparently include 4 multi billion dollar nuclear power plants. There are major continuing costs to reach final and safe decommissioning of those reactors."
What is that "cheap energy" going to cost rate payers now?