Union Of Concerned Scientists Releases Report On US Nuclear Plant Safety, Finds NRC Oversight Weakness At Indian Point NPP

Tyler Durden's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
hedgeless_horseman's picture

It could never happen here, bitchezzzz!

Dr. Richard Head's picture

Exactly.  The power plant in my stomping grounds, Perry, OH, was built on a fault line, albeit a fault line that only gives us 3 richter earthquakes.  Normalcy bias will get me through all of this.  You just wait and see.

CH1's picture

I know engineers who were fired for refusing to falsify critical testing results during the construction of a nuke plant. They know many others, and at different plants.

It sounds unbelievable, but the NRC has overseen a culture of corruption in the construction of these plants. Of all places to skimp - a NUCLEAR plant! But the stories are too many and the sources too reliable.

Yes, Lord Acton, power DOES corrupt, and the NRC has power over a LOT of money.

FilthyLucre's picture

Power corrupts, nuclear power corrupts absolutely?

scrappy's picture

A better way? After this disaster perhaps we might consider...

http://www.dauvergne.com/key-advantages/safe

The DBI Thorium Breeding/Breeder Reactor designs represent an evolutionary advance in nuclear reactor design. Under development for four decades, the reactor consists of a small number of robust, mechanically elegant and low-pressure core systems. This elegance reduces overall manufacturing, installation, operations and maintenance costs. The design simplicity includes extensive use of modern automated controls that also translates into greater operational safety.

The DBI designs comply with all safety requirements and specifically obviate nuclear accidents like those that occurred at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl.

The DBI Thorium Reactor designs provide for enhanced safety from a variety of perspectives including the mechanical design, fuel type usage and fuel waste.

DBI reactors are designed to comply with the prevailing “Defense in Depth” philosophy of nuclear reactor safety. Remote automated monitoring and operational control redundant computer systems and gravity driven fail-safe controls, etc. are just some of the safety features. These mechanically simple and robust engineered features have been used in the United States nuclear industry since first-generation nuclear reactors to eliminate the possibility of radiation release to the environment, catastrophic failure through operator error or core meltdown.

ALL Key Advantages of Thorium-powered nuclear reactors.
http://www.dauvergne.com/index.php

Wired Magazine also ran a story on this technology a while back.

 

Uranium Is So Last Century — Enter Thorium, the New Green Nuke

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2009/12/ff_new_nukes/

Your job as a reader of this get informed and support what you think is best regarding nuclear energy. I personally believe this is a good technology (transitional) even if I would like to see renew-able energy to be our ultimate future.

Larry Darrell's picture

Attn:      Bruce Krasting

 

Subject:  Indian Point

 

Dear Mr. Krasting,

 

You may wish to consider relocating your primary residence.

 

Sincerely,

 

ZHer's

 

 

O/T

Can someone remind me?  Is USDX sub 76 bullish or bearish?

barliman's picture

 

Alternatively, there are Soviet designed half tracks and APV's that can be had for a song at any number of bazaars in Egypt.

"Why wait on traffic when you can just drive over it?"

barliman

slewie the pi-rat's picture

bruce is heavily self-medicated, fishing in his fave pothole. 

he's reeling in tires!

sub 76 is bearish you moron!  buy!  then sell into any rally past 76 or when yer tight stops are taken out, like in about 7.6 seconds!

the commodities are flying!  so much for slewie's deflation call, eh?  corn is up 5%!  crack that whip!  OJ and silver are down when i peeked.  makes me just wanna rim that hot, young blythe! she may be the woman to push slewie past the point of no return!

Bruce Krasting's picture

I am fairly "up" on the IP news. Like I said, it's only nine miles away. I have know for a few decades that this is a dangerous relic that has no business being open 30 miles from mid-town.

Do I worry? Not really. I have an exit strategy.

But draw a 50 mile circle around this beast. You will find 20mm people inside the ring. A good portion don't have an exit strategy.

Cuomo said the other day that it would be closed. Given that this is the worst nuke in the USA that will probably happen. But that is no solution. Yes they would have two "cold' reactors. They also have 40 years of spent rods on the site. As we now know, this may be the greatest risk, as the stored rods have no containment.

Remember my last line of that piece:

Electric rates are going up. Big time!

The true cost of Japan's problems will be measured in the trillions as all the consequences come to play.

 

tmosley's picture

Wow, is some form of good going to come from this?  Are people learning lessons?

Not if the government has anything to say about it.  They'll just impose some new regulations.  That should fix everything!

NotApplicable's picture

As I'm always saying, one should have no rational expectation that the criminals d.b.a. "government" have the ability, let alone the desire to provide goods and services in an efficient manner, when they can fake it instead, because they cannot be held accountable for their individual actions.

StychoKiller's picture

Yet NRC managers have dismissed the longstanding problem, noting that the refueling cavity leaks only when it is filled with water (NRC 2010o).

D@mn, now I have "QWERTY" spelled on my forehead!

 

Alienated Serf's picture

I live 15 miles away from IP, but as the japanese government has shown, one only needs to be 12 miles away to be safe.  Cool beans.

Ruffcut's picture

Your homeowners policiy does not cover any nuke damage. So keep the mortgage as high as you can, buy a place anyway from there to bug out, when or if necessary.

Like a good neighbor, state farm will not be there.

Alienated Serf's picture

Locked and loaded pal.  Once the price goes down, I'll pick up some KI pills.  I should have thought of that before....

StychoKiller's picture

Sea Kelp pills are an effective substitute (or so I've read).

docj's picture

Isn't the UCC an inherently, at-its-core, anti-nuke outfit?  And if so, ought we not take their conclusions, if not their findings, with only so many grains of salt?

docj's picture

Heh - so I get "Junked" because I dare to suggest we should greet with the same degree of skepticism we ought to greet any "data" put out by the fed.gov a report from an organization that has (unless I'm mistaken, so feel free to correct me) a rather well-known bias on this subject.

Welcome to Fight Club.

Tyler Durden's picture

You are absolutely correct. All "information" should always be independently verified and evaluated. 

AN0NYM0US's picture

it is problematic when anti nuke advocates are presented without disclaimer as nuke experts, even here on ZH it is wise to check  sources. What surprised me is the number of readers who appear to take stuff at face value and join the hysteria as they pop their idodine tablets (best that folks read about the side effects before ingesting too many of those things)

Pseudo Anonym's picture

failed to address known safety problems

second hand info: same problems if not worse exist at Bruce Power in Tiverton, Ontario. It is owned by a UK company. Employees that attempted, in the past, leak info re safety hazards at the plant were attacked by Bruce Power lawyers (breach of non-disclosure agreements), discredited, and required to pass psychiatric / psychological test. these "doctors" work/ed directly for Bruce Power.

Commander Cody's picture

The Union of Concerned Scientists, while not pro-nuclear, is less anti-nuclear than most similar organizations.  They actually try to be helpful in addressing perceived vulnerabilities rather than just rant that all nuclear plants are bad.  However, like the financial criminal cartel and governments, they never let a crisis go to waste.

docj's picture

Gad-zooks but my internet is slow today.  OK, here's the UCS's "About us" on Nukes...

UCS staff monitor and work to improve the safety and security provisions at existing nuclear power plants and the performance of the industry's oversight body--the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; assess the safety, security and nuclear weapons proliferation risks of new reactors; and analyze the pros and cons of increasing nuclear power as a means of reducing global warming.  We write reports, file formal petitions to the NRC, testify before Congress, and provide technical assistance to groups of citizens living near nuclear plants.

Actually sounds pretty reasonable to me - and their other reports on the subject (which I've only had the chance to skim) are similarly reasonably balanced.  So it's entirely possible I have them confused with some other "science" union.

docj's picture

Oh, and thanks Commander.

koot's picture

I personally don't care about discussion of "are these things safe or not", simple fact is that should something go wrong which can no matter what is said or done, radiation leaks around a dangerous nuclear pile makes it very difficult if not impossible for living things to work, enter or correct a cascading catastrophe.  This makes nuclear energy dangerous and not a solution to energy sources at this time.  Should Robots be advanced to such level equal to an intellegent Human, only then could these things be viable.  Never mind the fact that the Robots might decide to turn against humanity and poison us all.

IrishSamurai's picture

You either forgot your [/sarc] tag ... or you win the "Trigg Palin Found ZH and Posted" award of the day ...

Which is it?

(And to the people that junk me for the Trigg Palin reference ... meh)

Alienated Serf's picture

you are a bad person, but that was f'in funny.

barliman's picture

You will want to go live in a cave then until we can get the robots up and running ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster

barliman

Hugh_Jorgan's picture

You have no idea what you're talking about. You need to learn the real facts behind the technology before you start blathering about what is safe and what is not. Nuclear power has produced millions of MW hours globally over the past 60 years and has verifiably killed far fewer that any fossil fuel technology. Not to mention that fissioning 1 Uranium atom releases milions of times the energy you get from breaking a hydrocarbon bond in coal. People are ignorant of the realities of nuclear power and the media capitalizes on this to spin us into a foaming mass of angst because it gets ratings.

If I may suggest a book to you, written by a left-wing greenie scientist that doesn't particularly like nuclear power. However unlike most people, he doesn't let his opinion get in the way of hard facts:

http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9226.html

http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Future-Presidents-Science-Headlines/dp/039...

BTW, we haven't called anything a "nuclear pile" since  the 1940s... Just saying...

Bearster's picture

Ayn Rand had something to say about regulation:

"... When you see that trading is done not by consent but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing - when you see that money is flowing to those who deal not in goods but in favors - when you see that men get rich more easily by graft than by work, and your laws no longer protect you against them, but protect them against you - when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice - then you will know that your society is doomed..."

flacorps's picture

Apropos St. Paddy's day: There are no nuclear power plants in Ireland. The incompatibility of whiskey and 4,000 dials and meters is well understood.

barliman's picture

+1 Not to mention the pubs open at 5:00 AM so you can stop in on your way to work

barliman

johnQpublic's picture

similar reason why there are no power generating nuclear plants in jamaica

flacorps's picture

I thought they had a bad experience with the one on Crab Key?

americanspirit's picture

The underlying message here is that for some nuke operators profit is more important than safety. I'm sure they justify this policy decision by telling themselves that the chances of a serious event are so remote that it isn't worth taking a hit to their profits to take steps to prevent highly unlikely events. As this report points out, ignoring identified safety violations increases the risk of such unlikely events actually occurring.

Although these rogue operators probably don't see it this way, what that actually means is that at a certain point, determined largely by their accountants and lawyers, our lives (all of them) are not as important as their profits. 

drswhaley's picture

Someone needs to get Scott Walker here to bust up the

Union Of Concerned Scientists.

 

 

yipcarl's picture

What is the validity in regard to this report on Raditation from http://anncoulter.com/

 

I've never been to her site before today.  Please read this article on how Radiation is not bad for you. 

flacorps's picture

Sometimes I see Ann Coulter on TV. A former boss of mine once had a bookkeeper who was on crack. Now I know it when I see it.

yipcarl's picture

You are retard.  You should be perusing, CNBC.  Leave. 

 

I don't even like the chick, but you are a fool.. 

Horatio Beanblower's picture

Some light hearted relief...

 


"Bully Year 7 Gets Head slammed by Year 10 Sydney. Original." - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cd7JX1sZnmk

Kurtieboy's picture

From a military stratigic perspective nucular plants are incredable. If someone wanted to attack the US our nucular plants are sitting ducks.

nonclaim's picture

It depends if the objectives are conquest or extermination. It may be used as scorched earth as well.

flacorps's picture

The scientists questioned the [former operators of SL-1]: “Did you know that the reactor would go critical if the central control rod were removed?” Answer: “Of course! We often talked about what we would do if we were at a radar station and the Russians came. We’d yank it out.”

– Susan M. Stacy, Proving the Principle,

SubjectivObject's picture

The corporate nuclear industry and their handmaiden regulators are their own worst public relations.