Why Nuclear Power Scares The Shit Out Of Me
by lizard
When greed is the number one driving force, everything else takes a back seat, including, it would appear, preparing for cataclysmic disasters like floods and tsunamis when you’re running a nuclear power plant. Here’s Joseph Giambrone from an article put up at Counterpunch today.
When I wrote last week about the Nebraska reactor surrounded by floodwaters I, like most, still considered it a highly remote possibility of cataclysm.
Upon further investigation, it seems much more likely now. The New York Times has exposed some major criminal negligence and game playing with the safety of the nation by the plant’s operator. Peter Behr’s June 24th report examines what we’ve been told vs. what’s there on the ground at Fort Calhoun’s nuclear power station. This is truly frightening with water levels approaching the 1007 ft. above sea level mark.
The article goes on, closely examining language used in news reports, then interpreting the possible meaning. The article is worth reading, and incredibly disturbing, like this part:
The NRC gave the operator OPPD a wristslap last October 6 to try and force some improvements of “substatntal importance” to the facility. The OPPD predictably stalled and tried to fight spending any money on improvements up through this year.
The plot thickened back in the 1990s, where a series of floods threatened the area. The Army Corps of Engineers warned the plant operator to increase its defenses by at least 3 feet, back in 2003. The plant however did not “properly act” on the “deficiencies.” No surprises there.
When a senior nuclear investigator for NRC was asked how these situations can go on so long with no meaningful action taken to protect the public from disaster, Gerond George answered, “We only sample certain parts of their design basis…” This admission reveals gaping holes at the NRC.
No surprise indeed, but still totally fucking crazy. This, folks, is the consequence of a long, concerted attack on the government’s role in regulating an industry that has the collective real world potential of destroying virtually all life on earth. And with the planet experiencing increasingly volatile weather from the changing climate, we continue to entrust our safety to law makers and regulators who are absolutely incapable of doing their jobs.
Obama did a fantastic job of minimizing the negative impact on BP and gulf drilling after the gusher in the gulf. Now, with a nuclear disaster still unfolding in Japan, and two possible situations in Nebraska (the other facility, the Cooper Nuclear Station, is STILL operating) I wonder how he’ll tap dance for the Nuclear industry.
Don’t worry, though. Just listen to this douche quoted in the NYT:
Though the plants have declared “unusual events,” the lowest level in the emergency taxonomy used by federal nuclear regulators, both were designed to withstand this level of flooding, and neither is viewed as being at risk for a disaster, said a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
“We think they’ve taken all the necessary precautions and made the appropriate arrangements to deal with the flooding conditions,” said the spokesman, Victor Dricks.
After reading that, I did some quick price checking for geiger counters, and it looks like they run anywhere from a couple hundred bucks, to over a thousand. Maybe it’s time to cash in my growler savings account full of quarters.
-
Recent Comments
Steve W on Is UM Discriminating Against F… Ryan Morton on Is UM Discriminating Against F… Ryan Morton on Is UM Discriminating Against F… Ingemar Johansson on Is UM Discriminating Against F… Rob Kailey on Is UM Discriminating Against F… Ingemar Johansson on Is UM Discriminating Against F… ladybug on Is UM Discriminating Against F…
June 27, 2011 at 6:00 pm
japan has learned that giving corporations control over their government (supply side – profit driven economics) may cost them millions of lives lost in radiation exposure cancer.
beginning to wonder just what it will take for this country to wake up and realize that the corporate controlled presidency, congress and supreme court is slowly taking over our rights to life, liberty and any non-cyborg-based lifeform’s pursuit of happiness.
unregulated greed powered by lobbyists dollars can only equal doom.
June 27, 2011 at 6:16 pm
This is not the consequence of a long, concerted attack on the government’s role in regulating an industry that has the collective real world potential of destroying virtually all life on earth. This is precisely how government works and is exactly what happens when you have government. It is controlled by those who can afford to pay for it. The more dependent we are on government, the more power the rich have because they can afford to control it whereas we can’t.
June 27, 2011 at 9:30 pm
So what are you saying it should be? The market can regulate itself? Or there shouldn’t be nuclear energy?
June 29, 2011 at 4:51 pm
The “market” won’t regulate itself when government removes its liability for its actions and socializes that expense to divert it from the market to victims and taxpayers. That is precisely the situation we are in today.
I think the practical thing that people can do today is citizen-driven, crowdsourced, openly reported science such as this, for example: http://www.safecast.org/
Take government out of the process and it’s much harder to obscure what is going on from public view. That information and publicity is something we can really leverage in these kinds of situations. We may pretend we have control over government because we get to wear a sticker on our shirt for a day every November proclaiming that we voted. That, however blissful, is simply ignorance of how the process actually works.
June 27, 2011 at 7:02 pm
Is there any kind of power generation that you actually DO approve of lizard ?
I’ll bet you would fit right in with the greenies who hate coal plants too – LOL
June 27, 2011 at 8:20 pm
No power generation E-man. This how they want us to live.
June 27, 2011 at 9:31 pm
Why not? Isn’t that really what Krayton Kerns and Derek Skees wants? Natural law?
June 27, 2011 at 11:25 pm
Stop with the straw man. The choices you present are false Ingy, it’s not between a cave or a horribly run nuclear industry, but between a what we have today and a future that includes more renewables.
I would like a pet dinosaur though.
June 27, 2011 at 8:36 pm
So I hear lots of storm and fury, but do you have any real facts about whether there is even a real situation there? The last article I read on CNN yesterday claimed that the only issue was a loss of cooling for the spent reactor rods (the reactor was undergoing a refueling when the flood situation started) and the backup cooling system started up (as designed) before the water in the tank could even reach boiling level. Further, is there any reason – at this point – to believe there is an issue with the other reactor operating? Again, as of yesterday, the flood waters were still two feet below the area of the plant, the plant was preparing flood protection for it’s buildings and equipment and there are people depending on that power to help them deal with their flooding.
And what with this line… “This is not the consequence of a long, concerted attack on the government’s role in regulating an industry that has the collective real world potential of destroying virtually all life on earth. ” Care to back that one up with real science or is that just more hyperbole?
Every time you make some mis-informed post or rant about nuclear power, I can only read you and wonder why you are so afraid of it. Did the Hammer radioactive monster movies scare you as a child?
I will not say that the US civilian nuclear industry isn’t without problems. There is a reason I chose not to go into the civilian world as a reactor operator. Your rants do nothing to further the discussion on how to address those problems, though. It is more extremism, sky is falling, hyperbole BS and it hinders any REAL discussion on how to get these sites (all civilian sites, actually) operating in a far safer manner.
June 27, 2011 at 9:05 pm
did you read the first article i linked to? were there not facts in that article describing the situation, and the cause for concern?
and do you not find the fact that the army corps of engineers told the plant operator EIGHT YEARS AGO to better prepare for a flood, and it didn’t happen, just a little bit disturbing?
as for your other demand i back up my assertion there has been an attack on the regulations of nuclear power, i spent about 3 minutes with the google and found this:
oh, and that little snipe about scary movies is cute. maybe i’m scared because i have two young kids and i don’t like the idea of radioactivity floating through the atmosphere or showing up in their milk.
June 28, 2011 at 12:55 am
The assertion I was asking you to back up (which you convienently ignored was “an industry that has the collective real world potential of destroying virtually all life on earth. ” That was the hyperbole I was refering to.
As far as the article you linked to, yes I did read it. Then I read four REAL articles about what was really going on there. Excuse me if I find what a partisan nuke hating blog says about the situation a little suspect.
I won’t argue that the plant ignoring the Army Corp of Engineer’s recommendation is silly and potentially dangerous. Nor will I argue that there are issues with the way civilian nuclear power is handled and regulated. In fact, I said as much in my original comment. What I have an issue with is your “the sky is falling” hyperbole. This is NOT a repeat of what happened in Japan… not even close. It is only your reactionary attitude to nuclear power that even suggests that it is. Even the reporter on CNN is guilty of some exaggeration when he said that the plant would be “in big trouble” if the transformer is shorted by water again. The fact is, if that transformer is shorted again, they will do the same thing they did last time.. they will start the secondary generator and engage the backup system (sadly, the reporter even mentioned that earlier on in his story…). If that fails (unlikely since they have already used it once), they have a tertiary system that uses high pressure air to force water into the system. This is a different plant, a different situation and a different set of circumstances than the Japanese accident and you trying to link it to that accident makes your entire argument suspect.
When you are ready to talk rationally about the problems with the American Civilian Nuclear Power System, I am more than willing to do that. The political and financial influence on the Nuclear industry is just one of the many problems that I am aware of. I will NOT talk about it with anyone that is just looking for another reason to justify their irrational fear of the nuclear boggyman.
June 28, 2011 at 5:39 am
i should have been more clear with the hyperbole you are so concerned about, i was thinking also about the weaponized fissile material that exists, but that’s mixing issues.
i find your casual dismissal of the article i linked to indicative of your own stubborn bias. you don’t think it’s a REAL article? do you contest any of the facts of the article? or do you see that it comes from a blog you don’t like and therefore dismiss it because of that?
at least i linked to an article. you could try doing the same.
as for my comparison to Japan, the only thing i stated in my post is that making money trumps safety, so when you say this:
you are effectively putting words in my mouth, which i find obnoxious. i never said this is a repeat of what happened in Japan.
and i certainly hope it remains that way, because if you’ve been paying attention, that cataclysmic disaster IS as bad as i feared when i initially posted my concerns months ago, which you did your best to mock and minimize.
June 28, 2011 at 9:33 am
I didn’t think I had to provide links to CNN, MSNBC, and the local news center. I probably made a bad assumption in thinking that you could find those on your own.
June 28, 2011 at 1:26 pm
I thought you were all about having a “real” conversation. so why don’t you knock off the condescension and mockery, because you are undermining what you claim to want.
i’m not going to waste my time looking up the stories you are citing but refusing to link to, to help you make your case against this “sky is falling” post. you can either be obstinate, or show me the “real” sources you are reading.
June 27, 2011 at 9:25 pm
Anytime a nuclear reactor is keeping dry thanks to sandbags, there’s reason for concern. The immediate concern is whether the sandbags hold, and whether rising groundwater seeps into places it shouldn’t. So far the backup systems and jury-rigged defenses seem to be working, but every day the water rises, or just stays high, the worse the situation becomes.
I hope, and expect, that independent scientists and engineers look at the flood frequency numbers for the power plant’s site to see if this is a case where the flood stage reached this year could have reasonably been expected given the data and methods available to analysts when the plant was approved.
June 27, 2011 at 9:37 pm
This situation has been going on for weeks. The U.S. government called for a news blackout on this – which is why it is now probably finally gaining some media attention. Locals knew a little about what was going on and kept pushing for answers.
Flooding a facility is a defacto nuclear incident.
The place as lost power. It was or is now running on generators.
Nuclear scares me – it scares me that many of our plants – many – are built on fault lines – several of them in California, in fact….(plus, some of them face tsunami threats).
Currently we, as a government, barely acknowledge these threats.
So am I scared of nuclear energy? You betcha. We got a whole hell of a lot of potential disaster sitting around – much like what you are suggesting here in this post.
June 28, 2011 at 1:01 am
The plant only lost power for a short period of time (due to an emergency worker accidently puncturing a water filled rubber dike). The situation was quickly resolved and the backup system performed as it was designed to.
CNN is claiming this level of flooding is unprecidented. That said, the plant should still have been better prepared. As Liz said earlier, the Army Corp of Engineers made a recommendation years ago that the plant could sustain damage if they didn’t do some precautionary steps.
June 27, 2011 at 9:54 pm
There are always alternatives: http://smu.edu/geothermal/heatflow/heatflow.htm
June 28, 2011 at 3:36 pm
It’s tragic that bickering over regulation, and what plants can do building-wise, has led to things like this. Democrats fought to limit plant construction and alteration. Republicans fought against adequate regulation. What we have now is a mess that leaves one wondering why both parties can’t find middle ground on not letting nuclear accidents occur. Seems like a bipartisan issue to me.
June 28, 2011 at 6:06 pm
I don’t know why I am responding to Liz… nothing I say will ever change is almost pathological dislike of nuclear power. For the rest of the people interested here…
http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/06/28/nebraska.nuclear.plant.flood/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
The Nebraska plant is NOT Japan and it is not going to meltdown. Get over the hype, loose the hyperbole and then we can talk. There are things that really do need to be done, not the least of which is a complete reorganization of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
June 28, 2011 at 9:36 pm
thank you for the link, moorcat. i like looking at other sources. and even though i’m weary of how corporate news covers the early stages of situations like these, i still find value, and would never imply the article isn’t “real”
the end of the article is rather astonishing, though.
how encouraging is that? it’s your challenge guys, good luck. wow.
also, it would be nice if the article went into a little more detail about exactly what kind of steps to upgrade safeguards have been made. i hope it’s more than just sandbags and fingers crossed for clear skies.
and i guess we’re just suppose to feel ok an NRC that even you, moorcat, acknowledges needs a complete organization, states its “satisfied” with those safeguards.
if nuclear energy is an inescapable part of our near-future energy plan, then existing facilities and waste storage MUST be addressed first.
i think that’s a reasonable place to start.
June 28, 2011 at 10:26 pm
Actually, it is useless to address ” existing facilities and waste storage” until a working framework exists to address the issues. The current NRC is a political organization first and an engineering organization second. This has always been the issue with the Civilian Nuclear field. Politics (read money) has always come first.
What has to happen is that the NRC has to be completely reworked into the engineering/monitoring organization it was meant to be. The politic aspect has to be taken out of the equation – it has to be an operator heavy organization, not a dump for political allies. In short, it should have been modeled after Rickover’s Naval Reactors.
Only then will you see true inspections, safety upgrades and safer operation. When the NRC finds an issue, they “suggest” modifications, upgrades or new procedures. When NR (naval reactors) find an problem, they take the keys away from the plant until the plant makes the upgrades, changes or training and CAN PROVE IT. Does this mean making the NRC bigger? Yes, and No. It certainly means rethinking the personnel at the NRC… Far more “operators” and far less “managers” (read appointees). This organization should answer directly to the President of the US and as such, they should not be subject to the whims of Congress Critters bought and paid for by the Industry. While Congress would have to lay down the mandate for the organization, they should (in fact, they MUST) have the ability to shut a plant down if it is not operating safely without the fear of being overruled by a congress critter on the payroll of big power.
It would be impossible to address all the changes that should be made to each plant A) because I am not personally familiar with each plant, and B) I would have to brush up on the differences between power production plant operations and the propulsion plants I spent most of my time working on. I am sure, though, that there are probably plants that SHOULD have their keys taken away, just as I am sure that a qualified engineer could find safety issues/upgrades at every privately owned plant.
The alternative would be for the US government to take over operation of every nuc plant in the US. That will never happen – and not just because the nutcases would be screaming “Socialism”. Right now, the US government doesn’t have the talent, money or time to set up the infrastructure to run such a venture. I would be remiss if I failed to remind everyone, though, that the US Navy have NEVER had a nuclear incident.. not one.
June 29, 2011 at 4:04 pm
To me, this is another issue that highlights the tragedy of partisan politics. With the private business interests involved in the nuclear industry, how can we ever have a rational discussion amongst politicians about the issue? Does anybody think Montana voters could help change this? Seems to me like it can only be solved through voting in better politicians.
June 29, 2011 at 9:01 pm
further proof of insanity is the fact dangerous waste at the Los Alamos facility is being stored in…canvas tents?!?