Skip to main content

View Diary: Nuclear safety must be first priority (49 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  exactly - so in addition to dry casks, as you say (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    HoundDog, OtherDoug
    Pools for cooling spent fuel immediately upon removal from reactors are necessary.  They should be made safe and secure.

    That's the other thing that is absolutely critical to address now.

    Thanks for calling that out.

    “Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world, is either a madman or an economist.” ~Kenneth Boulding

    by Earth Ling on Thu Apr 14, 2011 at 02:24:18 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  you're right about where we differ (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I might agree to the example you give, but ONLY AFTER we have agreed to stop generating new waste beyond a steady phase out of all plants, the most dangerous first.

      I know that's not the future you see for nuclear.

      I don't mind spending money researching nuclear, but I do not support Price Anderson or other types of subsidies required by nuclear.

      Nuclear can't be built fast enough to save us from global warming.  It's much slower than wind, solar PV, solar thermal, CSP, negawatts, etc to be built and deployed, pulling money away from better investments.

      If it weren't for profit motive, greed and sheer human foible (sorry dude those aren't going away in this world in the foreseeable future) I might allow advanced new reactors to be built next to old ones that were being shut down so that those could consume the spent fuel of the old reactor.  

      But I would want no more waste to be generated, only old waste consumed.
      Beyond that I just don't trust the humans with something so dangerous and so permanent.

      Would an Iroquois looking out 7 generations honestly saddle the world with the attendant dangers?

      Do you think that Israel should pursue nuclear power (electricity generation I mean)?

      Do you think Israel would never take out an Iranian plant?  And vice versa?

      India and Pakistan both have nuclear power generation.  Are you confident they will NEVER attack each others plants?

      Its too much to expect of future generations.  Its not fair to them.  Its just not.

      “Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world, is either a madman or an economist.” ~Kenneth Boulding

      by Earth Ling on Thu Apr 14, 2011 at 02:40:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Robert Alvarez warned us, in an article on March (0+ / 0-)

        13, that a fire in the spend fuel ponds would potentially be more danagerous than a reactor core meltdown, for two reasons.  

        First, as you point out, most in the US are not in containment buildings or dry casks,  

        Secondly, because, currently we are storing all spent fuel rods from the beginning of operations on site, due to the fact we have no approved of final repository.   So the quantity of fuel rods is vastly greater.

        By comparision, he suggest that a typical spent fuel pond can have up to 50 million curies of Cesium 137, whereas, the Chernobyl accident released "only" 6 million curies of Cesium 137.

        In 2003, he and five other top US nuclear experts recomended we follow Germany's lead and put all spent fuel over five years in these state of the art dry casks.  The first five years after use they are still to "hot."

        As, of now, every one of these non-contained spent fuel ponds, is essentially a gigantic radioactive dirty bomb waiting for ignition.   Which could be by an Cessna loaded with C4 or fuel, a missle, rocket, or artilliary shell.

        Remember, in the modern world of modern "state-backed" terrorism, we could be dealing with a break away faction, from Iran, Lybia, Pakestan, North Korea, or others, firing a cruise missle, from an offshore yacht, or submarine.

        I believe the costs of dry casking fuel rods over five years is estimated to be between $6 and $10 billion which should be assessed as a tax to all operationg nuclear plants.

        It is unwise to continue to subsidize these expensive, and unsafe reactors, but, then claim that clean renewable alternatives such as solar, wind, geothermal, tideal, efficiency, and conservation are too expensive.

        I support Ed Markey in all respects on his courageous work on our nuclear and energy policies, and am proud to have him as one of our Massachusetts Representatives.

        Thanks Again Representative Markey.

        The means is the ends in the process of becoming. - Mahatma Gandhi

        by HoundDog on Thu Apr 14, 2011 at 03:50:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site