Published: August 21st, 2012 at 4:55 pm ET
|
Title: Nuclear chief says Belgium reactor could have ‘thousands of cracks’
Source: Power Engineering International
Author: Diarmaid Williams
Date: Aug 17, 2012
Belgium’s Federal Agency for Nuclear Control (FANC) held an international meeting of nuclear experts on Thursday as nuclear safety chief, Willy De Roovere, confirmed that there could be thousands of cracks in the reactor vessel of the Doel 3 nuclear reactor near Antwerp, on the Dutch border.
[...]
The inspector [...] said the cracks are parallel to the surface of the walls and pose no immediate threat but the large number has left him concerned, reports AFP. Repairs, he noted, would be almost impossible, as it is in the reactor vessel that the water of the main primary system flows through the core, where it is heated by the nuclear fuel.
The cracks, which possibly date back to the reactor’s construction some 40 years ago, were discovered using ultra-sound during inspections in June and July.
[...]
Title: AFP: Belgian nuclear safety chief spells out fissure fears
Source: AFP
Date: Aug 17, 2012
[...]
De Roovere said June and July tests had suggested there could be “thousands” of possible fissures inside a giant, multi-cylindrical structure that serves as a protective vessel holding the Doel 3 reactor, located 25 kilometres (20 miles) north of Antwerp, and that these probably dated back to its construction decades ago.
[...]
repairs have been described as practically impossible.
[...]
It would be “difficult to prove” the Doel 3 site is watertight safe, he said, suggesting its permanent closure was all but certain.
Published: August 21st, 2012 at 4:55 pm ET
|
sending...
and this is what the IAEA had to say about the cracks in the 22 reactor vessels that could have caused a meltdown somewhere in the world in the last 30 odd years oops!
Press Release 2012/20
IAEA Expert Team Concludes Mission to Onagawa NPP
"…Presenting information collected by the team to the Japanese Government, the mission recommended that follow-up missions be conducted at Onagawa and reviews be conducted at other nuclear power plants in Japan that have experienced varying magnitudes of earthquakes.
"The data we are collecting will make an important contribution to improving safety," said Sujit Samaddar, mission leader and Head of the IAEA's ISSC. "Information in the database will allow IAEA Member States to measure the performance of their nuclear power plants in the face of external hazards. We are also seeking such data from Member States of the IAEA other than Japan."
"This is an initial step in a much longer process. The level of cooperation and frank sharing of information that we received from the staff at Onagawa NPS and its owners, the Tohoku Electric Power Company, sets a very good example," Samaddar said…."
http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/2012/prn201220.html
Report Comment
shocked that the IAEA is living in a nuclear dreamworld? are you european? do you want to do something about it?
Urgent appeal to stop misuse of the medical based “radiation dose model” after nuclear accidents.
Urgent 31st August 2012 deadline for this petition!
"the ICNJ (International Commission on Nuclear Justice) has been appealing to the european population to sign up to a petition to challenge the ICRP dose model on permitted doses of radiation to the public.
This campaign was contrived and developed during the convention in Berlin 2011 and The “Alternate World Heath Organisation” Geneva 2012"
http://nuclear-news.net/2012/08/20/urgent-appeal-to-stop-misuse-of-the-medical-based-radiation-dose-model-after-nuclear-accidents/
Report Comment
Health Risks of Nuclear Power: Report
June 17 2012
"…Information on nuclear matters to the public and politicians originates almost exclusively from institutions with vested interests in nuclear power, for example IAEA, WNA, NEA, NEI, and from the nuclear industry itself, e.g. Areva and EdF.
There are strong connections between the IAEA and UNSCEAR and ICRP and consequently these institutions do not operate independently of each other.
Even the World Health Organization (WHO) cannot operate independently of the IAEA on nuclear matters.
The nuclear industry has a habit of Après nous le déluge by postponing indefinitively the actions required to deal adequately with the human-made radioactivity. The assertion of the World Nuclear Association, representing the Western nuclear industy, that all safety matters are fully under control is in flagrant contradiction to the practice…”
http://nuclear-news.net/2012/08/21/health-risks-of-nuclear-power-report/
Report Comment
thx admin
Report Comment
RADIATION DAMAGE TO ORGANIC MATERIALS
IN NUCLEAR REACTORS
AND RADIATION ENVIRONMENTS
PROCEEDINGS OF A FINAL RESEARCH CO-ORDINATION MEETING
ORGANIZED BY THE
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY
AND HELD IN TAKASAKl, JAPAN, 17-20 JULY 1989
Within the framework of the Agency's coordinated research programmeon "Radiation Damage to Organic Materials in Nuclear Reactors andRadiation Environments" during the period 1986-1989, two researchcoordination meetings were held: Rome, Italy (1987) and Takasaki, Japan(1989).At the Takasaki meeting the participants of the coordinated researchprogramme reviewed the work done throughout the duration of the programme. The present publication compiles presentations made at the meeting
Unfortunately, the implementation of accelerated aging tests to make suchpredictions can be extremely difficult. For instance, in a number of casesthe radiation damage to a material at low dose rates characteristic ofapplication environments is found to be much greater (as much as two orders ofmagnitude) compared to damage which results from exposure to an identicalabsorbed dose using a high dose rate accelerated aging test. The reason forsuch occurrences is the fact that the degradation mechanism can change atdifferent stress levels, and to be influenced by several other factors(temperature, atmosphere, etc.)
http://www.iaea.org/inis/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/21/085/21085992.pdf
Report Comment
With all of the evidence of problems at so many plants…its clear that nuclear power is only being held onto out of desperation and profits, and supported primarily by our need for nuclear WEAPONS. But with the world economy at a standstill, you have to wonder where all the venture capital will come from to roll out a grid refurbishment or for innovative use of renewables.
Report Comment
No such thing as a "safe" reactor. One reactor gone awry will ruin a country (forever). And the electricity isn't special, we can get it many safe ways. Citizens of Belgium, save your country.
Report Comment
TBP: I'm belgian. Belgium chose to quit nuclear power by 2025.
However, our contry is, roughly, 200 by 100 miles big, and we are surrounded by french, dutch and german NPP's.
So… woohoo, we won't be a nuclear country! but we still won't be safe…
Report Comment
How can any country be nuke free when the whole lives/decay exceed that of all living beings on the planet?
Report Comment
Not German. They also come with Atom already resigned…
But there The French Revolution have ever , and heretofore hard to distinguish good from evil….:)You need to give them some time…
Report Comment
The only safe nuclear reactor is one that was NEVER built in the first place. How much more evidence does anyone need to know that this has never been a safe technology and never will be.
How can anyone pick death and genocide? Murderers need to be locked up away from society for life for their crimes. Extinction of all life forms on the planet is not a sane choice.
Report Comment
Here your safe reactor is
http://www.zwentendorf.com/#
Report Comment
Atomfritz,
here's another one! Kalkar
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNR-300
Report Comment
Could the Belgium plant be susceptible to Pressurized Thermal Shock?
In America at the Palisades Nuclear Plant in Michigan….
Perhaps the most significant revelation provided by the NRC staff was admitting that Palisades has the single most embrittled reactor pressure vessel (RPV) in the U.S., making it vulnerable to pressurized thermal shock (PTS). Jennifer Uhle, PhD., from NRC's Office of Regulatory Research, admitted that "it's true that Palisades' vessel is the most embrittled vessel at an operating nuclear power plant" in the U.S.
Environmental watchdogs have long been concerned PTS could fracture Palisades' RPV like a hot glass under cold water if the emergency core cooling system (ECCS) is ever turned on. Frighteningly, Palisades' ECCS did activate on Sept. 25, 2011, during an incident of "substantial significance to safety," in NRC's words. However, the High-Pressure Injection and Low-Pressure Injection did not actually inject cooling water into the RPV, due to the high pressure inside.
Source: http://www.beyondnuclear.org/safety/2012/3/4/concerned-citizens-turn-out-in-force-at-nrc-public-meeting-a.html
Report Comment
Happy Bing!
Thanks for the link.
Sadly, the nuke plants in other countries are in no better shape. So don't hope the next accident will be at Palisades.
At least Doel 3 probably won't be a candidate for a happy bing anymore.
Report Comment
Another one bites the dust. Chalk one up for our side.
Check the world status of reactors here:
http://nucleus.iaea.org/RRDB/RR/ReactorSearch.aspx
Check the box for Operational, click Find button and you get: 230
Check TEMPORARY SHUTDOWN, SHUT DOWN, DECOMMISSIONED, CANCELLED and you get: 465
SP: Looking better!
Report Comment
Yes, SP, but when will they stop putting band aids on the problem, like dumping toxic waste and "low level" nuclear waste in places like salt caverns (which the U.S. EPA doesn't regulate). Arrgh.
http://enenews.com/us-govt-epa-specifically-allows-radioactive-waste-to-be-dumped-in-salt-caverns-exempted-from-hazardous-waste-requirements
"US Gov’t: EPA specifically allows radioactive waste to be dumped in salt caverns — Exempted from hazardous waste requirements"
Is this SOP?
Another one bites the dust, another aging rust bucket is in the process of disintegration, which proves our collective point, here at this site. What do we do with the mess? From Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-238
"Uranium-238 (238U or U-238) … most common isotope of uranium found in nature …. not fissile … but can capture a slow neutron and after two beta decays become fissile plutonium-239
Around 99.284% of natural uranium is uranium-238, which has a half-life of 1.41×1017 seconds (4.468×109 years, or 4.468 billion years).[1] Depleted uranium has an even higher concentration of the 238U isotope, and even low-enriched uranium, while having a higher proportion of the uranium-235 isotope, is still mostly 238U. Reprocessed uranium is also mainly 238U, with about as much uranium-235 as natural uranium, a comparable proportion of uranium-236, and much smaller amounts of other isotopes of uranium such as uranium-234, uranium-233, and uranium-232.[2] "
Report Comment
Another example of why NP must go:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isotopes_of_neptunium
Neptunium (Np) is an artificial element, and thus a standard atomic mass cannot be given. Like all artificial elements, it has no stable isotopes. The first isotope to be synthesized was 239Np in 1940, produced by bombarding 238U with neutrons to produce 239U, which then underwent beta decay to 239Np.
Trace quantities are found in nature from neutron capture by uranium atoms.
Twenty neptunium radioisotopes have been characterized, with the most stable being 237Np with a half-life of 2.14 million years, 236Np with a half-life of 154,000 years, and 235Np with a half-life of 396.1 days. All of the remaining radioactive isotopes have half-lives that are less than 4.5 days, and the majority of these have half-lives that are less than 50 minutes. This element also has 4 meta states, with the most stable being 236mNp (t½ 22.5 hours).
The isotopes of neptunium range in atomic weight from 225.0339 u (225Np) to 244.068 u (244Np). The primary decay mode before the most stable isotope, 237Np, is electron capture (with a good deal of alpha emission), and the primary mode after is beta emission. The primary decay products before 237Np are isotopes of uranium and protactinium, and the primary products after are isotopes of plutonium.
Report Comment
And this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium
Plutonium is the heaviest primordial element by virtue of its most stable isotope, plutonium-244, whose half-life of about 80 million years is just long enough for the element to be found in trace quantities in nature.[3] Plutonium is mostly a byproduct of nuclear fission in reactors where some of the neutrons released by the fission process convert uranium-238 nuclei into plutonium.[4]
One utilized isotope of plutonium is plutonium-239, which has a half-life of 24,100 years. Plutonium-239 along with plutonium-241 are both fissile, meaning the nuclei of their atoms can split when bombarded by thermal neutrons, releasing energy, gamma radiation and more neutrons. These neutrons can sustain a nuclear chain reaction, leading to applications in nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors.
Lest I spend too much time venting my frustration, hopefully this contributes to a constructive dialog for problem-solving. Some brainy and educated person here posted a lengthy decay chain (isotope decay chain) chart or list recently. It gave the original isotope names, daughter products and half lives, length of effective life of isotopes, and I think the type of emitter each isotope is.
If you're reading this, please re-post the info. or a link to it at the Forum, it's info. we all need to be aware of, IMHO. Thanks, HT.
Report Comment
The two Wiki things posted above are quoted directly from the site. Didn't get the quotation marks in place.
Report Comment
HT sez…"Yes, SP, but when will they stop putting band aids on the problem, like dumping toxic waste and "low level" nuclear waste in places like salt caverns (which the U.S. EPA doesn't regulate)."
SP: I hate it when you're right. >;->
On the positive side…we ain't dead yet. I will take our victories slim as they may be.
Report Comment
Are any one of those reactors in the US MK1 BWR's?
Anyone?
Is this what happened to #3?
If any one of those suspect reactors has trouble, for whatever reason, and they start the ECS to cool it, and it shatters with multiple tons of spent fuel, right next to it… Well, we know what happens next.
Here is a logical explanation of what the recent spent fuel appeals court ruling means, and what the NRC thinks it means.
Tomorrow is the last day that the NRC can challenge this ruling, on spent fuel, and have the unanimous decision overruled by a majority vote of the court "en banc".
Read how they change the rules "midgame".
Radioactive quandry: States wonder what's next for spent fuel
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission faces a Thursday deadline to challenge a landmark, unanimous decision by a three-judge Appellate Court panel in June which ordered the agency to develop site specific assessments of the environmental impact of meltdowns in the bulging spent fuel pools before extending the licenses of some 30 nuclear power plants.
http://www.newjerseynewsroom.com/science-updates/radioactive-quandry-states-wonder-whats-next-for-spent-fuel
There are 3 pages on this. You must get to the last page to have your eyes opened, even further than they are…
Report Comment
67,000 tonnes of spent fuel in US pools.
Kinda makes you think that Stephen King missed part of the plot when he wrote "The Stand"
Report Comment
If you think of all the pronukers (pukers) fervent insane support for nuclear power, in spite of all the damning data against it, Trashcan Man's metaphorical representation becomes crystal clear.
Steven King didn't miss much…
Report Comment
JEC, would you please post some links and provide the news source on this to Admin? Would like very much to see follow up published here. Very newsworthy, thanks.
Report Comment
Let me see–the reactor vessel may have had cracks for decades..and then comment:
"It would be “difficult to prove” the Doel 3 site is watertight safe"
If the cracks have been there for decades..and its not watertight..just WHAT has the water/contaminated water been leaking into?
US reactors may have the same issue…guess there are a few US nuclear facilities which need the ultrasound testing to check out the situation? About time President Obama pays attention to his green "nuke" technology problems…!!
Report Comment
Probably neutron damage. The materials in nuclear reactors can't withstand all of the incident radiation for long periods of time.
Eventually the components get brittle and cracking occurs.
Report Comment
Or storage designs fail!
http://ens-newswire.com/2012/08/20/hanford-double-shell-tank-leaks-nuclear-waste/
Report Comment
@gottagetoffthegrid,
Re Stephen King: Recommend you get hold of "The Tommyknockers" and read Chapter Five. One really great anti-nuke rant.
Report Comment
You can read it here:
http://www.freebooks2u.net/horror/The_Tommyknockers/1449.html
Report Comment
Any plans for new nuclear plants (anywhere in the world) must be outlawed and stopped.
Report Comment
And the public is "still vehemently anti-nuclear."
http://enenews.com/report-global-public-sentiment-is-still-vehemently-anti-nuclear-extreme-public-resistance-in-japan-italy-germany-belgium-switzerland
You ain't seen nothin', yet.
Report Comment
Re: comment above, 8/23/12, my post at 1:49PM, the public has only begun to show its displeasure with nuclear energy and weaponry. In that sense, "You ain't seen nothin' yet."
Millions will march in protest, eventually in one place. It's only a matter of time.
Expect the mainstream media to say there were only a few hundred doing so, at most.
Report Comment