Tag: Nuclear Policies

There Is NO Nuke Waste

I try to give both sides of a story and here is the other side of the nuke story I did about the Obama decision on nuke waste.

This is from an article in the WSJ:

So is this material “waste”? Absolutely not. Ninety-five percent of a spent fuel rod is plain old U-238, the nonfissionable variety that exists in granite tabletops, stone buildings and the coal burned in coal plants to generate electricity. Uranium-238 is 1% of the earth’s crust. It could be put right back in the ground where it came from.

Of the remaining 5% of a rod, one-fifth is fissionable U-235 — which can be recycled as fuel. Another one-fifth is plutonium, also recyclable as fuel. Much of the remaining three-fifths has important uses as medical and industrial isotopes. Forty percent of all medical procedures in this country now involve some form of radioactive isotope, and nuclear medicine is a $4 billion business. Unfortunately, we must import all our tracer material from Canada, because all of our isotopes have been headed for Yucca Mountain.

The supposed problem of “nuclear waste” is entirely the result of a the decision in 1976 by President Gerald Ford to suspend reprocessing, which President Jimmy Carter made permanent in 1977. The fear was that agents of foreign powers or terrorists groups would steal plutonium from American plants to manufacture bombs.

That fear has proved to be misguided. If foreign powers want a bomb, they will build their own reactors or enrichment facilities, as North Korea and Iran have done. The task of extracting plutonium from highly radioactive material and fashioning it into a bomb is far beyond the capacities of any terrorist organization.

Mr. Tucker must have missed the report:

Some granite countertops contain levels of uranium high enough to be dangerous to humans, said Rice professor W.J. Llope.

Using a spectrometer, Llope tested 25 varieties of granite bought from Houston-area dealers. In some cases, he said, he found countertops that could expose homeowners to 100 millirems of radiation in just a few months — the annual exposure limit set by the Department of Energy for visitors to nuclear labs.

A pretty good article by William Tucker….but I ask….at what cost?  I think it would have been a better article if he would have given us the start up costs of recycling the spent rods and then the cost of storage of what is left.  Just my thought.

What To Do With Nuke Waste?

If you recall the waning days of the last election, energy was all the rage and McCain was hell bent on the building of more and more nuke plants.  It was billed as a “clean energy”.   And at that time I was involved in an exchange on why I was opposed to the expansion of nukes.  Yes, it is an almost emissions free industry, but my question was then as it is now…what to do with nuke waste?

President Obama’s proposed budget all but kills the Yucca Mountain project, the controversial Nevada site where the U.S. nuclear industry’s spent fuel rods were to spend eternity. There are no other plans in the works, so for now the waste will remain next to Zion and 103 other reactors scattered across the country.

Obama has said there are too many questions about whether storing waste at Yucca Mountain is safe. His decision fulfills a campaign promise, but it also renews nagging questions about what should be done with the radioactive waste steadily accumulating in 35 states.

During his confirmation hearings, Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the waste could safely remain at nuclear plants while another plan is worked out. Reversing course from previous administrations satisfies critics in Nevada, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, but triggers another round of political maneuvering and regional bickering in Congress.
More than 57,000 tons of spent fuel rods already are stored next to reactors, just a few yards from containment buildings where they once generated nuclear-heated steam to drive massive electrical turbines.

The lack of a permanent solution poses a serious challenge to the industry’s plans to build more than 30 new reactors. Existing nuclear plants produce 2,000 tons of the long-lived waste each year, most of which is moved into pools of chilled water that allow the spent — but still highly lethal — uranium-235 to slowly and safely decay. Uranium-235 has a half-life of nearly 704 million years — meaning that half its atoms will decay in that time.

But containment pools never were intended to store all of the spent fuel that a reactor creates. The idea was that the cool water would stabilize the enriched uranium until it could be sent to a reprocessing plant or stored in a centralized location.

Instead, it keeps piling up. Although industry officials insist the waste is safely stored in fenced-off buildings lined with concrete and lead, there are concerns that a leak or a terrorist attack could create an environmental catastrophe. Many of the nation’s nuclear plants are close to highly populated areas or next to bodies of water.

Obama has taken a high road here….but my question still stands….What To Do With Nuke Waste?

India-Russia Nuke Deal

Wait!  Did not the US just soign a nuke deal with India?  Why do they need this much assistance?

President Medvedev signed the accord in the Indian capital, Delhi, with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

The deal follows the landmark civilian nuclear accord between India and United States earlier this year.

In September, the Nuclear Suppliers Group lifted a ban that had stopped India from getting access to the global nuclear market.

The Russian agreement is part of a series of deals, including ones on space and defence sales.

But wait there is more.

And India will buy 80 military helicopters from Russia, cementing a relationship that dates back to the Cold War.

President Medvedev also pledged to support India’s fight against terrorism following last week’s Mumbai attacks.

The Russian president is on a three-day visit. On his arrival in Delhi, he was welcomed with a full military salute at the presidential palace.

Later, he visited the memorial to Mahatma Gandhi, the father of the Indian nation.

India and Russia have been traditional allies and around 70% of India’s military hardware comes from Russia.

note:  damn I have been busy!  this is my 2500th post since April……wordy old fart, huh?

A New Nuke Deal

Russia and Venezuela have signed an agreement to promote the development of nuclear energy for civilian use.

The agreement was signed during a visit by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, on the latest leg of his Latin American tour.

Under the accord, Russia would help Venezuela build a nuclear energy plant. Joint gas projects were also approved

Boosting bilateral trade between Russia and Latin America, which could reach $15bn (£9.9bn) this year, is another priority for the Russian president during his talks.

The Russian leader travelled to Venezuela from Brazil, where he and President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva held talks on boosting trade and technical co-operation.

Geez!  I can hear the screams now…..Venezuela is build a nuke bomb why else would they want nuke power.  Wait for it…it is coming.

Is There Nuclear Safety?

Potential threats make it necessary for the United States to maintain a nuclear arsenal for many years to come, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday, and called for steps to ensure the nation has the ability to build such complex weapons.

Gates, in a speech at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, embraced former President Bill Clinton’s “lead and hedge” nuclear approach. Under this approach, Gates said, the United States should take the lead in seeking to eliminate such weapons while also hedging its bets by maintaining a deterrent nuclear arsenal.

He pointed to the nuclear programs and ambitions of nations like North Korea, Iran, Russia and China as reasons Washington must take steps to ensure the nation’s existing nuclear force is ready for launch, and also make sure industry and government have the technical expertise to build new versions.

He urged Congress to alter its recent practice of stripping money in annual Pentagon budget requests for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program, which he said would “reinvigorate and rebuild our infrastructure and expertise.”

Many skeptics argue pursuing a new program would hurt Washington’s ability to keep other nations from getting “the bomb.” They say because of this, and because the nation’s existing arsenal can be maintained for 50 to 100 years, the RRW program should be delayed for some time. Still other critics simply oppose all nuclear weapons.

But yet Washington is pushing nuclear programs for Egypt, India, and others.  Yes, they are nuke power programs, but as with Iran, how long would it be before the bomb is to follow?