In August 2014, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved NUREG-2157, Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Continued Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel. That action was the end result of several years worth of detailed analysis of the known and uncertain impacts of storing used nuclear fuel on the earth's surface in licensed and monitored facilities.
It's time to stop worrying about the risk of a spent fuel pool fire at decommissioned nuclear reactors. Even at operating reactors, there is good reason to put the risk quite low on any table that prioritizes items worth fretting over.
A United States appellate court recently handed down two long-awaited rulings with respect to Yucca Mountain. As most observers expected, both decisions were decidedly in nuclear's favor.
News out of Fukushima-Daiichi this week is encouraging: TEPCO successfully transferred the first batch of fuel rod assemblies from the reactor unit No. 4 spent fuel pool to a common fuel pool building offering longer-term stable storage conditions. Completing the process for the more than 1,000 fuel rod assemblies that remain at No. 4 is projected to take a year, and will be a first major step toward decommissioning of the site.
Yes, of course... in super slo-mo. Today's Nuclear Matinee features videos of a recent test conducted to simulate an aircraft crash on a HI-STAR 180 spent nuclear fuel transport cask, a product of Holtec International that is completing rigorous certification for the Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate.
Shortly after the Obama administration unlawfully terminated the Yucca Mountain Project, three Washington State citizens (Robert L. Ferguson [the author], Bill Lampson, and Gary Petersen) filed suit to hold the President and his administration accountable to the law. Similar suits filed by Aiken County, South Carolina, and the states of Washington and South Carolina; the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners; and Nye County, Nevada, were combined into one lawsuit.
Breaking the used nuclear fuel logjam?
As I discussed last fall, a federal appeals court ordered the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to perform more thorough evaluations in support of its new Waste Confidence Rule, particularly with respect to the potential impacts of long-term storage of spent fuel at plant sites. While those evaluations are being performed, the NRC has suspended all new plant licensing and plant license renewals.
What's Next For Used Nuclear Fuel and Nuclear Waste Management Policy?
The nuclear energy industry is the only large-scale energy producer responsible for managing and storing (and paying for) all the wastes generated by the process [in contrast to, for example... dumping wastes into the atmosphere].
The 800 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity produced by the 104 nuclear reactors in the United States each year -- all while emitting no greenhouse gases -- is by far America's biggest source of green energy. And this abundant energy source can become even greener by recycling used nuclear fuel.
Integrating Storage, Transportation, and Disposal
As the Eastern half of the United States falls under siege by Hurricane Sandy and combined weather fronts-which together are being termed "Frankenstorm"-the nuclear community is targeted by nuclear opponents keen on capitalizing on this severe weather event. A recent piece quoting Arnold Gundersen asserts that Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station is facing serious problems should it lose offsite power, saying essentially that the plant will be unable to provide cooling for the spent fuel in its spent fuel pool.
As I discussed in a June 20 ANS Nuclear Cafe post, a federal appeals court rejected the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's new nuclear Waste Confidence rule, and ordered the NRC to perform a more thorough evaluation that addresses potential risks and health and environmental impacts of very long term storage of nuclear waste at nuclear sites (until a final disposal option is developed).
The Arthur M. Sackler Colloquia addresses scientific topics of broad and current interest that cut across the boundaries of traditional disciplines. "The Science of Science Communication" was a Sackler Colloquium interdisciplinary scientific meeting held at the National Academy of Sciences in Washington, D.C., on May 21-22, 2012. At this meeting, American Nuclear Society Past President Dr. Eric Loewen addressed the other "three R's" of [nuclear] education: Radiation, Reactors, and Residuals.
Since the previous View from Vermont posted June 12, courts have issued several decisions that will have a major effect on nuclear power nationally, and on the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in particular. The Supreme Court ruling on the Affordable Health Care Act has moved attention from these important federal court decisions, which otherwise would have received more publicity (outside of Vermont).
Vermont Yankee's annual NRC performance review for the previous calendar year was held May 23, in Brattleboro Union High School, within 10 miles of the plant. In previous years, annual reports and state meetings have been held here, and in the Vernon Elementary School, across the road from the plant. The town of Vernon stopped hosting plant-related events due to behavior of some attendees.
On Wednesday, June 6, Dr. Mark T. Peters appeared on behalf of the American Nuclear Society before the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. Peters is the Deputy Laboratory Director for Programs at Argonne National Laboratory and testified at the invitation of the subcommittee.
In recent days, a number of articles have been printed that assert that a grave danger exists at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear generating station. These articles claim that this danger exists due to the condition of the spent nuclear fuel at the site and the supposedly shaky condition of its storage and care. Two examples:
The plant dodges another bullet at least for now