Infonugget: Nuclear leaks

Leaks imperil nuclear industry:

The nuclear industry, once an environmental pariah, is recasting itself as green as it attempts to extend the life of many power plants and build new ones. But a leak of radioactive water at Vermont Yankee, along with similar incidents at more than 20 other US nuclear plants in recent years, has kindled doubts about the reliability, durability, and maintenance of the nation’s aging nuclear installations.

Vermont health officials say the leak, while deeply worrisome, is not a threat to drinking water supplies or the Connecticut River, which flows beside the 38-year-old plant, nor is it endangering public health. But the controversy is threatening to derail the nuclear plant’s bid, now at a critical juncture, for state approvals to extend its operating life by 20 years when its license expires in two years. Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors, Vermont Yankee’s owners, and state officials are tracing the source of the radioactivity and searching for other leaks in the labyrinth of below-surface pipes on the plants’ property about 10 miles from the Massachusetts border.

The timing couldn’t be worse for the nuclear industry, coming as it attempts a broad rebirth as a green energy source in the battle against global warming; the reactors do not emit greenhouse gases that cause the atmosphere to warm.

Memories of the accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl are receding and many in the public are taking a second look at nuclear. President Obama last week endorsed a new generation of nuclear power in his State of the Union address, and for the first time in decades, more than 20 new plants have been proposed.

But the leaks have the potential to slow, if not stop, the bandwagon. Crucial voices are calling for caution. “I am appalled by the safety procedures not only at Vermont Yankee, but at other nuclear facilities across the country who have failed to inspect thousands of miles of buried pipes at their facilities,’’ US Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, the chairman of the House Energy and Environment Subcommittee, said last week. Earlier this month, Markey asked the US Government Accountability Office to investigate the integrity, safety, inspections, and maintenance of buried pipes at nuclear plants.

Oops.

As I said in a recent post (see Nuclear predictions), we will build more nuclear plants in the US and they will have government support until they are seen to be a failure. That could be purely on economic grounds or it could be safety issues (operations, nuclear material proliferation, waste disposal), but nuclear will get every conceivable chance to succeed.

(If you don’t like nuclear power, don’t bother sending me hate mail. This is not a description of what I want to see happen, but the path I’m convinced we’re on. The political climate (including the influence of big business on public policy) plus the number of people who are happy to have nuclear power as long as we can ship the nasty ol’ waste to somewhere Far Away, like Yucca Mountain[1], make it a lock. The only mystery is how we get there and how the elected representatives in office at the time will spin it.)

[1] Wait–did I just predict the resurrection of Yucca Mountain? Why yes, I did. I think it’s virtually certain that the recently announced blue ribbon committee tasked with figuring out what the heck to do with all that nuclear waste will conclude that [1] we can’t store it on-site at the plants forever, [2] the most logical alternative is to store it in a centralized, tightly controlled facility, and [3] thanks, in part, to the amount of money and effort already invested in Yucca Mountain, it’s the best option. Once again: This is not my conclusion; it’s my prediction of what the committee will conclude.