Small number of nuclear evacuees choose to return to life in former "No Entry" zone

As reported by the Asahi Shimbun:

'TAMURA, Fukushima Prefecture—When the sun set on Aug. 1, Hisao Watanabe sat under the fluorescent lights of his living room in the Miyakoji district here and could not contain his joy.

“I don’t need to go back tonight,” said the 78-year-old farmer, who had grown accustomed to returning to a rental apartment in Tamura’s Funehiki-machi district.

Watanabe joined the government’s first long-stay program for nuclear disaster evacuees that started Aug. 1 in Miyakoji.

The district, which lies partly within a 20-kilometer radius of the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, was designated a no-entry zone after the nuclear accident unfolded in March 2011. But it was reorganized as a “zone preparing for the evacuation order to be lifted” in April 2012.

The government said radioactive decontamination work in the area was completed in June, and that residents could return home for extended stays from August through October.

The returning residents must reapply for the long-stay program every month, and they can remain at their homes for a maximum of three months. The government is renting out dosimeters for residents who return, and it plans to lift the evacuation order as early as in November after consultations with the Tamura city government.

But with Tokyo Electric Power Co. still struggling with radioactive water leaks and other problems at the Fukushima plant, not everyone from Miyakoji is eager to return home.

Among the 380 residents of 121 households in the district, 112 residents of 28 households applied for long-term stays by July 31. Of them, 82 residents of 22 households returned to their homes on Aug. 1...".

"Radioactivity levels higher in water deeper underground at Fukushima plant"

As reported by the Asahi Shimbun: 

"Radioactive cesium levels were much higher in water deep underground at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant than in samples taken closer to the surface, Tokyo Electric Power Co. said on Aug. 1.

TEPCO measured the radioactivity of water samples taken from the vertical shafts of two concrete trenches for pipes each connected to the turbine buildings of the No. 2 and No. 3 reactors.

The samples were collected on July 31 at a depth of 1 meter, 7 meters and 13 meters on the seaward side of the plant.

Cesium-134 levels of 300 million becquerels and cesium-137 readings of 650 million becquerels per liter were found in water samples from a depth of 13 meters in the trench for the No. 2 reactor turbine building, according to TEPCO.

Levels of radioactive materials that emit beta rays, including strontium, were 520 million becquerels at the same site, TEPCO said.

In the trench for the No. 3 reactor turbine building, cesium levels of 39 million becquerels were found in water at a depth of 1 meter...".

Dr. Gordon Thompson's "devastating critique" of NRC's HLRW storage pool fire risk whitewash

Dr. Gordon Thompson, executive director of the Institute for Resource and Security Studies in Cambridge, MAYesterday, to meet the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) arbitrarily short 30-day deadline for public comments on its "Draft Consequence Study of a Beyond-Design-Basis Earthquake Affecting the Spent Fuel Pool for a US Mark I Boiling Water Reactor" (NRC-2013-013), attorney Diane Curran and expert witness Dr. Gordon Thompson filed a blistering response on behalf of an environmental coalition of 26 groups, including Beyond Nuclear.

In her cover letter to NRC, Curran wrote: "...the Draft Consequence Study is not a credible scientific document. While the study purports to be a broad scientific inquiry into pool fire phenomena, in fact it is a very narrow study that ignores basic pool fire phenomena and important pool fire accident contributors. It misleadingly implies that a severe earthquake causing complete draining of a fuel pool is the primary source of risk to a spent fuel pool, and assumes that open-rack low-density pool storage is not advantageous without even examining it. In short, the Consequence Study appears designed to advance the authors’ pre-determined and unsupported conclusion that high-density pool storage is safe."

Thompson makes clear that a partial drain down of a high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) storage pool is an even worse-case scenario than a complete drain down, for air cooling provided by convection currents -- which might otherwise prevent ignition of the irradiated nuclear fuel's combustible zirconium cladding -- is blocked by the layer of water in the bottom of the pool. Thompson points out that any technically-competent analyst who has been paying attention to pool-fire risks since 1979 would have known that, and charges NRC with being deliberately misleading. He also points out the potentially catastrophic consequences of pool fires -- over 4 million people could be displaced, long-term, from their homes, as even NRC acknowledges.

Curran concluded: "We are appalled that after decades of avoiding and obfuscating this urgent safety issue, the NRC now proposes to rely on this biased and unscientific document to justify continued high-density
pool storage of spent fuel, both in its post-Fukushima safety review and in the Draft Waste Confidence Environmental Impact Statement. We join Dr. Thompson in urging you to withdraw the Draft Consequence Study and begin anew with a study of spent fuel pool fire risks that finally complies with basic principles of sound scientific inquiry."

Curran represented a coalition of environmental groups which, along with a coalition of state attorneys general, prevailed against NRC's Nuclear Waste Confidence at the second highest court in the land. The U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that NRC must complete an environmental impact statement on the risks of on-site storage of HLRW at reactors, including in pools. NRC did not appeal the ruling, and quickly acknowledged that the completion of the EIS would prevent finalization of proposed new reactor license approvals, as well as old reactor license extension approvals, for at least two years (NRC had previously admitted that a Nuclear Waste Confidence EIS would take seven years to complete!).

Robert Alvarez, senior scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies, has heralded Dr. Thompson's work as a "devastating critique." Alvarez adds, "Gordon's comments systematically reveal the kinds of scientific malpractice the NRC is resorting to at a time when one of the nation's largest and oldest high-hazard enterprises faces a deepening economic crisis."

Alvarez, formerly a senior advisor to the Energy Secretary during the Clintion administration, knows what he's talking about. Along with Dr. Thompson, now-NRC Chairwoman, Ph.D. geologist Allison Macfarlane, and five more experts, Alvarez published "Reducing the Hazards from Stored Spent Power-Reactor Fuel in the United States," in Jan., 2003. This groundbreaking warning about the potentially catastrophic risks of HLRW pool fires was largely affirmed by a congressionally-ordered National Academy of Science study in 2005; NRC unsuccessfully attempted to block the security-redacted public release of NAS's findings. Alvarez also published a May 2011 report on the hazards of high-density pool storage across the U.S., in the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear catastrophe. And in June, in a report commissioned by Friends of the Earth, Alvarez focused on the risks of HLRW pool storage at the now permanently shutdown San Onofre nuclear power plant.

SACE Statement on Duke Energy Florida’s Cancellation of Levy County Nuclear Reactor Project

Contact: Jennifer Rennicks, Director of Policy & Communications, 865.235.1448, jennifer@cleanenergy.org

St. Petersburg, Fla.///NEWS STATEMENT/// Duke Energy Florida (DEF) today filed a motion with the Florida Public Service Commission to approve a settlement agreement that will cancel its proposed Levy County nuclear reactor project.

The project’s estimated cost to build two Toshiba-Westinghouse AP1000 reactors had skyrocketed by 400% to $24 billion from initial estimated costs of approximately $5 billion per reactor and the original in-service dates were delayed by at least eight years. The motion was filed in the annual nuclear cost recovery clause docket – which is set to begin Monday - that considers approval of costs related to proposed new nuclear generation and determines the reasonableness of projected costs.

 

According to Florida Public Service Commission staff testimony in this year’s docket, “As of December 31, 2012, DEF has spent approximately $962 million on the Levy project including AFUDC” (Allowance for Funds Used During Construction). Duke has not yet recovered this entire amount from the Commission. Hearings on the 2013 docket for Duke and FPL, which is also pursuing two new nuclear reactors at their existing Turkey Point plant near Miami, are scheduled to begin next week.

Dr. Stephen A. Smith, executive director of Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, issued this statement about today’s decision to cancel the proposed Levy County nuclear reactor project:

 

“We welcome Duke Energy’s announcement today that they are seeking approval to cancel the controversial Levy County nuclear reactor project.  Since the merger, Duke’s leadership has taken a fresh look at these unnecessary nuclear projects and has absolutely made the right decision for Florida consumers.

While important details are still being resolved, Florida consumers should rejoice in knowing that the fleecing associated with this nuclear project will end. The time has come to stop throwing good money after bad.

SACE has long opposed this project and the nuclear tax recovery mechanisms that have been associated with it. SACE supports the need for Duke and FPL to have exit plans for these unnecessary reactors, however, we must stay vigilant in protecting consumers as the projects wind down.

The FL PSC has been negligent in its protection of Florida ratepayers and as these projects are cancelled, the Commission must stand strong in defense of consumers. But we also must ensure that the utilities do not continue to pursue high-risk, unnecessary projects as if there were no viable exit strategy.”

Join us for a media availability call tomorrow, Friday, August 2 at 11:00 a.m. EDT to speak with SACE experts on this case and today’s decision.

WHEN: Friday, August 2, 11:00 a.m. EDT

 

WHO:

Dr. Stephen Smith, Executive Director, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy

George Cavros, Florida Energy Policy Attorney, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy

Sara Barczak, High Risk Energy Director, Southern Alliance for Clean Energy

 

WHERE: Conference Dial-in Number: (605) 475-4000; Participant Access Code: 663387#

# # #

Founded in 1985, the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy is a nonprofit organization that promotes responsible energy choices that create global warming solutions and ensure clean, safe, and healthy communities throughout the Southeast. Learn more at www.cleanenergy.org

Environmental interveners respond to Duke's cancellation of proposed new reactors at Levy County, FL

Washington, D.C.-based attorney, Diane Curran, represented environmental interveners NIRS and Ecology Party of Florida against the now-cancelled proposed new reactors at Levy Co., FLThe Ecology Party of Florida and NIRS, environmental interveners against Duke/Progress Energy's proposed new reactors at Levy County, FL, have responded to the announced cancellation:

The Ecology Party of Florida could not be happier that the proposed nuclear plant scheduled for construction in Levy County, Florida (LNP), has been cancelled by Duke Energy, which acquired Progress Energy Florida (PEF), the LNP applicant.  The Ecology Party, along with Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) waged a five-year battle within the confines of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s  (NRC) rigged system, challenging the construction of the plant. The challenge was based primarily on the fact that the water modeling used was unsuited for the karst geology at the site and that in combination with other mining projects in the area, including the nearby proposed King Road Tarmac mine which would have supplied materials for the plant. Due to this failing, the proposed LNP  would have irreparably harmed the aquifer, source of drinking water for the area. Dewatering the area further than it already has been would have resulted in impacts far more serious and far-reaching than those alleged by Progress and the NRC Staff.  The two groups presented evidence that any predictions in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) were inadequate and that the destructive consequences of withdrawing millions of gallons of water from the aquifer each day, as well as drawing all fresh water from the abandoned Cross Florida Barge Canal and its estuary in the Gulf had been grossly underestimated.

The Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) had not yet issued the necessary permit for the destruction of wetlands at the site and the Ecology Party, its members, and Hydroecologist Dr. Sydney Bacchus, primary expert for the Ecology Party, have been extremely active in opposing the project in the Corps' process. We believe our opposition and the compelling evidence we've submitted has had a bearing on the decision.

In response to news of the abandoned LNP project, Dr. Bacchus's reaction was, "This is an excellent example of what can be accomplished when the public refuses to accept false and inaccurate information fed to agencies by consultants and instead fights to have the truth exposed. I hope this will serve as a role model for future grass-root battles."

Diane Curran [photo, above left], who represented the Ecology Party and NIRS said, “It is great news for the environment that PEF apparently thinks Levy would be an economic disaster.  It would have been an even bigger disaster for the fragile wetlands where PEF wanted to build the reactors.”

Cara Campbell, Chair of the Ecology Party, pointed out, “The cost of this debacle had risen from 4 Billion dollars to 25 Billion. How much were the ratepayers of Florida expected to take?”

"The people, animals, plants and waters of the Nature Coast are figuratively sighing with relief that an area of recreation and sanctuary, the Nature Coast, will be nuclear-free!" said Mary Olson of Nuclear Information and Resource Service who supported efforts by Florida activists to intervene in the proposed Levy County 1 & 2 nuclear license.

Michael Mariotte, Executive Director of Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS), added:

"The nuclear renaissance is in shambles. Earlier this week, the world's largest nuclear company, Electricite De France, announced it is leaving the U.S. nuclear market having failed to build any of the reactors it was planning. Now Duke Energy is giving up on the most expensive nuclear project ever proposed--and the only "greenfields" site in the supposed nuclear revival. The basic truths about nuclear power outweigh the fantasies of nuclear boosters: it remains too dirty, dangerous and expensive to be a viable source of new electricity."