10 oldest U.S. reactors show weakness to earthquake and fire risks

In a photo essay focused on the ten oldest operating atomic reactors in the United States, National Geographic reports on findings by Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspectors revealing weaknesses to seismic and fire risks post-Fukushima. Not mentioned is the fact that four of the ten oldest reactors -- Nine Mile Point Unit 1, NY; R.E. Ginna, NY; Point Beach Unit 1, WI; and Palisades, MI -- are located on the shoreline of the Great Lakes, 20% of the world's surface fresh water, drinking water supply for 40 million people downstream in the U.S., Canada, and numerous Native American First Nations. Four more of the ten oldest U.S. reactors -- Dresden Units 2 and 3, IL; Monticello, MN; and Quad Cities Unit 1, IL -- are located just outside, or not very far from, the Great Lakes watershed, in terms of the potential for airborne fallout from a catastrophic radioactivity release, as clearly shown by the widespread contamination downwind and downstream of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear catastrophe. Not mentioned in the article is the fact that four of Canada's oldest reactors -- four units at Pickering A nuclear power plant just east of Toronto -- also are located on Lake Ontario's shore. All 10 atomic reactors mentioned in the National Geographic article have already had 20 year license extensions rubberstamped by the NRC.

Ohio's solar PV panel production could displace Davis-Besse reactor's electrical output

Environmental coalition expert witness Al Compaan and a solar PV panelIn an article entitled "Ohio ranked 2nd in U.S. in solar-panel output," the Toledo Blade has reported that by next year, Ohio manufacturers will be churning out 550 Megawatts-electric (MW-e) of solar photovoltaic panels. Beyond Nuclear, along with Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, Don't Waste Michigan, and the Green Party of Ohio, have challenged the 20 year license extension sought by the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant, contending that solar PV alone could displace the atomic reactor's electrical output of 908 MW by 2017, the year its original 40 year operating license expires. Emeritus professor of physics at the University of Toledo Al Compaan (pictured at left) -- the environmental coalition's expert witness in the proceeding -- testified earlier this year to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Atomic Safety (sic) and Licensing Board (ASLB) that simply covering FirstEnergy's Davis-Besse site, its Norton Compressed Air Energy Storage site, as well as the commercial rooftops in several northern Ohio cities, would be enough solar PV panels to entirely replace Davis-Besse. As the article indicates, Ohio's own production levels alone could readily meet that challenge.

State of Vermont wins first round in legal battle against Vermont Yankee

As reported by Vermont Public Radio, in an 18 page ruling U.S. District Judge J. Garvan Murtha denied Entergy Nuclear's request for an injunction against the Vermont state law which would force the closure of Vermont Yankee atomic reactor at the end of its original 40 year license next March. Entergy Nuclear needs to refuel Vermont Yankee this fall if it is to operate the reactor beyond March 22, 2012, so sought an injunction against the state's mandated closure by July 23rd, in order to decide whether or not to order the replacement fuel. The judge clarified that his rejection of Entergy's request for an injunction does not indicate how he will rule on the overall case, in which Entergy seeks to nullify the Vermont state law via federal pre-emption over nuclear safety matters. Judge Murtha has announced he will hear that case beginning on September 12th. On legal grounds, Vermont has argued its decision to shut down Vermont Yankee has to do with economics and reliability, not health and safety, which are federally pre-empted. "From Fukushima to VT Yankee: The Vermont Nuclear Power Conference" will be held in Burlington on  Saturday, July 23rd, to build further momentum to shut Vermont Yankee.

Fukushima Daiichi Unit 1 received license extension just the month before it melted down

As reported by the World Nuclear Association (see the third full paragraph, under the section titled  "Recent energy policy: Focus on nuclear"), Japan's Nuclear & Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) granted a 10-year licence extension for Fukushima I-1 (also known as Fukushima Daiichi Unit 1) in February 2011, after technical review and some modifications in 2010. Thus, if Fukushima Daiichi Unit 1 had been shut down at the end of its 40 year license, in February 2011, then it likely would not have melted down within just the first several hours after the March 11 earthquake and tsunami. Unit 1 did scram the instant the earthquake struck, but because it was at 100% power, the loss of electricity to run cooling systems led to the reactor's complete melt down within just several hours. Had the shut down happened in February, although the core would still have needed cooling (or the high-level radioactive waste storage pool would still have needed cooling, if the core had been unloaded into there), it almost certainly would not have melted down in just the first several hours.

Riverkeeper to NYC Mayor Bloomberg: replace Indian Point with renewables, efficiency

As part of its years-long campaign to block the 20 year license extension sought by Entergy Nuclear of New Orleans, in an open letter to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has taken a position that the Big Apple is simply stuck with the risky Indian Point nuclear power plant, Hudson Riverkeeper has called on him to join New York Governor Andrew Cuomo in pushing for the twin reactors' shut down at the expiration of their 40 year licenses. Riverkeeper writes:

"...Contrary to Mayor Bloomberg’s warnings, we can transition to a sustainable energy future, without Indian Point and without dooming ourselves to rely on dirty sources of replacement power. Instead, we can increase energy efficiency, establish renewables and improve the state’s transmission grid.

Over 5,000 Megawatts (MW) are due to come online by 2015 from renewable energy sources alone. In addition, the potential for renewable power generation within New York City is virtually untapped. Researchers at CUNY predict that putting solar collection panels on two thirds of NYC’s rooftops could generate enough power to replace two Indian Points. Thankfully, we only need to replace one.

Combine these safe, sane renewable energy projects with new transmission capacity, such as the 660 MW cross-Hudson transmission line, and then add in easily-attainable energy efficiency savings of 2% per year [New York City's peak power use actually declined last summer – one of the hottest on record -- due to proactive energy conservation policies], and Indian Point’s 2,000 MW won’t be missed..."

Riverkeeper's letter comes in response to a July 7th New York Times article reporting Mayor Bloomberg's position.