American Public Still at Risk from U.S. Fukushima-style Nuclear Disaster Five Years after Japan’s Triple Meltdowns

From Beyond Nuclear

Fukushima explodes March 11, 2011
Fukushima explodes March 11, 2011

TAKOMA PARK, MD, March 10, 2016 — Beyond Nuclear, a leading U.S. anti-nuclear watchdog group on reactor oversight, health impacts and radioactive waste, decried the absence of reasonable plans to prevent and protect against a nuclear disaster in the U.S., five years after the March 11, 2011 triple meltdowns began at the FukushimaDaiichi nuclear power plant in Japan.

More than 32 million Japanese have been exposed to Fukushima’s radioactive fallout. Close to 160,000 people were forced to evacuate, many of whom are being urged to return — under threat of loss of compensation -— into areas the government claims to have “cleaned up”. Costs have ballooned to at least $100 billion and will soar higher once economic losses, compensation and decommissioning costs are factored in.

In the U.S., 30 GE Mark I and Mark II boiling water reactors identical in design to those at Fukushima, are still in operation. While the GE model is considered the most vulnerable to catastrophic failure, every operating U.S. reactor poses a risk. Beyond Nuclear launched its Freeze our Fukushimas campaign shortly after the Japan disaster to get the GE reactors shut down.

“Not only is there no Plan B for what to do if and when a Fukushima-style disaster happens in the U.S., there is no Plan A to prevent one either,” said Cindy Folkers, Radiation and Health Specialist at Beyond Nuclear. Public health is woefully under-protected she said.

Officials in protective gear check for signs of radiation on children who are from the evacuation area near the Fukushima Daini nuclear plant in Koriyama, March 13, 2011. REUTERS/Kim Kyung-Hoon
Officials in protective gear check for signs of radiation on children who are from the evacuation area near the Fukushima Daini nuclear plant in Koriyama, March 13, 2011. REUTERS/Kim Kyung-Hoon

“For example, the distribution of potassium-iodide, or KI, which at least protects the thyroid from fast-arriving iodine-131 released during a major nuclear disaster, is not mandatory in the U.S.,” Folkers said.

Although available free with an industry voucher from designated U.S. pharmacies, only 5% of impacted Americans voluntarily pick up KI. To effectively block radioactive iodine absorption in the thyroid, KI must be readily at hand.

“That is why Beyond Nuclear is urging compliance with the American Thyroid Association’s recommendation for the direct delivery of KI to the door of all residents within 50-miles of every nuclear power plant,” Folkers said.

The GE Mark I and II reactors have an inadequately small reactor containment that, during a serious accident, can only be saved by venting extreme pressure, heat, explosive gas and highly radioactive releases into the environment.

Fermi 2 at Monroe, Michigan, a GE Mark 1 reactor twice the size of Fukushima 4
Fermi 2 at Monroe, Michigan, a GE Mark 1 reactor twice the size of Fukushima 4

But the industry has refused to mitigate this problem, blocking efforts by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to mandate the installation of highly efficient radiation filters that could reduce public exposure to radiation during a nuclear power plant disaster. The NRC subsequently capitulated to the industry’s financial motives, and will not now mandate the retrofit.

“All of Fukushima’s lessons warn against a nuclear industry that protects its profit margins over public safety margins,” said Paul Gunter, Director of Reactor Oversight at Beyond Nuclear.

“The Japanese concluded that Fukushima was a preventable tragedy resulting from collusion between industry, government and regulator,” Gunter added. “But here in the U.S. the NRC has chosen to cave to industry financial concerns while gambling with public health.”

While Fukushima was precipitated by an earthquake and tsunami, there are multiple factors that could lead to a similar calamity in the U.S.

“The U.S. risks an American Fukushima, not just due to a variety of natural disasters, age-degraded equipment breakdowns, or operator errors, but also due to sabotage or attack,” said Kevin Kamps, Beyond Nuclear’s Radioactive Waste Watchdog.

“Numerous security vulnerabilities remain fifteen years after 9/11, including high-level radioactive waste storage pools, which could release catastrophic amounts of hazardous radioactivity in the event of a successful airborne or waterborne attack,” Kamps added.

-Beyond Nuclear

More information about potassium-idodide (KI) 

More information about US GE Mark1 reactors 

80 Groups Urge Canada: Reject Great Lakes Nuke Dump!

dsgasdg

 

CACC is proud to have signed this letter. We are dedicated to stopping nuclear power at every turn. The following was written by Kevin Kamps, Radioactive Waste Watchdog for Beyond Nuclear. 

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada and Washington, D.C. – Outlining the legal grounds for the Canadian federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change Catherine McKenna to reject Ontario Power Generation’s bid to bury radioactive wastes right beside Lake Huron, 80 public interest groups from Canada and the US have issued a joint letter as pressure mounts on McKenna to make the right call. McKenna is due to issue her decision on or before March 1, 2016.

Thanking McKenna for responding positively to the joint letter sent by NuclearWaste Watch in November by extending the timeline for issuing a decision statement on Ontario Power Generation’s proposal to bury up to half a million cubic metres of radioactive wastes beside Lake Huron, the February 8th correspondence restates that the Joint Review Panel (JRP) recommendation that Ontario Power Generation’s proposed Deep Geologic Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Radioactive Wastes be allowed to move to licensing was in error, and sets out several examples of how Ontario Power Generation failed to meet the requirements of the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA 2012), the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Guidelines, and the JRP Agreement, which are the three legal requirements.

Ontario Power Generation’s proposal was to bury 200,000 cubic metres of low and intermediate level radioactive wastes produced during reactor operations deep underground in a series of underground caverns carved out of limestone. Weeks before the federal hearing began in September 2013, OPG publicly acknowledged its intention to double that amount by adding decommissioning wastes – including radioactive reactor components and contaminated building materials and rubble – through a license amendment after approval based on the initial proposal has been issued.

The proposal faces large and growing public opposition. 184 municipalitiesrepresenting more than 22 million people have passed resolutions opposing OPG’sproposed waste repository. On November 5, 2015, a bipartisan group of six U.S. Senators and 26 U.S. Representatives from a number of Great Lakes states wrote to Prime Minister Trudeau urging him to block the deep geological repository.

“Momentum continues to build against this burial scheme,” said Kevin Kamps, a radioactive waste specialist with Takoma Park, Maryland, U.S.A.-based organization Beyond Nuclear, a national and international watchdog on the nuclear power industry.

“McKenna made a good call in November, extending the deadline for the decision statement on the Joint Panel Report, which allowed her and her staff more time to get to know this file,” commented Brennain Lloyd, a spokesperson with Northwatch.

“Now comes the bigger test: rejecting Ontario Power Generation’s nuclear waste burial scheme.”

The Feb. 8th letter to Canadian Environment Minister McKenna is posted online HERE

The Supreme Court just burned us on climate change

Oil Pumps

Tuesday, Republican Supreme Court Justices used their majority to derail what stands to be the most meaningful climate action ever taken by the US

While Supreme Court Justices are supposedly non-partisan actors, the US Supreme Court is clearly divided along party lines, with five Republicans and four Democrats.

While the Democrats voted to allow the rules to take effect, the majority Republican group opposed that vote, and issued orders:
“the Environmental Protection Agency’s ‘Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units,’ is stayed pending disposition of the applicants’ petitions for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and disposition of the applicants’ petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is sought.”
Because of the Supreme Court’s schedule and the complex nature of this case, Tuesday evening’s order could delay the rules until after President Obama leaves office. In fact the rules may never go into effect because they are now dependent on the outcome of this year’s presidential election.