Archive for nukes

Ex-regulator: All 104 nuclear reactors in US have a safety problem that can’t be fixed. They should be replaced.

no nukes smaller

I am a staunch non-fan of nuclear energy. Not only is it dangerous as hell, not only do I live relatively close to two reactors situated in earthquake country, but what really irks me is how we have no safe place to store all that extremely dangerous nuclear waste. Gregory B. Jaczko has a thing or two to say about a nuclear thing or two.

Via the New York Times:

All 104 nuclear power reactors now in operation in the United States have a safety problem that cannot be fixed and they should be replaced with newer technology, the former chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said on Monday. Shutting them all down at once is not practical, he said, but he supports phasing them out rather than trying to extend their lives. [...]

[I]t is highly unusual for a former head of the nuclear commission to so bluntly criticize an industry whose safety he was previously in charge of ensuring.

Jaczko said he would have spoken up sooner, but he only just came to his conclusions “recently.” One of those conclusions is that we’ve been putting Band-Aids on major problems. Well, there’s that. Follow the link for more.

You want to know how you can trust his judgment? The nuke industry hates him:

Dr. Jaczko resigned as chairman last summer after months of conflict with his four colleagues on the commission. He often voted in the minority on various safety questions, advocated more vigorous safety improvements, and was regarded with deep suspicion by the nuclear industry.

ding ding ding

Video- SNL: C-SPAN North Korea Cold Open

Officials rejected some fixes to crippled San Onofre nuclear generators

Nuclear Power Option

Back in March of 2011, I posted “Memo: Workers at San Onofre nuclear plant fear retaliation for reporting problems.”

In February of this year, I posted “New radioactive waste leak found at nuclear site, and clean-up could be halted by sequestration.”

And in a couple of other posts, I’ve repeated that we should remember to expect the unexpected:

The word “expect” keeps popping up, and that ambiguity is what makes many of us a little wary. That’s because the 9.0 magnitude was also not expected. The combo of a huge quake and a tsunami was not expected. Experts say they don’t expect a quake larger than 7.0 near the San Onofre nuclear plant, nor do they expect one bigger than 7.5 near Diablo Canyon, despite the fact that new fault lines are discovered from time to time, not to mention the proximity to the San Andreas Fault.

This breaking news bulletin from the L.A. Times just landed in my inbox:

A report on the root causes of problems at the San Onofre nuclear plant shows that officials considered making design changes to the plant’s new steam generators before they were installed but rejected some fixes in part because they would require further regulatory approvals.

Some of the generators began malfunctioning a year after they were installed, and the nuclear power plant has been shuttered for 14 months. The closure has already cost San Onofre’s operators, Southern California Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric, $470 million.

Ratepayers across the region are already shouldering some of those costs and could be on the hook for hefty future repair bills.

For the latest information, go to www.latimes.com.

So public safety and security got tossed aside because regulation was, you know, an imposition. What a pain! The result? Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of bills and putting a whole bunch of us in harm’s way.

Ain’t nuclear energy grand?

New radioactive waste leak found at nuclear site, and clean-up could be halted by sequestration.

sequestration

In the state of Washington, there is radioactive waste leaking at the Hanford nuclear site. Call me crazy, but it’s my feeling that wind doesn’t leak, nor does solar power… but that’s another argument for another day.

Today let’s concentrate on cleaning up yet another potentially lethal nuclear mess.

Via the L.A. Times:

An aging tank of high-level radioactive waste is leaking at the Hanford nuclear site in south-central Washington state at the rate of up to 300 gallons a year, federal authorities disclosed Friday after discovering a dip in the volume of toxic sludge in the tank.

Gov. Jay Inslee said, “This raises concerns not only about the existing leak that has been recently discovered, but also concerning the integrity of the other single-shell tanks of this age, some of which have experienced prior leaks.”

Meh, no worries:

State officials say there is no immediate public health threat, because it could take years or even decades for the leaked material to reach the groundwater and move on to the nearby Columbia River.

See? It could take years before Washington residents have to worry about things like “public health threats,” or as I like to call them, fear, pain, suffering, cancer, and death.

What’s everyone getting so worked up about? Relax. There are plenty of hard-working federal employees who are working to clean up the toxic slop before anything really bad happens. They are the heroes of this story. They are on it.

But Inslee said the timing of the leak’s discovery coincided unfortunately with a report this week from Democrats on the House Appropriations Committee that more than 1,000 federal employees now working on cleanup at the site could be placed on unpaid leave for six weeks if threatened federal budget “sequestration” cuts occurred on March 1.

uh oh smaller

Breathe, people. Obviously, Congress is all over it. They’d be fools to let something as dangerous as this slip by them, right?

Oh… Excuse me, something is coming through my imaginary earpiece, hang on…

“We’ve been told not to be in Congress. Speaker Boehner controls the agenda… and he sent us home.”

How’s that sequestration thing workin’ for ya?

yikes!

From Dep’t. of Under-reported, Under-Appreciated Very Important Items: Pres. Obama will renew his push for nuclear treaty

obama nuke security

Um, this is kind of important. It’s also very under-reported and under-appreciated. In fact, other than Rachel Maddow, I can’t remember a single person at any cable news outlet that pays much attention to President Obama’s relentless efforts to rid the world of nuclear weapons.

Remember this? Anyone? Bueller?

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

President Obama, 2009:

As a nuclear power as the only nuclear power to have used a nuclear weapon, the United States has a moral responsibility to act. We cannot succeed in this endeavor alone, but we can lead it. We can start it. So today I state clearly and with conviction America’s commitment to seek the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. [applause] I’m not naive. This goal will not be reached quickly. Perhaps not in my lifetime. It will take patience and persistence. But now we, too, must ignore the voices who tell us that the world cannot change. We have to insist, yes we can.”

Now the president is renewing that push for a nuclear treaty at the United Nations. Per The Hill, progress on a treaty has been stalled due to Pakistan’s opposition:

Administration officials and arms control activists believe they now have a new window for action. They point to increased cooperation on the UN Security Council and the beginning of John Kerry’s tenure as secretary of State as reasons for optimism. [...]

[Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association] said progress on Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty (FMCT) would depend on cooperation from Pakistan, which harbors fears of archrival India having more access to fissile material. The five permanent members of the UN Security Council might hold side talks with India and Pakistan in April to try and move the treaty forward, he said. [...]

Kerry is seen as a potential facilitator in those talks because of his long-standing relationship with Pakistan. [...]

Kimball said that if Pakistan won’t agree to let the treaty talks proceed, another option would be for other nuclear powers to jointly declare that they will collectively observe a moratorium on fissile material production. The United States, Russia, France and Great Britain have already acknowledged they’ve stopped producing fissile material, and China is believed to have ended it as well.

Maybe it’s finally time to get this news around, whaddya think?

VIDEO– Defense Sec. Panetta: Iran has “not made the decision to proceed with the development a nuclear weapon.”

schmo mentum

File under SchmoMentum: Another Republican talking point has bitten the dust, at least for now.

Earlier, Paul Krugman destroyed Carly Fiorina’s GOP blahblahblah with, “Don’t think about bureaucrats….We’ve laid off 100s of 1000s of school teachers.”

Now Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta smothered another one, at least for now. Apparently, Republicans can put down their military weapons, stop hyperventilating, stop frothing at the mouth, and start backing off of their accusations that President Obama (and Chuck Hagel, while we’re at it) is a big ol’ wuss, especially when it comes to Iran.

If you recall, Saxby Chambliss is one of the panicky GOP who think Iran is on the verge of having their very own nuke, and the U.S. better be ready to pounce. And by pounce, I mean attack. And by attack, I mean create a brand spankin’ new and enormous Middle East crisis. And by Middle East crisis, I mean world crisis.

Via Think Progress:

“If your position is truly prevention and not containment, Chuck, what is the redline [on Iran], what is the point?” asked Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA). “We know there’s some things happening over there right now that are very serious.”

Yes, we must take Iran very seriously and keep our ideas and options wide open, but let’s not revive this golden oldie quite yet, mmkay chickenhawks?

Panetta on Meet the Press:

Leon Panetta: What I’ve said, and I will say today, is that the intelligence we have is they have not made the decision to proceed with the development a nuclear weapon. They are developing and enriching uranium, they continue to do that…

Chuck Todd: Why do you believe they’re doing that?

Panetta: I think it’s a clear indication — They say they’re doing that to be able to do their own energy source. I think it is suspect that they continue to enrich uranium, because that is dangerous, and that violates international rules.

Todd: You believe that they are probably developing nuclear weapons, but you don’t, the intelligence doesn’t —

Panetta: No, I can’t — I can’t tell you they are in fact pursuing a weapon, because that’s what not intelligence says they’re doing right now.

“The Right To Bear Nuclear Arms”

time bomb smaller

Reader John Rachel wrote a guest post for us to share with you. It’s his first contribution to TPC, so welcome in, John!

“The Right To Bear Nuclear Arms”

My lovely Japanese wife frequently asks me about gun ownership in America. In Japan, it’s difficult, if not impossible, to buy a gun. So when there are incidents of gun violence in America — and there have been many recently — she understandably questions the prudence of having so many guns around.

I explain that written in the U.S. Constitution — specifically the Second Amendment — is a clause which protects the right of U.S. citizens to possess and use all sorts of guns for a variety of commonly accepted purposes, hunting and self-defense chief among them.

She has several times asked me, “Is it really that easy to buy a gun there?”

I came across this article:  “Amazon ships assault rifle instead of television”.

Apparently it’s not only easy, it’s actually difficult to not buy a gun. This guy just wanted a nicer screen to watch TV and movies and ended up with a full-blown assault weapon.

I got to thinking about the whole thing and came to a surprising conclusion. The rationale for having so many weapons at our itchy fingertips springs from the powerhouse argument contained in this pithy gem of philosophical analysis . . .

Guns don’t kill people. People kill people!

Since this is irrefutable logic, I began to wonder why it has been applied so narrowly. The truth is, guns are just one form of lethal entertainment. Thanks to the amazing advances in science and technology, there is a cornucopia of devices which fit the legal definition of “arms” as referred to in our Constitution. It seems to me, the legal framework and the rationale would apply equally to nuclear weapons.

Now, narrow interpreters of the Bill of Rights might say:  “There’s nothing in there about the right to bear nuclear arms.”

I say:  “So what? There’s nothing in there excluding them!”

Conservatives argue that government should be about increasing the options of its citizenry, or at least staying out of the way so that all of the options are on the table. Normally, I’m not one to agree with people on the right end of the political spectrum. Grudgingly I admit the wisdom of their arguments here is just too overwhelming.

So let’s go for it! After all . . .

Hand grenades don’t kill people. People kill people!

Stinger missiles don’t kill people.  People kill people!

Cluster bombs don’t kill people. People kill people!

Predator drones don’t kill people. People kill people!

Nerve gas doesn’t kill people. People kill people!

Nuclear weapons don’t kill people. People kill people!

Just think about how much fun we can have if we’re not restricted to only using sawed-off shotguns and assault weapons! It’ll be awesome! Finally, hunters will regain the upper hand from those pesky critters out there who have been outwitting them and managed to keep from being slaughtered into extinction. We’ll show ‘em who’s boss around here!

Understandably there have to be a few controls in place. You can’t just have anybody and everybody driving around with WMDs in the trunk of their SUV or family station wagon. But with some reasonable waiting period and background check, I don’t see why this couldn’t work. Permits could be issued as they now are with handguns . . .

The bearer of this permit, offering appropriate corroborative identification, is entitled to possess and use within applicable limits and restrictions, explosive nuclear devices up to 50 kiloton explosive equivalency, as defined by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

It’s time to claim our rights under the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution and realize the profound wisdom of the founding fathers.

It’s time that we be able to put in that munitions cache which has become the hallmark of a safe and happy American home, all of weaponry available today, including nuclear bombs.

It’s time to assert our constitutionally protected right!

The right to bear nuclear arms.

nuke peace