President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%

30%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
March 15, 2011 07:16 PM UTC

Uh, Please Turn Off CNN While I Explain...

  • 46 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

You’ve got to have some sympathy for a guy who has to sell a nuclear power plant to a local community glued to the news from Japan–as the Pueblo Chieftain’s Loretta Sword reports:

A nuclear power expert who’s involved with trying to build a plant east of Pueblo said Monday that chances are nil that Japan’s scenario could play out anywhere in this country.

Don Gillispie, CEO of Alternative Energy Holdings Inc., in Idaho, said federal regulations require American plants to have multiple backup power and reactor-cooling systems that would have prevented the Japanese crisis. He spoke by phone Monday, hours before the third explosion in four days at a nearly out-of-control reactor in Japan.

Gillispie said he once managed a Massachusetts plant that was nearly identical to Japan’s imperiled plant, which has no secondary backup power or cooling system. It was built 40 years ago using a design that’s 50 years old. Older plants in the United States have been retrofitted with multiple backup systems, he said…

“I’d say the chances of an earthquake followed by a tsunami in Colorado are pretty small,” Gillispie said, referring to the local proposal. [Pols emphasis]

As a solution to ever-growing energy needs, nuclear power has both attractions and enormous pitfalls–one of the worst of which is now unfolding in northern Japan. There are no nuclear power plants in Colorado today, but obviously Mr. Gillispie would like to change that. And it’s true that any new nuclear power plant would incorporate generations of safety improvements over the antiquated Fukushima I design; advocates say the current objections to building newer and safer nuclear plants make accidents more likely, not less.

It’s just a really tough sell, you know, right now.

Tweet
Share

Comments

46 thoughts on “Uh, Please Turn Off CNN While I Explain…”

      1. Natural gas is a closer call, but its price fluxates wildly and the expectation in the fifty year time horizon you have in mind when you build a power plant isn’t good.

        Solar doesn’t provide power when the sun doesn’t shine and wind doesn’t provide power when the wind doesn’t blow.  We can’t make new rivers to dam.  

  2. The media has been overreacting to this nucelar power plant siuation. While it is leaking some harmful radiation, which is a problem, this is not chernobyl, nor is it 3-Mile Island.

    I love how CNN has one nuclear expert after another come on and explain how the plant is designed to contain a meltdown and prevent significant public exposure to radiation. And yet, they follow these interviews with doom-and-gloom headlines of nuclear meltdown.  

    The fuel rods are in a thick steal chamber that is designed to withstand the temperatures of a meltdown. While the chamber for Reactor 2 appears to have some leakage, it is not expected to reach a level that would cause great harm to the environment or to public health.

    1. There’s obviously been some exposure of fuel to the environment.  You don’t get 131I and 129I any other way.  They’re fission products.

      And the radiation levels spiked quite high–8,217 microsieverts per hour–after the fire at the #4 fuel storage facility.  That also says exposed fuel and/or fission products.

      My concern is that with 500 workers now evacuated from the plant, and dose rates that give you your total annual dose in minutes, it’s going to be hard to maintain the pumping operations.

      As far as the US media and their “experts,” I agree.  I’ve been getting my news from NHK World Service.  It’s the Japanese Government, so take it with a grain of salt (or potassium iodide), but it’s better than the Union of Concerned Scientists.

      http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/en…

      2. One thing I’ve noticed is the difference in tone between ‘anlalysts’ and actual experts. A news analyst is simply someone a news agency hires to share an opinion. Often these analysts have no real expertise in anything. The get their information from the same sources the rest of us do.  

        But, in the CNN article linked below, they quote David Brenner, the director of the Center for Radiological Research at Columbia University (seems to be a reliable source). Near the top of the lengthy article they have a quote from him talking about the workers at the plant,

        “Their situation is not great. It’s pretty clear that they will be getting very high doses of radiation. There’s certainly the potential for lethal doses of radiation. They know it, and I think you have to call these people heroes.”

        That sounds pretty scary and those workers should be commended for their sacrifice. However, near the end of the lengthy article he is quoted again with a far less gloomy outlook on the situation. He says, “I think, at this point in time, there’s no real evidence that there are health risks to the general population”

        The point I suspect he is trying to make is that their is high radiation at the plant, mainly because some explosions and fires have created short spikes in radiation. However, that exposure is not affecting the general public. But CNN chooses to put the scarier quote at the beginning of the article. How many people will actually read the whole thing?

        http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/…

        2. However, that exposure is not affecting the general public.

          Then the general public is being affected.

          And there have been cases of personnel contamination:

          Reuters news agency reported a Japanese official said before the blast that 22 people had been confirmed to have suffered radiation contamination and up to 190 may have been exposed. Workers in protective clothing have used hand-held scanners to check people arriving at evacuation centres.

          From http://www.moneylife.in/articl…

          And that was as of yesterday.

          I’m pro-nuke, but this is a no-fooling-around situation.

          1. from World Nuclear News:

            http://www.world-nuclear-news….

            These are just neighbors, not plant workers.

            Another source of news is TEPCO itself, although it’s like reading manuals for electronics equipment. The volume of their press releases from Fukushima Daiichi has fallen off since the evacuation.

            http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/pres…

            They haven’t been very forthcoming, reporting only what the government requires, but it’s a “straight from the horse’s mouth” kind of thing.

    2. From the NYTIMES:

      After a series of conflicting reports about how much damage was inflicted on the reactor after that blast, Yukio Edano. the chief cabinet secretary, said that “there is a very high probability that a portion of the containment vessel was damaged.”

      http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03…

      1. No one is saying that the vessel isn’t damaged. In fact, they think that is what caused the massive explosion yesterday. But it does not appear to be leaking radiation at a level that will cause harm to the general public.

        I’m not saying that this situation does not have the potential to get worse, I’m simply saying that the media so far has taken what appears to be a small possibility of total meltdown and implied that it is a near certainty because it makes for more compelling tv.  

        1. is a level that would cause harm to anyone pretty quickly.  Maximum allowable dose for a trained radiation worker is 20mSv/yr (20,000 uSv/yr).  That’s your whole annual dose in less than three hours.

          Maximum allowable dose for a member of the general public is 1mSv/yr (1,000 uSv/yr).  So the dose rate at the periphery of the property is 8x what’s allowed off site.

          1. they are now reporting that rods were exposed for something like six hours last night. So the start of a meltdown may have already occurred. It’s like getting a recall notice in the mail; sometimes you don’t see or smell the symptom so wait to fix it, sometimes you smell the gas and go right away.

            I suspect it’s also worth pointing out, again, that the Japanese department has a crap track record of accurately reporting incidents at the time. Just over the last ten years.

            More than anything else it’s worth pointing out, again, that the problem isn’t going away. If people would’ve taken the officials more seriously in New Orleans, Katrina would’ve taken all that property, but fewer lives.

            So I’m with you, Ralphie. Even though I’m not necessarily a “pro-nuke” sort of person. Every place has different challenges and should be discussed accordingly. But it’s not really fair to call this an overreaction yet. Tokyo should be as prepared as possible. So should our aiding troops and volunteers.

          2. “Japanese authorities told the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that radiation levels at the plant site between units 3 and 4 reached a peak of some 400 millisieverts per hour. “This is a high dose-level value,” said the body, “but it is a local value at a single location and at a certain point in time.”

            Later readings were 11.9 millisieverts per hour, followed six hours later by 0.6 millisieverts, which the IAEA said “indicate the level of radioactivity has been decreasing.”

            http://www.world-nuclear-news….

            I understand that even .6 mSv is high exposure, but that was taken from within the plant compound. Much of that radiation is dispersing quickly, and is being blown out to sea.

            Clearly there is no consistent reporting and radiation levels are fluctuating. These numbers I found do come from ‘Japanese authorities’, and who knows what that means.  

            1. I was simply pointing out that the 24-hour news networks are not presenting all the facts. They are highlighting the low-probability risks and discounting experts who say their is little risk of mass public health issues.

              The primary containers holding the rods are supposed to be designed to withstand melting rods. So, just because the rods are melting does not mean everyone is going to die. And it doesn’t mean the city will be uninhabitable for thousands of years like Chernobyl.

               

            2. Given the ” Japanese authorities ” penchant for telling their citizenry that there’s nothing to see here, everything is going to be OK, all in the name of quelling panic I think quite the opposite that you do.

              I think the situation is far worse than they are letting on, and I think there are real health risks to the general population.

              Just my two cents.  Worse than Chernobyl ? No, but that could change.

              1. This morning I was listening to their update and they said that the Japanese Minister admitted that they had “downplayed” the initial severity of the situation “significantly” and were now asking for help from experts in the field and recognized that the problem was reaching critical mass, so to speak.  

    3. it’s worse than TMI.  TMI had one small hydrogen “burp” that did not affect containment integrity; the Japan event has seen three large hydrogen explosions, including at least one that current reports indicate has breached the containment of Unit 2.  And TMI had no apparent fires of stored fuel.

      It remains to be seen if there has been a core meltdown in any of the reactors, but in almost every way Fukushima has exceeded the accident at TMI.

        1. it never will be as bad as Chernobyl.  Chernobyl was a graphite-cored reactor, similar to our old Fermi-designed tritium production reactors at Hanford.

          The graphite blocks actually caught fire at Chernobyl.  There was no pressure vessel, no containment building.

          It may rise to the same “Level 7” as Chernobyl but that only requires that contamination affects more than the host nation.

                    1. I’m not an expert on nuclear physics, but I think the time-honored way of making plutonium is to irradiate slugs of 238U metal in a reactor.  And I think it takes a certain speed of neutrons to get a decent yield.  That’s why both us and the Soviets were using the graphite-moderated reactors.

                    2. Breeder reactors of various sorts are generally considered good ways of generating Plutonium; reactors like those at Hanford were useful for their design at the time, but there are better reactor designs now for that purpose.

                      Again, though – is it something we really want?

                    3. We have plenty from dismantling old nukes.

                      Tritium is the problem right now because it has a 5.5 year half life.  As our nukes get older, they get less potent.

                      And I was wrong about the tritium.  Tritium for the weapons program was produced at the K-reactor at Savannah River.  It, too was shut down in 1988.

                      I think the tritium at Hanford pretty much went right into the groundwater and ultimately into the Columbia River.

        2. This will almost certainly never be a Chernobyl.  Given current reports, cleanup will be a messier version of TMI’s cleanup, and radiation levels within the current evacuation zone, unlike at TMI, will probably be somewhat elevated (though probably not uninhabitable).

    4. Not as FUBAR as Chernobyl, but probably worse than 3-Mile Island, given radioactive releases to date, the geographic expanse of the impact, the impact on the power grid, and the Japan’s situation has plenty of room to continue to get worse before it is over.

    1. In CA, Humbolt Bay has been shut down, as has Rancho Seco. Davenport was never built(!).

      Yes, San Onofre and Diablo Cyn are still there, but the bad data kind of diminishes teh point you’re trying to make.

    2. A 9.0 earthquake in Colorado outside the mountains would be 10,000+ year event, and it still wouldn’t also trigger a tsunami (although, curiously, a just right earthquake could trigger a tsunami out of Lake Tahoe).  Needless to say, we also don’t get hurricanes and typhoons.

      This event is probably most discouraging for much more geologically active places like Alaska that had been considering riding a next wave of nuclear power technology.

  4. I’m also a supporter of nuclear energy (less of one today than a week ago). But the fact that this is playing out much worse than the worst case predictions means no one will trust estimates of safety. And they clearly shouldn’t.

    And we presently have no idea how bad this will end up. Several days ago everyone knowledgeable was saying the containment vessels couldn’t be breached. Now one has cracked.

    1. Even the Japanese government has now admitted that at the plant radiation is high enough to do damage to humans. The rescue workers are toughing it out to minimize that damage.

      If you pray, or believe good thoughts can travel, send one or two their way.

        1. From the article you cited:


          Bridenbaugh said that to the best of his knowledge, the design flaws he had identified were addressed at the Daiichi plant, requiring “a fairly significant expense.”

          And although the design is a GE design, only three of the reactors (#1, #2, and #6) were supplied by GE. Numbers 3 and 5 were supplied by Toshiba and #4 was supplied by Hitachi.  Number 3 even uses a different kind of fuel, and #6 uses a different containment design.

          The only things they have in common was that they all survived the ground motion of the most severe quake in Japanese history and all had their primary, secondary, and tertiary cooling systems and spent fuel refrigeration systems drowned by a tsunami.

          It’s a terrible situation, but you can’t blame it all on GE.

    2. I didn’t hear anyone saying the containment vessels couldn’t be breached (of course I wasn’t really listening for that kind of statement); anyone who did should be taken ’round back and shot, career-wise, because containment vessel ruptures have been a “feature” of bad reactor behavior for decades.

      However, there was certainly a lot of “it’s not going to happen here” going on.

      And now apparently the 50 onsite workers have been pulled back; reports of a radiation spike from unit #4, the shut down reactor where spent fuel is being stored (which had the fire yesterday).

  6. of things nuclear. However, at this point, the hearings being held here in Pueblo are for a land use permit. Tuesday is for comment from those supporting the nuclear plant. Wednesday is for those who oppose it. I had another meeting and couldn’t go tonight. Talked to someone who had attended and he said that most of the discussion was about  safety and 2 cent/kwh electricity and very little about whether the land use application is appropriate. I am opposed and plan to attend tomorrow’s-well now it’s today’s-meeting.

    For the sake of argument and presuming what we are being told is true, I am still opposed to the plant because of the huge amount of water these things require. This is an area of high desert which receives on average 12 inches of precipitation each year. We are totally dependant on whatever water comes down the Arkansas River and we have to share it with Aurora, farmers in SE Colorado and Kansas.

    So if you live in Aurora, you need to pay attention to this issue. It is going to have a dramatic effect on SDS. Get in your cars and drive to the Sangre de Christo Arts Center. Take I-25 South to the 1st Street exit-98B, turn right and go 1 block. Turn right and go 1 block again. Turn right into the parking lot. There is overflo parking in the next block north. The hearing is from 5-8 pm. See you all there.

  9. “Fort St. Vrain (FSV) was Colorado’s only Nuclear Power Plant and America’s only commercial High Temperature Gas Cooled reactor design.  Plans to construct FSV were announced in 1965.  Work began at the site in 1968.  Initial hot flow testing of the reactor began in 1972, and several years of design problem work followed.  The first commercial electric power using the reactor was generated from the plant in December 1976.  Nuclear operations came to a close in 1989 due to continuing problems with the plant.  Decommissioning of the reactor, as well as shipping of all nuclear fuel off-site to a U.S. Department of Energy managed facility, was complete in 1992.  Fort St. Vrain was the first commercial nuclear generating plant in the United States to be decommissioned.  In 1996, generation from FSV began again, this time with a combustion turbine burning natural gas and generating 130 megawatts of power.”

    From http://www.fsvfolks.org/FSVHis…

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

174 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!