Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant Shoreline Contains Small Amounts Of Tritium

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) -- Health officials say a radioactive form of hydrogen that leaked from a Vermont nuclear plant into soil and groundwater has reached the nearby Connecticut River.

State Department of Health Commissioner Dr. Harry Chen said Wednesday water samples from the shoreline near the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant last month tested positive for small amounts of tritium, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen that's been linked to cancer when ingested in large amounts.

Gov. Peter Shumlin wants more wells to pull contaminated water from the ground on the Vermont Yankee site. He says he's "very concerned."

Tritium has leaked from nuclear plants around the country. It's particularly problematic for Vermont Yankee as it seeks to renew its license.

New Orleans-based plant owner Entergy Corp. is suing Vermont in federal court over the state's efforts to shut the plant down.

Comments

[mdinoregon]

12:00 PM on 08/22/2011

News Flash
This plume of radionucleutides are from a plume that was released a long time ago.
It also had a few other things in it. Do you know what strontium is? Like what showing up in the trout? That was in the same plume that They filed in a report with the NRC? Or how it's been in their test wells, since? Heading towards the river?
Yep, MM you the Man, let me find the link because there was something else there......besides just the sheer volumn, and of course, the cooling tower catching on fire or falling over.
AND YOU SAY WHAT A GREAT RECORD THEY HAVE?

drug much??????

[mdinoregon]

12:08 PM on 08/22/2011

The Commons last year that plant tests revealed Strontium-90 as well as Cobalt-60, and Cesium-137 in soils surrounding the January 2010 tritium leak. Smith added that Strontium-90, unlike tritium, does not move easily through the soil.

[Michael Mann]

12:29 PM on 08/22/2011

Did you know the fish found with strontium in it was from the CONTROL group, that's right they take fish 10 miles UPSTREAM for a control group so they have a baseline for the ones caught downstream, for comparison. The fish in the "plume" from the plant had no detectable, but one fish from the control group did! Do you know anything about scientific method? Thank you for illustrating my point!

[mdinoregon]

12:54 PM on 08/22/2011

and the other issues? BTW control group just swimming in a river? LOL, yep, in your world they stay put.

[mdinoregon]

01:00 PM on 08/22/2011

Hey, I remember when you said they pump hydrogen into the containment to prevent rust and corrosion by binding up O2. How that little hydrogen explosion at Fukushima work out? Blew the rust all to hell? Is Fort Calhoun next? Or Yankee? Oyster Creek is in the running, it leaks like a sieve

[Michael Mann]

06:08 AM on 08/22/2011

Newsflash.... your body contains small amounts of tritium... ooh scary... every body of water on the planet contains small quantities of tritium and has since the beginning of time...
http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/tritium.htm
http://www.evs.anl.gov/pub/doc/tritium.pdf

Knowledge is power! Know Nukes!

[mdinoregon]

06:56 AM on 08/21/2011

Yep, interesting article

Tarred and feathered by its own hand

As was to be expected, tritium that leaked from an underground pipe at Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon has finally been found in the Connecticut River

To its credit, Entergy, which owns and operates the plant, notified federal and state regulatory agencies as well as the public when the first sample taken late in 2009 from a groundwater monitoring well tested positive for tritium -- even though by law it wasn't required to do so.

It was one of Entergy's attempts to be more transparent after its public relations nightmare when the state learned Entergy representatives had given inaccurate information to Vermont regulators.

To make matters worse for Entergy, the inaccurate information had to do with whether underground and buried pipes at the power plant were carrying radioactive materials, to which the representative said he did not believe so.

It was a death of 1,000 self-inflicted cuts.

part 1

[mdinoregon]

06:57 AM on 08/21/2011

part 2

Let us list just a few of them: Enexus; malfunctioning stop valves; inoperable steam relief valves; the collapse of a cooling tower; a crane malfunctioning while lifting a 100-ton cask full of spent fuel; and a transformer fire.

Even those skeptical of the claims of those opposed to Yankee's continued operation were dumbstruck by the NRC's shameless disregard of events on the ground as Fukushima's GE Mark I reactors melted down.

So while we believe the reaction to the leak of tritium was overblown and that the flames of fear were fanned by people reacting on emotions and not facts as well as by those with a political agenda, we still believe (as we have noted in these pages before) that Entergy is not a trustworthy partner in a venture as potentially dangerous as the continued operation of a 40-year-old nuclear power plant.

We don't believe Entergy can ever reassure most of Vermont that it holds the public good first and foremost and that it will take the measures necessary to set our minds to rest that the plant is safe to operate for another 20 years.

As has been said before: Entergy just doesn't do business the way Vermont expects a good corporate citizen to do.


http://www.utilityproducts.com/news/2011/08/1483087483/tarred-and-feathered-by-its-own-hand.html

[mdinoregon]

07:05 AM on 08/21/2011

My personnal believe is if that pro-nuclears really wanted to keep the industry alive and well. Then they would be the first ones to try to close old, leaky and badly built reactors before something worse happens here. The right set of circumstances and a major release and they WILL all be shut down. Keep pushing for the new and improved, but defending the ones that are known trouble? Would like to see thorium reactors (and no plutonium production also the constant removal of waste products) do something, but it's time for the industry to cough up a little cash instead of taking until there is no more to take. Help America just a bit, ya' know....

[Michael Mann]

01:51 PM on 08/20/2011

I think people who write these articles underestimate the intelligence of Vermont people, do they really think vague inferences and the scary words "tritium" and "radiation" will sway opinion in their favor? Vermonters are not idiots and will do the research, find out they are being misled and become angry at the attempted manipulation. This may backfire and hurt the anti-nuclear cause Vermont people are educated, intelligent and know how to research the truth.
http://hps.org/documents/tritium_fact_sheet.pdf
http://hps.org/documents/environmental_radiation_fact_sheet.pdf

[mairs]

12:40 AM on 08/21/2011

You're so right. Everyone should do their research, and ahem... without nuclear industry people writing such manipulative posts are yours. So transparent.

Here's some more research:

http://www.fairewinds.com/content/decommissioning-vermont-yankee-nuclear-power-plant-and-storing-its-radioactive-waste

[nirek]

09:13 AM on 08/21/2011

I'm a native Vermonter and believe me we are smarter than you think. We are in favor of closing the leaky old plant and going with renewable energy!
I have a solar array and show it off to all interested folks.

[Michael Mann]

01:19 PM on 08/20/2011

Nuclear power plants are safer, cleaner and more reliable than any other method to produce electricity.There is 40 years of safe operation in the USA. Tritium is not nearly as dangerous to your health as petroleum products which are found leaking from every gas station in the country, get real people.The amounts found are smaller than EPA DRINKING water specs and tritium is naturally found in all water in trace amounts anyway These fear mongering articles are disturbing and misleading. When every dirty coal fired plant or explosive natural gas plant is shutdown then start thinking of replacing nuclear plants.

[nirek]

09:14 AM on 08/21/2011

You are being mendacious.

[Michael Mann]

09:31 AM on 08/21/2011

Maybe I overestimated Vermonters?... Or are a few very vocal anti-nuclear zealots trying to speak for the silent majority who are more informed? Fear comes from ignorance, knowledge and education are the keys to understanding, which is the only cure for that particular malady.

[Atoms4Peace1]

01:00 PM on 08/20/2011

Spotlight: New Nuclear Projects Can Help Administration’s Job-Creation Efforts

http://us.arevablog.com/2011/08/11/spotlight-new-nuclear-projects-can-help-administration%E2%80%99s-job-creation-efforts/

[PoloniumMan]

01:10 PM on 08/20/2011

Interest rates are low and there's an excess of labor. Sounds like a good time for utilities to start building large, capital intensive construction projects. But, NO, instead they are buying natural gas burners with the belief that gas prices will remain stable for the next ten to twenty years.

[mairs]

12:41 AM on 08/21/2011

While costs for building nuclear plants soar between the concept stages and actual construction.

[Beautiful World]

12:34 PM on 08/20/2011

Nuclear energy supplies about 19.6 % of US electricity.

One of the best ,yet I admit, hardest ways to make an difference ,is to reduce your personal consumption of electricity. Start in your home, shutting off appliance, turning down cooling and heating appliances, insulating, turn out lights when you leave a room , reduce use outdoor lighting. Consume products with awareness of how they are made.Support alternative energy like solar. However do your research on green energy because not all is really green (like mercury light bulbs). Help phase out dependence on nuclear energy 1 percent at a time.

[Atoms4Peace1]

12:51 PM on 08/20/2011

People wont do it. Its outside their comfort zone. There is not enough pain in our society or anxiety over nuclear energy to warrant such action. Americans are energy hogs. We only enjoy cheap oil and gas (versus other countries) due to politics. Make a gallon of gasoline $5 a gallon and then people will listen. Then they will want nuclear since that will offset oil plants.

We want more energy and are building more nuclear plants. Vogtle in GA, Simmer in SC and most of the existing plants have already been "uprated" and are looking at license extension.

Why not just work for safer nuclear. One lb of uranium is the same energy content as a billion gallons of oil.

[capnamerca]

01:42 PM on 08/21/2011

"Then they will want nuclear since that will offset oil plants."

There are no commercial oil fired power plants in the U.S. ! ! ! If there are, perhaps you could tell me where. I have been building large energy facilities for 35 years and never seen one that burns oil.

[palindrom]

09:47 AM on 08/26/2011

"One lb of uranium is the same energy content as a billion gallons of oil. "

A billion gallons? I thought the ratio of nuclear to chemical energies was more like 1-10 million. It's still a lot, but it's good to be accurate.

[mdinoregon]

04:32 AM on 08/20/2011

Justice Department stays out of Vermont Yankee dispute

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said he received word Tuesday from the Justice Department that it would not intervene in a federal lawsuit the owners of Vermont Yankee have filed against the state of Vermont.

"I appreciate the Justice Department's decision," Sanders said in a statement. "Vermont has a right to choose an energy future that emphasizes energy efficiency and sustainable energy and does not include an aging, problem-plagued nuclear power plant. The federal government has no role to play in that decision."
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20110810/NEWS03/108100308/Justice-Department-stays-out-Vermont-Yankee-dispute?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE

[Atoms4Peace1]

12:52 PM on 08/20/2011

The Justice Department wont intervene. It doesnt mean the case is thrown out of federal court. The plant will have its day in court.

[Joffan]

02:13 PM on 08/26/2011

I'm glad the Justice Department is staying out of the court case. Simpler is better.

[mdinoregon]

04:30 AM on 08/20/2011

Entergy attempts to bar three state witnesses


In 2002, when Entergy purchased the plant, it signed a memorandum of understanding with Vermont that included a number of conditions Entergy had to agree to prior to the sale. Entergy is arguing that two of those conditions -- that the PSB has jurisdiction under current law to grant or deny approval of the plant's continued operation and that Entergy waive any claim it might have to federal preemption of any actions taken by the board -- are no longer valid due to two actions that occurred since the memorandum of understanding was signed.

http://www.reformer.com/localnews/ci_18721521

[Atoms4Peace1]

12:56 PM on 08/20/2011

Yes when one of the witnesses writes an opinion that the court is in the process of deciding, then that witness should be dismissed.

In his report, Bradford wrote, "states may regulate nuclear plants with respect to a variety of non-safety issues" and among other claims, "the reliability assessment called for by Act 189 did not intrude on the NRC's regulatory authority."

[mdinoregon]

04:24 AM on 08/20/2011

Mediocre hackers can cause major damage
Researchers find vital infrastructure, factories at risk
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/15/mediocre-hackers-can-cause-major-damage/

Nice picture of Yankee there.....

[palindrom]

08:50 PM on 08/19/2011

I live near VT Yankee, and I'm not at all worried by these tritium leaks, or Sr90 leaks, which are minuscule.

I'm more concerned that (a) it's an old plant, and old equipment tends to lose reliability; and (b) they have a huge inventory of spent fuel on site.

I'd actually be perfectly happy if they replaced the plant with a state-of-the-art nuclear plant, but I think the first priority should be to get that old fuel into dry-cask storage.

[Terry Floyd]

09:47 PM on 08/19/2011

State of the art is Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor LFTR which uses spent nuclear fuel

as fuel with Thorium (abundant as lead and ready to burn as natural ore) so there is no need to

dry cast that old fuel just burn it with 99% consumption! The remaining less than one percent

waste requires only 300 years of storage not 1000s.

Robert Hargraves : THORIUM ENERGY CHEAPER THAN FROM COAL ~ AIM HIGH!

http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=BOoBTufkE­og

[Atoms4Peace1]

12:59 PM on 08/20/2011

I think a lot of antinukes believe there is no state of the art nuclear plant. They are mistaken.

No one wants to drive vintage automobiles, fly in old prop planes (not the more modern regional jets).

Technology has evolved.

[NoMoreNukes2012]

08:34 PM on 08/19/2011

I was unaware of this thread until mdinoregon posted it on the EQ thread. Thank you MD....
SHUT THE MUTHERS ALL DOWN!!

[Steelheadangler]

09:11 PM on 08/19/2011

Yeah, let just replace them all with coal!

[Terry Floyd]

10:02 PM on 08/19/2011

Are you aware that coal burners are more radioactiv­e than nuclear waste?

http://large.stanford.edu/publications/coal/references/hvistendahl/

“Robert Finkelman, a former USGS coordinator of coal quality who oversaw research on uranium in fly ash in the 1990s, says that for the average person the by-product accounts for a miniscule amount of background radiation, probably less than 0.1 percent of total background radiation exposure. According to USGS calculations, buying a house in a stack shadow - in this case within 0.6 mile [one kilometer] of a coal plant - increases the annual amount of radiation you're exposed to by a maximum of 5 percent. But that's still less than the radiation encountered in normal yearly exposure to X-rays.
So why does coal waste appear so radioactive? It's a matter of comparison: The chances of experiencing adverse health effects from radiation are slim for both nuclear and coal-fired power plants - they're just somewhat higher for the coal ones. "You're talking about one chance in a billion for nuclear power plants," Christensen says. "And it's one in 10 million to one in a hundred million for coal plants."
Radiation from uranium and other elements in coal might only form a genuine health risk to miners, Finkelman explains. "It's more of an occupational hazard than a general environmental hazard," he says. "The miners are surrounded by rocks and sloshing through ground water that is exuding radon."“

Did someone say MERCURY?

http://www.coal2nuclear.com/

[Atoms4Peace1]

12:46 PM on 08/20/2011

Antinukes do not know that the TVA Kingston fly ash spill released more alpha in the air than TMI.

[Michael Mann]

01:29 PM on 08/20/2011

No coal fired plant can be built on a site zoned for a nuclear plant, because it would exceed the maximum radiation/contamination limits imposed on nuclear plants by the NRC.

[mdinoregon]

08:19 PM on 08/19/2011

It sounds like the makings of the next cheesy action flick: The sun begins spewing massive clouds of radiation and electromagnetic charges toward planet Earth. When they hit, they knock out power grids, GPS satellites, airline communications and incite nuclear meltdowns.

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/08/solar-flares-threaten-disrupt-devices-sun-enters-active-phase#ixzz1VcNYcsf3


Utilities must take steps to make sure their transformers are robust enough to handle the charges a massive solar flare could pack, Sandoval said.

“And no transformers are more important than those attached to nuclear power plants,” she said.

[Atoms4Peace1]

12:47 PM on 08/20/2011

People get the weirdest ideas after going to the movies.

Spoiler alert:

In the movie Knowing, Nicholas Cage is an MIT astrophysicist who discovers when the sun is going to burp a super solar flare and kill all mankind.

[mdinoregon]

06:25 PM on 08/19/2011

In January 2010, Vermont Yankee confirmed that tritiated water had leaked from underground pipes near the Advanced Off-Gas (AOG) Building. Later lab tests also identified radioactive isotopes strontium-90, cesium-137, and cobalt-60 in the soils surrounding the leak

http://vtdigger.org/2011/08/19/state-officials-sayy-tritium-from-vermont-yankee-has-reached-the-connecticut-river-entergy-disputes-lab-results/

[Steelheadangler]

06:51 PM on 08/19/2011

The first sample collected July 18 measured 611 pCi/L, and the second collected July 25 measured 534 pCi/L.

The federal Environmental Protection Agency’s acceptable limit for drinking water is 20,000 pCi/L

the total amount of release would be approximately 2.79 curies,

A tritium exit sign has up to 25 curies of tritium

[mdinoregon]

02:07 AM on 08/20/2011

I find a beta emitter sealed in a glass tube with phosphorus a little different then strontium, cesium or cobalt in the enviroment, either emitting or especially in the food chain where they could be internalized. I would think anybody that understood the least bit about anything nuclear or radiation related would see the difference. Guess not, makes me doubt the intelligence of people that are Suppose to have it under control.

[Steelheadangler]

02:29 AM on 08/20/2011

Do you even know what at beta particle is?

[mdinoregon]

03:46 AM on 08/20/2011

yawn
whadda' ya' think?

[Jtt]

05:45 PM on 08/19/2011

Yea why no levels posted. Between the anti nukes with their ridiculous comments and the nuclear industry that cant seem to keep pipes from leaking its just incompetence across the board. Luckily none of these leaks ive seen levels for really poses a significant health threat by accepted science.

Its kinda funny what people feed their kids coming out of drought areas created by global warming is substantially more of a threat than any reactor around them. Yet they are completely oblivious to it.

For instance:

Can toxins from drought stressed animal feeds be passed on to meat and dairy consumers? ( http://diseaseclimate.blogspot.com/2011/08/can-toxins-from-drought-stressed-animal.html ) - doesn't even rate. lol.

[PoloniumMan]

09:56 AM on 08/21/2011

The levels measured were ~500 pCi/l, just above detection limits.