Marvin Resnikoff2013-05-18T12:27:39-04:00Marvin Resnikoffhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/author/index.php?author=marvin-resnikoffCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Marvin ResnikoffGood old fashioned elbow grease.Fracking: Has the USGS Been Co-opted by the Oil and Gas Industry?tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.19797662012-11-07T20:23:00-05:002013-01-07T05:12:01-05:00Marvin Resnikoffhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/marvin-resnikoff/appeared in the New York City press and energized battles against the Spectra pipeline from Jersey City into New York City under the Hudson River. The pipeline would bring natural gas from the Marcellus shale formation in Pennsylvania and New York into New York City.
In response to a scientific article I authored calculating the possible radon concentrations at the wellhead that has been picked up by the anti-fracking movement, the USGS sought to measure the actual radon concentrations at the wellhead. Preliminary data for two wells allegedly down to the Marcellus shale formation and other wells in Pennsylvania were published by the USGS in September 2012. The measured radon concentrations, from 1 to 79 picoCuries per liter (pCi/L), were on the low side of my calculations. Depending on the assumptions made, the paper I authored showed that the radon concentrations could range from 37 to 2576 pCi/L, leading to an increase in lung cancer. The calculations were not too much higher than radon wellhead concentrations measured by the EPA in pre-fracking days, 5 to 1450 pCi/L. The recent USGS radon measurements were also inconsistent with the concentrations of uranium and radium in Marcellus shale measured by the USGS in 1980.
Why were the USGS measurements so low and at variance with other EPA and USGS studies? Here the story takes an interesting turn. A call to one of the USGS researchers revealed the following:
In response to a request for the well logs, to examine whether the wells reached the Marcellus shale formation, the USGS researcher said they had none.
"Then can you give us the location of the Pennsylvania wells? With the location, we could find the well logs in Pennsylvania state files."
"Well, no, that would break the trust with the gas companies that allowed us access."
"OK, then how do you know you reached the Marcellus shale formation?"
"Because we were told so."
"Who selected the wells?"
"The U.S. Department of Energy, in collaboration with the gas companies."
"Did you feel comfortable publishing what are essentially screening results?"
"No, but pressure from higher-ups at USGS forced our hand."
To summarize: The oil and gas industry chose specific wells, in which USGS researchers unsurprisingly measured low radon concentrations and were then pressured by the oil and gas industry to publish these preliminary findings, under the USGS imprimatur. It appears that the USGS has been corrupted by the oil and gas industry.]]>Fukushima 2.0tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.8435582011-04-01T14:35:28-04:002011-06-01T05:12:01-04:00Marvin Resnikoffhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/marvin-resnikoff/Doomsday Scenario 2.0
With the decision to entomb four Fukushima reactors in concrete, Tokyo Electric (TEPCO) is moving the disaster into uncharted waters. The heat producing fuel rods cannot be turned off. Concrete will insulate the heat from the fuel rods, and cause the internal temperatures to climb. The nuclear fuel will melt down and pass through the bottom of the reactor vessel and containment structure and enter the environment. The radionuclides, primarily cesium-137 and strontium-90, but also plutonium and others, will enter the sea. The human health and economic costs will be enormous.
TEPCO's choices were limited. The brave workers who were attempting to put a lid on atmospheric releases were fighting a valiant, but losing battle. Iodine was entering the air and the sea. Iodine concentrations in the sea were already over 4,300 times safe limits and in the plant, greater than 10,000 times safe limits for nuclear workers. Cesium, a semi-volatile metal, was also entering the sea through unknown pathways, likely leakage from below. Clearly the cladding around the nuclear fuel rods and the reactor vessel had been breached. So the choice was to continue to expose workers to extremely high radiation doses, while releasing cesium and iodine to the air and sea, or close it down, cover it with concrete and let the reactor cores and fuel pools melt into the ground and into the sea.
Fukushima Inventory
Assuming four reactors are coated with cement, and reactors 5 and 6 and the common ground level shared fuel pool can be saved, we can give a rough estimate of the radioactive inventory and compare it to two other nuclear disasters: Hiroshima and Chernobyl. Roughly, 2,100 Curies of cesium-137 were released at Hiroshima. At Chernobyl, according to the UNSCEAR (United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, 2000), 2.3 million Curies of cesium-137 were released. The approximate inventory of reactors 1 through 4 is 100 million Curies cesium-137, or more than 40 times the Chernobyl release, and 48000 times the Hiroshima release of cesium-137. (spreadsheet available). Only a fraction of this Fukushima inventory has been released to-date. If a sizable release takes place, say 10% of the Fukushima inventory, this represents 8 times the Chernobyl release and 4,800 times the Hiroshima release. This would be a major catastrophe. Cesium would not just dissipate in the ocean or concentrate in fish; it will also wash back to shore. This will make it difficult for workers to service reactors 5 and 6.
The Implications
The implications of cementing over reactors 1-4 are not clear. With the cesium-137 and iodine-131 releases from Fukushima, the evacuation zone is out to 30 miles, but a much larger coastal zone may ultimately be affected for many decades. The internal heat may explode the containment and cause additional cement cracking. The heat will certainly melt through the bottom of the reactor vessel and containment and into the underlying soil. The human health and cost implications of this accident could be enormous. Four hundred thousand Japanese have already been displaced by the tsunami and the forced evacuation. The present cost estimate of $300 billion, before the decision to cement over the four reactors, does not account for the long-term loss of the coast. Based on our cost estimates for potential nuclear transportation accident for the State of Nevada, we believe $300 billion is far too low. TEPCO may go into receivership and be taken over by the government. The Japanese economy, struggling before this accident, will take another hit.
For the United States, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission may take a harder look at the safety of the 23 or so Fukushima-type boiling water reactors. While the industry has fastened on the low probability of an earthquake and a tsunami, other factors may also be important. Reactors are complicated high tech machines run by humans, who, as TMI showed, make mistakes.
Vermont Yankee has had leaking and inoperable safety valves and a rundown cooling system. Entergy, the company that runs the plant, has little incentive to put money into the operation, since the State has refused to grant it a Certificate of Public Good to continue operation for an additional 20 years. Its decommissioning fund is half the needed amount. New York State is pushing Entergy to close down its Indian Point reactor. In case of a major accident, the evacuation zone includes New York City and its suburbs.
The Fukushima accident has heightened the tension between profits and safety. As the Fukushima accident plays itself out, the nuclear industry and GE in particular, must be vitally concerned. Unlike an oil or gas generating station, the heat at Fukushima cannot be turned off. Nuclear fuel is the gift that keeps on giving. GE, TEPCO and the Japanese economy will take a big hit, but the Japanese people, who have suffered through the earthquake and tsunami, will take the biggest hit, in terms of an expected increase in cancers caused by radiation from Fukushima.
]]>Conflicting Stories Surround Fukushima Fuel Pool #4tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.8377802011-03-18T16:15:50-04:002011-05-25T18:40:24-04:00Marvin Resnikoffhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/marvin-resnikoff/stated in Congress on Thursday? Is the zirconium fuel cladding on fire, as CNN has graphically shown? To this and more, I say, no.
Earthquake and Tsunami of Biblical Proportions
When the 9.0 earthquake struck off shore, and 30 foot waves washed out ten thousand lives and tens of thousands of homes, Fukushima reactors 1, 2 and 3 were operating, and reactors 4, 5 and 6 were shut down for maintenance, and had been since the end of November. The fuel in those reactors had been transferred to the fuel pools. When the tsunami washed out off-site power and backup power from diesel generators, nuclear fuel from reactors 4, 5 and 6 had already cooled for 100 days. But now, all pumps and water circulation ceased.
Heroic Workers and Measures
The immediate problem was the three operating reactors 1, 2 and 3. On immediate shutdown, the fuel in those reactors was more than 100 times more heat-generating than the fuel in pools, 4, 5 and 6. Without pumps, workers had to pump water into the reactors, and let the pressure out before more water could be pumped. "Feed and bleed" it was called, likened to pumping water into a balloon. But hydrogen was created in the process; the bleed exploded. Over 2 dozen workers have been injured, while the radiation fields continued to rise. Cesium, a semi-volatile metal and gaseous iodine, were released. At one point, only 50 workers remained on the site. Tokyo Electric (TEPCO) acknowledges that reactors 1, 2 and 3 had partial meltdowns. TEPCO is in the process of bringing in external power and pumps to begin properly circulating cooling water. But the melted fuel will likely not allow unfettered cooling.
Fuel Pool at #4 Reactor
Meanwhile, two fires occurred at reactor #4, partially destroying the roof and side panels of the building. The fuel pool is a deep pool of water, approximately 40 feet deep, with a lattice work to hold the fuel assemblies that are approximately 12 feet long. The water cover is 20', enough to cool and shield the fuel. The International Atomic Energy Agency says the water had reached 84 oC, about 1½ days after the accident. My calculations show that it would take almost 3 days for the water to reach 100 oC. Steam has been seen emanating from the pool. It would then take less than two weeks for the fuel to become uncovered. As the water levels declined and the vaporization increased, the radiation dose rate above the pool would increase. When five feet of cover remained, the dose rate would begin to increase precipitously. When the fuel becomes uncovered, a zirconium fire would ensue. The heat and radiation levels, including released radioactivity, would be enormous. I estimate, using the standard software, Microshield, dose rates on the order of 3000 rems/hour, 200 meters above the fuel pool. Less than one minute in this dose field would be grave.
Conflicting Reports
The New York Times acknowledges Friday afternoon that there are conflicting versions of what is taking place. On the one hand, Union of Concerned Scientists and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission claim that fuel pool #4 is dry and that zirconium fires have taken place, releasing cesium and iodine to the environment. On the other hand, TEPCO says the #4 fuel pool has water. Who's right? The NRC is right, if the fuel pool had a leak and water drained out. But if the steel liner and concrete walls remained intact, TEPCO is right and there is time to bring the #4 pool situation under control. In this conflict, I agree with TEPCO, and hope that the company quickly resolves the problem. The alternative is unthinkable.]]>Doomsday Scenario at Fukushimatag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2011:/theblog//3.8359322011-03-15T11:03:54-04:002011-05-25T18:40:24-04:00Marvin Resnikoffhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/marvin-resnikoff/
Nuclear reactors are not the same as coal/oil/gas electricity plants. Unlike conventional plants, they cannot be turned off. So while brave workers were tending to Units 1, 2 and 3 reactors, attempting against all odds to keep the reactor from overheating, the fuel pool at Unit 4 was left untended; without makeup water to cool them, the fuel rods overheated. Above 1800 oF, an exothermic reaction, a fire, took place with the zirconium cladding around the uranium pellets. Zirconium burned, forming zirconium oxide and hydrogen gas, which then exploded and released radioactive cesium, a semi-volatile metal, to the atmosphere.
Near the plant, the radiation levels dangerously escalated to 400 milliseiverts/hour (or 40 rems/hour in U.S. parlance). Considering background is on the order of 1 milliseivert per YEAR, this means a yearly background dose every 9 seconds. Put plainly, workers at the Fukushima reactors are putting their lives in immediate jeopardy.
What is a fuel pool?
Each year a commercial reactor operates, approximately 30 tons of fuel are irradiated. Every year or year and a half, this fuel is moved to a fuel pool for safe storage. Under 20 feet of circulating and replenished water, the fuel is stored. Water shields the radioactivity and cools the fuel, which still gives off heat. If water is not resupplied, which apparently was the case at unit 4, the water levels decline, the fuel is uncovered and it overheats, leading to a hydrogen explosion.
How much cesium-137 is contained in a fuel pool?
The amount of cesium contained in the fuel pool is typically measured in curies or becquerels, but these assessments are meaningless unless you are a physicist. An easier way to look at it is in relation to the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima at the end of World War II, where 100,000 Japanese where killed. Cesium is a semi-volatile material that has been detected in the air downwind of the Fukushima reactors. How many Hiroshima bombs worth of cesium-137 are contained in the fuel pool?
In work for the State of Nevada, we estimated that 10 tons of irradiated (what the industry calls "spent") nuclear fuel was equivalent to 240 times the amount of cesium-137 released by the Hiroshima bomb. Ten tons is the amount of irradiated fuel that would be contained in a shipping container or cask used to transport the fuel. Why so much more cesium than the Hiroshima bomb? Because an atomic explosion occurs in milliseconds, but a nuclear reactor operates continuously for years. Many more fissions means much more fission products, including cesium You do the math. If Unit 4 operated for 35 years and produced 30 tons of irradiated fuel per year and each ton is equivalent to 24 times the amount of cesium-137 produced by the Hiroshima bomb, then each fuel pool could contain on the order of 24,000 times the amount of cesium-137 produced by the Hiroshima bomb, if all the produced irradiated fuel remains in the fuel pool..
This is not to say all this material will be released to the atmosphere or ocean. This is the maximum cesium-137 possible inventory at each Fukushima reactor. Each fuel pool at each Fukushima reactor also contains approximately the same amount of strontium-90 and other cancer causing materials. In addition to the fuel pools at each Fukushima reactor, a larger common fuel pool sits at ground level between two reactors in a building with windows. The damage the tsunami caused to this independent fuel pool has not been discussed by the media.
Iodine, cesium and other radionuclides can be carried downwind and inhaled. Radionuclides that land in the sea may be taken up by fish and eaten. When these cancer-causing materials are taken into the body by inhalation or ingestion, they concentrate in different organs. Cesium concentrates in muscle, strontium (like calcium) in bones, iodine in the thyroid. Once in the body, these radioactive materials continue to decay, releasing harmful gamma and beta radiation. Plutonium, also present, gives off alpha radiation. Rearranging the DNA in the human body leads to cancer. To put this in another way, a BWR reactor boils water to produce electricity by generating cancer-causing materials.
Take this out of the nuclear realm. Imagine another harmful poison, botulism. Imagine a botulism reactor, reproducing botuli fast enough to produce heat and steam to turn turbines. Then imagine having to contain these billions of botuli so the public is not harmed. This is essentially the friendly atom that has now come full circle in Japan and that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will relicense for an additional 20 years at Vermont Yankee and at 30 other Fukushima-type reactors in the United States. Fortunately, the State of Vermont has taken matters into its own hands and has decided not to allow Vermont Yankee to run past 2012..
]]>