Spent reactor fuel, containing roughly 85 times more long-lived radioactivity than released at Chernobyl, still sits in pools vulnerable to earthquakes.
More than a year after the Fukushima nuclear power disaster began, the news media is just beginning to grasp that the dangers to Japan and the rest of the world are far from over. After repeated warnings by former senior Japanese officials, nuclear experts, and now a U.S. senator, it's sinking in that the irradiated nuclear fuel stored in spent fuel pools amidst the reactor ruins pose far greater dangers than the molten cores. This is why:
• Nearly all of the 10,893 spent fuel assemblies sit in pools vulnerable to future earthquakes, with roughly 85 times more long-lived radioactivity than released at Chernobyl
• Several pools are 100 feet above the ground and are completely open to the atmosphere because the reactor buildings were demolished by explosions. The pools could possibly topple or collapse from structural damage coupled with another powerful earthquake.
• The loss of water exposing the spent fuel will result in overheating and can cause melting and ignite its zirconium metal cladding resulting in a fire that could deposit large amounts of radioactive materials over hundreds, if not thousands of miles.
This was not lost on Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR), who after visiting the site on April 6, wrote to Japan's U.S. ambassador, Ichiro Fujusaki, that "loss of containment in any of these pools... could result an even larger release of radiation than the nuclear accident."
The urgency of the situation is underscored by the ongoing seismic activity where 13 earthquakes of magnitude 4.0-5.7 have occurred off the northeast coast of Japan between April 14 and 17. This has been the norm since the first quake and tsunami hit the Dai-Ichi site on March 11 of last year. Larger quakes are expected closer to the power plant.
Spent nuclear fuel is extraordinarily radioactive and must be handled with great care. In a matter of seconds, an unprotected person one foot away from a single freshly removed spent fuel assembly would receive a lethal dose of radiation within seconds. As one of the most dangerous materials on the planet, spent reactor fuel requires permanent geological isolation to protect humans for thousands of years.
It's been 26 years, since the Chernobyl reactor exploded and caught fire releasing enormous amounts of radioactive debris -- seriously contaminating areas over a thousand miles away. Chernobyl revealed the folly of not having an extra barrier of thick concrete and steel surrounding the reactor core that is required for modern plants, in the U.S., Japan and elsewhere. The Fukushima Dai-Ichi accident revealed the folly of operating several nuclear power plants in a high consequence earthquake zone while storing huge amounts of highly radioactive spent fuel in vulnerable pools, high above the ground.
What both accidents have in common is widespread environmental contamination from cesium-137. With a half-life of 30, years, Cs-137 gives off penetrating radiation, as it decays and can remain dangerous for hundreds of years. Once in the environment, it mimics potassium as it accumulates in the food chain. When it enters the human body, about 75 percent lodges in muscle tissue, with, perhaps, the most important muscle being the heart.
Last week, Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) revealed plans to remove 2,274 spent fuel assemblies from the damaged reactors that will probably take at least a decade to accomplish. The first priority will be removal of the contents in Pool No. 4. This pool is structurally damaged and contains about 10 times more cesium-137 than released at Chernobyl. Removal of SNF from the No. 4 reactor is optimistically expected to begin at the end of 2013. A significant amount of construction to remove debris and reinforce the structurally-damaged reactor buildings, especially the fuel- handling areas, will be required.
Also, it is not safe to keep 1,882 spent fuel assemblies containing ~57 million curies of long-lived radioactivity, including nearly 15 times more cs-137 than released at Chernobyl in the elevated pools at reactors 5, 6, and 7, which did not experience meltdowns and explosions.
The main reason why there is so much spent fuel at the Da-Ichi site is that the plan to send it off for nuclear recycling has collapsed. It was supposed to go to the incomplete Rokkasho reprocessing plant, just south of the Fukushima nuclear site, where plutonium would be extracted as a fuel for "fast" reactors. This scheme is based on long discredited assumptions that world uranium supplies would be rapidly exhausted and that a new generation of "fast" reactors, which held the promise of making more fuel than they use, would be needed. Over the past 20 years the Rokkasho's costs have tripled along with 18 major delays. World uranium supplies are far from depleted. Moreover, in November of last year, Japan's "fast" reactor project at Monju was cancelled for cost and safety reasons -- dealing a major blow to this whole scheme.
The stark reality, if TEPCO's plan is realized, is that nearly all of the spent fuel at the Da-Ichi containing some of the largest concentrations of radioactivity on the planet will remain indefinitely in vulnerable pools. TEPCO wants to store the spent fuel from the damaged reactors in the common pool, and only to resort to dry, cask storage when the common pool's capacity is exceeded. At this time, the common pool is at 80 percent storage capacity and will require removal of SNF to make room. TEPCO's plan is to minimize dry cask storage as much as possible and to rely indefinitely on vulnerable pool storage. Sen. Wyden finds that that TEPCO's plan for remediation "carries extraordinary and continuing risk" and sensibly recommends that "retrieval of spent fuel in existing on-site spent fuel pools to safer storage... in dry casks should be a priority."
Despite the enormous destruction from the earthquake and tsunami, little attention was paid to the fact that the nine dry spent fuel casks at the Fukushima Da-Ichi site were unscathed. This is an important lesson we cannot afford to ignore.
Posted on May 16, 2012
By Will Davis
In recent days, a number of articles have been printed that assert that a grave danger exists at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear generating station. These articles claim that this danger exists due to the condition of the spent nuclear fuel at the site and the supposedly shaky condition of its storage and care. Two examples:
“The Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Is Far From Over” by Robert Alvarez
“Fukushima Daiichi Site: Cesium-137 is 85 times greater than at Chernobyl Accident” by Akio Matsumura
These articles are highly deceptive. The occurrence of a cataclysmic release of radioactive material as surmised is hinged upon the occurrence of so many statistically impossible events that it is certain to be a practical impossibility.
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2012/05/16/spent-fuel-at-fukushima-not-dangerous/
Setting the Record Straight on the Spent Fuel Pool at Fukushima Daiichi Unit #4
At the end of April, former Department of Energy official Robert Alvarez sounded the alarm about the safety of the spent fuel pool at Fukushima Daiichi Unit #4 (click here for his piece from the Huffington Post). Here at NEI, we've long been familiar with Alvarez's position on the disposition of used nuclear fuel, and it's safe to say that not only do we disagree with his assessment, we also believe that it is needlessly alarmist.
We're not the only ones who have said that, something that's become abundantly clear in recent weeks as independent bloggers have decided to take on Alvarez on their own initiative. The first to step to the plate was Dan Yurman of Idaho Samizdat:
One of his (Alvarez's) favorite rhetorical strategies is to total up the mass of material at a nuclear site and then make the assumption that all of it will blow up through some mysterious and unspecified mechanism spewing its contents far and wide. This is a great stuff for a B- movie on the SciFi channel, like an imaginative idea for a script of Mega-Shark meets Atomic Octopus, but it doesn't match reality.
http://neinuclearnotes.blogspot.com/2012/05/setting-record-straight-on-spent-fuel.html
see
http://flyingcuttlefish.wordpress.com/2012/05/19/breaking-5-9-quake-near-fukushima/
(last graphic on the post)
On 3/11; 15 Nuclear Reactors In Japan Were Damaged, Not 3 or 4
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/14-nuclear-reactors-at-4-japan-sites.html
Atucha Nuclear Reactor Taken Over By Terrorists; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/04/atucha-nuclear-reactor-taken-over-by.html
Super Solar Storm To Hit Earth In 2013 'Carrington Effect'; 400 Nuke Plants Will Melt Down/Explode; via A Green Road Blog
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2012/03/super-solar-storm-predicted-to-hit-2013.html
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/
For those who would like a less sensationalized perspective, i recommend the following article from Scientific American, written one year after the man-made disaster at Fukushima, which points out that stress and heart conditions pose a greater health threat to the population of Fukushima prefecture than radiation.
It is wise to first consider than no deaths - as in zero - have resulted from radiation poisoning in Japan following the tsunami at Fukushima Daiichi.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=japans-post-fukushima-earthquake-health-woes-beyond-radiation
358 million cancers from nuclear bomb production and testing.
9.7 million cancers from bomb and plant accidents.
6.6 million cancers from the "routine discharges" of nuclear power plants.
As many as 175 million of these cancers could be fatal.
Rosalie Bertell
We have 8M cancer deaths per year, so another 6M over 50 years is 2%, easily missed by epidemiological studies.
Nuclear power grew out of the super secrete nuke bomb project. Nukes bombs became the most powerful and important weapons of all time. Thus the incredible power that nuke companies working with the military have to suppress evidence and protest. Even to the point of corrupting the W.H.O.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Health_Organization#IAEA_.E2.80.93_Agreement_WHA_12.E2.80.9340
Yet the pro nukers here have all claimed zero deaths from nuclear power. That should also tell you how desperate they are to deny the cancers.
(NaturalNews) This is, without question, the most important article I've ever penned, because it discusses the idea that the human race is being destroyed in the name of science.
Stopping these "scientists" from destroying our world and our civilization must become our top priority if we hope to survive.
The entire Northern hemisphere is now imminently threatened by a massive, "global killer" radiation release from failing Fukushima reactor No. 4. (http://www.naturalnews.com/035789_Fukushima_Cesium-137_Plume-Gate.htm...). Our world is right now just one earthquake away from a radiological apocalypse........
http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com/
Ambassador Murata writes to UN Secretary General:
“It is no exaggeration to say that the fate of Japan and the whole world depends on No. 4 reactor”
http://enenews.com/ambassador-murata-writes-secretary-general-exaggeration-fate-japan-world-depends-4-reactor-appeals-independent-assessment-team/comment-page-1#comment-230805
Here is an excerpt from "Atomic Insights"
My fervent hope is that it will cause at least a few reporters to check their sources more carefully before crowning them with the title of “nuclear energy expert.”
I also hope at least a few people slept just a little more soundly knowing that their fears were being irrationally stimulated by a music major dropout who has been milking an antinuclear gig for a couple of decades.
http://atomicinsights.com/2012/05/adam-curry-exposes-robert-alvarezs-fukushima-spent-fuel-pool-fable-on-no-agenda.html
And they have been proven wrong about the triple meltdown, which they said after 3/11/11would not ever happen!
Sorry about that... Better re-check YOUR sources!
You think the Japanese Ambassador is a flak too? He calls is a world crisis.
Nuclear power accounts for roughly 20 percent of total US energy and 16 percent of energy worldwide. And although nuclear isn't perfect, it possesses features that no other current energy source has.
“It's the only form of power generation in the world that is low cost, large-scale, reliable and emissions-free,” says Adnani. “There's just no credible alternative to that.”
Additionally, the dangers of dealing with nuclear waste are relatively small and far more manageable than the constant dumping of CO2 into the atmosphere from burning other fossil fuels.
Uranium is one of the most abundant minerals on the Earth's crust, and the U.S. has the largest uranium reserves in the world. “Peak uranium” is not a concern; it's all about economics and establishing the right price to ensure necessary supplies.
http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/U.S.-Nuclear-Industry-Must-Find-Vast-Supplies-of-Uranium-before-Next-Year.html
Re: "Additionally, the dangers of dealing with nuclear waste are relatively small"
Oh sure Fukushima's impact is small
What Nuclear Baloney!
Nuclear power has killed 6 million people or so from it's "emissions free" radiation emissions.
Waste bio fuels can easily backup solar and wind for a 24/7, safe clean, cheaper, faster to install forever solution to the world energy needs.
Nuclear power will be out of fuel in 60 years at current use rates, and 6 years if all our energy came from it.
Cheaper high grade uranium ore is already so scarce they are mining the grand canyon for it.
http://world-nuclear.org/info/inf09.html