I work at a nuclear power plant much closer to sea level than most of the nuclear plants in the United States. We have sealed vaults to protect some of the important pumps closer to sea level. The majority of the plant is clear of 70' above sea level. If we had a tsunami that high, then we there would be SUCH great death and destruction that our shutdown nuclear power plant would be a drop in a huge bucket. In fact, the same thing is true of Fukushima. (Did you actually read the WSJ article? If so, then you know that the deaths due to radiation exposure is far less than 10 percent of the deaths due to the tsunami itself.)
I don't have blinders on, I am not "bought and paid for" or a "corporate sellout". In fact I am a technician making hourly wages. I have to study all kinds of changes in power plant design and construction over the years, most of them due to problems that have occurred in power plants both in the US and in other countries (dozens of incidents contribute to improvements, not just three mile island). Thus we have redundancies in safety pumps, electrical buses, diesel generators, etc. The goal is that multiple failures will not result in catastrophe during a "design basis accident" (a kind of worse-case scenario).
All that being said, Fukushima was an eye-opening catastrophe. And TEPCO's response was deplorable. The American nuclear power industry is required to change available equipment and facilities and re-evaluate how emergency plans would be implemented in the case of an extended loss of off-site power (along with multiple failures of redundant diesel generators). And lack of plant access due to a natural disaster is now a part of our worst-case scenario planning. Just as security has responded (to the nth degree!) to possible terrorist threats, Emergency Planning is responding to possible natural disasters on the scale of Fukushima.
I don't think I will reassure those who say "We don't know or cannot measure the full effects of the leakage". I can say that controversy and conflict are much more interesting, exciting, newsworthy, and dramatic than realism and facts. And I know that outrage and adrenaline can be addictive.
I just gotta say there are people who fall down a flight of stairs to avoid something with a radioactive material sticker on it (this happened in the Navy, where the stairs are more like ladders). The guy was lucky he survived, no kidding. And the radioactive material was in transit and contained less curie content than a bag of fertilizer.
So, just in case you are still interested in the truth, then here it is, paraphrased and simplified: Other factors being equal, airline pilots are more likely to have occupational-related cancer than nuclear power plant workers. People who live in Denver (the mile-high city) receive a higher annual whole-body dose than the average US nuclear power plant worker. Smokers -- well do I really have to say it??
Groundwater contamination is a problem, radioactive waste leakage into the ocean is a problem, the cancellation of Yucca Mountain waste repository is a problem. (Utilities who contributed millions of dollars for the construction of Yucca Mountain are now having to arrange storage of used fuel on their own plantsites at great expense, and requiring increased security measures).
But if you want a little perspective, then consider the role of alcohol in murders, suicides, and accidental deaths. Less widespread --I mean less pervasive than the role of alcohol in all sorts of deaths-- and relatively less risky would be auto accidents in general. Somewhere around here (maybe more risky than auto accidents) would be lifestyle choices that lead to heart disease and obesity. (I am avoiding any introspection at this point). The agricultural, mining, and oil supply and refinery industries are the biggest occupational hazards (as I understand it). Demographically, some urban residents are quite likely to die of a gunshot wound.... I think that would be somewhere around here. Then as the relative risk continues to go down, we have accidental deaths at the home, infections contracted at hospitals, encounters with animals and snakes, recreational activities (this might be variable depending on the type of activity, eh?), choking and drowning, contracting a disease from an illegal immigrant -- oops did I really write that??? -- and then maybe something like being struck by lightning. Finally (deal with it, liberals) accidental gun deaths. Yes, they are indeed more rare than dying of being struck by lightning, no kidding.
So.... not that I am getting ready to go to the gym ... if you want to worry maybe we should all consider worrying about something we have control over!
The human performance standards, licensing and procedures, regulatory oversight, continuous "operating experience" lessons learned, security measures and screening of personnel, multiple and redundant control and safety systems including automatic shutdown designs, and a comprehensive plan for emergencies that includes power plant corporate leadership as well as local, state, and federal authorities, are all part of making a nuclear power plant safe -- YES, safe enough to live next to!
I will tell you what I tell my wife: if an emergency evacuation is declared due to the nuclear power plant 10 miles away, lock the doors and STAY INSIDE!! Windows can be open if you wish, but you might want to lock them due to possible looters. Do not get in the car and do not travel on the roads. The nuclear power plant is NOT a threat compared to the evacuation chaos, panic, and stupidity.
You life could depend on understanding relative risks, and knowing what an appropriate response would be in various circumstances.
"Careful with that axe, Eugene."
You said:
(Did you actually read the WSJ article? If so, then you know that the deaths due to radiation exposure is far less than 10 percent of the deaths due to the tsunami itself.)
________________________________________________________
The death toll has only begun. Chernobyl is still effectively destroying quality of life and killing 20 plus years after the explosion and will continue to do so for many years.
Portions of the true toll from Fukushima are suppressed, the yet are still to come. It’s unethical for nuke industry personnel to falsely present the hazards and losses.
The tsunami was an unavoidable natural event which had been predicted to occur and TEPCO ignored the warnings, as was their habit. The melt-throughs were avoidable.
_________________________________________________________
You said:
The goal is that multiple failures will not result in catastrophe during a “design basis accident” (a kind of worse-case scenario).
_________________________________________________________
You missed the goal 3 times in one day, didn’t you? And now there is no way to contain or repair the ongoing disaster. Nuke plants promise more safety than they can deliver when they are in the planning and start-up phases. It’s only after the disasters that they portray safety as an honorable “goal” rather than a solemn promise.
_________________________________________________________
You said:
All that being said, Fukushima was an eye-opening catastrophe. And TEPCO’s response was deplorable.
_________________________________________________________
I will possibly develop a molecule of respect for the US nuclear power industry when they make this statement formally in the public eye. But when I went to the US agency after Fukushima, I saw double speak implying that the “little event” in Japan was going to make it harder to train the “stupid cattle” (that would be the tax paying public) that nuclear power is 100% safe. Yes, while the reactors were still steaming the agency was designing it’s next propaganda campaign.
_______________________________________________________
You said:
The American nuclear power industry is required to change available equipment and facilities and re-evaluate how emergency plans would be implemented in the case of an extended loss of off-site power (along with multiple failures of redundant diesel generators). And lack of plant access due to a natural disaster is now a part of our worst-case scenario planning. Just as security has responded (to the nth degree!) to possible terrorist threats, Emergency Planning is responding to possible natural disasters on the scale of Fukushima.
______________________________________________________
Too little, too late. Or haven’t you noticed?
The US industry is every bit as deceptive as TEPCO and the Japanese government. YOu failed to mention that after Fukushima, 25% of US nuke plants reported that they, too, had excessive amounts of nuclear fuel stored above reactors and urgently requested funds to remedy this little problem. It really doesn’t help to know that after explosions and meltdowns, the power companies can always decide to improve upon design and ask for money. Really.
_______________________________________________________
You said:
I can say that controversy and conflict are much more interesting, exciting, newsworthy, and dramatic than realism and facts. And I know that outrage and adrenaline can be addictive.
_______________________________________________________
This is repulsive. You think we like watching what’s happening, begging officials to respond, being ignored by the government and the industry they prop up? I am watching the future be radioactively contaminated and you suggest I am havin’ some fun, eh?
________________________________________________________
You said:
I just gotta say there are people who fall down a flight of stairs to avoid something with a radioactive material sticker on it (this happened in the Navy, where the stairs are more like ladders). The guy was lucky he survived, no kidding. And the radioactive material was in transit and contained less curie content than a bag of fertilizer.
_________________________________________________________
So is the vast quantities of radioactive waste pouring out of Fukushima for over 2 years now greater, or less than the amount of radiation in a bag of fertilizer. You are being deceptive. Since the bag of fertilizer doesn’t require nuke labeling and the radioactive material being transported with a label does - there was a medical/scientific/functional difference between the two sources which made one a hazard requiring a label. Overacting citizens of these United States do not determine what receives a transportation label on Navy ships. You are being deceptive or you can’t tell the difference between radioactive materials and manure.
______________________________________________________
You said:
So, just in case you are still interested in the truth, then here it is, paraphrased and simplified: Other factors being equal, airline pilots are more likely to have occupational-related cancer than nuclear power plant workers. People who live in Denver (the mile-high city) receive a higher annual whole-body dose than the average US nuclear power plant worker. Smokers — well do I really have to say it??
_______________________________________________________
Airline pilots can choose to accept the risks of external radiation re flight. We, the US citizens downwind of 3 molten open reactor sites do not have have this choice - the nuke power industry took all choice away from this.
Please open a book this weekend and read about the differences between the external exposure to radiation and breathing/eating/drinking radioactive isotopes. Big difference. I really wish the nuclear power industry would invest in professional training for its employees - I should not have to explain the basics to them. Uniformly, they demonstrate no comprehension of the health risks in various forms of exposure to radiation. Denver is an example of external radiation (thin atmosphere admitting more radiation from the sun)and eating/breathing hot particles from Fukushima is not comparable.
_______________________________________________________
You said:
Groundwater contamination is a problem, radioactive waste leakage into the ocean is a problem, the cancellation of Yucca Mountain waste repository is a problem. (Utilities who contributed millions of dollars for the construction of Yucca Mountain are now having to arrange storage of used fuel on their own plantsites at great expense, and requiring increased security measures).
________________________________________________________
THese are not equal, why try to compare incompetence and lies of the nuclear power industry to the social activism of those who have learned the hard way not to trust the nuclear power industries promises? You know that fire at LLL? Remember reading about above ground casks of radioactive waste being exposed to the fires and the conjecturing that they were not meant to withstand such conditions? How dare the public pay attention and protest the actions of the nuke industry! Why the nuke industry is a GOD and never lies. NEVER!
______________________________________________________
You said:
But if you want a little perspective, then consider the role of alcohol in murders, suicides, and accidental deaths. Less widespread —I mean less pervasive than the role of alcohol in all sorts of deaths— and relatively less risky would be auto accidents in general. Somewhere around here (maybe more risky than auto accidents) would be lifestyle choices that lead to heart disease and obesity. (I am avoiding any introspection at this point). The agricultural, mining, and oil supply and refinery industries are the biggest occupational hazards (as I understand it). Demographically, some urban residents are quite likely to die of a gunshot wound.... I think that would be somewhere around here. Then as the relative risk continues to go down, we have accidental deaths at the home, infections contracted at hospitals, encounters with animals and snakes, recreational activities (this might be variable depending on the type of activity, eh?), choking and drowning, contracting a disease from an illegal immigrant — oops did I really write that??? — and then maybe something like being struck by lightning. Finally (deal with it, liberals) accidental gun deaths. Yes, they are indeed more rare than dying of being struck by lightning, no kidding.
___________________________________________________
Gun shot wounds, snakes, smoking, drowning are all pathetic comparisons because Fukushima and it’s brethren will contaminat, maim and kill for generations. These stupid comparison hazards are not generational and born upon the wind and the ocean and land where they will remain hazardous for generations. Someone struck by lightning has little to fear that his offspring will all be struck by lightning.
Chernobyl has resulted in generations of people living their entire lives in contaminated zones and suffering for it, raising their children, their grand children in it because there is no place for those people to live that isn’t contaminated.
___________________________________________________
You said:
So.... not that I am getting ready to go to the gym ... if you want to worry maybe we should all consider worrying about something we have control over!
___________________________________________________
We tax paying, voting citizens should have control over the abuses of the industry our taxes pay for. That was the promise of America - representation. In truth, Fukushima and other disasters past and future are 100% avoidable by the greedy sociopathic liars in the nuke industry. Lightning, not so much.
____________________________________________________
You said:
The human performance standards, licensing and procedures, regulatory oversight, continuous “operating experience” lessons learned, security measures and screening of personnel, multiple and redundant control and safety systems including automatic shutdown designs, and a comprehensive plan for emergencies that includes power plant corporate leadership as well as local, state, and federal authorities, are all part of making a nuclear power plant safe — YES, safe enough to live next to!
_____________________________________________________
I heard all those empty promises after Chernobyl and before 3 nuke plants lost containment and continue to pour contaminants into our atmosphere to this day. Someone said that the newest and safest nuke plant ever was now being built in the US and I should find out about it before I questioned the safety of reactors blah blah blah. Well, I tried to find out about it but when I found it on the web I discovered that during construction of the plan, buiding was halted to address a design flaw. The structure around the containment structure was open to the sky and someone thought maybe it should be fully enclosed, in case, you know, something happened.
Nuke plants aren’t safe enough to live next to. When something goes wrong, like 3 mile Island, you are called liars if you point out that your new 50 year roof was eaten through overnight by iodine rain, leaving tinted puddles on your back porch. The insurer for nuke plants is the US and they don’t plan on paying anybody anything.
I saw a chart made of breast cancer patients in the US and the cases were clearly clustered around nuke plants. The same kind of chart was drawn in the UK for leukemia. Nuke plants are authorized to release radioactive gasses (off gassing) as a normal part of operations. THere are limits and rules but they are permitted to burp these radioactive gasses from the plants because the Nuke Power industry insists there is a safe limit below which exposure is harmless. This is why they insist there is a safe threshold, they have to be able to release radioactive gasses regularly. Now, the National Academy Of Sciences BEIR VII report, which is state of the art research into low level exposure to radiation, proves once again (builds on prior research proving) that there is no threshold below which exposure to ionizing radiation is harmless. That’s why the nuke industry hates the BEIR VII report. I’ve had pro nukers shout in all caps that the report is false but they have nothing but assertion to back up their claims. And capital letters. yeah...real convincing
_____________________________________________________
YOu said:
I will tell you what I tell my wife: if an emergency evacuation is declared due to the nuclear power plant 10 miles away, lock the doors and STAY INSIDE!! Windows can be open if you wish, but you might want to lock them due to possible looters. Do not get in the car and do not travel on the roads. The nuclear power plant is NOT a threat compared to the evacuation chaos, panic, and stupidity.
_____________________________________________________
Well during Chernobyl and Fukushima, officials never told citizens to stay inside until significant exposure had occurred. Even afterwards, Japan would not advise people in areas to stay inside. Once a disaster happens - the first priority of nuke officials is to keep the populace from finding out what has been inflicted upon them.
Staying inside might have spared those who fled, unknowingly, in the direction of the radioactive plume released by Fukushima. SPEEDI emulation data was available but according to TEPCO “We did not feel like releasing this information.”
Staying indoors would reduce exposure compared with being outside but after 3 days or so, the air outside has equalized with the air inside and no further protection results unless it is to avoid rain or dust contamination. The nuke industry brags about its public warning systems and protections and then never uses them once a disaster occurs because it would be proof that there are hazards and liability.
_________________________________________________________
You said:
You life could depend on understanding relative risks, and knowing what an appropriate response would be in various circumstances.
_________________________________________________________
Yes. But the nuclear power industry, with the help of the government, will keep necessary information from us by claiming we’d just panic anyway. A design flaw believed to be the basis of the loss of containment (something along the lines of pressure backwash)in Fukushima was described in a confidential memo among nuke industry insiders years before the disaster. Don’t know how big a role this played but I do know that nothing was done to address the flaw nor was the public made aware. The public will never have the information they need to protect themselves because they would object and nuke industry people call public objections “panic.”
______________________________________________________
You said:
“Careful with that axe, Eugene.”
_______________________________________________________
The public is not failing or careless. The nuclear power industry is the one abusing the public trust and failing. Check the east coast of Japan to see what I mean.