[ RadSafe ] [Nuclear News] Turnbull says Labor waging nuclear scare campaign

[Sandy Perle]

Index:

Turnbull says Labor waging nuclear scare campaign
NRC to conduct Diablo Canyon waste review
India seeks to sell nuclear reactors to its neighbours 
Owner of Yankee Rowe fined for environmental infraction
State approves half of Duke's Cliffside plan
Lawmakers, NRC clash over Yankee
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Turnbull says Labor waging nuclear scare campaign

Federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull has attacked what he 
calls Labor's scare campaign on nuclear reactors.

The Opposition is pushing the Government to explain where nuclear 
power plants might be built if a nuclear industry is developed in 
Australia.

Prime Minister John Howard yesterday told Parliament that last year 
he spoke to Melbourne businessman Ron Walker, who is behind a new 
business called Australian Nuclear Energy.

Mr Turnbull says it is too early to discuss the location of nuclear 
sites.

"There is a scare campaign being run but people are concerned about 
all sorts of developments, people are concerned about wind farms, 
people are concerned about coal-fired power stations, naturally 
they'll be interested in what is happening in their backyard," he 
said.

"But the siting of a nuclear power station, or indeed a coal power 
station or a wind farm, has to take in a whole range of 
considerations."

He says Labor's opposition to nuclear energy casts doubt over its 
commitment to addressing the impact of climate change.

"You cannot run a modern economy on wind farms and solar panels," he 
said.

"It's a pity that you can't, but you can't. 

"Labor refuses to recognise the reality of the challenge - they panic 
about the challenge then they take the solutions off the table, for 
no reason other than their own ideology."

Democrats Senator Natasha Stott Despoja says John Howard should 
reveal more details about his conversation with Ron Walker.

Senator Stott Despoja says she wants to know more. 

"I'd like to hear the Prime Minister detail his conversation," she 
said.

"Nuclear energy and power is not currently sanctioned in this country 
and yet this is a business company that is going to invest in and 
potentially develop nuclear energy if it's allowed.

"And he's had a chat with the Prime Minister - you bet I'd like to 
know more."

Greens Senator Christine Milne says Mr Howard has more questions to 
answer over his conversation with Mr Walker.

"I'd be very interested to know about the relationships between the 
Prime Minister, the polling, the waste dump, the task force and 
nuclear reactors," she said.

"These businessmen have got access to polling companies, the same 
companies the Government uses.

"The whole thing looks very much like a little inner cabal."

Convincing public

Federal Liberal backbencher Mal Washer says the Government must act 
quickly to convince the public that nuclear power is the way forward.

"We have a lot of work to do to to allow our public to do that 
appropriately and that's going to take some time, and I think we 
should be starting now," he said.

"Let's not worry about the electoral cycle, let's start now."

Another Liberal backbencher, Russell Broadbent, says he would not 
support a nuclear power plant in his Victorian electorate.

Mr Broadbent says his electorate in the Latrobe Valley produces coal-
fired power and is not an appropriate location for a nuclear plant.


"Quite seriously, why would you put a nuclear plant that's 20 times 
dearer than clean coal, right on top of the opportunities that we 
have in Victoria?' he said.


"Yes, there are other parts of Victoria that you might put a power 
plant but you wouldn't put it in Gippsland."
-----------------

NRC to conduct Diablo Canyon waste review

ROCKVILLE, Md., Feb. 27 (UPI) -- Federal regulators have 90 days to 
study how a terrorist attack on a California nuclear plant's waste 
storage system would affect the environment. 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission set the deadline to study the 
Diablo Canyon nuclear plant's dry cask storage system in order to 
comply with a 2006 federal appeals court ruling. 

The San Luis Obispo Tribune reports the study's scope will include 
both the chance and result of a terrorist attack on the storage 
system. 

NRC spokesman Victor Dricks said he isn't sure public hearings will 
be held. The NRC ordered all info that would not pose a security risk 
be released to the public. 

The end result could mean mandatory changes to the storage system. 

Dry cask storage is used to hold the highly radioactive nuclear waste 
after it has been in cooling pools, which are nearly full. The waste 
is put into steel and concrete containers and put onto concrete pads. 

Pacific Gas & Electric, which owns Diablo Canyon, in Avila Beach, 
Calif., plans to begin storage in 2008. 

But the San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace led a coalition of groups 
who filed a lawsuit claiming the NRC erred in not taking into account 
potential terrorist attacks when conducting an environmental review 
of the dry cask storage project. 

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco agreed last June 
and, last month, the U.S. Supreme Court refused the case.
---------------

India seeks to sell nuclear reactors to its neighbours 

MUMBAI: Nuclear Power Corp of India Ltd said it is in talks to sell 
small nuclear reactors to Malaysia and other Asian nations once an 
international embargo on India's atomic technology ends. Indonesia, 
Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam are also potential customers for the 
220MW pressurised heavy water reactors, state-run Nuclear Power 
Corp´s chairman SK Jain said in a phone interview on Monday from Goa 
in western India. The model is one-quarter of the typical 1,000MW 
units deployed in industrialised nations. The UN is negotiating to 
end sanctions that bar nuclear trade with India because of its atomic 
bomb tests in 1974 and 1998. That would free Nuclear Power Corp to 
target developing countries which may deploy the smaller reactors 
developed by India to gain nuclear power at a lower cost. "We are 
trying to showcase our ability to supply this technology to a number 
of countries that want to benefit from nuclear power," Jain said. 
"It´s a matter of how long it will take before the US deal is 
finalised." India can´t sell reactors before a final agreement on its 
nuclear accord with the US and the International Atomic Energy 
Agency, the UN´s nuclear regulator. That accord would primarily be 
aimed at allowing India to purchase light-water nuclear power 
reactors of more than 1,000MW from overseas companies. The Nuclear 
Suppliers Group, a 45-nation forum dedicated to limiting the spread 
of atomic weapons, has to approve the agreement. "We are very serious 
about grabbing the export market," Jain said. The company on Monday 
announced that its third unit of 220MW at Kaiga in the southern 
Indian state of Karnataka has gone "critical," or is ready to produce 
power. Nuclear Power Corp will commission a fourth reactor at Kaiga 
in six months, Jain said. The 220MW third unit, which began producing 
power on Monday, will sell power to four states in southern India, he 
said. India has fourteen 220MW reactors. India is one of the few 
countries with expertise in smaller reactors, said Sudhinder Thakur, 
an executive director at Nuclear Power Corp. South Korea and Canada 
stopped manufacturing the small reactors two decades ago as they were 
uneconomical for large power grids, Thakur said in an interview 
yesterday. Once India gets larger 1,000MW reactors, the 220MW units 
will be uneconomical for domestic use as well, Thakur said. The 
reactors will be ideal for countries with smaller power grids, 
according to him. "The idea is a logical extension of the July 2005 
agreement," C Uday Bhaskar, an independent strategic analyst, said in 
a phone interview from New Delhi. "The agreement was about enabling 
India to enter the loop of civilian nuclear commerce even as a 
seller." Indonesia plans to open bids next year for building its 
first nuclear power plant in 2010, Research and Technology Minister 
Kusmayanto Kadiman said on December 8. The move comes as the world´s 
fourth-most populous country struggles to stave off a shortage of 
power supply. Indonesia needs an additional 16,167MW of power by 
2011, or 80% of the peak demand in 2005, according to a revised 
electricity plan by state utility PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara. 
Malaysia doesn´t have any nuclear reactors generating electricity on 
a commercial basis. The country´s peak power demand may double to 
20.09 gigawatt-hours in 2010 from 10.66 gigawatt-hours in 2005, the 
government forecasts in the Ninth Malaysia Plan.  
------------------

Owner of Yankee Rowe fined for environmental infraction
 
ROWE, Mass. The owner of the decommissioned Yankee Rowe nuclear power 
plant is fined more than ten-thousand dollars for allowing dirt to 
wash into a nearby reservoir.

The state Department of Environmental Protection says heavy rain 
washed dirt and sediment into the Sherman Reservoir last December 
first.

Yankee Atomic Electric Company notified the state of the problem and 
agreed to pay the fine.

Company spokesman Bob Capstick says the company is also installing 
erosion control systems.

Yankee Rowe shut down in 1992 although about 1,700 tons of spent 
uranium fuel remain stored at the site.

Officials say the dirt that washed into the reservoir was NOT 
contaminated by radioactive material or any other pollutant.
-----------------

State approves half of Duke's Cliffside plan

The N.C. Utilities Commission has approved only one of the two 800-
megawatt units Duke Energy Corp. wants to build at its Cliffside 
plant on the border Cleveland and Rutherford counties.
"Clearly we're disappointed," says Duke spokeswoman Paige Sheehan. 
"We thought we presented the best recommendation for our customers."

 Environmental opponents of the project warily welcomed the decision 
Wednesday afternoon.

Duke had argued for the two units, even though it has considered 
selling a half interest in the project. The company (NYSE:DUK - News) 
said it would cost more per megawatt to build just one plant. The 
economies of scale, it said, made two units the preferred and most 
efficient choice.

The commission says Duke's announced intention to sell half interest 
in the plant was a factor in its ruling. But its ruling doesn't say 
how that affected its decision to issue a certificate for only one 
unit.

The commission announced its ruling in a brief three-page order 
Wednesday afternoon. It will provide the full reasoning for the order 
soon.

The two units were estimated to cost $3 billion. According to Duke's 
testimony, the single unit will cost appreciably more than $1.5 
billion to build. The company has argued it will need more than 2,000 
megawatts of additional base-load capacity in the next 10 years to 
meet projected growth of demand in the Carolinas.

Michael Shore of N.C. Environmental Defense calls the commission's 
order a "glass-half-full" decision. "It's good that Duke was denied 
permission to build one of the plants," he says.

Jim Warren, executive director of the N.C. Waste Awareness and 
Reduction Network, has opposed building either unit. He says his 
group is deciding whether to appeal the ruling. The organization 
contends the plant is unnecessary because energy efficiency and 
alternative resources could provide the energy necessary for the 
state.

But he and Shore contend Duke could decide to abandon the project 
entirely.

By Duke's own testimony, Warren notes, the project will now be too 
expensive to meet the least-cost standard the commission generally 
encourages in power-plant construction.

Sheehan says Duke doesn't have a good estimate on how much it will 
cost to build just one plant. She says Duke will run cost models 
based on a single plant and determine whether it still makes sense to 
continue with the project. She says the decision will let Duke 
proceed with a first step in its plans to build power plants to meet 
expected growth in demand over the next decade. The utility could 
also appeal the order, but it will make no decision on that until the 
commission issues a full explanation of its ruling, Sheehan says.

Charlotte-based Duke has acknowledged a combination of gas and 
nuclear plants rings up as a lower-cost alternative. But it has 
argued the company needs a mix of generating fuels and that it is 
important to keep coal in that mix.

Shore says Duke Chief Executive Jim Rogers has already expressed the 
company's interest to proceed on making efficiency and renewable 
resources lines of profitable business for the company. Shore 
contends it makes good business sense to pursue that instead of the 
Cliffside project.

Duke launched its proposal to build the Cliffside units almost two 
years ago. At the beginning of 2006, the company estimated it would 
cost $2 billion to build the two units. Late in the summer, it raised 
its estimate to $3 billion.
--------------------

Lawmakers, NRC clash over Yankee
 
MONTPELIER - Lawmakers criticized federal energy policy for a lack of 
planning for long-term storage of nuclear waste Tuesday during a 
meeting with nuclear regulatory officials regarding Vermont Yankee's 
relicensing.

Rep. Virgina Milkey, D-Brattleboro, decried the "mumbo-jumbo" of 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission officials for not addressing the lack 
of a national storage facility for the waste in the federal agency's 
environmental review of Yankee's request to extend its operating 
license.

Milkey, who lives one town away from the 34-year-old Vernon reactor, 
said continued storage at the plant for 30 more years, which NRC 
officials have deemed safe, is unacceptable to the tens of thousands 
of people living nearby.

"I'm not convinced that facility will ever be open," Milkey said 
about the federal government's long-proposed national radioactive 
waste storage facility. "And I wonder why we're not talking about a 
moratorium until we have one."

Tuesday's special session was intended to inform southern Vermont 
legislators on the process of Yankee's request to continue operating 
for 20 years beyond 2012, when its license now expires.

Richard Emch, the NRC's senior project manager for Yankee's 
relicensing, repeated a slideshow presentation shown last month at a 
Brattleboro meeting on how the agency decided to give preliminary 
approval on its environmental review of the possible effects of 
Yankee operating until 2032.

"The preliminary review has found that the adverse environmental 
impacts of license renewal are not so great that preserving the 
option would be unreasonable," Emch said.

But the meeting in Montpelier quickly degenerated into a back-and-
forth between legislators and NRC officials regarding the lack of a 
long-term storage facility for nuclear waste. A plan to build such a 
facility at Yucca Mountain in Nevada has been delayed and now its 
fate appears in doubt. Rep. Sarah Edwards, P-Brattleboro, said it's 
irresponsible for the federal government to consider license 
extensions for nuclear power plants while "not having a fallback 
plan" for off-site storage on the highly radioactive waste.

"I wonder how you are so confident that we will overcome these 
problems," Edwards said.

NRC representatives said they are operating under the agency's policy 
that storage of the waste on site, which at Yankee will be stored in 
steel containers surrounded by concrete, is safe for 30 years. Beyond 
that, NRC officials are operating under the belief that a permanent 
home for the waste will be built in the "first quarter of this 
century."

"We've got some time," one official said.

Sen. Jeanette White, D-Windham, also found fault with part of the 
NRC's equation in determining if the license extension should be 
approved.

The 430-page draft Environmental Impact Statement used a calculation 
of 650 megawatts, the total energy output of the facility, in 
calculating how much energy from other sources would be required to 
replace Yankee.

But White pointed out that the state of Vermont only uses half of 
that energy from Yankee. The true cost of replacing that source of 
energy for Vermonters would be much lower, she said.

David Miller, a scientist with Argon National Laboratories, a group 
of consultants that participated in the NRC review, replied that the 
calculation is not site-specific, meaning the NRC sees Yankee as a 
regional power plant that sells energy to nearby states.

"That doesn't make me feel better," White said of his answer.

The Department of Energy began studying Yucca Mountain as a possible 
storage facility for spent nuclear waste in 1978. The facility is now 
scheduled to open in March 2017, but that date assumes there are no 
continued delays.

Building the facility would also require congressional approval. 
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, who has opposed the plan 
to store the waste there, told state legislators recently in that 
state that the project was "dead."
 
Sandy Perle
Senior Vice President, Technical Operations
Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc.
2652 McGaw Avenue
Irvine, CA 92614 

Tel: (949) 296-2306 / (888) 437-1714  Extension 2306
Fax:(949) 296-1144

E-Mail: sperle at dosimetry.com
E-Mail: sandyfl at cox.net 

Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/ 
Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/