[ RadSafe ] [Nuclear News] French radiation overdose scandal widerthan thought

Sat Sep 8 23:50:30 CDT 2007

About French radiation overdose scandal wider than thought:

To those interested in a more complete article in French, GO TO the site
http://www.tv5.org/TV5Site/info/afp_article.php?idrub=15&xml=070907174527.amce05j5.xml
Accident de radiothérapie d'Epinal: 300 nouveaux cas identifiés
NANCY (AFP) - 07/09/2007 17h45

Jose Julio Rozental
joseroze at netvision.net.il
Israel

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sandy Perle" <sandyfl at cox.net>
To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>; <powernet at hps1.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 08, 2007 12:04 AM
Subject: [ RadSafe ] [Nuclear News] French radiation overdose scandal 
widerthan thought

Index:

French radiation overdose scandal wider than thought
Flood of new nuclear reactors expected
Putin Gets A Nuclear Boost Down Under
Groups pull out of nuclear debate
Conservationists call for investigation into nuclear waste leak
Nuclear industry does not fear competition from gas
Welch calls for safety review of aging nuclear reactors
Four nuclear plants planned in Thailand
-----------------------------------------------------------------

French radiation overdose scandal wider than thought

NANCY, France (AFP) Sept 7 - The number of people given overdoses of
radiation at a cancer treatment centre in northeast France is much
higher than previously thought following the discovery of 300 new
cases, Health Minister Roselyne Bachelot said Friday.

A total of 721 men suffering from prostate cancer are now known to
have received excessive amounts of radiation due to a calibration
error at the Epinal general hospital between 1999 and 2006. Twenty-
four were seriously affected and five of these have died.

When the scandal was first revealed earlier this year, only 421 cases
were identified.

Health authorities are trying to contact the estimated 4,500 patients
who were treated at the centre.
--------------------

Flood of new nuclear reactors expected

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. (AP) Sept 7 - Federal regulators, girding for
explosive growth in the nuclear power industry, say they are weeks
away from an anticipated flood of license applications for new
reactors not seen since the 1970s.

"There are a lot of challenges for new construction," said Bill
Borchardt, director of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's newly
created Office of New Reactors. "And a lot of challenges for the
NRC."

The independent regulatory agency expects to receive new fast-tracked
combined construction and operating license applications for as many
as 29 reactors at 20 sites, most in the South, over the next three
years.

The first could come as early as Oct. 1, the start of the federal
fiscal year.

"We have never had to do this many reviews at one time in parallel
with an office that has only existed for less than 12 months,"
Borchardt said Thursday at the NRC's reactor training center in
Chattanooga.

"Nobody thinks this is going to be easy."

Borchardt has hired more than 400 inspectors, engineers and examiners
to handle the load. Ultimately, the power companies will be billed
for their time. The office is nearly as large as the NRC unit
overseeing the country's existing 104 commercial reactor fleet.

Growing electricity demand, energy supply security concerns and
greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels are driving a nuclear
revival in this country after a three-decade chill. Improvements in
nuclear operating experience and efficiency have also played a role,
Borchardt said.

Some of the power companies expected to file soon for new reactors
include the Tennessee Valley Authority, as part of the NuStart group
for its Bellefonte site in Alabama; Duke Energy, for its Lee Station
in South Carolina; NRG Energy, for its South Texas Project; Dominion
Energy, for the North Anna site in Virginia; Southern Co., for its
Vogtle plant in Georgia; and South Carolina Electric & Gas, for its
Summer station.

Most want to begin construction in five to six years and be online by
2015 to 2020, Borchardt said.

All are looking to use advanced reactor designs, which the NRC is
working to approve in advance in standardized form to hurry along the
process.

Two of five most likely designs already have been certified by the
NRC. The others are either under review or expected to be submitted
by year's end.

The new reactors are expected to have significant safety improvements
over current boiling-water and pressurized-water designs in today's
U.S. reactors.

They will have multiple independent systems to cool reactor cores in
an emergency, multiple backup power systems, digital control rooms
and more passive systems to open and close valves automatically by
gravity or water flow, to reduce human error.

The reactors also will have enhanced post-9/11 security features,
including hardened concrete exteriors that can better withstand the
shock of events such as an airplane strike.

And to keep reactors on the fast track, most will incorporate modular
construction with large parts - the reactor vessel, for instance -
made in other locations, such as Japan. Some large components already
are being ordered, Borchardt said.

Using standardized design and modular construction "allows General
Electric to (be able) to claim that they can construct from first
concrete to reactor critical - an entire power plant - in
approximately 36 months," NRC reactor technology instructor Richard
DeVercelly said.

That's about how long it took to build two new reactors in Japan that
use an advanced boiling-water design that the NRC has certified for
U.S. power companies, he said.

By comparison, TVA took five years alone to rebuild and restart its
oldest reactor at the Browns Ferry station in Alabama, which returned
to service this year.

"It is pretty clear that the plants will be built more rapidly (and)
are going to make extensive use of modular construction," Borchardt
said. "One of the great lessons from the 1960s and 1970s is that you
do a much better job if you can design them before you start building
them. (That's true) whether you are building a house or anything
else."
-------------------

Putin Gets A Nuclear Boost Down Under

LONDON - Despite his government's less-than-stellar record on human
rights Russian President Vladimir Putin has built a following among
his country's voters. And its not just due to those photos of him
fishing shirtless that have grabbed the electorate's imagination, but
his very public efforts to further Russian interests internationally.

His latest coup came Friday, after the Australian prime minister John
Howard said his country agreed to sell uranium to Russia for nuclear
power generation, on condition that the material was not then sold to
Iran.

"Any uranium that is sold to Russia will be sold under very strict
safeguards," said Howard after a meeting with Putin in Sydney,
according to the BBC. The meeting took place ahead of a summit of
Pacific Rim leaders, who included President George W. Bush.

Though the use of nuclear power is currently forbidden under
Australian law, the country controls approximately 40.0% of the
world's uranium reserves.

"It's a very significant deal for Russia," said Mikhail Stiskin, an
analyst at Russian investment bank Troika Dialog.

Russia has been trying to rapidly expand its nuclear power industry.
One way the nation has done this is by forming Atomenergoprom, a
state holding company, which brought the entire nuclear sector in
Russia under one umbrella, in July. The company is responsible for
everything nuclear in Russia, from uranium extraction and reactor
development to disposal and decommissioning.

By boosting its nuclear industry, the country is hoping to free more
of its natural gas for export and profit.

The country has tried to rapidly expand its nuclear power industry.
Nuclear power currently accounts for 16.0% of electricity generated
in Russia, though the country hopes to increase to 25.0%.

Russia's own domestic production of uranium--which is far outstripped
by demand--could threaten its ability to reach this target, however.

"Uranium production is the weakest link in Russia's plans to expand
its nuclear energy industry," said Stiskin. "We have pretty abundant
uranium resources, but they are largely under-explored."

The country requires between 14 to 15 kilo tons of uranium a year to
satisfy both home demand and foreign contracts, but only produces 3.2
kilo tons domestically.

The deal could have wider significance, in terms of Russia and
Australia's relationship.

"This contract signifies much wider cooperation in the field of
nuclear energy. For example it could lead to the construction of
Russian nuclear power plants in Australia," said Stiskin. He added
that though the use of nuclear energy is currently prohibited in
Australia, there were chances that the legislation could soon be
changed.

Coming less than a month after Putin announced that Russian bombers
would be resuming long-range patrols, the latest development has
fuelled concern's about the country's aggressive foreign policy.
Speaking at the meeting with Howard, Putin stressed that the deal was
an economic one, however.
------------------

Groups pull out of nuclear debate

The government is in favour of more nuclear power stations
Environmental groups have pulled out of a consultation on whether the
UK should build nuclear power stations, saying it is not a "fair and
full debate". Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth are among those
unhappy with the way the government has presented the arguments.

They had already won a High Court ruling that a previous consultation
was "seriously flawed" and "misleading".

Business and Enterprise Secretary John Hutton said he would be
"extremely disappointed" if the groups pulled out.

Public meetings are being held across the UK on Saturday, on the
principle of including nuclear power as part of Britain's energy mix,
but a coalition of groups has withdrawn its support.

It is up to the government to decide, is it going to carry out a
proper public consultation or not?

Most existing nuclear power stations are due to close by 2023 and the
government has said its "preliminary view" is that new stations
should be built - to reduce carbon emissions and Britain's reliance
on foreign oil and gas imports.

Environmental groups say that the consultation, rather than
presenting a "fair and full public debate", was more about promoting
nuclear power.

John Sauven, from Greenpeace, told BBC News: "It is up to the
government to decide, is it going to carry out a proper public
consultation or not?

"Their own advisers have told them that this consultation should last
for nine months, it should put all the information before the public,
and they have been very critical of the way it is currently being
carried out."

'Stitch-up'

The environmental organisations have formed a coalition, and branded
the consultation process a "public relations stitch-up".

Friends of the Earth said it would not be sending representatives to
the meetings, and that it would make its case officially to the
government.

Earlier this year Greenpeace successfully challenged a previous
consultation on the issue at the High Court arguing it had been "a
sham".

It is possible that the government might change its view

The judge granted a quashing order and the government began the new
consultation.

Mr Hutton said the government had made a preliminary view about the
nuclear issue but did not have a "closed mind".

"It is possible that the government might change its view," he said,
but told the BBC it would take a "very, very strong" argument to
persuade them to reduce the "nuclear element in the energy mix".

'Long-term interests'

A spokesman for his department later said time was "pressing" as most
power stations were due to close within decades.

He added: "John Hutton is clear that whatever decision the government
finally makes, it is absolutely in the national interest that we make
a decision and urgently - our livelihoods and the future health of
the planet depend on us getting this right.

"That is why he thinks it is so regrettable that Greenpeace's tactics
seem to be to do everything they possibly can do to delay and
undermine the process of consultation that they themselves
demanded.''

But Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell said he understood
concerns about the "deeply flawed consultation".

"The government has failed to observe the spirit of the High Court
ruling, by making up its mind on nuclear power long before this
latest consultation had even begun," he said.

The government's Energy White Paper on the future of power supplies
in the UK also backs renewable energy and efficiency measures.
------------------

Conservationists call for investigation into nuclear waste leak

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) Sept 7 - Some conservation groups and lawmakers
called Thursday for an investigation of South Carolina's
environmental agency because of concerns that information about a
nuclear waste leak at a Barnwell County facility was not properly
disclosed.

Conservationists also are seeking the release of the state Department
of Health and Environmental Control's pollution records about Chem-
Nuclear's low-level atomic waste landfill.

"We are tired of a DHEC which shrinks from taking on polluting
industries," said Ann Timberlake, director of the Conservation Voters
of South Carolina. "We are tired of our regulators appearing as
enablers and defenders" of industries.

Tritium levels in wells beneath the site have registered as above
federal standards for safe drinking water, but DHEC has said that the
material hasn't tainted drinking wells. Members of a committee
debating the site's future were told earlier this year that there had
been a tritium leak in the past, but Chem-Nuclear officials said it
had been "caught in time."

"This isn't a little issue," said Rep. Joan Brady, R-Columbia, a
member of the panel that voted to allow the site to accept waste from
only South Carolina, New Jersey and Connecticut beginning next July.
"This is about public safety. This is about public health. This is
about drinking water."

Chem-Nuclear has been trying to reduce the tritium leaks by closing
landfill trenches to keep rainwater out of burial pits and is using
synthetic liners above some trenches to repel rainwater that would
leach through the nuclear garbage into groundwater, DHEC officials
have said.

State Attorney General Henry McMaster has also called for tougher
groundwater monitoring standards at the site, pressing DHEC to
enforce federal standards. The site has operated since 1971 under
Nuclear Regulatory Commission standards without consideration of
benchmarks set by the Environmental Protection Agency.
------------------

Nuclear industry does not fear competition from gas

LONDON, Sept 7 (Reuters) - The nuclear power industry in the United
States will stay cost competitive against natural gas as long as gas
prices stay above $3 per million British thermal units, senior
nuclear officials told a conference this week.
"Gas in $3 to 4 per million BTU (British thermal units) is probably a
market when we start to compete," President and CEO Steve Tritch at
Westinghouse Electric told the World Nuclear Association's annual
Symposium.

Today 16 percent of global energy supply comes from nuclear power,
but with world demand for electricity expected to double by 2030,
energy from nuclear as well as other sources would have to increase,
Tritch told the London audience.

On the New York Mercantile Exchange, October natural gas traded at
$5.54 per million BTU on Friday.

Henry Hub natural gas futures have held above $5 all year, according
to Reuters data.

"If we look at some of the recent prices of gas we feel our plants
will be extremely competitive," Tritch said.

Westinghouse Electric, mainly owned by Japan's Toshiba Corporation ,
supplies fuel as well as building reactors. Its technology is found
in 60 percent of U.S. nuclear power plants.

Westinghouse has operations in 12 states and 14 countries with annual
sales of approximately $1.8 billion.

HIGH URANIUM COSTS

Uranium prices hit a record of $136 in June and spot uranium was
trading around $90 per pound this week.

But that has only a limited impact on the competitiveness of nuclear
energy because very little is required to produce large amounts of
power.

According to the Paris-based Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), the cost of
uranium represents only 5 percent of the total cost of generating
nuclear electricity.

The costs related to the fuel cycle (including purchasing,
converting, enriching uranium and disposing of spent fuel) represent
about 15 percent of total costs, the NEA said.

By contrast, the cost of gas represents 76 percent of the total cost
of electricty generation.

Gas prices for U.S. futures have averaged around $7 this year,
hitting a low of just above $5 in August and a peak of around $8 in
April, according to Reuters data.

French nuclear technology group Areva's President and CEO of Nuclear
NP Luc Oursel predicted gas prices will rise rather than fall.

"We don't see why...the gas price will come down," he said.

He said the cost of offsetting the carbon emissions associated with
burning gas would ultimately push U.S. prices higher, on the
assumption the United States would adopt a carbon trading scheme, as
has already happened on European markets.

Nuclear power stations do not produce the carbon emissions blamed for
global warming.
-------------------

Welch calls for safety review of aging nuclear reactors

VERNON (AP) - Congressman Peter Welch has joined Sen. Bernie Sanders
in calling for extensive safety reviews of older nuclear power plants
following two incidents at Vermont Yankee that have shaken public
faith in the Vernon reactor.

Under the bill, governors would be allowed to seek independent review
of the plants in their state or adjacent states when the reactors
seek power upgrades or new licenses.

Federal regulators gave Vermont Yankee a passing grade for safety in
a recent inspection, before the two recent incidents.

On August 21st, a cooling tower collapse prompted Vermont Yankee to
cut power in half, and nine days later, the plant automatically shut
down, apparently because of lack of grease in a bearing that is part
of a large motor-operated valve. It has since resumed making power.
------------------

Four nuclear plants planned in Thailand

Thailand ´s energy minister said Friday that his country wants to
build at least four nuclear power plants - in an attempt to offset
dependence on imported oil and gas.

Energy Minister Piyasvasti Amranand said he envisioned the first,
4,000 megawatt nuclear plant becoming operational by 2020 and that as
many as four would likely built to make them cost effective.

"In the long-run, we have to look at something that is sustainable,
cost-effective and something that doesn't worsen global warming,"
Piyasvasti said in a speech. "The only answer is nuclear. Without
nuclear, you couldn't reduce greenhouse gases."

Thailand is just the latest country in Southeast Asian to consider
building nuclear power plants, which would help meet its power
demand, which is rising at 5 percent a year and reduce its dependence
on foreign oil and natural gas.

Last month, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations' annual
Ministers on Energy meeting agreed to set up a network to explore
nuclear safety issues after acknowledging that some of its members
were exploring civilian nuclear energy as an alternative energy
source.

Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam are among ASEAN members that have
stated their intention to build nuclear power plants in the next
decade.

But environmentalist have warned that nuclear power would be unsound
in a region where earthquakes, landslides and floods are routine.
Indonesia, for example, is prone to seismic upheaval due to its
location on the so-called Pacific "Ring of Fire," an arc of volcanos
and fault lines encircling the Pacific Basin.

But Pyasvasti said Japan's experience with nuclear power showed it
was a safe option for the region.

"Certainly you have to take into account seismic zones and things
like that," he said. "But look at Japan. What has happened to Japan
shows how safe nuclear is. Isn't it remarkable - a nuclear power
plant sitting on a fault yet there has been no problems with
radiation."

In July, a magnitude-6.8 quake caused malfunctions and leaks at
Japan's northern Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, the world's
largest in terms of capacity. But the International Atomic Energy
Agency said key parts of the facility sustained little damage in the
quake, thought it said further observation was needed to determine
any long-term effects.

-----------------------------------------
Sander C. Perle
President
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/

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the 
RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: 
http://radlab.nl/radsafe/