[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants Set Performance Records
Index:
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants Set Performance Records
Panel: Fallout Analysis Done Correctly
World food experts still divided over irradiation
South Koreans Grapple With Nuke Waste
USEC Application - Centrifuge Demonstration Facility
TEPCO unable to say when Fukushima N-plant to resume operation
=====================================
Platts: U.S. Nuclear Power Plants Set Performance Records for the 5th
Consecutive Year, Nucleonics Week Reports; Operators Set National
Records for Both Output and Capacity
WASHINGTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 12, 2003--The nation's 103
operating reactors generated more power and raised capacity to the
highest levels in history, according to Platts Nucleonics Week.
Platts is the energy information, marketing services, research and
consulting business of The McGraw-Hill Companies (NYSE:MHP).
U.S. nuclear power plants set output records for the 5th consecutive
year generating nearly 812-million gross megawatt-hours (MWh) in
2002. This output exceeded an 89% average unit capacity factor and
resulted in more than 780-million net MWh on the grid.
"These record numbers demonstrate that the U.S. nuclear plants
continue to increase their performance levels," said Margaret Ryan,
editorial director of Platts Nuclear/Coal Group. "This illustrates a
dramatic comeback from 1997 when regulatory outages sidelined 10% of
U.S. nuclear plants and kept average capacity below 70%."
More than 2.66-billion MWh of power were generated by 436 nuclear
plants from around the globe. Worldwide, Nucleonics Week reported
that Germany's Isar-2, operated by E.ON Energie AG, generated more
power in 2002 than any other single reactor - 12.16-million MWh.
South Korea's Kori-4, operated by Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power Co.,
had the highest capacity factor, with nearly 106%.
Platts Nucleonics Week tracks nuclear power plant performance
worldwide monthly, and annually publishes this exclusive analysis of
performance by nation and reactor vendor, including listing the top
50 performers. For more information visit www.nucweek.platts.com.
-------------------
Panel: Fallout Analysis Done Correctly
WASHINGTON (AP) - A draft report that estimated 11,000 people died
from cancers related to nuclear testing during the Cold War was well
done and should be published, the National Research Council said
Tuesday.
The study, done by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in
Atlanta and the National Cancer Institute, concluded that radioactive
fallout from Cold War nuclear testing exposed virtually everyone in
the United States and contributed to the cancer deaths.
The study, which became public last March, has not been published. It
is the first to consider the health effects of nuclear detonations,
including those done by foreign countries, between 1951 and 1962,
when open-air testing was banned.
The institute, an arm of the National Academies, suggested that the
CDC reanalyze public exposure to iodine-131, which can cause thyroid
cancer, in light of new information obtained by studying the
Chernobyl nuclear accident in Russia.
Nevertheless, the institute said, publishing the full report should
not be delayed during the reanalysis.
``The recommended reanalysis of iodine-131 exposure is unlikely to
make large changes in the key results, but it will make the risk
estimates current and hence more credible,'' said William Schull,
chairman of the committee that wrote the Research Council report.
Schull is a professor emeritus at the University of Texas-Houston.
A 1997 assessment by the National Cancer Institute found that 11,300
to 212,000 thyroid cancers could have been caused by iodine-131
produced in nuclear explosions at the Nevada Test Site. The CDC
research does not challenge that result and suggests iodine-131
fallout is responsible for almost all ill health effects from nuclear
testing.
The number of cancer cases attributable to nuclear testing is small,
relative to other causes. For example, among the 3.8 million
Americans born in 1951, who would have been exposed to the highest
fallout levels in their most vulnerable early years, testing is
expected to account for an estimated 1,000 additional cancer deaths.
Smoking, in comparison, is expected to account for about 250,000
cancer deaths in the same group.
On the Net: National Research Council: http://www.nas.edu/nrc/
-------------------
World food experts still divided over irradiation
BRUSSELS, Feb 9 (Reuters) - International food experts will soon
discuss revising -- if not abandoning -- the maximum dose for
irradiation, an idea that has stirred opposition from the European
Union and infuriated numerous consumer lobby groups.
While most scientists have accepted irradiation as a processing
technique, consumers and environmentalists have their doubts about
foods that are blasted with high-energy radiation in the form of
gamma or X-rays to kill unwanted micro-organisms.
Now, the recommended upper limit for absorbed radiation in food may
be removed altogether if a committee of the Codex Alimentarius
Commission, due to meet in Tanzania in mid-March, can reconcile wide
differences of opinion among its members.
"If they are successful a final text will be submitted to the Codex
Alimentarius Commission for formal adoption in June," a Codex
official said from the organisation's home base in Rome.
"If they cannot agree, we can expect a two-year delay."
The concept of irradiating conventional food by bombarding it with
ionising energy has long generated extreme views -- and a meeting
last year of Codex members ended in deadlock when a proposal was
tabled to delete all reference to a maximum dose.
Irradiation, endorsed by the World Health Organisation, exposes food
to low amounts of electrons or gamma rays to destroy micro-organisms
such as E.coli and salmonella. It causes chemical changes but does
not leave food radioactive.
Codex, which groups officials from the United Nations FAO and World
Health Organisation, sets non-binding recommendations for food
standards often used as the benchmark in international trade
disputes. It has members from more than 160 countries.
DEADLOCK OVER DOSAGE
Since the last major Codex meeting on irradiation, a working group
has drafted a compromise proposal that keeps a maximum dose but also
inserts a controversial clause saying that high-dose irradiation has
no effect on product safety.
In a standard dating from 1983, Codex sets the maximum level of
absorbed permitted irradiation in food at 10,000 Gray (Gy), which
represents 10,000 joules of absorbed energy per kilogram (2.2 lb).
Despite the compromise Codex wording, agreement on whether to remove
or keep a maximum dose is still a long way off and observers say the
debate could still go either way.
"This document will be discussed and may, or may not, be agreed at
that (March) meeting," said Merav Shrub at Britain's Food Commission,
an independent watchdog group. "It may just get postponed with
further debate for another year."
"What they are proposing is a compromise to keep the 10 kGy dose
limit but with a comment saying that it's absolutely safe at any dose
anyway. It's a bit contradictory," she said.
Several countries, including most EU member states backed by Japan
and South Korea, are opposed to removing this maximum dose.
In the European Commission, officials are wary about the idea of
removing the upper limit, saying the resulting large-scale
irradiation might flout good hygiene practices.
At present, the EU permits food to be irradiated under only one
category: dried aromatic herbs, spices and vegetable seasonings. All
irradiated foods must be properly labelled with the words
"irradiated" or "treated with ionising radiation."
Five EU member states also allow the marketing of certain irradiated
foods such as fresh and dried fruits and vegetables, poultry,
shrimps, fish or frog legs on their national territory.
The United States, Australia, the Philippines and Thailand lie on the
other side of the argument and claim that the dose is self-limiting
as amounts above 10,000 Gy are only technically feasible for a few
dry commodities such as spices.
"Foods with a higher moisture content will not support high doses,"
said the Codex official. "The flavour changes for the worse and
manufacturers will not use high doses because of this. Also, high
doses are expensive."
Advocates of unlimited irradiation argue they need a wide technical
scope to meet their national food regulations. They say if
irradiation is applied properly it reduces food-borne disease and
treats many potential problems in the food supply.
OPINIONS STILL DIVIDED
Irradiation can deactivate food spoilage organisms, including
bacteria, moulds and yeasts. It can also extend the shelf-life of
fresh fruits and vegetables by decreasing the normal biological
changes associated with growth and maturation -- such as ripening or
sprouting.
Last year, for example, Indian scientists came up with a cure for
flatulence, by blasting guilty foodstuffs such as beans with gamma
rays to knock out the offending chemicals -- smelly sulphurous gases
mixed with methane -- that cause the problem.
But irradiation's many critics insist there are serious concerns over
its impact on health, safety and the environment, saying the process
can create dangerous toxins, cause loss of nutrients and possibly
hide unhygienic food production methods.
"Food irradiation is not a solution for cleaning up foods which are
unhygienically produced and unfit for consumption," Britain's Food
Commission says on its website.
"Food irradiation benefits larger producers and traders rather than
consumers and small-scale producers. Good food doesn't need
irradiating," it adds.
Low doses, up to one kGy, are used to delay physiological processes,
such as ripening of fresh fruits and vegetables, and to control
insects and parasites in foods.
Medium doses, up to 10 kGy, can improve technological properties --
for example, reducing cooking times for dehydrated vegetables and
extending the shelf-life of many foods.
Amounts that exceed the 10 kGy barrier are used to sterilise meat,
poultry and seafood, also to disinfect certain foods or ingredients
such as spices and enzyme preparations.
----------------------
South Koreans Grapple With Nuke Waste
SEOUL, South Korea (AP) - While the United States worries about North
Korea's efforts to develop nuclear weapons, some South Koreans say
there's another nuclear crisis on the Korean Peninsula.
They fret about their own government's new plan to deposit nuclear
waste near their towns.
Last week, the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy said it has
selected four coastal counties as potential sites for the country's
first-ever nuclear waste dumps.
Two counties will be selected after a yearlong survey. Each county
has at least 60,000 residents.
``We feel our problem is more urgent than the Northern nuclear issue
because this directly involves our lives,'' said Lee Hwa-hyun, an
official in Yeonggwang county, site of six nuclear reactors.
Many South Koreans don't believe North Korea is a serious threat,
even though the North recently took steps to restart frozen nuclear
facilities that U.S. officials say were used to make one or two
bombs.
In Ulchin, a county that is home to four nuclear reactors, about
2,000 civic activists and residents peacefully demonstrated on
Wednesday against the waste dump idea in front of the county's main
office.
The protesters said in a statement that Ulchin was ``sentenced to
death penalty'' last week and pledged to fight until it is removed
from the candidate list.
Ulchin residents are especially angry because the government pledged
in 1994 not to build a nuclear waste dump in the county.
South Korea, which lacks oil and other natural resources, gets 40
percent of its energy from nuclear power plants. It tried to develop
nuclear weapons three decades ago, but shelved its plans under U.S.
pressure.
Although it first introduced nuclear power in 1978 and now has 18
nuclear power plants in operation, South Korea has not built a
nuclear waste dump because of opposition from residents.
The government, which has tried in vain to find a nuclear waste
storage site since 1986, says time is running out because temporary
storage facilities of reinforced concrete at nuclear power plants
will be full in 2008.
The government says it will give $247 million in subsidies to the two
counties where the waste dumps will be built. It also issued a
statement asking South Koreans for their understanding.
In 1990, the government designated an island in South Chungcheong
province as a waste dump site, but withdrew its plan several months
later because of violent protests by residents. Several people were
arrested, and the science and technology minister stepped down.
One Yeonggwang county resident welcomed the government's latest plan,
saying the subsidies will help the region prosper.
``I think it's only right to have a nuclear waste dump if there are
nuclear plants in the area,'' Kim Young-deuk said. ``We can all be
better off.''
------------------
USEC Files Application with NRC to License American Centrifuge
Demonstration Facility; Advanced Uranium Enrichment Technology
Expected to Be World's Most Efficient
BETHESDA, Md.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Feb. 12, 2003-- Taking another key
step in its plan to deploy the world's most advanced uranium
enrichment technology, USEC Inc. (NYSE:USU) today submitted a license
application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to
construct and operate the American Centrifuge Demonstration Facility
at its Portsmouth plant in Piketon, Ohio.
Scheduled to begin operation in 2005, the demonstration facility will
contain a lead cascade of up to 240 centrifuge machines, the first
new centrifuge enrichment machines in the United States. The lead
cascade is the basic building block of a commercial enrichment plant.
It will yield cost, schedule and performance data before USEC begins
construction of a $1 billion to $1.5 billion commercial plant later
in the decade.
"Submission of this license application is an important event for
USEC, the U.S. nuclear industry and power plant operators around the
world," said Dennis Spurgeon, USEC Executive Vice President and Chief
Operating Officer. "We have delivered our blueprint for operating the
American Centrifuge, a technology that will help ensure our position
as the global leader in uranium enrichment."
USEC's design will leverage more than two decades of U.S. Department
of Energy (DOE) research and development. In 1985, DOE centrifuge
machines demonstrated a production rate for enriching uranium several
times that of any commercial centrifuge operating today. The American
Centrifuge employs this same proven technology, while improving
efficiency and reducing costs through the use of state-of-the-art
materials, control systems and manufacturing processes.
USEC is submitting its application more than two months ahead of
schedule. The NRC will perform an extensive safety and environmental
review.
"We are delivering on our commitment to our customers as well as to
America's energy security and national security interests. Our new
enrichment technology will provide a reliable and competitive fuel
source for the world's nuclear power plants," Spurgeon said.
USEC has also begun testing key centrifuge components at the
Company's facilities in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Early results are
positive, and tests will continue for several months.
The American Centrifuge Demonstration Facility will be located in the
existing centrifuge facilities at USEC's Portsmouth plant, where DOE
operated hundreds of centrifuge machines in the 1980s. These existing
buildings have been well maintained and provide a strong
infrastructure. The facility is expected to employ approximately 50
people.
USEC will make a decision on siting the commercial plant in 2004. The
Company expects to build the plant either at Portsmouth or in
Paducah, Kentucky, where it operates a uranium enrichment plant. The
new plant will provide several hundred manufacturing and construction
jobs in addition to approximately 500 operating jobs.
-------------------
TEPCO unable to say when Fukushima N-plant to resume operation
FUKUSHIMA, Japan, Feb. 12 (Kyodo) - Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO)
is not in a position to say when it can resume operations of its No.
1 and No. 2 Fukushima nuclear power stations, the head of the
company's local office said Wednesday.
TEPCO will not resume operations ''simply because (the suspension of
operations) makes it difficult to meet summer demand for power,''
Kiyokazu Sano said at a press conference.
Plant operations have been suspended since last August when the
company was found to have falsified records regarding reactor cracks.
''I don't think local concern and distrust have been wiped out yet,''
Sano added.
-------------------------------------------------
Sandy Perle
Director, Technical
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service
ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100 Extension 2306
Fax:(714) 668-3149
E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net
E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com
Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.com/
ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/