Second unit of Czech nuclear power plant to be shut down for minor repairs

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET>]

Index:



2nd unit of Czech nuclear power plant down for minor repairs

UK Nuclear dumpsite' plan attacked

Nuclear waste facility may 'raise bar' 

Irradiated food causes controversy 

========================================



Second unit of Czech nuclear power plant to be shut down for minor 

repairs



PRAGUE, Czech Republic (AP) - The second unit of the troubled Czech 

nuclear power plant in Temelin near the border with Austria will be 

shut down later on Wednesday for minor repairs, an official said.



Milan Nebesar, a spokesman for the plant, said that workers will shut 

down the unit at 2000GMT for minor adjustments at the cooling system 

in the non-nuclear part of the unit. It should be restarted on 

Sunday, he said.



The first unit, with was working at full capacity on Wednesday, will 

be shut down for similar adjustments on Dec. 24, Nebesar said.



Construction of the plant's two 1,000-megawatt units, which were 

based on Russian designs, started in the 1980s. The reactors later 

were upgraded with U.S. technology, but they have remained 

controversial because of frequent malfunctions.



The station, 60 kilometers (35 miles) north of the Austrian border, 

has been a source of friction between the two countries. 

Environmentalists in Austria demand its closure, while Czech 

authorities insist it is safe.



The plant received permission for full use from the Czech nuclear 

safety authority in October.

-------------------



UK Nuclear dumpsite' plan attacked

 

Dec 15 (BBC) Sellafield receives spent fuel from all over the world 

Plans to allow foreign nuclear waste to be permanently stored in the 

UK have been branded "deeply irresponsible" by the Liberal Democrats. 



The government has confirmed intermediate level waste (ILW) that was 

to have been shipped back to its home countries will now be stored in 

the UK. 



The cash raised will go towards the UK's nuclear clean-up programme. 



But Lib Dem Norman Baker accused ministers of turning Britain into a 

"nuclear dumpsite". 



Under current contracts, British Nuclear Fuels should return all but 

low level waste, but none has ever been sent back. 



In future, only highly-radioactive waste will be sent back to its 

country of origin, normally Germany or Japan, under armed guard. 



Intermediate waste from countries such as Japan, Germany, Spain, 

Italy, Switzerland and Sweden will be stored permanently in the UK. 



At the moment, this waste is stored at Sellafield, in Cumbria, in the 

form of glass bricks, untreated liquid waste or solid material in 

drums. 



In a statement, the Department of Trade and Industry said the new 

policy meant there would be a "sixfold reduction in the number of 

waste shipments to overseas countries". 



And it said highly-radioactive waste would be returned to its home 

country sooner, ensuring there would be no overall increase in 

radioactivity. 



'Environmental millstone' 



Trade Secretary Patricia Hewitt said the new arrangements, revealed 

in a Commons written statement, would raise up to £680m for Britain's 

nuclear clean-up programme, under the new Nuclear Decommissioning 

Agency. 



But the move has been criticised by environmental groups and the 

Liberal Democrats. 



Mr Baker, the Lib Dem environment spokesman, said: "I have been 

warning for months that this would happen and raised it with 

government several times. But now our worst fears have been 

confirmed. 



"Once again Britain's environmental and health needs are being 

ignored in policies driven by the Treasury and DTI. 



"This is a terrible attempt to offload some of the £48bn cost of 

cleaning up nuclear sites. 



"The Energy Act was supposed to help Britain clean up, but in order 

to pay for it we are becoming a nuclear dumpsite. 



"The nuclear industry is an economic, social and environmental 

millstone that hangs around Britain's neck."

 ---------------



Nuclear waste facility may 'raise bar' 



Dec 15 (Deseret Morning News) Planned Tooele County plant hopes to 

import higher-level material Cedar Mountain Environmental Inc., a 

planned nuclear waste facility in Tooele County, might seek to import 

and dispose of the more radioactive Class B and C waste.  



Company president Charles Judd acknowledges he must overcome high 

hurdles in the project, if Cedar Mountain does decide to seek B- and 

C-level waste. And Bill Sinclair, deputy director of the state 

Department of Environmental Quality, says that if attitudes against 

that type of material coming into the state don't change, "that makes 

it look very unlikely."  



The controversy over B and C waste has a long history in the Beehive 

State. The material, mostly byproducts of decommissioned nuclear 

power plants, is more radioactive than the low-level Class A waste 

accepted by Envirocare of Utah at its disposal facility in the Tooele 

desert, about halfway between Salt Lake City and Wendover.  



When Envirocare expressed interest in accepting B and C waste, the 

public uproar was so loud that the Legislature passed a law requiring 

its specific approval before the material could be imported. The 

possibility that Cedar Mountain would seek a permit was raised in the 

Dec. 13 issue of "The International Radioactive Exchange," a journal 

that keeps tabs on the nuclear industry.  



"It's a possibility," Judd confirmed to the Deseret Morning News. 

"That's one of the things we're looking at. We are pursuing a 

disposal site and the type of waste we'll take has not been set yet, 

but B and C is an option."  



He plans to file an application with state officials in about six 

months, Judd said. The type of waste would be specified in the 

application.  



The Cedar Mountain site is located directly north of Envirocare's 

facility, said Judd, who is a former president of Envirocare. Cedar 

Mountain has an option to buy the private land involved, which is 

three or four miles south of I-80 and can be served by the freeway 

and by the Union Pacific Railroad line that runs through the area, he 

said.  



Cedar Mountain has completed siting criteria, receiving an approval 

from state regulators at that step after a year and a half of work, 

he said. This step involves checking whether a site is acceptable for 

waste disposal.  



"We haven't gone out and begun constructing any facilities," Judd 

added. "We're hoping for 2006, to get licenced and begin 

construction."  



Sources of the Class B and C wastes could be the U.S. Department of 

Energy, nuclear power plants and material used in research, he said. 



Earlier, he said, he was opposed to Cedar Mountain accepting B and C 

waste. The reason is that Envirocare was pursuing a permit to import 

that kind of waste, and he did not want to compete with the earlier 

facility on that, according to Judd.  



"Just recently, they (Envirocare) changed their philosophy and said 

they would no longer pursue B and C waste," he said. Also, Tooele 

County refused to approve his facility because of problems in showing 

a need for another project doing the same thing as Envirocare.  



Because of that, he said, Cedar Mountain changed its position and 

decided it might seek the higher classes of radioactive material. The 

project requires a $3 million investment, Judd believes. State law 

allows the Department of Environmental Quality to charge up to $1 

million for the expensive process of reviewing a nuclear waste 

disposal application.  



Several investors have talked with him about the project and are 

"very interested in it," and Judd is putting in his own money too, he 

said.  



He denied a suggestion that the move was an attempt to get leverage 

on Envirocare in a lawsuit it filed against him. "Envirocare sued me 

when I started this process," he said. The Radioactive Exchange says 

that suit involved an allegation by Envirocare that Judd was breaking 

a non-competition clause in his contract.  



Sinclair said that while Cedar Mountain has received approval as an 

appropriate site, it is far from winning state approval.  



The next step, "which is much more difficult process," is to seek a 

license, he said. "That's certainly a long process." Judd has not yet 

submitted his license application.  



Judd would need approval from Tooele County, "and that has not 

happened to date. In fact, he's been rejected by the county for a 

conditional use permit."  



If Cedar Mountain overcomes those roadblocks, it still requires 

permission both from the Legislature and the governor.  



In light of the opposition to Envirocare's efforts, legislative 

approval could be extremely hard to get.  



Before the gubernatorial election, Republican candidate Jon Huntsman 

Jr. responded to a Deseret Morning News questionnaire, "I strongly 

oppose any hazardous or radioactive waste of a higher degree of 

toxicity allowed into Utah storage facilities." Since then, Huntsman 

was elected as Utah's next governor.  



But Judd remains undaunted about the chances of importing B and C 

waste, should Cedar Mountain decide to pursue the permit.  



"We won't be investing $3 million in something we don't think there's 

a chance," he said. "We do think there's a chance."  

--------------------



Irradiated food causes controversy 



Dec 15 (Sierra Star News) Irradiated food has been exposed to 

ionizing radiation (similar to x-rays) that kills harmful bacteria 

and parasites in food. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has tried 

to introduce irradiated ground beef into the school lunch program 

since 2001. A huge negative reaction from the public led the 

Department to ban such foods from the program. However, Iowa Senator 

Harkin introduced a bill in 2002 that allowed the Department to use 

such foods in the school lunch program that serves 27 million 

students. Over 200 school districts around the country banned the use 

of such food in their cafeterias. Why is there a public outcry over 

irradiated food?  



Proponents of irradiation say it will make the food safer to eat by 

reducing the risk of food-borne bacterial and parasitic diseases. No 

clinical trials have been done to support this claim. Opponents cite 

a variety of research that shows eating such food can be hazardous to 

your health. Not all disease-causing organisms are destroyed by this 

method and the food must therefore be properly cooked to insure 

safety. Laboratory rats fed irradiated food show signs of genetic 

damage and higher cancer rates. Irradiation creates a new class of 

chemicals never found in foods before called cyclobutanones. These 

chemicals produce cancer in human cells in lab tests. Consumer 

Reports trained tasters noted a slight but distinct off-taste and 

smell and likened it to “singed hair.”  



The vitamins A, B complex, C and E are destroyed by irradiation. The 

fat in the beef is changed to trans fatty acids. Trans fatty acids 

are now known to be contributors to a host of chronic illnesses and 

it also elevates levels of the artery clogging bad cholesterol. 

Currently the Department of Agriculture is allowed to offer the 

irradiated beef to school districts and schools are free to use it or 

not. Irradiated beef is not required to be labeled as such and 

parents need to ask the school board and purchasing agent for the 

lunch program if irradiated food is being used in the lunch program.  



It seems incredible that the Food and Drug Administration, the 

Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency 

would allow food that has been damaged nutritionally and that has 

serious health risks to be used as an experiment in American school 

children. More information about the issue of irradiated food can be 

found at these websites:  



-------------------------------------

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) 296-1902 



E-Mail: sperle@dosimetry.com

E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net 



Global Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com/ 

Personal Website: http://sandy-travels.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/