Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nuclear Agency Is Criticized as Too Close to Its Industry

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-07-11 09:44 PM
Original message
Nuclear Agency Is Criticized as Too Close to Its Industry
Edited on Sat May-07-11 10:39 PM by Generic Other

According to the NYTimes: Since the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island’s unit 2 reactor in 1979, on 35 occasions reactors have been forced out of service for a year or longer in order to restore safe operation because of a systemic, cumulative degradation of the reactor’s components.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/08/business/energy-environment/08nrc.html?_r=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&src=igw




Time to shut the old ones down and quit building new ones. Why are we willing to risk our lives and the planet this way? The media doesn't even report when there are problems!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
whoneedstickets Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-07-11 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Standing too close, this explains why they glow.
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iemitsu Donating Member (524 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-07-11 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. all of these nukes need to be shut down.
the risk is too great.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-11 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. k&r (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-11 07:55 AM
Response to Original message
4. To get relicensed, a plant doesn't even have to prove it is complying with its CURRENT license.
Edited on Sun May-08-11 07:56 AM by enough
More>

It was not always so.

When the industry first set out in the 1980s to prove that the original 40-year licenses on its aging plants could be safely renewed for 20 years, two plants — Yankee Rowe in Massachusetts and Monticello in Minnesota — were offered as test cases. The N.R.C.’s criteria for relicensing essentially required that operators prove that they were in compliance with their current license and that they had an adequate plan to manage the aging equipment for the extra 20 years. That tripped up Yankee Rowe’s bid, because inspectors looking at its current operations found serious flaws in its reactor vessel. Rather than earn a renewal, the plant shut down with eight years left on its original license.

The failure threw the industry into turmoil. In 1992, Northern States Public Power, owner of the Monticello plant, complained that the agency was examining details beyond those necessary for license renewal.

With billions of dollars of revenue and investment at stake for each plant, the N.R.C. changed the rules in 1995, scrapping the requirement that operators prove they were complying with their current license. Instead, the renewal process would focus only on the aging management plan. The agency described the change as providing a “more stable and predictable regulatory process for license renewal.”

snip>

The situation is outrageous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generic Other Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-08-11 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. What gets me is that when we all turn our backs for even a second
these places are full steam ahead. The industry is dirty, seems to be unregulated, work under cover of darkness.

And they are planning to build more!!! How do we stop this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 11th 2024, 12:09 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC