While the American mainstream media has already moved from disaster victims in Japan to its impact on "their stock market" and "A'me'rican priorities”, there is a great deal about the nuclear industry, nuclear reactors and its safety regulations that the public still have little knowledge about.
Nuclear industry is a multimillion dollar business that does not just involve private companies. There are governments that are involved in selling nuclear programs globally to help their economy and create jobs. France, the only country in the world that uses nuclear energy as its primary source of power, has a nuclear policy that is a big part of its export. The South African government indirectly supports nuclear energy policies around the world because it helps its uranium mining industry. (Uranium is a radioactive substance that is needed for nuclear reactor rods).
Korea is emerging as a major exporter of nuclear equipment globally. The British, who had the first commercial nuclear power station at Calder Hall in Sellafield, and the United States government have very close ties to companies that sell nuclear energy programs and help build reactors around the world.
In the United States there were both economic and political reasons to pursue civilian use of atomic energy - beyond its military application. U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower made his famous “Atoms for Peace” speech to the UN General Assembly in December 1953 to help disseminate nuclear reactor technology to many U.S. institutions and foreign governments.
Some would say the U.S. Department of Energy is also an unofficial Department of American Nuclear Program and Weapons. Here is a brief statement on what the objectives of the Department of Energy (DOE) are (from Energy.Gov http://www.energy.gov/energysources/nuclear.htmdoes):
DOE's Nuclear Energy (NE) program promotes secure, competitive and environmentally responsible nuclear technologies to serve the present and future energy needs of the United States and the world. With the significant energy and environmental challenges facing the nation in this new century, the benefits of clean and safe nuclear energy are increasingly apparent.
A key mission of DOE's nuclear energy research and development program is to strengthen that basic technology and, through some of the most advanced civilian technology research being conducted today, chart the way toward introduction of the next generation of nuclear power plants.
While the research and theoretical designs of nuclear reactors to produce electricity are fairly exact, impressive and reliable, application and implementation have huge problems: cost-wise, personnel-related system-wise, management-related and in predicting and preparing for all contingencies.
The Russians, after visiting Pennsylvania, stated that a Three Mile Island accident would never happen to their reactors...Seven years later the Chernobyl nuclear meltdown occurred. The Japanese Government stated that their nuclear technology and reactor designs were much more advanced and secure than the Chernobyl reactor...Twenty-five years later the same government is grappling with a possible nuclear catastrophe (unexpected and unprecedented).
Now you have American leaders, corporate heads and nuclear industries claiming that, with over 104 reactors all over the United States, “this will never happen in the United States...or to the American people!"
As one Australian journalist asked crudely, “Is this ignorance, stupidity, arrogance or a conservative belief that God always shines and pees nectar on America?”
The cost of building a nuclear reactor, smaller than the ones in Daiichi plant, is thirty times the cost of building an entire oil refinery, mining industry or burning fossil fuel for forty years.
All the energy sources have their own serious repercussions to health, the environment and human life. But the argument that nuclear energy is a cheap, environmentally friendly and safe energy source is highly exaggerated.
In a world where water is becoming scarce, and water-wars are going to be inevitable, the amount of water needed to run the cooling system in nuclear reactors, though officially considered to be small, is not that small when you take all the operating reactors around the world, and their spent fuel storage sites (that increase in size every six years as new rods replace the spent ones).
Added to this specific need is the additional water required to deal with any excess heating, explosions and fires that may occur accidentally, due to natural disasters or human errors and mismanagement.
The water needed for nuclear reactor cooling system has to be clean and fairly pure. There are many poor countries where ordinary people stand in long lines for hours for a bucket of clean drinking water...while large amounts of clean highly purified water is pumped into reactors to cool its hot radioactive rods.
Any sea water, which is mostly impure salt water, pumped into the condensers of the cooling system usually never comes in contact with reactor-water. But when this water is pumped back into the sea it is about ten degrees warmer than it was before it entered the condenser. Many environmentalists have observed that marine life is dramatically affected by ten degrees rise in coastal water temperature.
There are other safety concerns with nuclear reactors. American Republicans have often raised concerns that the computer systems in nuclear facilities, that operate complex set of machines and carefully coordinated operations, could fall into the hands of terrorists. But more realistically worrisome is the number of ill trained and inadequately supervised people, hired cheaply by corporations, who can make serious, dangerous or cumulative errors that could lead to a Union Carbide-like, Chernobyl-like or Fukushima Daiichi-like disasters.
In addition to this is the incompetency and corruption in so many governments around the world that make their nuclear safety regulations weak or inadequate, and the implementation of safety regulations erratic and more favorable to corporate priorities.
As one scientist noted, “I am not afraid of the scientists in our nuclear facilities: many of whom are well educated - even brilliant, insightful, vigilant, careful and ultra intuitive in understanding or predicting problems in nuclear reactors - even in its daily operation. I am more concerned about the non-scientists who, without proper education, advanced knowledge in science and high level of expertise, are operating sophisticated technology and computer software that they cannot understand – let alone know how to correct when necessary!”
Large number of countries with nuclear reactors, including the United States, rank only thirty-fifth or lower in science and math education. Larger numbers have a huge illiterate population that cannot read or write, or can only do so at a third or fourth grade level.
Thirty-one countries operate nuclear power stations. Of these, twenty-seven countries have plans to build more nuclear reactors - while only four have no plans for expansion. Fifteen nations which do not currently have any nuclear power plant have plans to build their first reactors in the near future.
A PhD in physical chemistry , I know, stated, “Even I do not trust myself to handle lot of the work in these hyper-technologized, hyper-sensitive and hyper-dangerous nuclear reactors. How can we trust even ten percent of the staff not to make one serious mistake, at least every five or so years, that would lead to a catastrophe?"
Added to this possibility of human error and oversight in just one reactor, there are the unknowns, no matter how remote, that increase the probability of accidents as we build more reactors, manage existing ones, try to adequately maintain aging ones, and ensure safe storage of increasing numbers of radioactive spent fuel rods...contingencies after contingencies!
Welcome to Sci-Fi nightmare...already a reality!
Nuclear industry is a multimillion dollar business that does not just involve private companies. There are governments that are involved in selling nuclear programs globally to help their economy and create jobs. France, the only country in the world that uses nuclear energy as its primary source of power, has a nuclear policy that is a big part of its export. The South African government indirectly supports nuclear energy policies around the world because it helps its uranium mining industry. (Uranium is a radioactive substance that is needed for nuclear reactor rods).
Korea is emerging as a major exporter of nuclear equipment globally. The British, who had the first commercial nuclear power station at Calder Hall in Sellafield, and the United States government have very close ties to companies that sell nuclear energy programs and help build reactors around the world.
In the United States there were both economic and political reasons to pursue civilian use of atomic energy - beyond its military application. U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower made his famous “Atoms for Peace” speech to the UN General Assembly in December 1953 to help disseminate nuclear reactor technology to many U.S. institutions and foreign governments.
Some would say the U.S. Department of Energy is also an unofficial Department of American Nuclear Program and Weapons. Here is a brief statement on what the objectives of the Department of Energy (DOE) are (from Energy.Gov http://www.energy.gov/energysources/nuclear.htmdoes):
DOE's Nuclear Energy (NE) program promotes secure, competitive and environmentally responsible nuclear technologies to serve the present and future energy needs of the United States and the world. With the significant energy and environmental challenges facing the nation in this new century, the benefits of clean and safe nuclear energy are increasingly apparent.
A key mission of DOE's nuclear energy research and development program is to strengthen that basic technology and, through some of the most advanced civilian technology research being conducted today, chart the way toward introduction of the next generation of nuclear power plants.
While the research and theoretical designs of nuclear reactors to produce electricity are fairly exact, impressive and reliable, application and implementation have huge problems: cost-wise, personnel-related system-wise, management-related and in predicting and preparing for all contingencies.
The Russians, after visiting Pennsylvania, stated that a Three Mile Island accident would never happen to their reactors...Seven years later the Chernobyl nuclear meltdown occurred. The Japanese Government stated that their nuclear technology and reactor designs were much more advanced and secure than the Chernobyl reactor...Twenty-five years later the same government is grappling with a possible nuclear catastrophe (unexpected and unprecedented).
Now you have American leaders, corporate heads and nuclear industries claiming that, with over 104 reactors all over the United States, “this will never happen in the United States...or to the American people!"
As one Australian journalist asked crudely, “Is this ignorance, stupidity, arrogance or a conservative belief that God always shines and pees nectar on America?”
The cost of building a nuclear reactor, smaller than the ones in Daiichi plant, is thirty times the cost of building an entire oil refinery, mining industry or burning fossil fuel for forty years.
All the energy sources have their own serious repercussions to health, the environment and human life. But the argument that nuclear energy is a cheap, environmentally friendly and safe energy source is highly exaggerated.
In a world where water is becoming scarce, and water-wars are going to be inevitable, the amount of water needed to run the cooling system in nuclear reactors, though officially considered to be small, is not that small when you take all the operating reactors around the world, and their spent fuel storage sites (that increase in size every six years as new rods replace the spent ones).
Added to this specific need is the additional water required to deal with any excess heating, explosions and fires that may occur accidentally, due to natural disasters or human errors and mismanagement.
The water needed for nuclear reactor cooling system has to be clean and fairly pure. There are many poor countries where ordinary people stand in long lines for hours for a bucket of clean drinking water...while large amounts of clean highly purified water is pumped into reactors to cool its hot radioactive rods.
Any sea water, which is mostly impure salt water, pumped into the condensers of the cooling system usually never comes in contact with reactor-water. But when this water is pumped back into the sea it is about ten degrees warmer than it was before it entered the condenser. Many environmentalists have observed that marine life is dramatically affected by ten degrees rise in coastal water temperature.
There are other safety concerns with nuclear reactors. American Republicans have often raised concerns that the computer systems in nuclear facilities, that operate complex set of machines and carefully coordinated operations, could fall into the hands of terrorists. But more realistically worrisome is the number of ill trained and inadequately supervised people, hired cheaply by corporations, who can make serious, dangerous or cumulative errors that could lead to a Union Carbide-like, Chernobyl-like or Fukushima Daiichi-like disasters.
In addition to this is the incompetency and corruption in so many governments around the world that make their nuclear safety regulations weak or inadequate, and the implementation of safety regulations erratic and more favorable to corporate priorities.
As one scientist noted, “I am not afraid of the scientists in our nuclear facilities: many of whom are well educated - even brilliant, insightful, vigilant, careful and ultra intuitive in understanding or predicting problems in nuclear reactors - even in its daily operation. I am more concerned about the non-scientists who, without proper education, advanced knowledge in science and high level of expertise, are operating sophisticated technology and computer software that they cannot understand – let alone know how to correct when necessary!”
Large number of countries with nuclear reactors, including the United States, rank only thirty-fifth or lower in science and math education. Larger numbers have a huge illiterate population that cannot read or write, or can only do so at a third or fourth grade level.
Thirty-one countries operate nuclear power stations. Of these, twenty-seven countries have plans to build more nuclear reactors - while only four have no plans for expansion. Fifteen nations which do not currently have any nuclear power plant have plans to build their first reactors in the near future.
A PhD in physical chemistry , I know, stated, “Even I do not trust myself to handle lot of the work in these hyper-technologized, hyper-sensitive and hyper-dangerous nuclear reactors. How can we trust even ten percent of the staff not to make one serious mistake, at least every five or so years, that would lead to a catastrophe?"
Added to this possibility of human error and oversight in just one reactor, there are the unknowns, no matter how remote, that increase the probability of accidents as we build more reactors, manage existing ones, try to adequately maintain aging ones, and ensure safe storage of increasing numbers of radioactive spent fuel rods...contingencies after contingencies!
Welcome to Sci-Fi nightmare...already a reality!
Yet another excellent and perceptive article.
ReplyDelete