Environmental groups oppose nuclear reactor design; New design flaw in AP-1000

[bananas]

Another serious design flaw discovered in the AP-1000. Despite the massive PR campaign by the nuclear industry trying to portray nuclear energy as "green", it isn't "green", and none of the major environmental organizations support it. Efficiency and renewables will reduce emissions faster and cheaper than these nuclear dinosaurs.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/04/21/448017/environmental-groups-oppose-nuclear.html

Environmental groups oppose nuclear reactor design
Wed, Apr 21, 2010 02:26 PM

A coalition of environmental groups are asking federal regulators to suspend their review of proposed nuclear plants because they claim that a leading reactor design has defects.

The 12 groups, including Durham-based NC Warn, today asked three federal agencies to suspend consideration of Westinghouse's AP1000 reactor. The design flaws could lead to radiation leaks from corrosion holes, the groups contend.

<snip>

"Environmental groups holding press conferences against nuclear plants are not surprising to us," said Westinghouse spokesman Vaughn Gilbert.

<snip>

http://www.southernstudies.org/2010/04/new-safety-issues-documented-with-nuclear-reactors-planned-for-southeast.html

New safety issues documented with nuclear reactors planned for Southeast
Serious safety concerns continue to mount for the AP1000, a new type of nuclear reactor proposed for power plant sites across the Southeast.

A report released yesterday warns that the design of the Westinghouse reactor makes it particularly vulnerable to through-wall corrosion -- already a widespread problem with existing commercial reactors -- and thus the possibility of leaking radiation in the event of an accident. The report was commissioned by the AP1000 Oversight Group, which involves more than a dozen nuclear watchdog organizations.

"The potential consequences of a radiation release to the environment from a small hole or crack in the AP1000 containment are significant," according to the report by Arnold Gundersen, a nuclear engineer with Fairewinds Associates of Burlington, Vt. and a former senior executive in the nuclear power industry.

His concerns about the reactor's design are supported by Rudolf Hausler, a corrosion engineer with NACE International, a Houston-based organization devoted to the study of corrosion. Hausler states in an affidavit attached to the report that he agrees with Gundersen's assessment "in its entirety."

The groups behind the report -- which include the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Friends of the Earth and the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy -- are calling on the Obama administration to suspend the licensing process for the AP1000 reactors as well as consideration for taxpayer-backed construction loans. They also urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the NRC's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards to launch an investigation into the design flaw.

<snip>

Back in January, Obama hit a low point when he called for dirty nukes:

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/01/28/nukes-oil-coal-sotu/

Jan 28th, 2010 at 2:40 pm

Demoralizing His Supporters, Obama Calls Nukes, Coal, And Oil Drilling ‘Clean Energy Jobs’

<snip>

About 12,000 MoveOn members participated in a “live online dial-test of President Obama’s State of the Union speech.” While Obama’s mentions of clean energy innovation were some of his most popular moments, his paean to polluters was by far his worst moment with progressive activists:



Nukes, oil, and coal just aren’t clean. If Obama really is committed to “tough decisions,” he’ll take on the coal companies who are tearing up the Appalachian mountains, the nuclear companies who want taxpayers to take all the risk for accidents and waste, and the oil companies who are burning up the planet for their own profit. And that’s something the people who put him into office could support.

[Statistical]

1. From the article.

Westinghouse officials have said that the AP1000 is safe. Four reactors are under construction in China.

"Environmental groups holding press conferences against nuclear plants are not surprising to us," said Westinghouse spokesman Vaughn Gilbert. "We dispute their conclusions strongly. The AP 1000 is very well designed and is the technology of choice in most parts of the world."

For starters, the reactor's containment vessel is made of 1 3/4-inch steel that's designed to prevent corrosion, he added. Safety features would mean that any problems would be identified very early.

Raleigh-based Progress is confident the AP1000 is safe and still plans to use the design, said spokesman Mike Hughes. Periodic testing and inspections would help ensure that any problems are spotted and corrected, he added.

Remember the containment structure is the final line of defense. For there to be a radiation leak it would require there be:
a) a hole in containment building
b) the hole is not detected
c) a breech develops in the reactor

A reactor breach has never happened in the United States despite over 50 million operating hours.


#1 is the reactor, #5 is the containment building. In order for radiation to pass from inside the reactor to outside the building there must be a hole and it be undetected in both locations.

Unrec for scare mongering. NRC will do the right thing and give final approval for the AP1000.

[bananas]

2. From the other article...

His concerns about the reactor's design are supported by Rudolf Hausler, a corrosion engineer with NACE International, a Houston-based organization devoted to the study of corrosion. Hausler states in an affidavit attached to the report that he agrees with Gundersen's assessment "in its entirety."