Russia’s Nuclear Reactors Could Take over the World, Safe or Not [Preview]

The federation is aggressively selling reactors to countries with little nuclear experience, raising safety concerns

By Eve Conant

 

2
inShare

Share on Tumblr

EXPORT: Russia's new VVER reactors, under construction in Novovoronezh, are being ordered worldwide.Image: STRIHAVKA JAKUB AP Photo

In Brief

• Russia is preparing to sell unconventional reactors to developing countries that have little nuclear power experience.
• The models include breeder reactors that make plutonium, mini reactors meant to float on the ocean and pressurized-water reactors equipped with passive safety features intended to stop a reactor meltdown without human intervention.
• Western experts say some of the models may not be as safe as Russian officials maintain and could increase the chance that weapons-grade material would spread worldwide.

More In This Article

• Sidebar

  See Russia's Reactors on Your Smartphone

For any country that may be considering acquiring its first nuclear reactor, Russia's annual ATOMEXPO offers a seemingly simple solution. At a recent event, thousands of people from around the world flocked to a giant, czarist-era exhibition hall. A visitor could hear vendors such as Rolls-Royce talk about steam generators, watch reporters interview experts for a Russian nuclear-themed television program or pick up a “Miss Atom” calendar featuring the year's prettiest Russian nuclear workers.

The real action, though, was at a multilevel booth for Rosatom, Russia's state-owned nuclear company, which exuded a Steve Jobs vibe of pure whiteness and know-how. That was where “newcomers,” as the Russians fondly call them, from nations that do not have nuclear power plants heard about options and signed cooperation agreements for Rosatom to build or even operate reactors for them. At one point, photographers snapped shots of Nigerian nuclear officials as they clinked champagne flutes with Rosatom chief Sergey Kirienko, celebrating their baby steps toward joining Russia's growing roster of clients, including Turkey and Vietnam. Rosatom has already finished reactors in China and India. In July, Finland chose the company over French and Japanese competitors for its next reactor.

This article was originally published with the title Russia's New Empire: Nuclear Power.

Chinese oppose uranium processing plant in China

“OPPOSE nuclear pollution”; “Give us back our green homeland”. So declared
banners raised by some of the hundreds of protesters who took to the
streets of Jiangmen city in the southern province of Guangdong on July
12th. In a remarkable concession, the local government announced that it
would heed their demands and abandon plans to build a uranium-processing
facility. For officials in Beijing, keen to develop nuclear power and keep
activism in check, the demonstration was an unsettling sign of potential
trouble.
http://www.economist.com/news/china/21582016-rare-protest-prompts-government-scrap-plans-build-uranium-processing-plant
http://rt.com/news/china-protest-nuclear-plant-058/

When authorities finally lifted the moratorium on approvals in October
2012, it was with the stipulation that going forward only “Generation-III”
models that meet stricter safety standards would be approved. China has no
experience in operating these more advanced models; several of the
Generation-III reactors it has currently under construction are already
facing delays due to post-Fukushima design changes or supply chain issues.
http://climatecrocks.com/2013/03/01/sign-of-things-to-come-in-china-wind-surpasses-nuclear-in-energy-production/

CHINA’S state nuclear technology developer is in talks to buy land
earmarked for new
atomic reactors in Sellafield, Cumbria.
It is understood that State Nuclear Power Technology Company (SNPTC) will
go ahead
only if it receives assurances from Whitehall that it will one day be able
to build Chinese-designed nuclear
stations in Britain. The deal was raised in talks last week with Ed Davey,
the e

Radioactive Flytippers get off scot free

17 June 2013

On Friday at Carlisle Crown Court Sellafield was fined £700,000 for

dumping several bags of intermediate and low level waste in ordinary

landfill. The bags were plastic and lay broken in the same landfill used

for composting and recycling. The fine is meaningless. The public will be

picking up the tab. The only meaningful fine would be a ban on Sellafield

dumping ANY radioactive waste in ANY landfill. The media and especially

the BBC have consistently played this down and no media commentators have

made the points that

A. the public will be picking up the tab

B. the deregulatory “exempt” law allows radioactive waste into landfill in

the first place

C. there is no guarantee that this was an isolated incident.

Safe Beaches full of Plutonium

Barking Dog Award       

Watch Dog that Doesn’t Bark / Barks Madly

A Letter to Keep Britain Tidy –

Congratulations to Keep Britain Tidy on receiving the Barking Dog Award
2013. This is a new award and Keep Britian Tidy is the first recipient
for outstanding promotion of the worlds most radioactively contaminated
beaches as “Seaside Award” winning safe clean beaches.

One example is St Bees where 73 radioactive particles were found and
retrieved up to 2011. That number is increasing. The Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority have now scaled back the monitoring and
retrieval of radioactive particles despite the soaring numbers. The
Seaside Award should be revoked for all beaches in the vicinity of nuclear
plants (including Heysham/Morecambe) and most especially in the vicinity
of the worlds most dangerous reprocessing plant. Sellafield has in the
last few years stepped up its reprocessing activity and associated
discharges of radioactive waste into the Irish Sea. Monitoring and
retrieval of radioactive particles should be stepped up on all beaches in
the vicinity of Sellafield and reprocessing stopped immediately – when
reprocessing has ceased and an increased beach monitoring programme can
find no more radioactive particles on our beaches then perhaps children
can play safely. Until that time it is reckless beyond belief to be
promoting beaches in the vicinity of Sellafield as “safe and clean.”

At Seascale there is “zero tolerance” to dog poo but Pu and other
radioactive particles are scattered like a poisonous confetti cocktail on
the beach with every tide. Despite this the Nuclear Decommissioning
Authority are scaling back monitoring and retrieval citing ‘funding’ as a
reason. This is madness and Keep Britain Tidy have massively contributed
to the madness by awarding Seascale a “Seaside Award” flag. Prior to
Sellafield, West Cumbrian beaches were full of tourists and locals as the
old photographs testify. Sellafield is the reason people quite rightly
are wary of the beaches and the Health Protection Agency advice assumes
that babies, toddlers and young children are not spending hours digging,
rolling around and ingesting/inhaling the sand.

Please, Please, Please reconsider your Seaside Award to West Cumbrian
beaches and instead urge increased monitoring and retrieval of radioactive
particles on the beaches around Sellafield.

Axe Hinkley C. There is nowhere to put the waste

Axe Hinkley C call after Cumbria decision

PRESS RELEASE,  31/1/13  Southwest campaigners are calling for the planned nuclear development at Hinkley Point to be axed,  following Cumbria County councils decision not to accept a future underground waste dump in the Lake District.  Anti-nuclear activists  say that without a long term destination for it’s radioactive waste,  EDF’s Hinkley C project can only mean a permanent nuclear dump staying in West Somerset - for many thousands of years.

The proposed “Geological Disposal Facility” (GDF) was intended to safely store all the UK’s radioactive waste – including Somersets – deep underground for the next 10 thousand years.  Yesterday (30/1/13) Cumbrian councillors decided by a vote of 7 to 3 to reject the governments search for a suitable site in their county.

Cumbria had already been considered – and rejected – for a similar project in the 1980s, but experts then pronounced the lakelands too geologically unstable for storing the immensely hazardous radioactive waste,  which is the end-product of nuclear power.   So far no other counties have volunteered to host the permanent deep waste store,  despite offers of cash incentives from the government.

“In order to claim that the future waste from new nuclear plants can be disposed of safely, the government and the nuclear lobby needed the Stage 4 exploratory work to go ahead in Cumbria,” said Theo Simon, a spokesperson for the local Stop Hinkley campaign.  “In fact,  David Cameron said in 2007 that investment in new nuclear would not be possible unless the nuclear waste issue had been dealt with.

“EDF’s planning application for Hinkley C has rested on geological storage for its toxic spent fuel rods being available later this century,  but Cumbria was the only county in Britain that would even consider hosting such a facility.  Now the fig-leaf of the Cumbrian promise has dropped away.  The emperor has no clothes – and the EDF has no GDF.”

[StopNuke] Axe Hinkley C call after Cumbria decision

Inbox

x

theo@seizetheday.org via lists.riseup.net	Jan 31 (2 days ago)
to jane

PRESS RELEASE,  31/1/13


Axe Hinkley C call after Cumbria decision



Southwest campaigners are calling for the planned nuclear development at Hinkley Point to be axed,  following Cumbria County councils decision not to accept a future underground waste dump in the Lake District.  Anti-nuclear activists  say that without a long term destination for it’s radioactive waste,  EDF’s Hinkley C project can only mean a permanent nuclear dump staying in West Somerset - for many thousands of years.

The proposed “Geological Disposal Facility” (GDF) was intended to safely store all the UK’s radioactive waste – including Somersets – deep underground for the next 10 thousand years.  Yesterday (30/1/13) Cumbrian councillors decided by a vote of 7 to 3 to reject the governments search for a suitable site in their county.

Cumbria had already been considered – and rejected – for a similar project in the 1980s, but experts then pronounced the lakelands too geologically unstable for storing the immensely hazardous radioactive waste,  which is the end-product of nuclear power.   So far no other counties have volunteered to host the permanent deep waste store,  despite offers of cash incentives from the government.

“In order to claim that the future waste from new nuclear plants can be disposed of safely, the government and the nuclear lobby needed the Stage 4 exploratory work to go ahead in Cumbria,” said Theo Simon, a spokesperson for the local Stop Hinkley campaign.  “In fact,  David Cameron said in 2007 that investment in new nuclear would not be possible unless the nuclear waste issue had been dealt with.

“EDF’s planning application for Hinkley C has rested on geological storage for its toxic spent fuel rods being available later this century,  but Cumbria was the only county in Britain that would even consider hosting such a facility.  Now the fig-leaf of the Cumbrian promise has dropped away.  The emperor has no clothes – and the EDF has no GDF.”

Why this ad? Trade Oil Futures Online - www.optionshop.com - Cutting Edge New Broker Great Tools, No Exchange Fees

[StopNuke] Axe Hinkley C call after Cumbria decision

Inbox

x

theo@seizetheday.org via lists.riseup.net	Jan 31 (2 days ago)
to jane

PRESS RELEASE,  31/1/13


Axe Hinkley C call after Cumbria decision



Southwest campaigners are calling for the planned nuclear development at Hinkley Point to be axed,  following Cumbria County councils decision not to accept a future underground waste dump in the Lake District.  Anti-nuclear activists  say that without a long term destination for it’s radioactive waste,  EDF’s Hinkley C project can only mean a permanent nuclear dump staying in West Somerset - for many thousands of years.

The proposed “Geological Disposal Facility” (GDF) was intended to safely store all the UK’s radioactive waste – including Somersets – deep underground for the next 10 thousand years.  Yesterday (30/1/13) Cumbrian councillors decided by a vote of 7 to 3 to reject the governments search for a suitable site in their county.

Cumbria had already been considered – and rejected – for a similar project in the 1980s, but experts then pronounced the lakelands too geologically unstable for storing the immensely hazardous radioactive waste,  which is the end-product of nuclear power.   So far no other counties have volunteered to host the permanent deep waste store,  despite offers of cash incentives from the government.

“In order to claim that the future waste from new nuclear plants can be disposed of safely, the government and the nuclear lobby needed the Stage 4 exploratory work to go ahead in Cumbria,” said Theo Simon, a spokesperson for the local Stop Hinkley campaign.  “In fact,  David Cameron said in 2007 that investment in new nuclear would not be possible unless the nuclear waste issue had been dealt with.

“EDF’s planning application for Hinkley C has rested on geological storage for its toxic spent fuel rods being available later this century,  but Cumbria was the only county in Britain that would even consider hosting such a facility.  Now the fig-leaf of the Cumbrian promise has dropped away.  The emperor has no clothes – and the EDF has no GDF.”

Police investigating fatal shooting shocked by binge drinking on nuclear submarine HMS Astute

By Nuclear Information Service

Date: 11 January 2013

An inquest into a fatal shooting on board one of the Navy's nuclear powered submarines has been told that police investigating the incident were so shocked by binge drinking among the crew that they wrote to military authorities to highlight their worries.
Police officers investigating the shooting of Lieutenant Commander Ian Molyneux by Able Seaman Ryan Donovan on board HMS Astute during a public relations visit to Southampton in April 2011 discovered that "significant" numbers of the crew were intent on getting "drunk out of their minds" during the visit.
Detectives concluded that Donovan had drunk 20 pints of cider and lager, cocktails and double vodkas in the 48 hours before he was put on a guard duty with a gun, but that his drink intake was not out of the ordinary among the crew.
 The detective leading the inquiry was “highly alarmed” by the crew's alcohol consumption and took the “unprecedented” step of writing to the Chief Constable of the Hampshire Constabulary with his concerns.  The Chief Constable then raised the matter with regional military commander Brigadier Neil Baverstock.
The inquest was told that it was normal practice for the crew of the boat to “drink heavily while on shore leave, consuming alcohol over an extended period until they passed out and then returned to duty after five or six hours."
Commander Iain Breckenbridge, in command of the submarine at the time of the shooting, told the inquest that he had no concerns about Donovan before the shootings and was "surprised" to hear of the police's fears of binge drinking by the crew.
Donovan was jailed for 25 years for the murder of Lt Cdr Molyneux and the attempted murder of three others after opening fire with an SA80 rifle when HMS Astute was docked in Southampton on April 8 this year.
The Royal Navy has since tightened its rules on alcohol consumption before duty.

US climate scientist against nuclear in India

The Hindu - Mumbai, January 23, 2013

For Jaitapur villagers, questions remain:
The nuclear energy throughout the world is nearing to its irrelevance, said Dr. John Byrne, Director of the Centre for Energy and Environmental Policy (CEEP) and a distinguished Professor of University of Delaware, U.S. on Wednesday. Dr. Byrne has contributed to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) since 1992 and shares the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with the IPCC researchers.

Dr. Byrne, who is on a 12-day tour to India, held a meeting with the villagers of area in and around the proposed Jaitapur nuclear Power Plant (JNPP). “It seems the people have a number of unanswered questions. The answers provided to them and the risks or other implications of the project are not clear at all. People want to know the reason for bringing this project here,” he said, in a press conference organised by Greenpeace, after the meeting with villagers and anti-nuclear power activists.

Making his stand against nuclear energy clear, Dr. Byrne said, “This technology (nuclear) has a record of unanticipated accidents because of its complex nature. The economic investment required to build and operate the plant is huge and the ecological risks associated with the nuclear plant cannot be denied,” he said. In particular, he noted the repeated negative advisories from credit rating agencies regarding nuclear power. “Considering all the negative sides of the nuclear energy and the available options of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind, the nuclear energy is nearing to its irrelevance,” he said.

According to Dr. Byrne, the evidence from scientific community in Japan shows that nuclear accident in Fukushima after the earthquake and tsunami has its roots in the technology and management related issues. “These were the problems which were not anticipated even by the well-learned technicians from Japanese nuclear industry,” he alleged.


Comparing the option of solar energy to nuclear, he said the former is more sustainable. “But right now the solar energy is restricted for individual uses. There has been no cost-effective model in case of solar energy to build a plant which will benefit larger population. We are working on such model, but I am sure that in future, such model will be developed,” he said.

____________

SOUTH ASIANS AGAINST NUKES (SAAN):
An informal information platform for activists and scholars concerned
about the dangers of Nuclearisation in South Asia
http://s-asians-against-nukes.org/