溶融核燃料21年取り出し開始維持　福島第１で政府方針 via 日本経済新聞

Posted on 2017/08/31 by yukimiyamotodepaul

政府は東京電力福島第１原子力発電所１～３号機で溶け落ちた核燃料を取り出す作業の2021年中の開始を維持する方針だ。21年の作業開始は政府と東電が15年に決定していたものの、溶融燃料の実態把握が難航。開始時期の延期が焦点となっていたが、廃炉支援を担う原子力損害賠償・廃炉等支援機構が技術的に可能と判断した。

東京電力福島第１原発３号機の格納容器内調査で、水中ロボットが撮影した原子炉圧力容器底部の様子＝７月19日（国際廃炉研究開発機構提供）

原賠機構は31日、溶融燃料の取り出し方針を含む「廃炉戦略プラン2017」を公表。溶融燃料を水に浸しながら原子炉の横から作業する工法を柱に取り出し開始は技術的に可能とした。「21年取り出し開始を崩す理由はない」（原賠機構幹部）との結論になった。

強い放射線を出し続ける溶融燃料を取り除く作業は、福島第１原発廃炉の最難関に位置づけられている。原賠機構や東電などが溶融燃料の正確な位置や量の把握に努めてきたが、今年１～３月に実施した１～２号機の調査では特定できなかった。そのため21年の取り出し開始は技術的に困難との見方も出ていた。

続きは溶融核燃料21年取り出し開始維持　福島第１で政府方針

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

安倍は「ストーカー男」のように原発に執着 via 日刊ゲンダイ

Posted on 2017/08/30 by nfield

飯田哲也

「日本はなぜ原発を拒めないのか――国家の闇へ」山岡淳一郎著

原発投資を失敗した東芝が上場廃止から解体に向かいつつある。福島第１原発事故を起こした東京電力は事実上破綻し国有化された。原発事故の避難者は置き去りにされ、２０兆円から７０兆円もかかる「廃炉」はおろか汚染水すら処理のめどが立たない。六ケ所再処理工場や核燃料サイクルも事実上破綻し、「１０万年」もの管理を要する核のゴミの行方が決まろうはずもない。何と言っても、３．１１を経験した私たち国民の８割は脱原発を求めている。

こうして、今や日本の原発は全方位で崩壊状態にあるにもかかわらず、日本は、いや安倍政権は「ストーカー男」のように原発に執着し、電力会社はひたすら原発再稼働に突き進み、国が立ち上げたエネルギー基本計画改定の審議会では原発新増設を求める声ばかりだった。なぜなのか。

かつて「日米原子力協定のために日本は脱原発できない」という議論も見られたが、本書は、そうした大ざっぱな俗論には立たず、「国家の闇」に一つ一つ丹念に光を当てながら、絡み合った要因を読み解いてゆく。

電力会社が脱原発によって債務超過に陥る恐れ、国策民営が生み出した「政官財学報の原子力ペンタゴン」、いわゆる原子力ムラ、潜在的に核武装できるオプションを持とうとする政治的な野心、そして原発に依存した自治体の国策依存。

本書は、こうした原発のまわりに政治の固い殻が取り巻いていることを明らかにした上で、これらがいずれも政治的な意思と建設的な政策によって解き放たれることを、南相馬市など具体的な事例を挙げつつ解説してゆく。

[…]

全文

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

高濃度汚泥を高台に移送へ　２０年後半 via 産経ニュース

Posted on 2017/08/30 by nfield

　東京電力福島第１原発で事故直後に高濃度汚染水を処理して出た汚泥をめぐり、東京電力は３０日、現在保管している敷地内の海抜が低い建屋地下から、平成３２（２０２０）年後半に高台へ移送を始める方針を明らかにした。同日の廃炉作業に関する原子力規制委員会の会合で示した。再び津波が襲来して放射性物質が外部に漏れ出すのを防ぐための措置。

問題の汚泥は仏・アレバ社製の処理装置で２３年６～９月に約７万６千トンの高濃度汚染水を処理して発生。上澄み水も含む計約６００立方メートルが海抜１０メートルの「プロセス主建屋」地下の貯槽にある。

計画では、毎時数十ミリシーベルトと高い放射線量の貯槽周辺を３０年から除染。貯槽から抜き取った汚泥を脱水した上で保管容器に入れて、海抜約２５メートルより高いエリアに運ぶ。

 

原文

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Settlement Reached To Move San Onofre Nuclear Waste via CBS Los Angeles

Posted on 2017/08/30 by nfield

SAN CLEMENTE (CBSLA.com/AP) – Southern California Edison has agreed to make a good faith effort to relocate 3.6 million pounds of nuclear waste away from the shuttered San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, bringing an end to a nearly two-year legal battle between the utility provider and environmental groups.

According to a settlement agreement filed Monday in San Diego Superior Court, Edison has agreed to move the nuclear waste inland to an offsite storage facility yet to be determined.

“Pending development of a permanent DOE (Department of Energy) repository for the Spent Fuel, SCE shall use ‘commercially reasonable’ efforts to relocate the spent fuel to an offsite storage facility,” the summary of the agreement reads.

The DOE currently has no long-term storage site for radioactive fuel from commercial nuclear plants, forcing companies like Edison to find and operate their storage facilities.

San Onofre, located between San Diego and Los Angeles, was shut down in January 2012 after a small radiation leak led to the discovery of extensive damage to hundreds of tubes inside the virtually new generators.

The plant never produced electricity again. Edison closed San Onofre for good in 2013 amid a fight with environmentalists over whether the plant was too damaged to restart safely.

A third of the fuel on the seaside site was moved from storage pools into canisters. However, that complex reached capacity. The other two-thirds remained in what were known as wet storage pools.

In October 2015, the California Coastal Commission issued a permit allowing Edison to expand its onsite storage by moving the remaining the spent nuclear fuel rods from the storage pools into dry cask storage canisters on the coastline.

This prompted an uproar from neighbors and activists, who argued it was creating a nuclear waste dump that could leak or be damaged by flooding or an earthquake.

The permit allowed Edison to construct a complex of additional canisters, partially below ground, and move the fuel from pool storage into the steel containers by 2019.

In November 2015, an environmental nonprofit group called Citizens Oversight filed a lawsuit against Edison, challenging the CCC permit. However, under the terms of Monday’s agreement, Citizens Oversight has agreed to dismiss the lawsuit.

“The agreement plots a prudent strategy in furtherance of the goal of moving the fuel sooner than later,” said Ray Lutz of Citizens Oversight in a statement.

According to the parameters of the deal, Edison will spend up to $4 million on developing a plan to move the spent fuel to an offsite facility.

Edison will also have to provide Citizens Oversight with monthly progress reports on its efforts. However, the agreement did not stipulate a deadline for when the waste must be removed from San Onofre.

[…]

 

 

 

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Settlement Reached To Move San Onofre Nuclear Waste via CBS Los Angeles

If nuclear is not in the future US energy mix, what will replace it? via Utility Dive

Posted on 2017/08/30 by nfield

By Herman K. Trabish

The U.S. had only two nuclear plants being built; now one is out and the other is uncertain

The decision to not go forward with the V.C. Summer nuclear plant because of cost overruns and construction delays shows the 1960s dream of “too cheap to meter” nuclear-generated electricity is more like a financial nightmare today.

Policy specialists say significant new nuclear generation is unlikely for a decade or more. Many also agree existing nuclear plants should not be replaced by natural gas plants. They split, though, on crucial questions about nuclear power’s future, such as whether existing plants should get subsidies like zero emission credits or be replaced, when they should be replaced, and what they should be replaced with.

A report from Mark Cooper, senior research fellow at the Vermont Law School Energy and Environment Institute, was part of the proceeding that led to the decision by SCANA Corp and Santee Cooper in South Carolina to stop work on the Summer facility.

“Summer was 100% excess capacity for those utilities,” he told Utility Dive in an interview. “If they need new generation, the best approach is buying the smallest increments at the lowest price, and that’s efficiency, wind, and solar. The capital cost of renewables is between 12% and 25% of what Summer was costing.”

The Summer decision bolstered the economic argument against nuclear. Newer to the debate is the controversial question of nuclear’s role in the climate fight.

The MIT Energy Institute’s Jesse Jenkins, co-author of a recent review of research on deep decarbonization in the power sector, said nuclear is too important a source of emissions-free electricity to abandon.

“Using renewables to replace nuclear represents an opportunity cost because we are not using those emissions-free MWh to replace fossil fuels,” he argued. “We have very little time to waste and, at best, replacing nuclear with renewables is running in place.”

Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies (CEERT) Executive Director V. John White said neither national policy nor ideology should determine nuclear’s future. “It is a regional question.”

But the aging U.S. nuclear fleet is an increasing safety risk and “it is not prudent to keep reactors in service just because we aren’t sure how to replace them,” White said. “It is a plant by plant decision and a matter of economics, public safety and available resources.”

[…]

 

 

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , | 3 Comments

放射能被害の安全保障対策上も原発停止重要 via エコノミック･ニュース

Posted on 2017/08/29 by nfield

　民進党の菅直人最高顧問は、原発問題はエネルギー問題であるとともに最大の危機管理上の問題だ、と２９日発信した。「北朝鮮の軍事的行動に警戒する」とするなら「日本国内の稼働中の原発全てをまず停止させることだ」と放射能被害の安全保障対策上からも原発停止が重要と提起した。

菅元総理は「東電福島第一原発事故の後、東海地震の震源に近いと想定されている『浜岡原発』を止めた」。総理としての判断で、想定外の事故時のリスクを考え、安全策を優先させたものだ。

菅元総理は「北朝鮮のミサイルを警戒し、政府は警戒態勢を発令し、緊急時に地下鉄などを停止することを準備している。しかし、それ以上に万一原発が攻撃され破壊されても放射能被害を招かないよう、原発の稼働を停止させておくことがもっと重要である」と求めている。

原発については、事故を懸念する福島県の住民らが、１９７５年に福島第２原発１号機の国の設置許可に対し、取り消しを求め提訴したが、１９９２年に最高裁は「原子炉設置について、安全性が確保されることから、原子炉等規制法２４条１項４号の許可基準に適合しているとした被告（国）の判断には合理的根拠がある」とし、訴えを却下した。この時の最高裁判事だったメンバーの一人は退官後、当時、原発メーカーだった東芝の社外監査役に就任した。

原発の安全基準が安全を完全に担保、保証するものでないことは東日本大震災での福島第１原発事故で皮肉にも立証された。原子力規制委員会の田中俊一委員長も「規制委員会は安全基準に適合しているかどうかを審査しているのであって、安全を保証するものではない」と当初から話している。（編集担当：森高龍二）

 

原文

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

コラム：トランプ氏エネルギー政策の欠陥、「ハービー」で露呈 via ロイター

Posted on 2017/08/29 by nfield

Lauren　Silva　Laughlin

［ダラス　２８日　ロイター　BREAKINGVIEWS］ – 米テキサス州湾岸部を襲った大型ハリケーン「ハービー」は、トランプ米大統領のエネルギー政策の欠陥を露わにした。

大統領は石炭生産と油田掘削の拡大を通じ、米国を世界に冠たる燃料輸出国としたい意向だ。しかしゴールドマン・サックスの調査によると、テキサス州の洪水で米国の製油能力の１６％に支障が生じた。トランプ氏お気に入りの構想よりも、気候変動対策とエネルギーインフラの強化を優先すべきだ。

大統領は６月、国内の石油生産を拡大し、外国産石油への依存を止めるとの目標を掲げた。選挙中には石炭産業の復活を約束し、４月には米沖合油田の掘削を拡大する大統領令に署名。５月、米国の戦略石油備蓄の約半分の売却を提案した。

しかし現在、シェールオイル革命のおかげで原油と天然ガスは有り余っている。これらを燃料に変えるインフラが機能しなければ、この豊富な供給も役に立たない。

テキサス州は米国で最も製油所が集中する場所だ。当初の報道によると、大半の施設閉鎖は予防的な措置だが、損害規模を評価するのはまだ早い。米気象庁の予報では、ハリケーンは９月１日までテキサス、ルイジアナ両州の湾岸部に居座り、雨量は所によって最大５０インチに達する見通しだ。チューダー・ピカリング・ホルトの調査では、最悪の場合、米国の製油能力の最大３０％が一時的に失われる。

 

[…]

環境保護局（ＥＰＡ）によると、気候変動によってテキサス州の降雨量は増えつつあり、ハリケーンは勢力を増し、メキシコ湾岸の水位は１０年間に約２インチ上昇している。米国のエネルギー安全保障を確実にする上では、こうした脅威とテキサス州の製油・輸送インフラに手を打つ方が良策だろう。

[…]

全文

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | 4 Comments

Nuclear Reactors in Harvey’s Path via Institute for Public Accuracy

Posted on 2017/08/29 by nfield

Two nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project near Bay City, Texas should be shut down immediately in order to protect public safety in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, three watchdog groups warned today. With additional rainfall and increased flooding risks anticipated, the groups are calling on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Governor of Texas, Electric Reliability Council of Texas and utility owners of the nuclear reactors to take action immediately.

KAREN HADDEN
Hadden is director of the Sustainable Energy & Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, based in Texas. The watchdog groups pointed out that the Fukushima disaster showed the world that an energy asset can turn into a multi-billion dollar liability overnight. She said today: “We should do all we can to prevent such a mistake. … Flood waters reaching the nuclear reactors could make operation increasingly dangerous and the rains are expected to continue. There is plenty of reserve capacity on our electric grid, so we don’t have to run the reactors in order to keep the lights on. With anticipated flooding of the Colorado River, the nuclear reactors should be shut down now to ensure safety.”

SUSAN DANCER, [lives in Bay City] texasblessings at yahoo.com
Dancer is president of the South Texas Association for Responsible Energy. She said today: “A county-wide emergency evacuation notice was issued last week for all residents to be out ahead of Harvey’s landfall. In an even more aggressive move last night, the Bay City Mayor and Matagorda County Judge issued mandatory evacuation orders effective immediately as Bay City is expected to be ten feet under water in a flood of a scale we’d never even imagined, much less experienced. I loaded up my animals and fled my Bay City home, not even taking time to take any possessions with me. As we tried to flee, water was already flowing across many roads. Our 911 system is down, as are our police and fire department’s phone and dispatch systems. No emergency services are available. All businesses are shuttered and most are taking on water. Refineries have shut down.

“It’s an outrageous and reckless decision that the nuclear reactors are still running. Why aren’t they in cold shutdown with only a skeleton crew? Where is the concern for employees and their families? Why is corporate profit being prioritized over caution and good judgment?”

PAUL GUNTER, [in D.C. area] paul at beyondnuclear.org, @BeyondNuclear
Gunter is director of the Reactor Oversight Project at the group Beyond Nuclear. He said today: “Both the NRC and the operator have previously recognized a credible threat of a severe accident initiated by a breach of the embankment wall that surrounds the 7,000-acre reactor cooling water reservoir. … However remote, it’s simply prudent that the operator put this reactor into its safest condition, cold shutdown.”

Source

Posted in *English | Tagged , | Comments Off on Nuclear Reactors in Harvey’s Path via Institute for Public Accuracy

US nuclear watchdog keeping eye on South Texas plant via Energy Voice

Posted on 2017/08/28 by nfield

The US regulatory body was in close communication with officials from the STP Nuclear Operating Co. prior to the storm making landfall Friday night.

The NRC dispatched two additional staff from Arlington, Texas, to the site to relieve the two resident inspectors who were sent home to ensure the safety of their families.

[…]

“Like all of the nuclear power plants licensed to operate in the United States, they have robust concrete containment structures which have been built to withstand major hurricanes, tornadoes and torrential rain.

“Harvey is expected to produce additional rain accumulations of 15 to 25 inches over the middle and upper Texas coast through Thursday.

“Current weather projections for Harvey do not pose a threat to the #Waterford nuclear power plant in New Orleans and the #RiverBend nuclear plant near Baton Rouge, but the NRC is monitoring for any changes to those projections.

“The agency is closely monitoring the path of the storm and its Region IV office in Arlington, Texas, is prepared to activate its Incident Response Center if and when conditions warrant.”

 

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged | 2 Comments

DOE disposing of uranium-233 waste stored at ORNL via Oak Ridge Today

Posted on 2017/08/28 by nfield

They haven’t agreed on a final budget number, but the Trump administration and the U.S. House and Senate have proposed spending between about $33 million and $52 million in the next fiscal year to continue disposing of uranium-233 waste materials that are stored at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in a building that is the oldest continuously operating nuclear facility in the U.S. Department of Energy complex.

The uranium-233, or U-233, waste is now stored in secure vaults in Building 3019, which was built in the 1940s at ORNL. Removing the waste could allow ORNL to relax its overall security posture, which will reduce costs, eliminate nuclear safety issues, and make the campus more conducive to collaborative science, according to a U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee report published in July.

Some of the waste is from a 1960s research and development test in New York, and it is being shipped to the Nevada National Security Site, a former nuclear weapons proving ground about 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas. In interviews this summer, DOE officials in Oak Ridge declined to discuss the amount of that waste that has been shipped to Nevada or to say how long the shipments might continue. But they are making progress, said Jay Mullis, acting manager of DOE’s Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management.

[…]

hat waste is from the Consolidated Edison Uranium Solidification Program, or CEUSP. It contains radioisotopes of uranium from a 1960s research and development test of thorium and uranium reactor fuel at the Consolidated Edison Indian Point-1 reactor in New York. The test was sponsored by the Atomic Energy Commission, a predecessor to the U.S. Department of Energy.

The research and development test was completed in late 1968, and Nuclear Fuel Services of West Valley, New York, recovered the uranium, which was then considered to be a reusable nuclear material. The uranium was separated from certain other isotopes, fission products, and other constituents common to reactor fuel, according to a DOE analysis prepared in August 2014.

[…]

he material was then managed in ORNL’s Building 3019 for possible reuse.

But a “near-term use” still hadn’t been identified by the mid-1980s. So for safety and security reasons, DOE solidified all 8,000 liters of the liquid uranyl nitrate at high temperatures into 403 individual small, ceramic-like uranium oxide monoliths, the DOE analysis said. Each uranium oxide monolith was bonded to the inside of a steel canister measuring about 3.5 inches in diameter by about two feet long. Individual canisters contained just a few kilograms of uranium each, including some U-232.

[…]

“Thus, DOE changed its management strategy for the CEUSP low-level waste material from one of storage for potential reuse to a search for an appropriate disposal location,” DOE said in its August 2014 analysis. “The Department shares the concerns of the DNFSB that continued storage of this waste in Building 3019 cannot be a long-term solution for the disposition of this waste. After the CEUSP low-level waste material and other material are removed from Building 3019, the building can be decontaminated and decommissioned.”

[…]

 

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , | 2 Comments