I have sent this one to Cecil, but in the event that he is consumed by other questions I hope someone can help…
I recently bought a house that happens to be within 10 miles of a nuclear power plant. I am fine with the nuclear power itself, but it’s the storage of the waste that has me worried. Currently this plant uses 2 pools to store the spent rods. The rods must be stored under 25 feet of water. The powers that be intend to activate 2 more pools at the plant, which will cause this plant to have the title of “largest nuclear waste storage facility in the United States.” Turns out that spent rods from other plants in my state are transported to this plant for storage. So here is part one of the question: how is nuclear waste “transported”? If it is so dangerous that it needs to be stored in a 25-foot deep pool, how is it moved across my state? Could these things me driving down the highway next to us? And part two is: the anti-waste storage camp is adamant that the additional storage will cause this plant to become a prime terrorist target. How likely is that? And finally, part three: If there is indeed a nuclear disaster, what happens to humans within a certain radius of the event?
There was a plan by a company called Panacea to have Western Australia store nuclear waste in the vast desert region of that state. Panacea’s office building has since been the site of regular protests and as far as I know the State Government has backed down on the issue.
Moving the stuff just seems to me to be frought with the risk of a vehicular accident. This seems intuitively less likely with rail than by road, but the prospect of a train derailing and spilling radioactive debris doesn’t do much for me.
Okay, did you all see Duck’s Post? I encourage you to look at these links. Tomorrow when you drive to the office you may pass a vehicle containing nuclear waste. How does that make you feel? I just can’t believe the stuff is actually transported via vehicle. Are there other means? I drive past the nuclear power plant daily. How alarmed should I be?
Um… Has anyone seen the transport casks used to haul spent fuel rods? They make an airplane’s “black box” look like a robin’s eggshell by comparison. They are designed to be nigh-indestructible and reduntantly armored- very, very little short of towed artillery can damage one to the point of inner containment rupture.
The Nuclear industry is more heavily regulated than the Airline industry- does anyone think waste is simply poured into a five gallon bucket and put in the back of a pickup?
Besides, in addition to the nuke waste, there’s twenty times more trucks carrying a far more hazardous fluid in far less stringent conditions each day. Ever give a second look at a gasoline tanker? What’s one gallon of gasoline, the equivalent of six sticks of Dynamite?
To say nothing of the thousands of trucks you never even notice carrying stuff like sulfuric acid, pesticides, diesel fuel, propane, chlorine, formaldehyde, methyl mercaptan, toluene, methanol alcohol and even MTBE.
Worried? Be more concerned with the caffeine in that double Latte`.
At the risk of “me too-ing” Doc’s post, I’d recommend a balanced view (not a poke at you, Duck, I thought you did a good job of presenting reasonable links for moderate positions on both sides). I agree that it’s imperative to pay attention when things like nuclear waste are involved, but there is far more fear-mongering and mis-information than rationality floating around.
Panacea are not finished yet. They are still lobbying the Australian federal government for the right to establish the same facility in remote South Australia, and the feds are showing a good deal of sympathy towards the idea. Despite being of the same political party as the feds, the SA government is pubicly opposing the plan, but they are in crisis management mode, with an election looming in the next six months.
The feds have already foisted a storage facility for “low-level” nuclear waste in remote SA, at Woomera. You’d have to be quite naive to think that nothing hotter is there, or will never be shipped there. I think its the thin edge of the wedge - the first stage in a softening-up process to turn overwhelming public opposition into large scale apathy.
But I was always a cynical bastard…
“Tomorrow when you drive to the office you may pass a vehicle containing nuclear waste. How does that make you feel?”
Not one whit less safe than when I consider the literally hundreds of train cars that pass through my town every day carrying chemicals of every kind and description, from the most benign and inert to some of the most flammable and toxic. Many of which seem to pass through about four feet in front of me when I’m trying to cross the tracks to catch my commuter train to work.
Sounds to me like Manhattan has issued a challenge to debate Hazmat transport safety. No, of course I don’t think that nuclear rods are shipped in Tonka trucks. But I am aware of the power of the utility companies, and I know that public safety is compromised in the transportation of not only nuclear waste but other chemicals as well. So has anyone had any hazmat problems lately? Talk to us.
Hey, you’re worried about hazmat transportation issues? Know how the Nuclear Regulatory Commission sends its test samples back to the home office to be tested?
Think about that, the next time you drive past the mail dropbox in the parking lot of the Kroger store that’s down the road from the nuclear power plant.
