Home » Posts tagged 'us nuclear regulatory commission'
Tag Archives: us nuclear regulatory commission
Nuclear Power Kills: the Real Reason the NRC Canceled It’s Nuclear Site Cancer Study
Nuclear Power Kills: the Real Reason the NRC Canceled It’s Nuclear Site Cancer Study
Diablo Canyon nuclear plant.
After spending some $1.5 million and more than five years on developing strategies to answer the question of increases of cancer near nuclear facilities, the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) last week reported that they would not continue with the process. They would knock it on the head [1].
This poisoned chalice has been passed between the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the NRC since 2009 when public and political pressure was brought to bear on the USNRC to update a 1990 study of the issue, a study which was widely seen by the public to be a whitewash.
The NCR quickly passed the unwelcome task up to the NAS. It requested that the NAS provide an assessment of cancer risks in populations living ‘near’ the NRC-licenced nuclear facilities that utilize and process Uranium. This included 104 operating nuclear reactors in 31 States and 13 fuel cycle facilities in operation in 10 States.
The NRC request was to be carried out by NAS in two phases. Phase 1 was a scoping study to inform design of the study to be begun in Phase 2 and to recommend the best organisation to carry out the work.
The Phase 1 report was finished in May 2012. The best ‘state of the art’ methods were listed and the job of carrying out the actual study, a pilot study, was sent to: Guess who? The NRC. The poisoned chalice was back home. The NRC was now in a corner: what could they do?
If you don’t like the truth … suppress it
The committee sat for three years thinking about this during which time more and more evidence emerged that if it actually carried out the pilot study, it would find something bad. It had to escape. It did. It cancelled it. The reason given was that it would cost $8 million just to do the pilot study of cancer near the seven sites NAS had selected in its 600 page Phase 1 report. [2]
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
“Radiation is Good for You!” and Other Tall Tales of the Nuclear Industry
“Radiation is Good for You!” and Other Tall Tales of the Nuclear Industry
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is considering a move to eliminate the “Linear No-Threshold” (LNT) basis of radiation protection that the U.S. has used for decades and replace it with the “radiation hormesis” theory—which holds that low doses of radioactivity are good for people.
The change is being pushed by “a group of pro-nuclear fanatics—there is really no other way to describe them,” charges the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) based near Washington, D.C.
“If implemented, the hormesis model would result in needless death and misery,” says Michael Mariotte, NIRS president. The current U.S. requirement that nuclear plant operators reduce exposures to the public to “as low as reasonably achievable” would be “tossed out the window. Emergency planning zones would be significantly reduced or abolished entirely. Instead of being forced to spend money to limit radiation releases, nuclear utilities could pocket greater profits. In addition, adoption of the radiation model by the NRC would throw the entire government’s radiation protection rules into disarray, since other agencies, like the EPA, also rely on the LNT model.”
“If anything,” says Mariotte, “the NRC radiation standards need to be strengthened.”
The NRC has a set a deadline of November 19 for people to comment on the proposed change. The public can send comments to the U.S. government’s “regulations” website.
Comments can also be sent by regular mail to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff. Docket ID. Needed to be noted on any letter is the code NRC-2015-0057.
If the NRC agrees to the switch, “This would be the most significant and alarming change to U.S. federal policy on nuclear radiation,” reports the online publication Nuclear-News. “The Nuclear Regulatory Commission may decide that exposure to ionizing radiation is beneficial—from nuclear bombs, nuclear power plants, depleted uranium, x-rays and Fukushima,” notes Nuclear-News.
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
NY Governor Probes Nuclear Plant ‘Incident’ As Oil Spills Into Hudson River
NY Governor Probes Nuclear Plant ‘Incident’ As Oil Spills Into Hudson River
Having explained to the general public that there was nothing to be concerned about, when an exploding transformer shut down at least one unit of the Indian River nuclear power plant, noting “no danger to public safety,” it appears the situation is not as ‘contained’ as officials hoped. As Sputnik News reports, thousands of gallons of oil that leaked into the Hudson River after the explosion has formed a gigantic oil sheen on the waterway. NY Governor Andrew Cuomo has demanded a probe into the incident, adding that Entergy and contractors will clean up the spill.
- *CUOMO: PROBE ON WEEKEND INCIDENT AT INDIAN POINT PLANT ONGOING
- *CUOMO SAYS OIL DISCHARGE RESULT OF FIRE IN A TRANSFORMER
- *CUOMO: N.Y. WORKING WITH U.S. COAST GUARD TO MONITOR SITUATION
- *CUOMO: NY, U.S. EVALUATING ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE TO HUDSON RIVER
The oil made its way into the river following an explosion, fire, and leak that occurred Saturday at the Indian Point nuclear facility in Buchanan, about 40 miles north of Midtown Manhattan.According to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), oil leaked into the facility’s discharge drains during the fire, then into the river.
However, “there is no doubt that oil was discharged into the Hudson River,” New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said at Indian Point on Sunday. “We have booms in the water now around the discharged pipe to collect any oil that may be in the river.”
…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…
