Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Earth Power News

Tritium Leak At Vermont Nuclear Plant Grows 295

mdsolar writes "The tritium leak into ground water at Vermont Yankee has now tested at 775,000 picocuries per liter, 37 times higher than the federal drinking water standard. 'Despite the much higher reading, an NRC spokeswoman said Thursday there was nothing to fear. "There's not currently, nor is there likely to be, an impact on public health or safety or the environment," the NRC's Diane Screnci said in an interview. She had maintained previously that the Environmental Protection Agency drinking water safety limit of 20,000 picocuries per liter had an abundance of caution built into it. ... The National Academy of Sciences said in 2005 that any exposure to ionizing radiation from an isotope like tritium elevates the risk of cancer, though it also said with small exposures, the risk would be low. ' At what level should the NRC shut down the troubled plant?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tritium Leak At Vermont Nuclear Plant Grows

Comments Filter:
  • by Fanboy Fantasies ( 917592 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @12:30PM (#31046072) Homepage

    personally I'm sick of his anti-nuclear agenda. White Power!

  • by mysqlrocks ( 783488 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @12:34PM (#31046094) Homepage Journal
    Actually, the latest reading was 2.7 million picocuries: http://www.vpr.net/news_detail/87126/ [vpr.net]
  • by YesIAmAScript ( 886271 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @12:38PM (#31046120)

    The article says the levels in the well from before doubled and are still below the federal level. Levels at another existing well dropped. And a new well was drilled to try to find the leak and it has a much higher concentration of tritium.

    Unless you're drinking from the new well (and no one is, it's a test well), this doesn't really affect you at all. It's not like you're getting 37x as much radiation now (at least as far as the data we have says). And it's part of the process of finding the leak and fixing it.

  • Not A Major Concern (Score:1, Informative)

    by echusarcana ( 832151 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @12:50PM (#31046216)
    A light water reactor isn't capable of producing much tritium since hydrogen has to absorb two neutrons to become it. Since it doesn't exist in nature any amount, no matter how small, is detectable. Not really a concern. You would most likely get more radiation exposure from coal.
  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @01:05PM (#31046322) Homepage

    That's good. That reading is a sump inside the plant. It's about the level of the process water, so it's near the leak. They're getting close.

    The hazardous readings are all within the plant perimeter. Additional monitoring of off-site wells has been started (ten locations are normally monitored by the State of Vermont, but monthly) and those aren't showing any significant radioactivity.

  • by the eric conspiracy ( 20178 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @01:26PM (#31046460)

    We get far more exposure from radon outgassing from the granite countertops in our kitchens.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/garden/24granite.html [nytimes.com]

    Let's pay attention to something we can actually get exposed to.

  • by HiddenCamper ( 811539 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @01:31PM (#31046506)
    Actually they did act. They noticed the rates increasing. They added more wells and kept testing to locate the problem. They are self-policing and reporting using their corrective action process. Going over a limit will get them a hefty fine, but all things considered when a problem just pops up like this you dont know where its at and you have little control over it. They are doing the right things.
  • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @01:40PM (#31046582)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by limaxray ( 1292094 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @02:04PM (#31046740)
    Any American gun owner can tell you that tritium is NOT banned in the US - tritium makes for great night sights and is a common addition for home defense weapons.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 06, 2010 @02:11PM (#31046812)

    How nice from the contaminated ground water to stay inside those wells .... oh wait, d'ooh it doesnt!

    this will move to other areas, and do not forget that the water might be drunk and while we humans can take a little radiation -outside- our bodies, having this stuff in water we drink is a big recipe for cancer (and do not forget, radiation levels are cumulated over time in our bodies - they do not get lower, they add together!)

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 06, 2010 @02:33PM (#31046950)

    Equal ratio? No. The fraction of tritium in the ground water is a very small number (call it e). So you end up with (1-e)^2 H2O, 2*(1-e)*e THO, and e^2 T2O. H2O isn't contaminated, so you look at the other two. THO dominates by a factor of about 2/e, so for all practical purposes it's really just THO.

    Also, I guess it depends upon exactly when and how the water molecule was created or altered......

    It doesn't. Water molecules get randomly dissociated and recombined on a scale of about 10h. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-ionization_of_water

  • Re:Wow... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Smallpond ( 221300 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @02:41PM (#31047002) Homepage Journal

    Wait long enough and any technology can be lost. Lots of old cities still have wood water pipes. Good luck finding someone who knows where they are or can repair them.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/18/us/18water.html [nytimes.com]

  • by gbutler69 ( 910166 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @03:01PM (#31047126) Homepage
    Grandparent though a Giga-Byte wa 1,024 Mega-Bytes. You said, that's a "gibibyte". Actually a "gibibyte" is 1,024 "mebibytes" which is 1,024 "kibibytes" which is 1,024 bytes. Mega-byte is 1,000 Giga-bytes which is 1,000 kilo-bytes, which is 1,000 bytes.
  • by agnosticnixie ( 1481609 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @03:23PM (#31047276)

    No, that's because incults who don't realize that the OS counts in binary and the makers in metric (which IBM already did in the 80s) sue.

  • by YesIAmAScript ( 886271 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @03:33PM (#31047332)

    Of course it doesn't stay in those wells, that's how it was found in the other well too. And it's surely in other wells even further away, just at lower concentrations.

    That's why they're looking for the source of the leak by drilling more wells. Once they find the leak they can fix it.

    Some say they should shut down the plant while they find the leak. Which is an interesting concept. Do you know how they find leaks in underground pipes? They put in radioactive tracers and then detect for it.

    http://www.darvill.clara.net/nucrad/uses.htm [clara.net]

    So, as long as the levels of radiation at wells outside the plant are low enough it's safe to keep running the plant while the leak is found.

    Also, radiation doesn't build up in your body. There is a model for body damage from radiation that counts cumulative exposure over a long period. But that isn't because the radiation stays in your body the whole time, it's because the damage from the radiation takes a long time to repair so it's useful mathematically to sum it up over time.

    Either way, the radiation levels have not increased 37x. The danger has not increased 37x. There's not even information (at this time) that the leak has grown at all, they're just measuring at a new spot. This would be like jumping in a pool at the shallow end and saying it's 3 feet deep, then walking to the deep end and saying the pool got deeper. It was 6 feet deep at that end before, you just didn't measure it in that spot before.

    I hope they get this problem fixed soon.

  • Re:totally safe (Score:2, Informative)

    by jthill ( 303417 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @03:51PM (#31047424)

    "Even" alpha emitters?

    Alpha particles are over 7,000 times [google.com] more massive. — they're .50cal bullets to the spitwad of a beta particle.

    Canada's limit is ten times the US limit and substantially less than the WHO's limit, and all are intended to prevent dangerous effects if stuff like this is ingested repeatedly and often for years.

    If you steadily drink tritiated water like this for years or decades, it'll probably eventually hurt you. So it's worth fixing, which they're doing.

    Meanwhile, if you want to do something approximately as dangerous, have a beer.

  • by vtcat ( 1281774 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @03:56PM (#31047452)
    Exactly- It wasn't a PR guy, it was Jay Thayer, VP of operations, among others. Backtracking and in trouble: A detailed timeline on who said what on Vt. Yankees [timesargus.com] Also, instead of 0 underground pipes, there are 40. And they've found Cobalt-60 and Zinc-65 in a "trench". Nice
  • Re:Wow... (Score:2, Informative)

    by vtcat ( 1281774 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @04:03PM (#31047484)

    Actually, the plant is scheduled to close in 2012, unless the Vermont Legislature votes to allow it to operate for another 20 years.

    The Legislature meets from January to April or May. Vermont Yankee and the Governor were pushing for a vote this session. They're no longer quite as anxious to vote at this time.

  • Tritium (Score:3, Informative)

    by MrKaos ( 858439 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @09:54PM (#31049656) Journal

    A list of some scientific studies on the effects of tritium with references in case there is any doubt regarding Triated water's effect on living beings.

    Tritium is biologically mutagenic *because* it's a low energy emitter. This characteristic makes readily absorbed by surrounding cells. The available evidence from studies conducted journal a list of effects. From those works;

    Tritium can be inhaled, ingested, or absorbed through skin. Eating food containing 3H can be even more damaging than drinking 3H bound in water. Consequently, an estimated radiation dose based only on ingestion of tritiated water may underestimate the health effects if the person has also consumed food contaminated with tritium. (Komatsu)

    Studies indicate that lower doses of tritium can cause more cell death (Dobson, 1976), mutations (Ito) and chromosome damage (Hori) per dose than higher tritium doses. Tritium can impart damage which is two or more times greater per dose than either x-rays or gamma rays.

    (Straume) (Dobson, 1976) There is no evidence of a threshold for damage from 3H exposure; even the smallest amount of tritium can have negative health impacts. (Dobson, 1974) Organically bound tritium (tritium bound in animal or plant tissue) can stay in the body for 10 years or more.

    It's often said "of all the elements in nuclear waste tritium is one of the more harmless ones" and while it's more benign than most other radioactive effluents it's toxicity should not be under-estimated.

    Tritium can cause mutations, tumors and cell death. (Rytomaa) Tritiated water is associated with significantly decreased weight of brain and genital tract organs in mice (Torok) and can cause irreversible loss of female germ cells in both mice and monkeys even at low concentrations. (Dobson, 1979) (Laskey) Tritium from tritiated water can become incorporated into DNA, the molecular basis of heredity for living organisms. DNA is especially sensitive to radiation. (Hori) A cell's exposure to tritium bound in DNA can be even more toxic than its exposure to tritium in water. (Straume)(Carr)

    First, as an isotope of hydrogen (the cell's most ubiquitous element), tritium can be incorporated into essentially all portions of the living machinery; and it is not innocuous -- deaths have occurred in industry from occupational overexposure. R. Lowry Dobson, MD, PhD. (1979)

    References;

    Komatsu, K and Okumura, Y. Radiation Dose to Mouse Liver Cells from Ingestion of Tritiated Food or Water. Health Physics. 58. 5:625-629. 1990.

    Dobson, RL. The Toxicity of Tritium. International Atomic Energy Agency symposium, Vienna: Biological Implications of Radionuclides Released from Nuclear Industries v. 1: 203. 1979.

    Hori, TA and Nakai, S. Unusual Dose-Response of Chromosome Aberrations Induced in Human Lymphocytes by Very Low Dose Exposures to Tritium. Mutation Research. 50: 101-110. 1978.

    Straume, T and Carsten, AL.Tritium Radiobiology and Relative Biological Effectiveness. Health Physics. 65 (6) :657-672; 1993. [This special issue of Health Physics is entirely devoted to Tritium]

    Laskey, JW, et al. Some Effects of Lifetime Parental Exposure to Low Levels of Tritium on the F2 Generation. Radiation Research.56:171-179. 1973.

    Rytomaa, T, et al. Radiotoxicity of Tritium-Labelled Molecules. International Atomic Energy Agency symposium,Vienna: Biological Implications of Radionuclides Released from Nuclear Industries v. 1: 339. 1979.

  • Re:Wow... (Score:3, Informative)

    by swb ( 14022 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @10:45PM (#31049836)

    All the competitive shooters who can use holographic sights (which are really just illuminated sights with zero power magnification) and they're pretty much standard equipment anymore on military rifles. Bullseye shooters all seem to prefer red dots; I have one on my Model 41 and its wicked accurate.

    For defensive guns, its hard not to see the advantages of tritium -- much faster and easier sight picture in low light. I use TruGlo sights that also have fiber optics; its the same sight picture/color in dark or light conditions. Fiber optic front sights are nice on revolvers if you're not using magnified glass or a dot, in the right light almost as nice as a red dot.

    I'm sure a person CAN develop great skills with iron sights for self defense, but its a lot easier in the dark with visible sights.

  • Re:Wow... (Score:3, Informative)

    by HiddenCamper ( 811539 ) on Saturday February 06, 2010 @11:32PM (#31050078)
    BWRs are only 1 stage for cooling. The water in the reactor is the water that passes through the condenser. PWRs use 2 loops. Vermont is a BWR. Tritium levels could be higher in there because of the massive amount of free neutrons flying around in the reactor. double neutron absorption in the water could cause it.

To the systems programmer, users and applications serve only to provide a test load.

Working...