Entergy Admits 2005 Tritium Leak 385
mdsolar writes "The leaking Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant was hit last week by a whistleblower allegation that a previous tritium leak had occurred. Now the parent company, Entergy, has admitted the occurrence of at least one prior leak to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This is particularly significant for three reasons: because the leak occurred in pipes that company officials later testified under oath did not exist, because the Vermont Senate will likely soon vote to deny Entergy a needed approval to extend the power plant's license for another 20 years, and because President Obama just put taxpayers on the hook for new nuclear power plants in Georgia."
New (Score:5, Informative)
because President Obama just put taxpayers on the hook for new nuclear power plants in Georgia
The keyword there is "new".
It's been, what, 30 years? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:New (Score:2, Informative)
I agree, in that I'd say the only conclusion is that we don't want Entergy building the new plants
mdsolar (Score:2, Informative)
you're not biased.
Re:It's been, what, 30 years? (Score:5, Informative)
Nuclear power would be competitive with coal in terms of cost if it were not for the massive amount of red tape. In fact, if you built in the environmental cost that Coal has into the pricing, Nuclear power becomes the cheapest source of energy due to the much much lower CO2 emissions of the technology. France is a perfect example of a country that has cut its CO2 emissions to a third of comparable nations CO2/$ because of the fact that 70+ % of its power needs come from nuclear power.
Re:Troll summary. (Score:2, Informative)
He's been grinding this axe for the last couple of months.
(Taking them to task for the leak and the lying is okay, but the trying to tie in the loan guarantees and the nucular scare tactics are silly)
Re:mdsolar (Score:5, Informative)
In case the username wasn't enough, here's some more evidence to suggest that mdsolar might have a bias.
From mdsolar's profile page:
http://slashdot.org/~mdsolar/ [slashdot.org]
"Very recently, I've gotten involved in a startup that plans to rent solar photovoltaic systems in the residential market. My guess is this is going to catch on. My homepage is where you can sign up."
There's also various submissions and journal entries going back as far as 2007 denouncing oil and nuclear power and extolling the virtues of renewable energy (particularly solar.)
Re:Loan Guarantee (Score:2, Informative)
Define 'safe'.
This is a tiny leak that is a regulatory problem, not a safety problem. The tritium levels are regulated because it isn't expensive to contain it, not because it poses an extreme and eminent danger.
Re:WHAT! (Score:2, Informative)
We cannot continue down this unlimited power path forever. Eventually it will run out.
No way. The universe has effectively unlimited energy, although it is not always conveniently available to us at our present level of technology.
Re:It's been, what, 30 years? (Score:3, Informative)
NIMBY and Greenpeace. Coal is responsile for the deaths of over 40,000 people a year in the United States due to various pollution caused by Coal plants. I wonder why people are screaming so loud to stop nuclear plants when Coal is by far the greater danger to life and the environment.
Again, red tape. Coal plants do not have to run through nearly as much red tape which is extremely odd considering all of the pollution that is released by them. CO2 causing global warming, various NOX and SOx causing acid rain, Mercury and even relatively large quantities of Thorium and Uranium release from burned Coal due to the fact that the living organisms that later formed these coal deposits concentrated these radioactive elements. This is why Coal ash is radioactive to some degree. The estimated release of radioactive elements by Coal plants is on an annual basis much larer than all nuclear accidents combined. Ever.
Re:WHAT! (Score:3, Informative)
What happens when the uranium runs out? Then what do we use to replace nuclear?
Solar. If solar cost and efficiency improvements continue the way they are doing right now, we'll be fine in a hundred years, and the uranium ought to last that long. Should that fail, there's space based solar, there's fusion, there's reprocessing of fissionable material, there's all the non-solar "green" technologies (though they don't scale as wonderfully as solar).
Our current problems are somewhat temporary, unless they kill us or make it impossible to sustain technological improvements.
Re:Troll summary. (Score:3, Informative)
"I believe the point is the fact that they lied about the leak in the first place."
No, the fact is that they lied about existing infrastructure when asked about it. The leak happening is a result of that lying, as if that infrastructure were known about, it could have been properly inspected.
Re:Not enough uranium (Score:3, Informative)
Re:WHAT! (Score:3, Informative)
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;
Re:WHAT! (Score:3, Informative)
The leak was into groundwater. It was in no way harmless. From http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20100210/NEWS02/2100351 [rutlandherald.com]:
The Vermont Department of Health last month confirmed that the tritium contaminated water was reaching the Connecticut River, since one of the most polluted groundwater monitoring wells was about 15 to 20 feet from the river.
...
According to the Department of Health, there is a general increase in tritium contamination at the wells that do show the radioactive isotope.
The well that shows the highest level of contamination decreased a little on Tuesday, down from 2.52 million picocuries per liter to 2.4 million picocuries, according to the latest post from the Department of Health Tuesday afternoon.
The first well that showed contamination measured 39,000 picocuries, the next worst well measured 890,000 picocuries, and there were two other contaminated wells, one measuring 81,000 picocuries and another, 2,500 picocuries.
One well tripled in contamination in recent days, going from 6,900 to 23,000 picocuries per liter.
The federal standard for drinking water is 20,000 picocuries per liter.