This group brings together the best thinkers on energy and climate. Join us for smart, insightful posts and conversations about where the energy industry is and where it is going.

Post

NRC Near Term Report on Fukushima Safety Issues

Dan Yurman's picture
Editor & Publisher NeutronBytes, a blog about nuclear energy

Publisher of NeutronBytes, a blog about nuclear energy online since 2007.  Consultant and project manager for technology innovation processes and new product / program development for commercial...

  • Member since 2018
  • 1,442 items added with 1,005,178 views
  • Jul 13, 2011 5:27 pm GMT
  • 521 views

Your access to Member Features is limited.

Meltdowns in Japan drive an ambitious agenda in the U.S.

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has released a “Near Term Report” ( full text ) this week that calls for a wide range of safety improvements for the U.S. fleet of 104 nuclear reactors.

The report ominously calls for “redefining the level of protection that is regarded as adequate.” If that’s the case, just exactly what has the agency been doing up to now? This is not gratuitous skepticism. If a federal regulatory agency calls for moving the goal posts, it’s time to take a close look at its reasons for doing so.

Yet at the same time the NRC calls for change, it acknowledges that the information it has on what happened at Fukushima is “unavailable, unreliable, or ambiguous because of damage to equipment at the site.” In short, the report is vulnerable to criticism that it appears to be a case of shoot first and ask questions afterwards.

The 90 page report was written in response to the earthquake and tsunami of March 11 which resulted in partial or complete meltdowns of three reactors and the destruction of the infrastructure supporting six reactors at Fukushima, Japan.

Two key areas stand out in the report. The first is the question of how nuclear utilities will deal with multiple reactors impacted by the same natural disaster and second how to address “station blackout” when both internal and external electrical power is lost. It is clear from the experience at Fukushima that four-to-eight hours of battery power and a few days of diesel generator emergency power are not good enough. See also Reuters Fact Box list of subjects covered in the NRC report.

There are lots of reasons why the 40-year old Japanese reactors would never be built in the current era. The report takes pains to point out there is “no imminent risk” for U.S. nuclear reactors. The NRC needs to take care that it doesn’t over-react to problems in Japan that don’t affect the U.S. fleet.

Dan Yurman's picture
Thank Dan for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member
Discussions
Spell checking: Press the CTRL or COMMAND key then click on the underlined misspelled word.

No discussions yet. Start a discussion below.

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »