Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Study: Nuclear Plants Vulnerable To Attacks

Expand Messages
  • Mike Neuman
    Study: Nuclear Plants Vulnerable To Attacks Experts Found Compromised Fuel Storage Pools Are Likely Sources Of Fire And Radiation. Wisconsin State Journal ::
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 8, 2005
      Study: Nuclear Plants Vulnerable To Attacks
      Experts Found Compromised Fuel Storage Pools Are Likely Sources Of
      Fire And Radiation.

      Wisconsin State Journal :: FRONT :: A4
      Thursday, April 7, 2005
      H. Josef Hebert Associated Press
      Fuel storage pools at nuclear power plants in 31 states may be
      vulnerable to terrorist attacks that could unleash raging fires and
      deadly radiation, scientists advised the government Wednesday.
      The group of nuclear experts said neither the government nor the
      nuclear industry "adequately understands the vulnerabilities and
      consequences of such an event." They recommended undertaking a plant-
      by-plant examination of fuel storage security as soon as possible.

      In the meantime, plant operators promptly should reconfigure used
      fuel rods in the storage pools to lower decay-heat intensity and
      install spray devices to reduce the risk of a fire should a storage
      facility be attacked, the scientists said.

      Congress sought the study by a National Academy of Science panel
      because of the heightened concerns that terrorists might seek to
      target nuclear power plants. The release Wednesday of a declassified
      version of the report followed months of debate with the Nuclear
      Regulatory Commission over how much of the findings should remain
      secret, and therefore, unavailable to potential terrorists.

      At 68 plants, including some already shut down, in 31 states,
      including Wisconsin, thousands of used reactor fuel rods are in deep
      water pools. Dry, concrete casks hold a smaller number of these rods.

      Much more highly radioactive fuel is stored in pools than is in the
      more protected reactors -- 103 in total -- at these sites.

      Some scientists and nuclear watchdog groups long have contended that
      these pools pose a much greater danger to a catastrophic attack than
      do the reactors themselves.

      Some plants where pools are all or partially underground present less
      of a problem. Others, including a series of boiling-water reactors
      where pools are more exposed, represent greater concern, said Bob
      Alvarez, a former Energy Department official who has argued for
      increased protection of used reactor fuel at nuclear plants.

      The experts' report "pretty well legitimizes what we've been saying,"
      Alvarez said in an interview.

      The scientific panel said reinforced concrete storage pools -- 25
      feet to 45 feet deep, with water circulating to keep the fuel
      assemblies from overheating -- could tempt terrorists.

      The report said an aircraft or high explosive attack could cause
      water to drain from the pools and expose the fuel rods, unleashing an
      uncontrollable fire and large amounts of radiation.

      Nuclear regulators said they would give the report's
      recommendations "serious consideration." But the NRC has disputed
      many findings and suggestions from the experts.

      After the classified document was provided to members of Congress
      last month, the NRC's chairman told lawmakers in a letter that some
      of the panel's assessments about plants' vulnerabilities
      were "unreasonable" and that certain conclusions "lacked sound
      technical basis."

      "Today, spent fuel is better protected than ever," Nils Diaz wrote.

      The NRC said it believes the potential for large releases of
      radiation from such a fire "to be extremely low." Still, the agency
      has advised reactor operations to consider refiguring the pools' fuel
      rods -- pairing new ones with older ones to reduce the heat.

      Kevin Crowley, the scientific panel's staff director, said the
      classified version of the report includes "some attack scenarios well
      within the means of terrorists" that could result in a catastrophic
      fire of spent fuel.

      Nuclear safety advocates said the report recognizes, for the first
      time, the vulnerability of spent fuel.

      David Lochbaum, a nuclear industry watchdog for the Union of
      Concerned Scientists, said the study makes clear that regulators have
      not acted aggressively enough.

      "Three years after 9/11, our hope would have been more of that
      homework had been done," Lochbaum said.

      The industry says its system of storing the fuel is safe and
      protected. But in response to the report, the industry said it
      was "assessing the potential to augment" safety systems for spent
      fuel facilities.

      Marvin Fertel, a senior executive at the Nuclear Energy Institute,
      the industry's trade group, said a computer analysis the industry
      commissioned in 2002 showed that fuel pool structures would
      withstand, without a significant loss of water, the impact of an
      aircraft crash.

      But the study said the pools vary among plants and reactor designs,
      and that some are more vulnerable than others.

      The panel said dry cask storage provides better protection. It also
      said significant numbers of used fuel rods always will have to be
      stay in pools for as long as five years before they adequately cool.
      At least one-quarter of the power plants now have some of their spent
      fuel in dry casks.

      The panel said the government should look into more widespread use of
      dry cask storage as part of its detailed assessment of risks.

      The academy is a private organization chartered by Congress to advise
      the government of scientific matters.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.