New nuclear plant in Utah???

March 16th, 2014

BlueCastleNuclearPowerPlantLayout

Whoa! Looks like I’ve been paying attention to transmission in the Midwest.

Blue Castle Holdings: Nuclear power proposal along the Green River in Utah

This caught my attention as part of a transmission deal, see Salt Lake Tribune article below — this nuclear power plant was proposed quite a while ago, but my take is that it isn’t exactly going anywhere. 

My concern is that it just might sneak through anyway.  Why?  Because they’re making allowances for connection to the grid, and the state is caving in this “compromise” that’s not in the public interest:

Transmission line fight ends in compromise

TransWest had said it planned to build one near Delta at some point, but that assurance wasn’t enough for Utah power companies like Blue Castle Holdings, which is laying the groundwork for the state’s first commercial nuclear plant near Green River, and some solar companies.

What’s this nuclear power plant?  It’s the Blue Castle Project, planning a

“Clean energy resources…” — how dare they say this, given nuclear history in Utah. And yet, last November, they won a challenge and can take water out of the Green River, a major tributary to the Colorado River:

Here’s the judge’s decision — the opinion shows his misunderstandings about nuclear power and electric economics:

Decision regarding water access and use by nuclear power plant

Read this Blue Castle press release about an MOU where it’s claimed:

Page Electric Utility (PEU) provides electricity services as a municipal electric utility in Page, Arizona and the surrounding area.  By 2019-2020 PEU projects that it cold need as much as an additional 30 MW of base load electric resources.

30 MW as a justification for a NUCLEAR PLANT?  Yup, they’re nuts, this proves it!

PINuclearCalendar

Today in the mail, I got the annual Prairie Island nuclear calendar, above, with notice of the exciting “NEW Xcel Energy Nuclear Planning App” available at “Google play.”  Gee, I feel so much safer now.

Also today, thanks to the internet, I learned that the Fukushima Diiachi nuclear plant is exploding, again, underground… as a friend noted, time to kiss our collective ass goodbye.

It’s everywhere, just like the radioactivity emitting from the plant.  Just GOOGLE IT!

Anyway, to make a dreadful story short, on December 31, 2013, there were two explosions, one a 5.1 magnitude explosion, followed by a 3.6 magnitude explosion.

Underground Nuclear Explosion At Crippled Nuclear Plant Shocks World (take with a grain or two of salt!)

Steam Rises from Fukushima reactor, cause still unknown

Homeless recruited to clean up Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility and surrounding area

 

casktransuranic2

The transcript from last week’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission meeting-not-hearing regarding the Nuclear Waste Confidence GEIS and Rulemaking (click HERE for that NRC page) is out:

Transcript_ML13344B149

Comments are being solicited on the proposed rule (at the very end of the Federal Register notice below) and the Generic Environmental Impact Statement:

Nuclear Waste Confidence Rule_Proposed

Nuclear Waste GEIS

Once more with feeling, comments are due soon, so get cracking!  Send comments by December 20, 2013:

• Email comments to: Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you do not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact us at 301–415–1677.

And check out these ditties that I put into the record.  My nuclear stuff is all over at the other house, and it’s been so long that I can’t remember all that I’ve forgotten, so much about casks, and it’s really offensive that nearly 20 years later we’re still having to dredge up all the info about how it’s just not reasonable to think we can store it safely for any length of time, much less 100 years on-site, in “temporary” storage, or tens of thousands of years…

Premature Degradation of Spent Fuel Storage Cask Structures and Components from Environmental Moisture

INEL “unloads” TN-24P – stuck

Creep & Crud of Nuclear Waste Storage

Yesterday was a nuclear day…

December 5th, 2013

URGENT — MIA: All the big “environmental” groups — the Minnesota Sierra Club, Audubon Society, Fresh Energy, Izaak Walton League, Clean Water Action.  ALL were no-shows!

20131204_185030_1[1]

Greetings from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission!

Yesterday was  a long, long day, out the door just after 8 a.m. to get through the woods and over the river to the Rulemaking Advisory Committee for Minn. R. Ch. 7849 & 7850.  ZZZZZZZZZZZZ.  Then back, over the river and through the woods, with just a couple hours to study and get out the door and over the river and through the traffic jam to Minnetonka (how convenient) for an evening with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:

20131204_203103_Muller

Here’s Alan Muller doing his thing at the “meeting” that wasn’t a “hearing.”

Here’s the NRC page that has their info on this:

NRC Nuclear Waste Confidence Page

And here’s the actual rule that’s proposed — it took a lot of digging to find it and I needed help, but here it is:

Proposed NuclearWasteConfidenceRule

And here are the full documents for comment, the GEIS is very strange:

Nuclear Waste Confidence Rule_Proposed

Nuclear Waste GEIS

And note the Prairie Island Indian Community’s role in this case that resulted in the vacating of the Nuclear Waste Confidence Rule, with THREE reps showing up last night:

NY v NRC-Nuclear Waste Confidence Decision 11-1045-1377720

What’s strangest about this rulemaking is the way this is framed, they backwards engineered it “to support the rule.” Look at how “Issue 3″ is framed below, and also “Issue 1″ (click for a larger version).

EPSON MFP imageNo, that’s not how you do it folks.  You do the GEIS and then you find out what it says.  Maybe it supports the rule, maybe it doesn’t, it is what it is.  But nooooooooo, that’s not how they do things at the NRC.

We have until December 20, 2013 to send comments to:

• Email comments to: Rulemaking.Comments@nrc.gov. If you do not receive an automatic email reply confirming receipt, then contact us at 301–415–1677.

• Fax comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at 301–415–1101.

• Mail comments to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555–0001, ATTN: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff.

• Hand deliver comments to: 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852, between 7:30 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. (Eastern Time) Federal workdays; telephone: 301–415–1677.

I put a few choice things in the record, because the idea they can safely store nuclear waste indefinitely, and until a “repository” is built, well…. dream on, when might that happen?  And Dog help us if it does…  Confidence?  NO!

Premature Degradation of Spent Fuel Storage Cask Structures and Components from Environmental Moisture

INEL “unloads” TN-24P – stuck

Creep & Crud of Nuclear Waste Storage

And here’s Alan at the Sierra Club table, Pam Mackey-Taylor the IOWA Sierra Club.  And John LaForge/Nukewatch was there too.  It was disturbing, but not surprising that not one of the big funded “environmental” groups showed up last night, and it says a lot about Xcel’s ability to buy them off.  Iowa Sierra Club’s Wally Taylor was the one testifying… not North Star Chapter, no Clean Water Action, no Fresh Energy, no Izaak Walton League (but we know how much Bill Grant loves nuclear), no Audubon. No, no, no, no, not there.  Absent, one and all.

Iowa Sierra Club

Note the cops in the background — the NRC found it necessary to bring in police protection, two uniformed and I think one not in uniform.  What are they afraid of?

Home a couple of minutes before midnight… rulemaking taking over a day.

 

 

Nuclear Waste Confidence? NOT!

November 22nd, 2013

DATE: Wednesday, December 4, 2013

TIME: Open House: 6:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m. (CST)
Meeting: 7:00 p.m. – 10:00 p.m. (CST)

LOCATION: Minneapolis Marriott Southwest
5801 Opus Parkway
Minnetonka, Minnesota 55343
Lake of the Woods Meeting Room

SUBJECT: PUBLIC MEETING TO RECEIVE COMMENTS ON THE WASTE CONFIDENCE DRAFT GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT AND PROPOSED RULE

Prairie Island nuclear plant

That’s an old photo of Prairie Island, appropriate for an early winter day.  There is nuclear waste from the plant stored in casks just outside of the plant, and this whole nuclear compound is right next to the Mississippi River and the Prairie Island Indian Community.  Great… just great.  It’s just a couple miles upriver from us here in Red Wing, and it’s been incorporated into the City so the City could get utility personal property tax revenues, but that’s another can of worms for another day…

Nuclear Waste isn’t going anywhere anytime soon, but it’s allowed to keep piling up, and the nuclear reactors are allowed to continue to generate electricity and waste, based on the “Nuclear Waste Confidence Decision,” which was first issued in 1984, and then revisited since, and it’s essentially myopia in action:

seenoevil

A federal court didn’t buy the NRC’s policy:

NY v NRC-Nuclear Waste Confidence Decision 11-1045-1377720

So now they’re getting more public input into the rule.

NRC Nuclear Waste Confidence Page

What’s at issue now is the proposed Rule and the Environmental Impact Statement, and they’re soliciting comments on that EIS with the final due out about a year from now.  Here it is, and the EIS is BIG, 585 pages — yup, that’s what you’ve got to comment about (anything else will be tossed out and disregarded):

Nuclear Waste Confidence Rule_Proposed

Nuclear Waste GEIS

From the NRC’s page, the important documents/info:

So now it’s up to us to sort through all of this and explain why this is utterly insane policy… New York managed to get through to the federal court, so it isn’t hopeless.  But the NRC’s persistence in its “Nuclear Waste Confidence” is inexplicable.

head-up-ass