Imagine a situation within 100 years in which Japan, the northeastern USA and most of western Europe are all but uninhabitable because of one reactor disaster or meltdown after another, every 15 years. Researchers at the Max Planck Institute have arrived at conclusions along those lines:
Catastrophic nuclear accidents such as the core meltdowns in Chernobyl and Fukushima are more likely to happen than previously assumed. Based on the operating hours of all civil nuclear reactors and the number of nuclear meltdowns that have occurred, scientists at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz have calculated that such events may occur once every 10 to 20 years (based on the current number of reactors) — some 200 times more often than estimated in the past. The researchers also determined that, in the event of such a major accident, half of the radioactive caesium-137 would be spread over an area of more than 1,000 kilometres away from the nuclear reactor. Their results show that Western Europe is likely to be contaminated about once in 50 years by more than 40 kilobecquerel of caesium-137 per square meter. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, an area is defined as being contaminated with radiation from this amount onwards. In view of their findings, the researchers call for an in-depth analysis and reassessment of the risks associated with nuclear power plants. [emphases added]
These findings are not surprising to me. How ironic that this assessment comes in the same pack of headlines that has one read:
Why Jaczko Leaving The NRC Is Good for America
I doubt the American MSM will reflect much upon the findings of the Planck Institute, which conclude with this:
The team in Mainz found that in Western Europe, where the density of reactors is particularly high, the contamination by more than 40 kilobecquerels per square meter is expected to occur once in about every 50 years. It appears that citizens in the densely populated southwestern part of Germany run the worldwide highest risk of radioactive contamination, associated with the numerous nuclear power plants situated near the borders between France, Belgium and Germany, and the dominant westerly wind direction.
If a single nuclear meltdown were to occur in Western Europe, around 28 million people on average would be affected by contamination of more than 40 kilobecquerels per square meter. This figure is even higher in southern Asia, due to the dense populations. A major nuclear accident there would affect around 34 million people, while in the eastern USA and in East Asia this would be 14 to 21 million people.
“Germany’s exit from the nuclear energy program will reduce the national risk of radioactive contamination. However, an even stronger reduction would result if Germany’s neighbours were to switch off their reactors,” says Jos Lelieveld. “Not only do we need an in-depth and public analysis of the actual risks of nuclear accidents. In light of our findings I believe an internationally coordinated phasing out of nuclear energy should also be considered ,” adds the atmospheric chemist.
I doubt the NRC or any U.S. government or nuclear industry lobbying group is capable of such brutally honest reevaluation of the true costs of this awful, awful form of energy.




12 Comments

“I doubt the NRC or any U.S. government or nuclear industry lobbying group is capable of such brutally honest reevaluation of the true costs of this awful, awful form of energy.” ; Or France/Europe.
“France derives over 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy. This is due to a long-standing policy based on energy security. ”
“In mid 2010 a regular energy review of France by the International Energy Agency urged the country increasingly to take a strategic role as provider of low-cost, low-carbon base-load power for the whole of Europe rather than to concentrate on the energy independence which had driven policy since 1973.”
Even if it’s a road to nowhere, the PTB’s insist on driving on it.
Sharp, succinct, and recc’d. :)
Well, ya think? I keep telling peopl, alternate energy will not save us, we really, really have to cut down, like to what we can produce on our own roofs and windmills. And bicycle generators. They act like I am crazy, they think technology will save us. Somehow.
We are the third (or fourth or fifth, dep on how old you are) generation to have electricity making the lights and everything work, to have gas and oil instead of human and animal power. We can go back there again, and probably will, but it`s gonna be a hard change, and lots of us will be killed and eaten before it gets stabilized.
So, other than that, ET, thanks for the post and hope all is well in AK; regards to you and Mme ET. Heh, we just did a great gig, wld premiere of a dance piece by R Sharman and J Kudelka, From the House of Mirth, Depressing as all hell, but good writing for the harmonium (thanks, Rodney).
Thanks, HotFlash and Kelly. Congrats on the music! In a couple of weeks the Anchorage Youth Symphony will begin performing my The Wild Coast in Salzburg, Vienna and Prague.
I think that in order to get better numbers a look at regulations, the number of inspections and how regulations are enforced is needed. Since the nuclear industry covers up minor mistakes well its like a car and ignoring the funny noise until it breaks down and you can’t ignore it.
We might be better off looking at nuclear power companies balance sheet the amount of government cash each government offers and how much power costs in these countries.
The more government cash the more likely a government won’t want to report or even inspect nuclear plants to avoid looking bad about wasting money.
The more profit the power company makes and the more they charge for power the more lobbyists they can afford to buy government silence.
The less government regulation on the books. The less enforcement of said regulation revealed only after a disaster will tell us who is more likely to have an accident.
I don’t think the PTB will give up nuclear power until we have another big accident. Right now they are waiting for this to all blow over I think they can wait for years.
WOO and likewise HOO! I will say to them, “I commented on his posts way back when.” Heh.
Wow, Salzberg — you gonna go to do the stand-up-and-bow thing? Have ice cream in WAM’s hometown?
If I ever get to AK (not sure I ever want to go to US again, y’understand), can I stop by and say hi? And did you ever find homes for your thousands of iris?
Hey, TCU, nice to see you. Question, how ‘big’ do you think an incident has to be to get traction? Fukushima is pretty big, as was the Gulf ‘spill’ (I love it, ‘spill’, like it was just a sippy-cup of milk …), also Chernobyl, and the Valdez … My German friend tells me that the German people were so upset that they ordered *all* nuclear power plants in Germany shut down. Now they buy power from France :)(which still uses nuke). Well, I guess it’s OK as long as it blows up in somebody else’s backyard…
They make ‘the incidents’ seem small. How big would it have to get? Tarrytown blowing up? Three Mile Island doing a Chernobyl? Wikipedia says there are 106 of the things in the US. What would it take,and how many lives, to get ‘attention’? (Sorry for channeling DWBartoo here)
they won’t get them.
Planck Institute watered it down, if anything. Anyone in the so-called nuclear industry who claims “Fukushima is under control” is full of shit.
What I’ve been reading about Fukushima lately has been terrifying.
And they’re not releasing the full story. Calculate how much water they’ve spread on the melts and then calculate how much water they’ve got stored. The difference is either in the groundwater or the Ocean. It’s worth noting that they still won’t allow independent sampling in their territorial waters.
They claim there’s at least 20cm of concrete between the melt in #2 in the ground. They haven’t actually seen the melt. they haven’t actually seen the concrete. And they’re basing that on their best guesses for the heat applied by the melt and the time the melt was on the concrete(which they’ve consistantly underestimated) and they’re assuming that the concrete was laid to spec’s. They’re also assuming they understand the behavior of fresh corium, a bit of a strech since they’ve NEVER had a corium sample less than years old. Oh, and the only sources of corium to study are TMI and chernobyl.
The SPF in #4 is just barely not collapsing. There’s probably a sign saying NO SNEEZING WITHIN 10m. When that goes, they will no longer be able to cool it and the rods will burn within hours at best.
There have been dangerous hotspots located well outside the evac zone, but these have been mostly found by civilians and the government won’t confirm.
Boxturtle (Just the highlights)
You should diary that.
Have you been reading Fukushima News? Links to other news sources, some with eye opening comment sections.