Fukushima
on the Hudson: Could a nuclear accident happen near NYC?
New
York's Indian Point reactors are 40 years old and could threaten
millions of people
14
October, 2013
The
crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear facility again grabbed headlines
in recent weeks after reports of radioactive water leaks into the
Pacific Ocean and repeated exposure of
plant workers to dangerous levels of radiation once more focused
attention on the disaster and its aftermath. A massive earthquake and
ensuing tsunami in March 2011 damaged the Japanese plant's reactor
containment and cooling systems, triggering explosions and three core
meltdowns. After a string of troubling revelations surrounding
Tokyo's bid to host the 2020 Olympic Games, the Japanese government
has finally expressed a more open attitude toward
international help to
deal with the crisis.
While
Japan's problems seem far away, anti-nuclear activists in the United
States say a similar disaster — or perhaps one even worse — could
happen at a nuclear plant just 25 miles north of New York City, at
Entergy Corp.'s Indian Point Energy Center. Although that is
dismissed as fearmongering by the nuclear industry, anti-nuclear
campaigners say Indian Point poses a grave risk to 20 million people
who live in the New York metropolitan area.
On
Tuesday, Oct. 8, Naoto
Kan,
the former Japanese prime minister who was in office at the start of
the Fukushima crisis, joined Gregory
Jaczko,
a former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC); Peter
Bradford,
a public-utilities expert; Arnie
Gundersen,
a nuclear engineer turned anti-nuclear activist; and consumer
advocate Ralph
Nader to
discuss what they say are the untenable risks of nuclear power.
All
called for Indian Point to be shuttered.
"Technically
it is impossible to eliminate nuclear power plant accidents. There is
only one way to eliminate accidents, which is to get rid of all
nuclear power plants," Kan told an audience of about a hundred
people at the 92nd
Street Y in
Manhattan.
"Our
policymakers like to think that a nuclear accident can happen
anywhere else, but not America," said Gundersen, who serves as
chief engineer at consulting group Fairewinds Energy Education.
Gundersen
said the danger Indian Point poses is actually greater than
Fukushima, which lies about a hundred miles from Tokyo.
"The
Japanese were the best at emergency planning in the world. They
really took emergency planning seriously. They had an entire
emergency-planning system collapse," Gundersen said, adding that
the 30 years' worth of radioactive waste stored at Indian Point is
far greater than what was housed at Fukushima at the time of the
earthquake. "Indian Point has five times as much spent fuel
in its spent-fuel pool than Dai-ichi," Gundersen said.
Public-interest
advocate Nader stressed that the lack of preparedness for an accident
in the New York City area was the most compelling reason for shutting
the plant down.
"The
way to arouse people around Indian Point is to repeatedly demand a
real-life drill for the evacuation plan they're supposed to be
putting in your local libraries. And not 10 miles around, where there
may be 280,000 people, but go out 20 or 30" miles — distances
that would include millions, Nader said.
"Anything
is better than nuclear ... even fossil fuel as the transition,"
he said.
'Woefully insufficient'
About
20 million people live within 50 miles of Indian Point, which is
in Buchanan,
N.Y., along the Hudson River, from which the nuclear plant draws
approximately 2.5 billion gallons of water each
day to cool its reactors and use in its turbines. Environmental
groups have flagged Indian Point as one of the United States' most
dangerous nuclear plants, given its proximity to a major urban area
and its persistent safety issues.
Riverkeeper,
an environmental-advocacy group, is one of many calling for the
federal government to deny Indian Point a 20-year renewal of its
operating license. The license for one of the plant's two operating
reactors expired last month, and the other will run out in December
2015.
In
addition to concerns over being able to get people out of the
potentially radiation-contaminated area in case of an accident,
Riverkeepr cites regulators' overlooking safety at the plant.
"Indian
Point has been granted so many exemptions from safety rules in the
last 10 years that an NRC spokesman says he couldn't possibly recount
them all," the organization notes on its list of 10
reasons to
close Indian Point.
"To
help jog NRC's memory — it has relaxed requirements for insulation
on electrical cables controlling the reactors, reduced inspection
requirements on rusting containment domes and leaking spent fuel
pools (and) extended deadlines for equipment designed to prevent
sabotage."
While
also expressing concern about the safety issues, the Natural Resource
Defense Council (NRDC), an environmental watchdog, said in a
2011 report that
measures for evacuating people from the area around Indian Point are
woefully insufficient.
"Very
large populations could be exposed to radiation in a major accident,"
the report states. "The reactors are located in a seismically
active area, and their owner currently seeks to extend the reactors'
lives beyond their engineered 40-year life span."
The
NRDC said millions of people in the New York City area would have to
be administered potassium iodide pills, which help stop the body's
absorption of a radioactive isotope of iodine, a component of fallout
common to nuclear power plant accidents. Such a measure would be
necessary if worst-case-scenario winds sent radioactive fallout
toward the metropolis.
An
Associated Press analysis found
that population increases since the reactors at Indian Point were
built in the 1970s puts greater strain on the ability to remove
people from danger zones and rendered federal emergency plans
outdated.
Evacuation
for residents around the plant would be heavily dependent on a
two-lane highway. For New York City and Long Island, the prospects
are even more precarious, with millions of people relying on only a
few points of exit from an area that already experiences daily
gridlock along its bridges and tunnels.
"At
no time in the history of man has anyone tried to move 17 million
people in 48 hours," Kelly McKinney, New York City's deputy
commissioner of preparedness, told the AP.
Long-term health concerns
If
winds blew from the north, directly toward New York City, a
Fukushima-level event would demand potassium iodide be administered
to about 5 million people. In a catastrophic meltdown, 10 million
would need to seek medical help.
For
winds typical for an October night, one projection shows as many as
3,000 people could receive a severe, often deadly, dose of radiation
from an accident rated about four times as bad as current estimates
for the one at Fukushima.
The
report looked at a number of scenarios for Indian Point, including a
meltdown on the scale of the deadly 1986 Chernobyl disaster in
Ukraine. That accident rendered swaths of Ukraine and neighboring
Belarus uninhabitable because of radiation.
"An
accident at one of Indian Point's reactors on the scale of
Chernobyl's would make Manhattan too radioactively contaminated to
live in if the city fell within the plume," the NRDC report
found.
It
won't be safe to grow crops around Chernobyl for another 20,000
years,
and the legacy of that accident lives on in tragic consequences for
children born 27 years later.
According
to Chernobyl
Children International,
"85 percent of Belarusian children are deemed to be Chernobyl
victims: they carry 'genetic markers' that could affect their health
at any time and can be passed on to the next generation."
In
the area affected by the fallout from the plant's accident, the group
says there was a 250 percent increase in congenital deformities.
Unnecessary anxiety?
Concerns
over Indian Point are nothing new.
"An
incident at the plant could have catastrophic impacts on the local
environmental and human wealth by rendering much of the region
uninhabitable in a worst-case scenario," then–U.S. Rep. John
Hall, D-N.Y., told a public NRC hearing on
Indian Point's license renewal in 2007. Hall lost his seat in 2010.
In
2003 the state of New York commissioned a study of
evacuation procedures for the area around Indian Point that found the
strategy did not take into account the unpredictable human factor in
staging a mass evacuation.
"The
plans appear based on the premise that people will comply with
official government directions rather than acting in accordance with
what they perceive to be their best interests," the study found.
The
nuclear industry denies that the plants it operates are unsafe,
especially Indian Point, which nuclear power advocates say has
received many safety upgrades.
In
a statement provided to Al Jazeera by AREA,
the Affordable Reliable Electricity Alliance, an industry
public-relations group, former NRC chairman Dale
Klein said,
"Comparing the accident at Fukushima Dai-ichi to a hypothetical
accident at Indian Point or Pilgrim is intellectually dishonest and
resembles the classic fearmongering intended to create unnecessary
anxiety." (The Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station in
Plymouth, Mass., is a reactor of the same design as the ones that
failed in Japan.) "The additional safety systems and safety
procedures added to the U.S. nuclear power plants after the 9/11
attacks have greatly enhanced their ability to handle the loss of
off-site power, loss of the emergency diesel generators and the loss
of backup battery supplies," he said.
Rich
Thomas, director of AREA, told Al Jazeera after Tuesday's panel that
Indian Point operated safely during the calamity of Superstorm Sandy
in 2012 and that the risk of an earthquake was "inconsequential."
"When
you look at extreme weather events and the performance of the plant,
it's always passed with flying colors," he said.
But
during Sandy, Indian Point had to shut
down one
reactor because the electrical grid was unstable. Other reactors in
the storm's path suffered similar issues.
And
of all the nuclear power plants in the U.S., Indian Point is
considered the one at highest risk of experiencing an earthquake
strong enough to pose a safety hazard. An NRC
report from
2008 evaluated the quality of plant design and the likelihood of a
major quake. Each year, Reactor 3 at Indian Point faces a 1-in-10,000
chance of an earthquake-related failure; that's about 70 times as
likely as winning $10,000 with one Powerball lottery ticket and right
on the cusp of what the NRC would consider cause for "immediate
concern."
Thomas
added that evacuation plans are sufficient.
"Homeland
Security, FEMA (the Federal Emergency Management Agency) — they've
done an extraordinary job of ensuring that the counties surrounding
Indian Point, the municipalities around Indian Point are trained and
prepared for any scenario," he said. "The NRC coordinates
with the other agencies, and they've all determined that the
evacuation plans are adequate and the plant is safe."
50-mile radius
As
for the 50-mile distance NRC chairman Jaczko said Americans in Japan
should have stayed from Fukushima, Thomas dismissed that warning and
said the NRC recommends an evacuating a zone only 10 miles out from a
similar accident.
"When
you look at the claim of Fukushima on the Hudson, it doesn't really
add up," Thomas said, noting that the plant is farther inland
and farther above sea level than Fukushima.
The
Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), the group that maintains the
nuclear war Doomsday Clock, says nuclear plant operators should have
a plan for getting people 50 miles out of harm's way.
"The
NRC should ensure that everyone at significant risk from an accident
— not just people within the arbitrary 10-mile EPZ
(emergency-planning zone) — is protected in the event of a nuclear
disaster," the UCS found.
"Just
as the U.S. government advised Americans within 50 miles of Fukushima
to evacuate, an accident at a U.S. reactor could similarly require
evacuation of people outside the 10 mile EPZ and other protective
measures to avoid high radiation exposures. The NRC should therefore
require reactor owners to develop emergency plans for a larger area,
based on a scientific assessment of the populations at risk for each
reactor site."
An
NRC spokesperson told Al Jazeera that within 50 miles of the plant,
the main role of the NRC was to ensure food was safe from radiation
exposure.
"Evacuation
plans are viewed by the NRC, but those issues also lie with FEMA.
There is a 10-mile evacuation zone. We believe that accidents will
unfold slowly and provide adequate time for evacuations necessary,"
Eliot Brenner, the NRC's director of public affairs.
"Fifty
miles is in the planning guidance only insofar as dealing with
foodstuffs in distances out to 50 miles. But if there was a serious
action, we would recommend any protective measure necessary," he
added.
Skeleton crews
The
federal government shutdown slashed the 3,900-member staff at the NRC
on Oct. 10, leaving only 300 people to monitor 100 functioning
civilian nuclear reactors in the United States. Among those left on
duty are 150 nuclear plant inspectors. Most of them live near the
plants and conduct daily safety reviews, according to the NRC.
Brenner
said one NRC inspector is present at every plant. Some facilities
with dubious safety records have two or three inspectors.
The rest of
the NRC staffers still on the job will answer internal phone calls or
handle security, leaving the agency to operate with skeleton crews,
as many other government departments have since the shutdown started.
The NRC had been operating on rainy-day funds since Oct. 1
The
shutdown has forced the
agency to scuttle public meetings in Ohio, Minnesota and Illinois on
how to store nuclear
waste.
For
Indian Point, the shutdown means its relicensing process will likely
be on hold until policymakers return to work. In the meantime, the
two active reactors at the plant will continue to run, on and off, as
they have for nearly 40 years.
But
both aging reactors operate not only in close proximity to an
ever-expanding metropolitan population but in the long shadow of the
Fukushima disaster. And one reactor operates with anexpired
license,
and — as with the safety lapses and questionable evacuation
plans — it does so with the NRC's blessing.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.