Nuclear

A short document 'Nuclear Insecurities' outlining ten that would result from new nuclear plants such as Hinkley Point C.

There have been many official enquiries into the Fukushima disaster (2011-03-11). However NHK, the leading Japanese broadcaster, waited a year or more until people were ready to talk, interviewed over 300, later 400, of those directly involved and outside experts, and collected huge amounts of data. This has enabled realistic re-enactments of the sequence of events. So among many other programmes on the Fukushima disaster, NHK has produced three 'Meltdown' documentaries in English, first broadcast on 2012-01, 2012-08-18, and 2013-03-05. This last was about 24 months after the disaster

I had produced a 73-page study 'The Real Lessons of Fukushima', dated 2012-04-11, based on the evidence from over 230 references. This showed the crucial importance of 'decay heat' – an inherent characteristic of nuclear fission – in the event of a 'Loss of Cooling Accident' (LOCA). It also showed that the probability of a LOCA was unknowable, as the chains of events number billions, each requiring data on reliability, and failures could lead to catastrophic radioactive releases to air, land and sea. So nuclear disasters are inevitable, as the record shows.

The consequences of the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear releases are horrendous. Yet the 'worst-case' nuclear releases are 100 times greater, with far worse consequences.

This study is based on evidence on the Fukushima disaster and it's consequences, almost all from the internet. Many quantitative studies have been found, but no proper studies from the IAEA or the UK ONR. The fast-moving and highly dangerous events of such a disaster require decision support. Thermal models of the reactors and spent fuel pools are essential to predict their behaviour under Station Blackout and to evaluate possible counter-measures. Also plume (dispersion) models of possible radioactive releases are essential to inform decisions on the magnitude and direction of evacuations. The Japanese have such a plume model, but it was ignored until later. Also they had no instrument for airborne radioactivity measurements at hand and had to rely initially on aerial surveys carried out by the Japan-based US Emergency Response Centers. These deficiencies were omitted or downplayed in the reports of the IAEA Fact Finding Mission, but most were included in the report of the Hatamura Panel.

The critical issue for nuclear power is the consequences of a major radioactive release. These were predicted in the Sandia CRAC-2 study as 42,000 to 100,000 early deaths. They were confirmed empirically by Chernobyl, which contaminated huge areas of the Ukraine, Belarus and Russia as well as 40% of Europe, with an eventual death toll put variously at 10,000 up to 1.8 million. Due to the high population density, Fukushima has been predicted to cause up to 210,000 excess cancer deaths. The probability of any size of radioactive release is not just unknown but unknowable, so must be taken as 1 - i.e. inevitable. This was understood by the worldwide insurance industry from the start and by some involved in the Reactor Safety Studies as well as by independent analysts. If insurance was fully paid, the cost of nuclear power would increase by e.g. 45 to 348 p/kWh. Other countries are adopting safer, sustainable and infinitely cheaper solutions for supplying electrical and other energy services so there is no need to add to our already huge nuclear risks and debts. Moreover the consequences of a major radioactive release are completely unacceptable, so all existing nuclear plants should be phased out forthwith.

On 2011-03-11, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan was damaged by a major earthquake and tsunami. The three operating reactors overheated, leading to hydrogen explosions and radioactive releases, which necessitated progressively wider evacuations of the populace. In the weeks that followed, it became clear that Reactors 1 to 3 and the spent fuel pools of Reactors 1 to 4 had the potential for far greater radioactive releases.

'The Government published a nuclear Consultation Document, THE ROLE OF NUCLEAR POWER IN A LOW CARBON UK ECONOMY, May 2007.

As an engineer I became concerned that nuclear power posed unacceptable risks.