TVA About to Sign Death Sentence for Millions in AL, GA, TN, and NC

When it comes to modern nuclear power, I can't say I am an opponent of it. Because for the most part, nuclear power plants function as they should, and are well regulated and well built. And yet even in the case of modern reactors, one need look no further than Fukushima to see that even those can fail in dire circumstances.

But the problem is they are not all modern. And in this case, far from it. In fact, the Bellefonte Reactor near Hollywood in northeast Alabama was designed in 1968 by the same company responsible for the reactor design at Three Mile Island. But that is just the tiny tip of one deadly iceberg.

Many readers will recognize the name Arnie Gundersen- the nuclear scientist who gained international recognition recently for his reports on the Fukushima incident. I stopped by his site and was startled to read this report of an impending danger much closer to home.

He was just hired as part of a team to issue a report bound for the Tennessee Valley Authority on considerations for resuming construction on the Bellefonte Reactor, which TVA is about to decide on. Again.

And Arnie's verdict? Epic fricking FAIL x 1000. REAL BAD IDEA. See the video and/or read article here:

fairewinds.com...

Today the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy and Fairewinds Associates issued a report to the Board of Directors of the Tennessee Valley Authority regarding numerous concerns with the Bellefonte Unit 1 nuclear project. First designed with slide rules back in 1968, Bellefonte Unit 1 is America's oldest nuclear power plant that has yet to generate any electricity. TVA began construction in 1974, mothballed the plant in 1988, and cannibalized the plant for scrap metal between 2006 and 2008. Alarmingly, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission recently allowed construction of Bellefonte Unit 1 by TVA to start again with its 1968 design and its 40-year old weakened foundation and containment. In the video and in its report, Fairewinds identifies seven areas of substantial risk for TVA if it continues to construct this aged facility.

Substantial risk for the TVA? How about the substantial risk to the millions of people living within a fallout radius of this thing? Sheesh. But ok, we have only scratched the surface.

Visit his link for the full story of the deep rooted problems with the nuclear plant that hasn't made a single electron flow yet. A must read. Especially if you LIVE anywhere near this thing. And I do. Grrr.

fairewinds.com...

I don't see how the TVA could possibly even consider restarting construction on it, given all the points that Arnie brings up. This thing needs to be torn down and a new modern project started if they are going to do it at all. A nuclear accident at Bellefonte could have deadly consequences for people in all the states of the area and beyond.

So if you manage to exit reading his article and aren't on your way down to the TVA yet, then perhaps a few more considerations are in order, beyond what Arnie has mentioned.

After the killer EF5 tornado that hit Joplin and Birmingham, AL recently- I got the idea to check on tornado and earthquake risks for the Hollywood, AL area:

Tornado activity:

Hollywood-area historical tornado activity is slightly above Alabama state average. It is 202% greater than the overall U.S. average.

On 5/18/1995, a category 4 (max. wind speeds 207-260 mph) tornado 17.1 miles away from the Hollywood town center killed one person and injured 55 people and caused between $500,000 and $5,000,000 in damages.

On 5/19/1973, a category 4 tornado 21.0 miles away from the town center injured 19 people and caused between $500,000 and $5,000,000 in damages.

Earthquake activity:
Hollywood-area historical earthquake activity is slightly above Alabama state average. It is 79% smaller than the overall U.S. average.

On 4/29/2003 at 08:59:39, a magnitude 4.9 (4.4 MB, 4.6 MW, 4.9 LG, Depth: 12.2 mi, Class: Light, Intensity: IV - V) earthquake occurred 24.6 miles away from Hollywood center
On 12/8/2001 at 01:08:21, a magnitude 3.9 (3.9 LG, Depth: 3.1 mi, Class: Light, Intensity: II - III) earthquake occurred 15.9 miles away from the city center
On 7/19/1997 at 17:06:34, a magnitude 3.5 (3.5 LG, Depth: 6.2 mi) earthquake occurred 69.7 miles away from the city center
On 10/12/2005 at 06:27:30, a magnitude 3.6 (3.6 LG, Depth: 5.1 mi) earthquake occurred 97.5 miles away from Hollywood center
On 3/21/2001 at 23:35:35, a magnitude 3.2 (3.2 MD, Depth: 1.9 mi) earthquake occurred 31.4 miles away from the city center
On 4/5/1994 at 22:21:59, a magnitude 3.2 (3.2 LG, Depth: 3.1 mi) earthquake occurred 31.7 miles away from Hollywood center

www.city-data.com...

So the question is, would a reactor designed in 1968, and being the same design as the Three Mile Island epic failure, withstand a direct hit from an EF5 tornado? That's winds up to 318 mph! And I quote:

F5 Tornado

Strong frame houses lifted off foundations and carried considerable distances to disintegrate; automobile sized missiles fly through the air in excess of 100 meters; trees debarked; steel reinforced concrete structures badly damaged.

www.tornadoproject.com...

And I just provided the historical evidence above that the potential is there for one occur. If an F4 has hit there more than once, an F5 is not a stretch by any means. It's kind of like putting nuclear reactors in Japan, which sits on the juncture of four tectonic plates. BAD FRICKEN IDEA, Fukushima.

And speaking of earthquakes, notice that a 4.9 quake occurred near Hollywood. That means there is a mechanism there for quakes. The Japan 9+ quake provided enough of a surprise that some scientists are reconsidering fault lengths as a gauge of earthquake magnitudes. Unknown, deep fault extensions can rear their ugly heads at any time with much bigger quakes than were thought possible. That is a very hard lesson learned from Japan.

And it is also true that the eastern part of the US has not been studied like the west coast, so unknown faults abound. What if there's one lurking where the 4.9 hit and the next one is a 7 or 8? Where they thinking of these things back in 1968? Yeah? Well what about the water erosion of the foundation that Arnie has warned about has taken place at Bellefonte? Will that plant STILL survive a major quake with a weakened foundation?

:shk:

I for one don't want to find out. And I am close enough to be affected. There is only one thing to do if there is any nuclear plant to be made there: tear that piece of rotting junk down and start over with a modern design reflective of the cumulative nuclear, seismic, and weather experience as known to us now. Yeah, the heck with the investors. Too bad. Times change. Experience shapes our actions. Or at least it should.

Click here for more information.

After the Kingston, Tennessee coal ash spill, the people of the South are not going to be happy about this. All TVA sees is the $$$ and not the huge risk it could be. This is why our planet is the way it is. Corporate Greed.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


This conversation needs to go way beyond that. Way beyond.

The EPA and the environmental activists stopped so many conventional plants from being built they stopped trying. We are on the brink of a catastrophe in regards to energy. Mostly caused by, you guessed it, the environmental lobby.

Problem is everyone is vocal about what they are against but never have an alternative plan.

A country wide failure of the Grid would likely kill more people than a nuclear plant failure and yet how many activists are addressing that today? Alternative energy sources would raise the cost of food and energy to the point millions might starve worldwide. Somebody with a functional brain and common sense has to deal with the bridge between now and when alternative energy is feasible; but how many are willing to discuss it honestly? Very few I think.

These knee jerk reactions do more harm than good. That has always been the case. The answer is logic and reason, but that is in short supply.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
The EPA and the environmental activists stopped so many conventional plants from being built they stopped trying. We are on the brink of a catastrophe in regards to energy. Mostly caused by, you guessed it, the environmental lobby.

We're not the environmental lobby, we're just smart people that know how dangerous and deadly nuke plants are, and that the long-lasting consequences to human life are never worth the incredibly long-term risks, as proven at Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
A country wide failure of the Grid would likely kill more people than a nuclear plant failure and yet how many activists are addressing that today?

What would the human race do if we had never discovered nuclear power? We'd all be dead, apparently? Give me a break. Nuclear technology is absolutely irresponsible and has to be stopped. Now.

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by Blaine91555
The EPA and the environmental activists stopped so many conventional plants from being built they stopped trying. We are on the brink of a catastrophe in regards to energy. Mostly caused by, you guessed it, the environmental lobby.

We're not the environmental lobby, we're just smart people that know how dangerous and deadly nuke plants are, and that the long-lasting consequences to human life are never worth the incredibly long-term risks, as proven at Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
A country wide failure of the Grid would likely kill more people than a nuclear plant failure and yet how many activists are addressing that today?

What would the human race do if we had never discovered nuclear power? We'd all be dead, apparently? Give me a break. Nuclear technology is absolutely irresponsible and has to be stopped. Now.

Exactly. Would Blaine91555 like to find out someday what it's liked to be cooked from the inside out and there's nothing you could do about it? Seriously...the world has no common sense any more. You may think it's okay if some people die because it's not effecting you, but I sure as hell know if it were happening to you, you would have a totally different viewpoint.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

These knee jerk reactions do more harm than good. That has always been the case. The answer is logic and reason, but that is in short supply.

And these knee jerk responses like yours only show that you have failed to:

1) Read Arnie's article.

2) See that this is a specific plant with specific problems, and is NOT derogatory for the nuclear industry as a whole. I stated that I am not an opponent of nuclear energy per se in the opening sentence of the OP.

Therefore, I would not have a need to argue against it. I am just saying plans to restart construction on this particular plant are insane, given all the points against it.

Furthermore, seeing as this plant after all these years hasn't produced one darn red cent worth of electricity yet, because of continually changing TVA positions on it, it pretty much renders your points invalid in regards to this specific plant. i.e., the people living in the area have been getting power another way anyway.

They aren't going to build the plant broken. Nuclear power is good, and you can't judge this plant before they have finished it- especially considering Japan. I laugh when people jump the gun whenever Power Plant news comes up. Some guy last month was freaking out about PSE&G a month ago. Luckily, it didn't blow up.

While the reactor design is from 1968, a significant number of improvements will have been made to the reactor design which should mean it is safer than a reactor that was built in 1968 - for example, a fully digital control system. However, the reactor will still require active cooling when shutdown unlike very modern reactors which use gravity and convection for cooling in emergency situations. The reactor supplier was also Babcock and Wilcox which made by far the most problematic reactors in the USA. I would therefore rather TVA build a new Westinghouse AP1000 or several small modular reactors rather than complete an old B&W at Bellefonte. Still, let's not forget that TVA is going to idle over a gigawatt of coal as a direct result of completing Bellefonte - which can only be a good thing. An accident from a nuclear plant can have consequences several times greater than an equivalent coal power station - however a coal power-station is guaranteed to kill people during normal operation whereas at least with nuclear, it's just an improbable possibility.

I don't see how the TVA could possibly even consider restarting construction on it, given all the points that Arnie brings up. This thing needs to be torn down and a new modern project started if they are going to do it at all. A nuclear accident at Bellefonte could have deadly consequences for people in all the states of the area and beyond.

Arnie Gundersen would oppose a new reactor design too. He is not a nuclear scientist, I believe he was a nuclear engineer working with small research reactors, but then became disgruntled because he wasn't happy with safety practices. Or something like that anyway. I'm not going to say he doesn't bring up good points but you have to be careful and take it with a grain of salt at the same time 'cause he has made some errant claims in the past.

What would the human race do if we had never discovered nuclear power? We'd all be dead, apparently? Give me a break. Nuclear technology is absolutely irresponsible and has to be stopped. Now.

If nuclear power was never discovered then the 15% of the worlds electricity supply that nuclear currently supplies would then be a mixture of coal and gas. There is about 360 gigawatts of nuclear generating capacity substituting that with coal would kill several tens of thousands of people per year due to air pollution alone.

Exactly. Would Blaine91555 like to find out someday what it's liked to be cooked from the inside out and there's nothing you could do about it?

I like how you don't even answer what any part of what Blaine91555 said. Here's a question for you...:

Ukraine has a significantly lower age standardized cancer rate compared to the United States - even after Chernobyl. This is largely because low doses of radiation are only a very small bit player in terms of overall cancer risk - far smaller than actually, other causes like for example air pollution and diet. Would you therefore rather take the simplistic view and whine about nuclear power, or would you rather rationally compare everything and then present an actual solution?

I'm not disagreeing with the OP, but I find it hard to believe the project is going to proceed with a design from 1968 as-is. The biggest problem with on-time within-budget construction of nuclear plants in the 70's and 80's was the ever-changing regulatory targets. I did some work in 79-84 with the South Texas Nuclear Project. At almost every phase of construction , new regs were being put in place and the compliance issues drove construction times and costs through the roof. At that time, the development of regulations and standards was just evolving. There are a tremendous number of systems and construction details for a nuclear facility that are subject to regulatory requirements. It just seems impossible that any design of that era would meet any current DOE specifications without extensive revision and recertification prior to construction.

However, from the posts I've read, there are many other serious reasons not to locate a facility in that area. IMO the old design just can't be an issue assuming the DOE and whomever elase enforces it's regulations. I can see maybe the TVA getting a break on some filings and fees, but not safety and construction standards.
Just my 2cents.

ganjoa

I don't think either of you actually watched his video or read his problems with this specific plant. And why would he oppose a modern design? Nowhere did I see that.

A friend of mine said people have been dressing up like Zombies & protesting outside of this Plant.

Yeah, I look at that plant every time I go off the mountain that way. As the crow flies it's only a smattering of miles away from where the big tornadoes hit recently and they pretty much hit around here every year. The New Madrid butts up to our area as well.

I had no idea the design was that old. That's scary. I wonder how close I could get to the place to get some pics? I'm gonna look into it. If I come up with anything revealing I will post it here.

Thanks for the OP and spreading the word. Really good info and outstanding original research.

Originally posted by Observer99

Originally posted by Blaine91555
The EPA and the environmental activists stopped so many conventional plants from being built they stopped trying. We are on the brink of a catastrophe in regards to energy. Mostly caused by, you guessed it, the environmental lobby.

We're not the environmental lobby, we're just smart people that know how dangerous and deadly nuke plants are, and that the long-lasting consequences to human life are never worth the incredibly long-term risks, as proven at Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Originally posted by Blaine91555
A country wide failure of the Grid would likely kill more people than a nuclear plant failure and yet how many activists are addressing that today?

What would the human race do if we had never discovered nuclear power? We'd all be dead, apparently? Give me a break. Nuclear technology is absolutely irresponsible and has to be stopped. Now.

Although i feel the nuclear power plant inthe OP should be revisited in terms of design and quality assurance when building it,

i must now point out that people moaning about nuclear power as a whole should be aware of how many completley functioning plants are around the world, that have no disaters and provided a much cleaner and safer form of energy that coal or other fossile fuels....


Over 60 of the world's operating reactors were opened before 1975, the vast majority in the US.


www.guardian.co.uk...

There is a list of litterally hundreds of power plants world wide...


here is a list of the different types of Nuclear reactor...

PWR: pressurized water reactor
PHWR: Pressurised Heavy Water (nuclear) Reactor
CANDU: Canadian Deuterium Uranium
AGR: advanced gas-cooled reactor
GCR: gas-cooled reactor
ABWR: Advanced Boiling Water Reactor
BWR: Boiling Water Reactor
LWGR: Light-Water-cooled Graphite-moderated Reactor
VVER: Vodo-Vodyanoi Energetichesky Reactor (PWR)

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by TrueAmerican

 

This conversation needs to go way beyond that. Way beyond.

The EPA and the environmental activists stopped so many conventional plants from being built they stopped trying. We are on the brink of a catastrophe in regards to energy. Mostly caused by, you guessed it, the environmental lobby.

Problem is everyone is vocal about what they are against but never have an alternative plan.

A country wide failure of the Grid would likely kill more people than a nuclear plant failure and yet how many activists are addressing that today? Alternative energy sources would raise the cost of food and energy to the point millions might starve worldwide. Somebody with a functional brain and common sense has to deal with the bridge between now and when alternative energy is feasible; but how many are willing to discuss it honestly? Very few I think.

These knee jerk reactions do more harm than good. That has always been the case. The answer is logic and reason, but that is in short supply.

ha ha ha, this just in...a special news bulletin....energy is running out...electrons are going on strike.....we are in short supply and we will soon be energy deficient.....we have reached peak energy.......so we need to conserve it while it lasts!!!!

and in a related story, electrons and protons are on strike after claiming that they feel like they are just being used by the general public...this has caused the aclu to step in and help them fight for their rights and put them on a union plan.....the government has implemented the "smart meter" to help with the load that these electrons are having to carry by themselves.....but opponents are claiming that smart meters are just plain dumb.....

Originally posted by The GUT
I wonder how close I could get to the place to get some pics? I'm gonna look into it. If I come up with anything revealing I will post it here.

Careful now, you don't want the DHS thinking you're some kind of terrorist, taking pictures of a nuclear plant. Telephoto lens might help... But yeah, get whatever you can and post it!

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by The GUT
I wonder how close I could get to the place to get some pics? I'm gonna look into it. If I come up with anything revealing I will post it here.

Careful now, you don't want the DHS thinking you're some kind of terrorist, taking pictures of a nuclear plant. Telephoto lens might help... But yeah, get whatever you can and post it!

Good point. Presents me with a dichotomy: On the one hand I wanna be careful now that you mention it but on the other hand I wanna be a pain in the butt. I'll choose stealth...mebbe disguise myself as a zombie .

Thinking I can get closer by boat mebbe. I'll look at some satellite pics if they are available.

Originally posted by GonzoSinister
Although i feel the nuclear power plant inthe OP should be revisited in terms of design and quality assurance when building it,

i must now point out that people moaning about nuclear power as a whole should be aware of how many completley functioning plants are around the world, that have no disaters and provided a much cleaner and safer form of energy that coal or other fossile fuels....

The nuclear plants and the nuclear regulatory commission LIE about emissions. It is PROVABLE that cancer is higher downwind from nuke plants. Even in "normal operation", these plants are deadly cancer machines. The Earth now has two large uninhabitable zones from Chernobyl and Fukushima. Human life will not live there for a millennium. Chernobyl killed a million people, and sickened another 4 million. Fukushima has the potential to kill and sicken a lot more.

There are no excuses left for nuclear power.