Andrews Texas, Bloomington, Braidwood Nuclear, Chernobyl, Chicago, clean water, EIS, Environmental Impact Statement, Exelon, fish kill, Generic EIS, Illinois, NRC, nuclear energy, nuclear waste, Peoria, radioactive racism, squirrels, Texas, Texas invasion, Tritium leaks, US NRC, WCS
Residents near Braidwood Nuclear Power Station were reportedly to be given bottled water because of tritium leaks. This squirrel, tree, and other animals and plants were not. They must survive in an increasingly radiation contaminated environment or perish. Their plight is the face of the near future for us all. US NRC nuclear nuts are bad for squirrels and all life. We are to be stewards of life and not destroyers thereof.
American red squirrel, photo by Bill Thompson /USFWS, (See Table 3–7. Wildlife in the Illinois and Indiana Prairies Level IV Ecoregion below)
“Exelon Generation Company, LLC; Braidwood Station, Units 1 and 2; Draft Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement”
We encourage you to comment on this and all dockets. One or two sentences is fine. It can be anonymous. Consider it your right to vote. Be sure and put Docket ID NRC-2013-0169-0014: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NRC-2013-0169
Comment: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NRC-2013-0169-0014 Draft Report for comment: http://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=NRC-2013-0169-0015&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
This is Obama’s big donor Exelon’s old nuclear power station – Braidwood NPS with a 50 mile fallout zone near Chicago-Bloomington-Peoria. The so-called low level waste, which isn’t really low level at all, goes to Texas. This is the real Texas invasion – takeover, while no one is looking. As all things nuclear, if there is a problem in west Texas, it could impact much of the nation. Why should Texas be the dumping ground for Chicago? Because they were on the losing side the Civil War? If Chicago has no good place for its nuclear waste – and they haven’t – then they need to shut their reactors down. They need to make a nice above ground monitored facility and keep their radioactive rubble too and not go dumping on other people. Even some anti-nuclear people live under the strange delusion that someone else wants-should take their radioactive waste and rubble. For highly seismic California, this may be necessary, since a disaster in California could effect much of North America, but for most places it is not necessary and not fair. Even if you hate Chicago and hate California and hate Texas, a problem in any of these locations could impact you!
This EIS has a lot of important stuff to pick through and comment on, we’re just short on time. But, we encourage everyone to pick through it – take something at random or from the index, if you lack time. Almost everything the US NRC says is so nutty that it should be easy to find something to criticize. Unfortunately, the kind of nuts found at the NRC are bad for squirrels and other animals, including humans. They are bad for plants too. Only mold appears to fare ok in radioactive environments. They are radiation resistant and thrive on death.
Glancing through this EIS, one thing which struck us was the so-called alternatives, where they claim that the land requirements for a new nuclear power station would be 355 acres, whereas the current Braidwood site is actually on 4,457 acres. The Texas nuclear waste dump in western Andrews county Texas (WCS) is 1,338 acres on a 14,900 acre site. There is 19,000 acres committed to the transuranic waste dump WIPP. And, how much land did their leak pollute with plutonium?
14.8 million acres were the most severely contaminated by Chernobyl. No mention is made of any of this, of course. https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/05/11/transport-of-radioactive-materials-by-fires-in-chernobyl-contaminated-areas/
[For that matter there appears no discussion of radiation impacts at all in the document besides the tritium contamination, which they had to mention due to severity.]
A Chernobyl fallout scenario is thus a “footprint” which is 41,690 x greater than the so-called 355 acres listed in this EIS. Above and beyond the 14.8 million acres, the UK, Norway, Sweden and Finland were also highly contaminated from Chernobyl and remain so (1,000 plus Bq/kg of Cs in Reindeer and sheep). Most of Europe was very contaminated in a splotchy way and remains so (sometimes more than the 600 Bq/kg allowed in German Wild Boar). It was largely the luck of the draw of wind and rain. The highly radioactive fallout footprint reached around 2,000 miles or more from Chernobyl.
According to the EIS, prevailing winds in the Braidwood area have varied from W, WNW, and S depending on the year, but then they also flip around so no one is safe within 2,000 or more miles, if you consider Chernobyl’s impact on the UK. Braidwood would most likely take out Canada and/or much of the eastern half of the US.
By allowing over 1,500 Bq/kg in American food (15 x more than Japan’s 100 Bq/kg), the US government has pre-rigged the system so that people will be forced to stay on contaminated land and will have no legal recourse, when an old nuclear reactor pressure vessel fails and when there are more nuclear dump leaks (e.g. WIPP). This is why radiation exposure standards for air, food, and water are the most important of all. Since ultra contaminated food, water and land are now acceptable, then an exploded nuclear reactor pressure vessel is also now acceptable. https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2015/04/24/us-radionuclides-in-imported-foods-levels-of-concern/ Obama and Congress covered their nuclear-utility buddies’ asses on this, as though Price Anderson doesn’t do enough. These are truly sick people.
The 50 miles fallout radius from Braidwood, runs from the outskirts of Chicago to near Bloomington-Peoria and includes around 5 million people. The 10 mile evacuation radius includes 33,910 people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braidwood_Nuclear_Generating_Station
This EIS and the high levels of radiation in food and diminished pressure vessel standards represents a farewell present for Obama’s campaign donor Exelon. Many high level Congress people of both parties are deeply in bed with the nuclear industry-utilities too, so Obama’s exit won’t bring sanity and safety… Politicians who love America and its people are needed. Those whose patriotism is to their pocketbooks must be somehow given the boot, in elections, or no one and nothing will survive. We live on borrowed time already.
So, when this EIS says that Land Requirements for nuclear is 355 acres they are lying. They add 520 acres uranium mining and processing. They fail to mention the cost and virtual impossibility of restoring land and water from uranium mining. We have no idea if this mining acreage is accurate and it would surely depend on the grade and whether it was underground or surface mined or ISL. It might be the acreage for a high grade underground mine in Canada, but probably not the frequently mined low grade. They also fail to say how many years this is for.
Wind farms would require 3,376 acres to 10,127 acres; and solar photovoltaic facilities would require 6,749 acres, they say. However, solar panels on homes and businesses require no additional land. And, this is totally misleading because wind farms and solar don’t contaminate land with long-lived dangerous radionuclides, and food can be and is grown under wind turbines and animals graze there. There are mini-windmills too.
And, would you rather a nuclear reactor exploding from defective materials and/or old age, or a random wind turbine falling due defective materials, which seems the worst case scenario for wind? Birds? Look at the impact of Fukushima and Chernobyl on birds (Mousseau, et.al.) Furthermore, wind turbines are not the only option.
(Alternatives Including the Proposed Action, p. 2-9)
Even if some humans can filter water and air and maybe find a way to grow uncontaminated food, the animals are out there on their own. Authentic religious traditions teach that humans are to be the stewards and caretakers of the plant and animal world, not the destroyers.
Some residents were reportedly to be given bottled water because of the tritium leak, but the animals were not. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Braidwood_Nuclear_Generating_Station
Table 3–7. Wildlife in the Illinois and Indiana Prairies Level IV Ecoregion
14,282,000 picocuries of tritium per liter =
528, 434 becquerels (radioactive emissions/disintegrations per second) per liter of water!
More from “NUREG 1437, Suppl. 55
220.127.116.11 Groundwater Quality 1 The water quality of both the Upper Aquifer and the Deep Aquifer is acceptable for public use 2 and consumption. 3 Controlled effluent from plant operations, which may include radionuclides produced in the 4 reactor coolant system, may be released to the Kankakee River via the discharge or “blowdown” 5 pipeline. Before the effluent is released into the pipeline it is sampled, analyzed, and processed 6 to ensure the liquid released complies with NRC and EPA regulations. In 2005, Exelon 7 determined that water from the blowdown pipeline had been released by three malfunctioning 8 vacuum breaker valves located along a section of the pipeline approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) 9 east of the plants eastern boundary. Exelon determined that water containing tritium had been 10 released from the pipeline in 1996, 1998, 2000, 2003, and 2005. The water released from the 11 blowdown pipeline infiltrated into the groundwater in the Upper Aquifer (Figure 3-12) 12 (CRA 2006a; Exelon 2013j). 13 The highest on-site tritium concentration, detected in Upper Aquifer groundwater was 14 282,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L), and the highest offsite concentration (230,000 pCi/L) was 15 found in a monitoring well located immediately adjacent to the 2005 Braidwood property line. 16 Only one private well was found to contain tritium above the lower limit of detection (200 pCi/L) 17 (CRA 2006a). The maximum concentration of tritium in this well was 1,524 pCi/L. This 18 concentration is well below EPA’s safe level for public drinking water of 20,000 pCi/L 19 (CRA 2006a, Table 6.4). 20 The blowdown pipeline was evaluated for structural integrity. Vacuum breakers along the 21 blowdown pipeline were repaired or permanently closed, and groundwater monitoring wells 22 were installed along the pipeline. Continuous monitoring systems were installed in the 23 operating vacuum breaker boxes to warn of any wastewater releases from the vacuum 24 breakers. Remediation of the contaminated groundwater began in 2006, principally by pumping 25 water from a small Braidwood-owned pond (a former sand borrow pit). This lowered the water 26 table in the Upper Aquifer around the pond, which in turn caused contaminated groundwater to 27 flow into the pond. Water from the pond was pumped into the repaired blowdown pipe, where it 28 was combined with water obtained from the Braidwood cooling pond and then discharged to the 29 Kankakee River in compliance with NRC regulations (Exelon 2013j). 30 Both off-site and on-site groundwater contamination in the Upper Aquifer has been successfully 31 remediated.” http://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=NRC-2013-0169-0015&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf (Numbers are line numbers in the document. Usually we remove them but there is no time to do so.)
Braidwood Kills Fish
The NRC-NUREG document says:
“3.7.4 Cooling Pond Fish Kill Events
Since 2001, six fish kill events have occurred in the Braidwood cooling pond. A brief description of each event follows…”
[Note that just the high temperatures of the released cooling water can be deadly to fish. The water intake can also be deadly. The impact of the radiation itself is unknown. There’s a good chance that they or tourists feed the fish (as at Chernobyl), which would reduce their radiation loads. Some fish are UV resistant which may help. However, fish breathe through their gills, which remains a problem. This is apparently an artificial reservoir built into an old coal mine. There is restocking of fish and fishing is encouraged! Pre-and post-nuclear reactor one really has to look at the river species and they do. Pre-and post-reactor shows a decline in species diversity and numbers in the general area and in the river near the outfall.]
Braidwood Impacts a High Percentage of Blacks and Latinos
It also points out:
“3.12.1 Minority Population
According to 2010 Census data, approximately 48 percent of the population residing within a 50-mi (80-km) radius of Braidwood (in contrast to the ROI data) identified themselves as minority individuals. The largest minority group was Black or African American (22 percent), followed by Hispanic or Latino (of any race) (21 percent) (USCB 2014f).” http://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=NRC-2013-0169-0015&disposition=attachment&contentType=pdf
They don’t discuss the impacts of radiation or a radiological accident on people or animals in this document, that we’ve found (excepting the tritium leak over which they were sued).
They mention that they follow US NRC and EPA rules but these are based on dilute to deceive. They dilute the radionuclides in water before they emit it to the river (and probably cooling pond). Also, it is a river meaning that the radionuclides go down river to be someone else’s problem.
The so-called alternatives seem more a cost study, and even then are poorly done. The only environmental impact study we have found in here is some discussion of changes in species diversity and numbers which have both declined. Also, species types have changed and become types which are more resistant to environmental stresses. In short, it calls to mind Mousseau’s findings at Chernobyl and Fukushima, which is surprising because most of the radionuclides would go downriver.
There is no cost-benefit analysis as to the loss of species and diversity. There are many other options now. They pretend that wind turbines aren’t an option but the amount of wind needed to replace this nuclear power station was less than has come online in the area over the last few years.
Their normal operational documents probably tell what is emitted into the cooling pond and river and its dilution. Limits are on dilution and not quantity. Unless it’s in the appendix, details do not seem to be in this document.