AREVA, Bulgaria, Chernobyl, dangers of nuclear, environment, Europe, Floating Chernobyls, Floating Nuclear Power Stations, Iran, nuclear, nuclear accident, nuclear disaster, nuclear energy, nuclear industry, nuclear power, nuclear power plant, nuclear reactors, nuclear safety, nuclear waste, public safety, Putin, risk management, Russia, Scandinavia, St. Petersburg, Turkey, water
Russian State owned Rosatom, which answers directly to the President of Russia (Putin). Thus, it appears more accurate to say Putin Plans. He/it has recently forced an expensive, unwanted, nuclear power station upon Bulgaria through international legal action, and is building reactors in Iran, Turkey, and elsewhere. As Toshiba-Westinghouse’s probable bankruptcy shows, the nuclear industry cannot survive in free markets, even where it gets massive subsidies. The US taxpayer may lose part of its $8.3 billion loan given for reactors. French State owned Areva is undergoing massive injections of money but must answer, somewhat, to the French parliament. Russian State owned Rosatom is unique – it only answers to the Executive, i.e. Putin. Apart from free speech issues, this is the single biggest reason not to be owned by Putin.
From Greenpeace: “Greenpeace protests against the launch of fueling of a nuclear power plant inside the city of St. Petersburg
Feature story – 6 February, 2017
Greenpeace Russia has filed a request to the Head of the Federal Service for Ecological, Technological and Nuclear Supervision to check the legality of loading of nuclear fuel into the reactors of the floating nuclear power in St. Petersburg.
The floating nuclear power plant “Academician Lomonosov” will get its two reactors fueled at the Baltic Shipyard in the center of St. Petersburg, Russia’s second biggest city. The shipyard has confirmed such plans to the Rosbalt news agency. Greenpeace is concerned that if Rosatom runs this dangerous operation it will break the current legislation and will put five million residents of the city at risk.
The floating nuclear power plant that is being built in St Petersburg, is a new experimental vessel. Its environmental impact assessment and licensing procedures must take into account that the barge would become a nuclear power plant not at its final destination, in Pevek in Chukotka in the Russian Far East, but in St Petersburg.
Loading nuclear fuel into the reactors in St Petersburg should not be possible without an environmental impact assessment of siting and construction of the floating NPP and public hearings in the city, as well as a state environmental assessment of the project and other necessary procedures, which could prove that loading of nuclear fuel within the city is too risky. Moreover, decision to have a dangerous radioactive object in the city, even temporarily, should be approved by requires a decision of the Russian government supported by the St. Petersburg governor. According to the information that Greenpeace has, none of these procedures have been followed.
“For quite a long time, Rosatom has been negotiating the sales of floating NPPs outside Russia. And this project is considered important not just for Russia’s Chukotka. We think that the corporation wants to have a working model to demonstrate it to potential customers abroad,” says Rashid Alimov, nuclear campaigner with Greenpeace Russia.
“Greenpeace opposes the very concept of a floating nuclear power plant as unacceptably dangerous, Alimov stresses. Experts say that in the event of an accident with a release of radioactivity, vast areas can get contaminated. It has been proved by the operating experience of vessel reactors. However, in case of floating nuclear power plants, piracy and terrorism add to the usual list of risks of natural hazards as earthquakes and tsunamis. If a floating NPP gets in the hands of criminals they would get hold of a significant amount of highly enriched uranium, and a chance for nuclear blackmail“. http://www.greenpeace.org/russia/en/news/Greenpeace-protests-against-the-launch-of-fueling-of-a-nuclear-power-plant-inside-the-city-of-St-Petersburg (Emphasis our own.) IAEA alleges that it is fueled by LEU and not HEU. However, submarines are fueled by HEU, so Greenpeace may be correct.
These floating nuclear reactors are not new! They are an old, stupid, US invention of a floating nuclear power station. The nuclear industry only recycles the same lethal crap. Nuclear is a dead industry only pumped alive through injection of massive taxpayer funds, worldwide. Thus, in democratic and capitalist societies the nuclear industry will not survive over time. However, solutions will still be needed for the nuclear waste. Clear proof of its death is its lack of innovation. Living industries innovate lest they die. Past time to bury this dead industry, before it buries us all. https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/01/19/runaway-foundering-sinking-nuclear-power-stations/
“Uranium fuel will be loaded before towing around Scandinavia
Russia’s first-ever floating nuclear power plant is scheduled to sail out of St. Petersburg towards Murmansk in October 2017“. By Thomas Nilsen
“World’s first floating nuclear power plant should not be fueled with uranium while in St. Petersburg, environmentalists say Political party Yabloko demands that the soon-to-be operation is conducted in safe distance from the city center.” By Atle Staalesen, March 08, 2017 https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic/2017/03/worlds-first-floating-nuclear-power-plant-should-not-be-fueled-uranium-while-st
“Russia mulls underwater nuclear reactors for Arctic oil” By Thomas Nilsen, September 12, 2016. https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic-industry-and-energy/2016/09/russia-mulls-underwater-nuclear-reactors-arctic-oil
Rosatom answers more directly to Putin, than some Russian state owned entities: “State Corporations are not obliged to submit to public authorities documents accounting for activities (except for a number of documents submitted to the Russian government) and, as a rule, are subordinate not to the government, but to the Russian president,…” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprise#Russia “Rosatom is the only vendor in the world able to offer the nuclear industry’s entire range of products and services. It runs all nuclear assets of the Russian Federation, both civil and weapons.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosatom
Toshiba bankruptcy could cost the US taxpayer billions: “With the U.S. government having guaranteed an $8.3 billion debt over a nuclear power plant project in Georgia contracted to Westinghouse, the company’s restructuring under Chapter 11 may force U.S. taxpayers to shoulder part of the cost“. http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/03/10/business/corporate-business/concerns-emerge-guarantee-toshibas-u-s-nuclear-project