November, 12 2009, 09:59am EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Tom Clements, 803-834-3084
Nick Berning, 202-222-0748
Duke Energy Abandons Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Testing Program in South Carolina Reactor
Utility’s decision to abort test during reactor outage is a huge setback for federal Department of Energy
COLUMBIA, S.C.
Friends of the Earth has learned that Duke Energy has taken a
decisive step which signals its complete withdrawal from the Department
of Energy's controversial program to test the potential use of surplus
military plutonium as fuel for commercial nuclear reactors.
In a stunning and silent move, Duke Energy has decided not to
reload experimental plutonium fuel (mixed oxide fuel, MOX) test
assemblies into its Catawba Unit 1 reactor during the current fuel
outage which began on November 6. This move is a major setback to the
Department of Energy's goal of using MOX fuel in commercial reactors.
Such an outage is a normal procedure, as the radioactive uranium fuel
must be withdrawn from the reactor core every 18 months.
This refueling outage began two weeks early due to a reactor
cooling pump leak which had to be repaired and which, according to the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, was not a reportable event because the
radioactive water leakage was within technical specifications.
"Duke's total abandonment of the plutonium fuel program should be
a wake-up call to the Energy Department. Plans to force the use of this
costly and dangerous fuel in U.S. reactors must be immediately halted,"
said Tom Clements, Southeastern Nuclear Campaign Coordinator for
Friends of the Earth. "That it took Duke a full ten years to pull out
of the MOX program is a good indicator of more trouble ahead with
respect to costs, schedule and safety. It's not too late to pull the
plug on the entire misguided program, halt construction of an expensive
MOX plant under construction at the Savannah River Site and pursue a
cheaper, safer and faster alternative: management of plutonium as
nuclear waste."
Duke's decision to abandon the first-ever testing of MOX fuel made
from surplus weapons plutonium is a huge setback to the Department of
Energy, as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will now not be able to
license full-scale MOX use. In order to be used with uranium fuel in a
nuclear reactor, the MOX fuel must perform acceptably during three
18-month test irradiation cycles. But the four MOX "lead test
assemblies" being tested at the Catawba reactor were withdrawn from the
reactor in May 2008 after only two cycles due to poor performance and
placed in the plant's spent fuel storage pool. Five rods were withdrawn
from one fuel assembly and shipped to Oak Ridge National Lab for
examination, but no test results have been made public.
Duke Energy, under contract with Shaw Areva MOX Services to
conduct the MOX test, has apparently now scrapped not only the MOX
reload but also halted reconsideration of any long-term MOX use in its
Catawba and McGuire reactors. Duke had signed a contract in 1999 "to
purchase mixed-oxide fuel for use in the McGuire and Catawba nuclear
reactors" and to conduct a test with the experimental fuel.
Use of MOX fuel has long drawn criticism from non-proliferation
and environmental groups due to the costs, safety concerns and
proliferation risks involved in processing, transporting and using such
fuel. In letters sent on November 10, 2009, Friends of the Earth
demanded assurances from the NRC that the aborted partial MOX test will
not be used as a justification for licensing MOX use and called on the
Department of Energy to halt construction of the $5 billion MOX factory
now underway at its Savannah River Site in South Carolina until such
time as full MOX use in nuclear reactors is licensed and MOX reactors
are contracted.
The test assemblies were manufactured in France in a now-closed
facility at Cadarache, leaving the Department of Energy with no
fabrication option for new tests of the experimental fuel. A repeat of
the MOX test would take approximately seven years, including NRC
licensing procedures, fuel fabrication, irradiation (three 18-month
cycles, taking a total of 54 months), and post-irradiation examination.
Now, with the loss of Duke, the Department of Energy has no
reactors lined up to use the MOX product from the MOX factory under
construction at its Savannah River Site. DOE claims that it is talking
to various nuclear utilities about MOX use, including the Tennessee
Valley Authority, but it is unknown if those utilities are aware that
they would have to conduct a lengthy test no matter the reactor type
they might propose for the program. Additionally, MOX alters reactor
performance and would result in more release of radiation in a severe
accident.
Acting in the public interest, Friends of the Earth and the Union
of Concerned Scientists revealed on August 4, 2008 that the MOX test
fuel had been prematurely withdrawn from the Catawba reactor. The
Department of Energy never issued a statement about that test failure
and Friends of the Earth now calls on the Department to issue a full
explanation of the failed test and Duke's abandonment of the program.
Resources:
November 10 letter to the Department of Energy:
https://www.foe.org/sites/default/files/Letter_Chu_on_MOX_test.pdf
November 10 letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
https://www.foe.org/sites/default/files/Letter_NRC_on_MOX_test.pdf
Notes:
1. Pertinent FOE news releases on MOX:
March 13, 2009: "DOE's Plans to Use Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Jolted by Duke Energy's Withdrawal," https://www.foe.org/plutonium-fuel-plan-hits-roadblock
August 8, 2009 "Nuclear Fuel Test Failure should Trigger Suspension of Weapons-Grade Plutonium Fuel Use," https://www.foe.org/nuclear-fuel-test-failure-raises-concerns
September 3, 2009: Energy Department Forced to Release Photos of MOX Transport Trucks, https://www.foe.org/photos-nuke-transport-trucks-released
2. Friends of the Earth has filed Freedom of Information Act
requests concerning examination of the MOX test rods at Oak Ridge
National Lab and also about the interest of the Tennessee Valley
Authority in MOX use. However, DOE has staunchly refused to respond to
the requests, contrary to openness directives by DOE Secretary Chu and
Attorney General Holder.
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400LATEST NEWS
To Push for Bold Treaty, Greenpeace Unveils Biden's Plastic Legacy Monument
"He can be the president who put an end to the plastic pollution crisis, or he can be the one who let it spiral out of control."
Mar 28, 2024
Inspired by Atlas, who in Greek mythology carried the heavens on his shoulders, Greenpeace installed a 15-foot monument outside the U.S. Capitol on Thursday to pressure the Biden administration to support an ambitious global plastics treaty.
President Joe Biden "has the chance to cement a lasting legacy: He can be the president who put an end to the plastic pollution crisis, or he can be the one who let it spiral out of control," Greenpeace oceans director John Hocevar said in a statement. "We're calling on him to stand up to plastic polluters like Exxon and Dow and put us on a greener and healthier path."
The third round of treaty talks ended in Kenya late last year with little progress—largely thanks to fossil fuel and chemical lobbyists along with allied governments. The next round of negotiations is set to be held in Canada next month.
The "Biden's Plastic Legacy" monument features the president kneeling and holding up an Earth full of plastic. The base has a written message: "Biden, the world's in your hands. Is this your plastic legacy?"
"Plastic pollution is everywhere, impacting every aspect of our lives. It affects our health, harms our communities, and fuels the climate crisis."
The statue's unveiling ceremony included remarks from Dr. Leo Trasande, a world-renowned environmental health researcher at New York University, and Jo Banner, who lives in Louisiana's Cancer Alley and co-directs the Descendants Project, an environmental justice group.
"The communities of color that live among the plastic manufacturers are first in line for the toxic mix of pollution they produce," said Banner. "Our health, bodies, and communities matter. We refuse to be treated as a mere checkmark on a list of concerns, and we cannot continue to be sacrificial zones."
"We need President Biden to truly listen to our needs and help create a strong global plastics treaty that protects communities like ours," she added. "We must ensure that Cancer Alley is confined to the past, not a part of the future we gift our children."
Trasande noted that in addition to the public health argument for cleaning up the plastic industry, there's an economic one.
"The chemicals found in plastics cost our economy hundreds of billions of dollars because of increases in disease and disability," the doctor said. "The easiest way to stop these diseases is to address plastic production, and a strong global treaty is essential, for people here in the U.S. and around the world."
Research has repeatedly shown the pervasiveness of plastic pollution. A January study found that there are 240,000 plastic particles in the average liter of bottled water. Last September, researchers discovered microplastics in clouds, potentially "contaminating nearly everything we eat and drink via 'plastic rainfall.'"
A 2022 Greenpeace report revealed that U.S. households "generated an estimated 51 million tons of plastic waste" the previous year, and the vast majority ended up in landfills or as pollution.
"Plastic pollution is everywhere, impacting every aspect of our lives. It affects our health, harms our communities, and fuels the climate crisis," Greenpeace campaigner Kate Melges said Thursday.
"The global plastics treaty is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to create a cleaner, safer planet," Melges argued. "President Biden must rise to this moment by supporting a strong plastics treaty that prioritizes human health, cuts production, and ensures a just transition for workers and communities."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Justice Is Delayed' as Judges OK Rigged South Carolina Map for Elections
"I'm disappointed it appears 30,000 people lost their political voice and nobody seems to care," said one Democratic congressional candidate from the affected district.
Mar 28, 2024
Voting rights defenders on Thursday decried a federal panel's
decision to let South Carolina use a congressional map the three judges found to be racially gerrymandered in this year's primary and general elections due to the U.S. Supreme Court's delayed resolution of the case.
The three-judge panel of the U.S. District Court for South Carolina in Columbia ruled last August that "race was the predominant motivating factor" in the Republican-controlled state Legislature's design of the 1st Congressional District "and that traditional districting principles subordinated to race."
Their ruling, which ordered the redrawing of the map, noted that "Charleston County was racially gerrymandered and over 30,000 African Americans were removed from their home district."
"Make no mistake—these discriminatory maps are a direct attempt to suppress Black voices ahead of a consequential election."
In their new decision, the judges acknowledged the awkward predicament of ordering the use of an unconstitutional map.
"But with the primary election procedures rapidly approaching, the appeal before the Supreme Court still pending, and no remedial plan in place, the ideal must bend to the practical," they asserted.
Brenda Murphy, president of the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP, said: "Make no mistake—these discriminatory maps are a direct attempt to suppress Black voices ahead of a consequential election. We will not stand idly by as the rights of thousands of South Carolinians continue to be overlooked."
"The court's ruling today, further delaying these proceedings, continues to tip the scale of justice during a crucial moment in our democracy in an undemocratic attempt to sway the outcome of the upcoming election," Murphy added. "We must strive for a system where every voice is heard and every vote counts, free from the stain of discrimination."
Last October, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case, which was filed in 2021 by the South Carolina State Conference of the NAACP and voter Taiwan Scott. They are represented by the ACLU, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, the ACLU of South Carolina, Boroughs Bryant LLC, Arnold & Porter, and the General Counsel's Office of the NAACP.
As Democracy Docket noted Thursday: "The parties asked the Supreme Court for a decision by January 1, 2024. Nearly three months later, the court still hasn't ruled on the case, creating a dire situation for congressional candidates as the candidate filing period started on March 16 and will end on Monday."
Joshua Douglas, a professor at the University of Kentucky Rosenberg College of Law, said on social media that "someone should write an article about the number of times jurisdictions have been allowed to use an illegal map because there's 'not enough time' to create a fair, legal one."
Douglas noted states where this has occurred, including Alabama, Louisiana, Ohio, North Carolina, "and now South Carolina."
South Carolina primary voters will head to the polls on June 11.
The 1st Congressional District is represented by Congresswoman Nancy Mace, a Republican. On Thursday, she toldThe Post and Courier that the judges' ruling "makes sense."
"It's only fair candidates know what the lines are," Mace said. "For us, I just want to know what constituents I'm serving."
Michael B. Moore, a Democrat running for the seat, called the decision "regrettable."
"I'm disappointed it appears 30,000 people lost their political voice," he said, "and nobody seems to care."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Weak Biden Endangered Species Rules a 'Massive Missed Opportunity'
"Imperiled plants and animals do not have the time for half-measures, since extinction is forever," one expert warned.
Mar 28, 2024
While welcoming efforts by President Joe Biden's administration to undo Trump-era damage to endangered species protections, conservationists warned Thursday that three new federal rules are inadequate, given the world's worsening biodiversity crisis.
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries, which proposed the rules last June, said that they will "restore important protections for species and their habitats; strengthen the processes for listing species, designating of critical habitat, and consultation with other federal agencies; and ensure a science-based approach that will improve both agencies' ability to fulfill their responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)."
The Center for Biological Diversity—which had blasted the Trump administration for taking a "wrecking ball" to the decades-old law—praised the agencies for removing barriers to designating unoccupied areas as critical habitat as well as for restoring the "blanket rule" for threatened species and the ban on considering economic impacts of listing decisions.
However, the center also pointed out that "of the 31 harmful changes made in 2019 to the act's regulations, only seven are fully addressed and corrected in today's final rules," despite years of work on the new rules and nearly half a million public comments.
"We're mostly still stuck with the disastrous anti-wildlife changes made by the previous administration."
"This was a massive missed opportunity to address the worsening extinction crisis," said Stephanie Kurose, a senior policy specialist at the center. "We needed bold solutions to guide conservation as the climate crisis drives more and more animals and plants to extinction. Instead we're mostly still stuck with the disastrous anti-wildlife changes made by the previous administration."
Jamie Rappaport Clark, president and CEO of Defenders of Wildlife, similarly said that "while the regulations restore some essential wildlife protections, we were hopeful for far more than the marginal win the Biden administration delivered today."
"Our nation's threatened and endangered species are under constant attack and the Endangered Species Act is the only thing standing between them and extinction," she stressed. "We appreciate the administration's work on this matter, but at the end of the day much work remains to be done to ensure the Endangered Species Act can fulfill its critical lifesaving mission."
Experts at the environmental law organization Earthjustice also expressed disappointment that—as Drew Caputo, vice president of litigation for lands, wildlife, and oceans put it—the Biden administration didn't fully seize "the opportunity to fully reverse the damage inflicted upon the Endangered Species Act and the imperiled species it protects."
Writing about former Republican President Donald Trump's gutting of the ESA—which Biden helped pass shortly after joining the U.S. Senate in 1973—Earthjustice president Abigail Dillen explained at The Progressive on Wednesday:
The dismantling of the ESA could not have come at a worse time. Scientists around the world are telling us that we are on track to lose a million or more species in this century. We have already witnessed a staggering drop of more than two-thirds of all plant and animal life on Earth since 1970. In the United States, nearly half of our ecosystems are now at risk of collapse. It is a staggering pace of loss that climate change is only accelerating.
It would have been far worse without the ESA. The law has saved 99% of listed species from extinction, including the bald eagle, Florida manatee, and the gray wolf, one of my first "clients" when I began my career as an environmental lawyer more than two decades ago.
Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles declared Thursday that "we are in the midst of an extinction crisis; it is time for bold action."
"Imperiled plants and animals do not have the time for half-measures," she noted, "since extinction is forever."
The new rules—expected to provoke lawsuits from farmers, ranchers, and right-wing groups—come as Biden and Trump prepare for a rematch in November.
"One of the lingering legacies of Donald Trump is his attempt to undermine the Endangered Species Act, one of the most successful and popular conservation laws in the history of the United States," Sierra Club executive director Ben Jealous said Thursday. "At this moment, we should be listening to scientists and acting urgently to save biodiversity, not letting Donald Trump's gutting of environmental safeguards and sellouts to Big Business stand."
"President Biden has made generational investments in climate action with the Inflation Reduction Act and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, but we need him to do more to protect imperiled wildlife," he added. "The Biden administration needs to protect more habitat, not less. We need the administration to increase protections for biodiversity, not abandon them. The president has the power, and we need him to use it."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular