The Mind-Boggling Cost of a Theoretical Fr. Nuclear Accident

[Oscar]

The Mind-Boggling Cost of a Theoretical French Nuclear Accident

< http://www.wind-works.org/cms/index.php ... 5bc1188c16 >

- - - - -

BACKGROUND:

----- Original Message -----
From: Gordon Edwards
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2013 11:46 AM

Background:

This was sent to me by Hélène Connor of HELIO International, long-time Board Member of CCNR, stationed in Paris France. I suggest that anyone who is seriously interested in spreading the information look at the short paper by IRSN, found at:
http://tinyurl.com/at6m5r8.

The regulatory authorities in North America -- the US NRC and the CNSC -- simply refuse to seriously consider the consequences of a truly major nuclear accident -- one in which large uncontrolled releases result.

To see how adamant CNSC is in avoiding any consideration of such major accidents, read my critique of the recent Darlington Hearings, entitled "Failure to Answer Fundamental Reactor Safety Questions": http://ccnr.org/CNSC_CCNR_Supp_2013.pdf .

Gordon Edwards.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Official Report Says “A Major Nuclear Accident in France Would be an Unmanageable European Catastrophe”

by Paul Gipe February 7, 2013

The metaphorical fallout from Fukushima continues to weigh on the world’s nuclear industry.

The latest blow comes from an unexpected source, a French-government-funded agency, the Institut de radioprotection et de sûreté nucléaire (IRSN) or the Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety.
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_d ... %C3%A9aire .

In a brief seven-page paper for Eurosafe,
< http://www.eurosafe-forum.org/userfiles ... _final.pdf >
the European reactor safety organization, the IRSN authors take the reader on a walk through the subtle semantics of nuclear-disaster speak. For example, what is the difference between a “Severe” nuclear accident and a “Major” one? The answer is about €300 billion ($400 billion) or “an unmanageable European catastrophe.”

More significant than the findings themselves is the fact that IRSN makes such a statement publicly.

France has the highest concentration of nuclear power in the world. The more than 60,000 MW of nuclear capacity in France from some 60 reactors meets 80% of the country’s electricity consumption.

Since Louis IV, the Sun King, political power in France has been concentrated in the hands of a select few in the capital, Paris. Despite repeated efforts to devolve power to the regions in the decades following WWII, the French elite (the product of the grandes écoles)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandes_%C3%A9coles >
is concentrated in the central government and in the administration of the country’s largest corporations.

Probably no country in the world is better suited than France for the centralized decision making necessary for such a commitment to nuclear power. And the French elite, politicians and administrators, almost universally endorse France’s nuclear bargain, made after the economic disruptions caused by the oil crises of the 1970s.

In turn, French leaders have been dismissive of renewable energy--when they have deigned to tolerate it. Despite a long history in wind-energy research, France has installed little more wind generating capacity than Great Britain, another laggard in renewable energy development in comparison to Denmark, Spain, and Germany.

France has prided itself on its cadre of technicians who keep their aging reactor fleet running. The country is literally putting its life in their hands. So, it was stung by the French nuclear industry’s reaction to Chernobyl.

While the Swiss and German governments were warning their citizens to take protective action, France was reassuring its people that all was well. In a now infamous incident, France was showing the plume of radioactive fallout from Chernobyl suddenly stopping at the French border.

This was simply too much, even in France. Since then the industry, its regulators, and the government have been trying to regain the moral high ground.

It was the Fukushima disaster that gave French nuclear regulators and safety organizations an opportunity to demonstrate their new found openness. And they performed well. French radiological technicians regularly reported releases, and modeled global fallout from the Japanese reactors. Their regular and reliable reports became standard fare in news reports worldwide during the days and weeks following the accident.

This, then, is the background to IRSN’s report. It is part of the French nuclear establishment’s new openness. Even so, the findings of the report are still startling.

Controlled releases from an accident at a French Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) would have limited “radiological consequences,” says the report. This statement conforms to earlier reassurances about the effects from a nuclear accident in France. The costs of such an accident would have severe, but not disastrous, economic effects.

The key words to note here are “controlled releases”.

The authors go on to explain that a severe nuclear accident in France would be a national disaster, but would nevertheless be manageable. France, like all countries, has endured national disasters, such as invasion and occupation during WWII, and has survived as a functioning state.

They define a severe accident as one with a core meltdown, as at Fukushima, but where technicians are capable of controlling the release of radiation.

They estimate severe accident would cost €120 billion or 6% of France’s €2,000 billion GDP.

MORE:

< http://www.wind-works.org/cms/index.php ... 5bc1188c16 >

[Oscar]

Major nuclear accident would cost France $580 billion: study

< http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/ ... 3X20130207 >

Date: 08-Feb-13
Country: FRANCE
Author: Michel Rose
A nuclear accident similar to the one at Japan's Fukushima reactor would cost France about 430 billion euros ($580 billion), or 20 percent of its economic output, French nuclear safety institute IRSN said in a study on the possible financial impact of a nuclear crisis.