Share this post:
PRISM Liquid Sodium Cooled, Small Modular Nuclear Reactor (SMR) Problems And Issues Analyzed - WIN Nuclear Lobbyist Corruption - Nuclear Industry Is Trying To Turn Plutonium Into Gold Via Delusion Magic Spells On The Public And Avalanches Of Money Poured Into Nuclear Monopoly

This article describes what liquid sodium cooled small modular reactors are, including PRISM Power (Reactor Innovative Small Module) nuclear reactors. This article then analyzes whether it is a viable and realistic choice for the future of humankind financially, and in other ways, including the potential for Thorium powered SMR's.


ACCORDING TO GALEN WINDSOR, THE FUTURE IS A SMALL NUCLEAR SHIP POWER REACTOR TIED UP AT EVERY SHIP DOCK AND PORT, PLUS A SMALL MODULAR (SMR) NUCLEAR REACTOR EVERY TEN BLOCKS AROUND YOUR TOWN

The Nuclear Scare Scam - Galen Winsor
"In 1975 we knew that large nuclear reactors were dead, that large was not the way to go. The way to go was small mass-produced nuclear reactors sitting right in the middle of town, one every 10 blocks, producing power. We haven’t built a reactor right yet. It’s time that we do it. Why haven’t we? Because of a federal energy cartel. These guys control the amount of electricity, the availability, and the price and they say, “You do not have a choice.” I have a choice. I’m gonna take one of those decommissioned nuclear subs up in Puget Sound, refuel it, and make my own electricity. Save the government $5 million because that’s what they want to throw them away. And I will use it for my own power probe. Quinn Millian up in Omak, Washington and I are moving on that and one of these days, if I hook one of them up to Pier 91 in Seattle, don’t be surprised."
Source; https://youtu.be/ejCQrOTE-XA (deleted video)

Are you ready to have a nuclear reactor 10 blocks or less from you? Are you ready for a nuclear ship tied up in your harbor? What happens when it wears out? So far, there is no answer for nuclear waste, and no one wants a worn out, leaking rust bucket nuclear reactor ship or SMR in their backyard. Are you ready to have thousands of worn out small nuclear reactors sitting there, full of nuclear waste that no one knows what to do with?  Think of the terrorist risk of thousands of these dirty bombs sitting around in large cities, unguarded and vulnerable.. Just one of these blown up by terrorists, would contaminate a whole region and/or make a huge city uninhabitable. 

MOST OF THE WORLD HAS MOVED ON, AND NUCLEAR POWER IS IN A TERMINAL DECLINE FOR MANY VERY GOOD REASONS; IT IS GAME OVER FOR THE NUCLEAR CABAL

































Laura Lynch NUCLEAR POWER: GAME OVER – new analysis by Professor Derek Abbott, a physicist and electrical engineer at the University of Adelaide, Australia ... "Nexit: Nuclear Exit. Around the world the nuclear industry is in gradual, inexorable decline. Starting from 1954, it took the world 48 years to gradually ramp up to a peak of 438 commercial nuclear power plants in 2002. Today, in 2016, we have dropped to 402 reactors with further closures foreshadowed." Read the full article from the Australian Quarterly Oct-Dec 2016: http://static1.1.sqspcdn.com/static/f/356082/27266889/1475068962187/NuclearPower_GameOver_DerekAbbott.pdf

THE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY IS IN DECLINE EXCEPT IN DESPOT, DICTATOR OR STRONG MAN LED COUNTRIES, SUCH AS USA

Open and mature democracies around the world are saying NO to nuclear everything, including nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants, including SMR.

INVESTMENT IN NUCLEAR POWER DECLINED 45% LAST YEAR








































Investment in new nuclear declines to five-year low, WNN 17 July 2018 Global energy investment fell for the third consecutive year in 2017, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). Investment in nuclear power declined by nearly 45% last year to USD17 billion. Although spending on new reactors reached the lowest level in five years, investment on upgrades of existing units increased………

Of the four new reactors commissioned last year, three were in China. More than 5 GWe of nuclear generating capacity was retired, leading to a net reduction of about 2 GWe in total nuclear capacity worldwide. Capacity was still about 10 GW higher than in 2007. While around 60 GWe of nuclear power remains under construction worldwide, new construction starts totalled just over 3 GWe.

Modernisations and upgrades of existing reactors represented about half of total nuclear investment last year. 
View original post 94 more words

WHY SMALL MODULAR REACTORS WON'T REVIVE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; IT IS LIKE TRYING TO TURN LEAD INTO GOLD VIA MAGIC; THE NUCLEAR RENAISSANCE IS DEAD


SMRs Won't Revive Failed 'Nuclear Renaissance'
http://www.nuclearpowerdaily.com/reports/SMRs_Wont_Revive_Failed_Nuclear_Renaissance_999.html



AntiNuclear.net; The massive holes in Senator Edward’s arguments for “new nuclear” technology for South Australia
Not a single PRISM [ (Power Reactor Innovative Small Module] has actually been built…. the commercial viability of these technologies is unproven

Crucially, under the plan, Australia would have been taking spent fuel for 4 years before the first PRISM came online, assuming the reactors were built on time.

If borehole technology works as intended, and at the prices hoped for, why would any country pay another to take their waste for $1,370,000 a tonne, when a solution exists that only costs $216,000 a tonne, less than one sixth of the price?

The impossible dream Free electricity sounds too good to be true. It is. A plan to produce free electricity for South Australia by embracing nuclear waste sounds like a wonderful idea. But it won’t work. THE AUSTRALIA INSTITUTE Dan Gilchrist February 2016

“……NEW TECHNOLOGY This comprehensively researched submission asserts that a transformative opportunity is to be found in pairing established, mature practices with cuspof-commercialisation technologies to provide an innovative model of service to the global community. (emphasis added) Edwards’ submission to the Royal Commission

Two elements of the plan – transport of waste, and temporary storage in the dry cask facility – are indeed mature. There is a high degree of certainty that these technologies will perform as expected, for the prices expected.

It should be noted, however, that the price estimates used in the Edwards plan for the dry cask storage facility draw on estimates for an internal US facility to be serviced by rail.17 No consideration has been given to the cost of shipping the material from overseas.

Around a dozen ship loads a year would be needed to import spent fuel at the rate called for in the plan.18 It is likely that a dedicated port would also need to be constructed. The 1999 Pangea plan, which proposed a similar construction of a commercial waste repository in Australia, made allowances for “…international transport in a fleet of special purpose ships to a dedicated port in Australia”. 19

Needless to say, building and operating highly specialised ships, or paying others to do so, would not be free. Building and operating a dedicated port would not be free. Yet none of these activities are costed in the plan.

Furthermore, beyond the known elements of transport and temporary storage, the principle technologies depended on – PRISM reactors and borehole disposal – are precisely those which are glossed over as being on the “cusp of commercialisation”.

To put it another way: the commercial viability of these technologies is unproven.

PRISM [Power Reactor Innovative Small Module]The PRISM reactor is based on technology piloted in the US, up until the program was cancelled in 1994. 20 It offers existing nuclear-power nations what appears to be a tremendous deal: turn those massive stockpiles of waste into fuel, and reduce the long-term waste problem from one of millennia to one of mere centuries. It promises to be cheap, too, with the small modular design allowing mass production.

Despite this promise, not a single PRISM reactor has actually been built. Officials at the South Korean Ministry of Science have said that they hope to have advanced reactors – if not the PRISM then something very similar – up and running by 2040.21 The Generation IV International Forum expects the first fourth generation reactors – of which the PRISM is one example – to be commercially deployed in the 2030’s.2

After decades spent developing the technology in the United States, a US Department of Energy report dismissed the use of Advanced Disposition Reactors (ADR), a class which includes the PRISM-type integral fast reactor concept, as a way of drawing down on excess plutonium stocks. It compares it unfavourably to the existing – and expensive – mixed oxide (MOX) method of recycling nuclear fuel.

The ADR option involves a capital investment similar in magnitude to the [MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility] but with all of the risks associated with first of-a kind new reactor construction (e.g., liquid metal fast reactor), and this complex nuclear facility construction has not even been proposed yet for a Critical Decision …. Choosing the ADR option would be akin to choosing to do the MOX approach all over again, but without a directly relevant and easily accessible reference facility/operation (such as exists for MOX in France) to provide a leg up on experience and design.23

Nevertheless, the Edwards plan hopes to have a pair of PRISMs built in 10 years.

Crucially, under the plan, Australia would have been taking spent fuel for 4 years before the first PRISM came online, assuming the reactors were built on time.

The risk is that these integral fast reactors might turn out to be more expensive than anticipated and prove to be uneconomical. This could leave South Australia with expensive electricity and no other plan to deal with any of the spent fuel acquired to fund the reactors in the first place.

For countries that have no long-term solution for their existing waste stockpiles, the business case for constructing a PRISM reactor is much clearer: even if the facility turns out to be uneconomical, it will nevertheless be able to process some spent fuel, thus reducing waste stockpiles. This added benefit makes the financial risk more worthwhile for such countries

Australia, on the other hand, doesn’t have an existing stockpile of high-level nuclear waste. The Edwards plan would see Australia acquire that problem in the hopes of solving it with technology never before deployed on a commercial scale. We would be buying off the plan, with many billions of dollars at stake, in the hopes that we, with little experience and minimal nuclear infrastructure, could solve a problem which has vexed far more experienced nations for decades.

By the time the first PRISM is due to come online it will be too late to turn back, no matter what unexpected problems may be encountered. Australia would have acquired thousands of tonnes of spent fuel with no other planned use.

Counting on the development of other PRISM reactors around the world is another gamble. The proposed reprocessing plant accounts for all of the 4,000 tonne reduction in waste over the life of the plan. Australia will have no use for most of this material – the rest must be used by other PRISMs. If PRISMs are not widely adopted, Australia will have no takers. This could leave Australia with even more than 56,000 tonnes of waste, with no planned or costed solution.

Source/Credit, Share this:

SMR PRISM REACTOR DETAILS

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




Drawing of the PRISM Reactor

PRISM (Power Reactor Innovative Small Module, sometimes S-PRISM from SuperPRISM) is the name of a nuclear power plant design by GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH).

The S-PRISM represents GE and Hitachi's Generation IV reactor solution to closing the nuclear fuel cycle and is also part of its Advanced Recycling Center (ARC) proposition[1]to U.S. Congress to deal with nuclear waste.[2] S-PRISM is a commercial implementation of the Integral Fast Reactor developed by Argonne National Laboratory between 1984 and 1994.

It is a sodium-cooled fast breeder reactor, based on the Experimental Breeder Reactor II(EBR-II) design, scaled up by a factor of ten.[3] The design utilizes reactor modules, each having a power output of 311 MWe, to enable factory fabrication at low cost.

In an identical fashion to the EBR-II that it is based on, the reactor would transition to a much lower power level whenever temperatures rise significantly, moreover the reactor vessel modules are pool type, as opposed to loop type, with the pool conferring substantial thermal inertia and the final key safety feature includes a "RVACS", which is a passive reactor vessel air cooling system to remove decay heat. These safety systems are passive and therefore always operate and are to prevent core damage in a Loss of coolant accident where no other means of heat removal are available.[4]

Integral fast reactor

The integral fast reactor was developed at the West Campus of the Argonne National Laboratory in Idaho Falls, Idaho and was the intended successor to the Experimental Breeder Reactor II, which achieved first criticality in 1965 and ran for 30 years. The Integral Fast Reactor project was shut down by the U.S. Congress in 1994.

Possible US demonstration reactor

In October 2010, GEH signed a memorandum of understanding with the operators of the Department of Energy's Savannah River site, which should allow the construction of a demonstration reactor prior to the design receiving full NRC licensing approval.[5]

UK interest in PRISM

In October 2011, The Independent reported that the UK Nuclear Decommissioning Authority(NDA) and senior advisers within the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) had asked for technical and financial details of the PRISM, partly as a means of reducing the country's plutonium stockpile.[6] In July 2012, GEH submitted a feasibility report to the NDA showing that the PRISM could provide a cost-effective way of quickly dealing with the UK's plutonium stockpile. The feasibility report includes an assessment from the consultancy firm DBD Limited suggesting there are "no fundamental impediment(s)" to the licensing of the PRISM in the UK. [7] [8]

A 2012 Guardian article pointed out that a new generation of fast reactors such as the PRISM "could dispose of the waste problem, reducing the threat of radiation and nuclear proliferation, and at the same time generate vast amounts of low-carbon energy". David J. C. MacKay, chief scientist at the DECC, recently said that British plutonium contains enough energy to run the country's electricity grid for 500 years.[9]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM_(reactor)

A Global Overview - How And Why Fast Neutron, Fast Breeder Reactors Like PRISM And FBTR, Never Lived Up To The Hype Or The Promises
http://agreenroad.blogspot.com/2013/09/a-global-overview-how-and-why-fast.html


LIQUID SODIUM FAST BREEDER REACTOR EXPERIMENT IN US CANCELLED DUE TO COST OVER RUNS, FAILURES AND MELT DOWNS


The liquid sodium reactor project that this one was based on ended up being cancelled by the Clinton Administration in 1994. Possibly this cancellation had something to do with the liquid sodium reactor design having problems, such as melting down, huge and repeated cost over runs, plus multiple failures globally, all of which the pro nuclear apologists fail to mention. 

Globally, fast breeder sodium cooled reactors have been dismal failures, with tens of billions of dollars thrown at them, and no workable, affordable solution has been found. 

WHAT HAPPENS TO USED SODIUM COOLANT COMING OUT OF REACTOR? FAST REACTOR LIQUID SODIUM COOLED DESIGNS HAVE A VERY POOR TRACK RECORD WHEN IT COMES TO SAFETY


The U.K. has a poor record in the past with its own experimental fast reactor designs—the Dounreay Fast Reactor and the Prototype Fast Reactor—including multiple sodium leaks. Dounreay also suffered an explosion at its dumping ground for used sodium coolant that may have contributed to radioactive particles from spent fuel turning up on nearby beaches. The Dounreay and Prototype cleanup and decommissioning continue today, despite both having been shut down for decades.

NUCLEAR INDUSTRY HAS COVERED UP LIQUID SODIUM REACTOR ACCIDENTS AND 30 NUCLEAR REACTOR MELT DOWNS


Liquid sodium reactors have had numerous problems, so many problems that they have been rejected by just about every nation trying them out.  One of the problems is that the nuclear industry covers up the disasters, failures, and environmentally damaging leaks, spills, meltdowns and other disasters.

The nuclear industry has made many false claims in the past; too cheap to meter, green, clean and carbon free. None of these claims turned out to be true. Now the nuclear industry wants everyone to believe them about this 'new' technology, which they say is clean and green. Haven't we heard this lie before somewhere? 

PRISM BURNS AND BREEDS PLUTONIUM MIXED WITH URANIUM AND ZIRCONIUM, THE MOST TOXIC AND DANGEROUS MAN MADE ELEMENT ON EARTH

What the pro nuclear apologists don't talk about is just as important as what they do focus on. Because the PRISM reactor requires a mixed fuel, which has not yet been perfected and must still be 'designed' and experimented with, this reactor also requires a very dangerous pyroprocessing technique, which requires huge amounts of energy and must be done remotely, because it so toxic and radioactive.  To create the fuel to burn in nuclear reactors required building two massive coal fired plants that were dedicated just to running Savannah River nuclear fuels site. How much energy will this 'new' fuel processing technique take, and how many coal fired plants must be dedicated to it?

The technical challenges include the fact that it would require converting the plutonium powder into a metal alloy, with uranium and zirconium. This would be a large-scale industrial activity on its own that would create "a likely large amount of plutonium-contaminated salt waste," Simper said.

Savannah River is where the PRISM demonstration project will be done, if it goes ahead. This site is one of the most polluted places on the planet, in addition to Hanford, which also ranks right up there along with it. Why are they so radioactively polluted? They processed and created the uranium and plutonium to make the fuel which was burned in the reactors, which then created the waste that is now the issue that cannot be solved. 

Now PRISM requires the making of radioactive fuel as well, which must also be 'manufactured' using even more toxic and dangerous processes than what has come before. PRISM does not burn pure plutonium, as it requires a 'mix' of things, which must be manufactured, in a process that has not yet been perfected. The processing and burning of plutonium, will release plutonium into the environment, guaranteed. 

Can humanity afford to release more and more plutonium into the environment? The rising cancer, genetic disease and other health issues rates say that this is the wrong course. Plutonium is too dangerous to have around, much less 'burn' for fuel, as it is 2 million times more dangerous and much more volatile than uranium.

The liquid sodium surrounding the reactor must be dumped on a regular basis. Where is this radioactive waste going to go? How much will be created? What are the hazards and dangers around it? As we already read, this sodium coolant can even explode, outside of the reactor, and cause massive environmental pollution.

The one time this sodium salt explosion and fire happened has still not been paid for, cleaned up or adequately dealt with, as of today. Can you imagine what would happen if thousands of these monsters were loosed on the world?

ACCORDING TO SCIENCE COUNCIL, 1,000'S OF THESE AND OTHER NUCLEAR REACTORS ARE NEEDED GLOBALLY TO STOP GLOBAL WARMING AND THEY CANNOT BE BUILT FAST ENOUGH EVEN IF MONEY COULD BE FOUND FOR THEM, WHICH IS A PIPE DREAM


The Science Council states that; "Anti‐nuclear ‘Greens’ as much a threat to the climate as Exxon‐Mobil, responsible for 10's billions /tonnes CO2. IFR/PRISM just one of a variety of competing 4th Gen designs, other fast reactors, SMRs, thorium LFTRs also important. Gen III+ also worth deploying at scale, need 1,000's of new reactors to solve climate change.

Actually, the Science Council is totally wrong, because the world can rely on 100% carbon free and nuclear free energy sources in the future. Greens are not the problem, but the nuclear industry is, with its creating nuclear waste that there is no solution for, constant spills, leaks and accidents, plus constant lying and covering up about the numerous disasters that they cause. 

DOWNSIDES OF SMR THORIUM REACTORS, BY DR MAKHIJANI

Some pro nuclear marketers promise that SMR Reactors powered by thorium are all humanity needs.

Dr. Arjun Makhijani speaks about the downsides of the proposed thorium reactors (by Dr. Helen Caldicott)
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/P4P7DlufqQM 57 min.

razzz April 21, 2015  Does this 'portable' reactor design sound familiar?

'SL-1, or Stationary Low-Power Reactor' "…and test a prototype reactor plant to be called the Argonne Low Power Reactor (ALPR).

Some of the more important criteria included:

All components able to be transported by air
Use of standard components
Minimal on-site construction
Simplicity and reliability
3-year fuel operating lifetime per core loading

The prototype was constructed at the NRTS site from July 1957 to July 1958. It was operational on October 24, 1958. The 3 MW (thermal) boiling water reactor (BWR) used highly enriched uranium fuel. It operated with natural circulation, using light water as a coolant and moderator…"

"…On January 3, 1961, the reactor was being prepared for restart after a shutdown of eleven days over the holidays. Maintenance procedures required that the main central control rod be manually withdrawn a few inches to reconnect it to its drive mechanism. At 9:01 p.m., this rod was suddenly withdrawn too far, causing SL-1 to go prompt critical instantly. In four milliseconds, the heat generated by the resulting enormous power surge caused water surrounding the core to begin to explosively vaporize…"

The nuke industry sure knows how to ruin pristine natural areas as in Idaho in this case."

NUSCALE SMR RESEARCH REACTOR IN CORVALLIS OREGON; HOW IS IT DOING? 


Laurel Kaskurs Small modular nuclear reactors are a horrible idea ! There is a Nuscale research facility in Corvalis, Oregon. No wonder their rads have gone up compared to neighboring cities.



CARBON FREE, NUCLEAR FREE SOLUTIONS ARE ALL THERE, READY TO GO, BUT ARE DENIED, ATTACKED AND SQUASHED BY THE FOSSIL FUEL AND NUCLEAR MONOPOLIES


The solutions are all there waiting for humanity to implement them. The solutions are ready to go. What is everyone sitting around twiddling their thumbs for? Why are we wasting time with nuclear, which is a dead end street and will cause Armageddon if humanity keeps on playing with this deadly life destroying toy?



Via Laurel Kaskurs

There are many renewable solutions ready and waiting for people to wake up and decide that they are better than dirty, toxic, expensive, DNA destroying nuclear anything.

Laura Lynch "On China: "Nuclear apologists point to China as a role model that is actively building a number of NPPs. The fact is that China has built $160 billion in overcapacity of coal plants that are unused. Will their NPPs, which are presently under construction, become similarly redundant? . . . By contrast, in 2015, China invested five times more in renewables than nuclear power. Those nuclear projects will take many years to complete, whereas renewables are deployed and put to immediate use."

"Getting uranium from seawater "is a fruitless suggestion as the uranium concentration is tiny, at 3.3 parts per billion. The energy it takes to lift a bucket of sea water 50 metres is equal to the energy you'd get from the uranium."

"Nuclear vs. renewables: "Nuclear power is large and centralized, with enormous entry and exit costs. By contrast, renewables are made up of small modular units that yield a faster return on investment. The revolution we are witnessing is akin to the extinction of big powerful dinosaurs versus resilient swarms of small ants working in cooperation." 

"Nuclear can't solve renewable intermittency: "Generators designed for constant baseload operation are exactly what uncontrollable renewable generators don't need. Uncontrollable renewables need flexible controlled sources of power such as hydroelectric power, pumped hydro, waste biofuels, solar thermal, and solar generated hydrogen or syngas to provide power when generation from intermittent renewable sources is insufficient to meet demand. Nuclear power plants work best when they provide constant power output and they lack the agility to follow the variability of renewable generators."

"Nuclear is not needed to solve grid instability: "First, nuclear power is not needed because controllable renewable sources. . . already stabilise the grid. It is true that other renewable sources do give rise to grid management issues, but this is bread and butter for grid engineers. There are numerous research papers by grid engineers developing solutions for increased renewable penetration and none are suggesting the need for nuclear power."




Via Laurel Kaskers

PRISM REACTOR IS EVEN MORE EXPENSIVE THAN TRADITIONAL REACTOR, WHICH IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN RENEWABLE FUELS AND THEY DON'T BLOW UP, MELT DOWN OR EMIT INVISIBLE HEAVY METAL RADIOACTIVE POISON GASES AND LIQUIDS


Can Fast Reactors Speedily Solve Plutonium Problems?
...Such fast reactors are more expensive than even traditional reactors, such as Westinghouse's new AP-1000 under construction in China and the U.S., which are estimated to cost roughly $7 billion apiece.....Ultimately, however, the core problem may be that such new reactors don't eliminate the nuclear waste that has piled up so much as transmute it. Even with a fleet of such fast reactors, nations would nonetheless require an ultimate home for radioactive waste, one reason that a 2010 M.I.T. report on spent nuclear fuel dismissed such fast reactors. Or, as Cochran puts it: "If you want to get rid of milk, don't feed it to cows."

Conventional light-water reactors can also "consume" plutonium, if need be. "If I was going to try to get rid of 100 tons of plutonium, I'd burn it in a light-water reactor," Cochran says, by making it into the mixed oxide fuels. And "the cheapest thing to do is vitrify it [convert it to glass] and mix it with other nuclear waste."


PRISM REACTOR DESIGN NOT PROVEN COMMERCIALLY, AND THEY WILL TAKE 25 YEARS TO DEVELOP AND DEPLOY, UNDER BEST CASE SCENARIO


The skeptics include Adrian Simper, the strategy director of the UK's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which will be among those organizations deciding whether to back the PRISM plan. Simper warned last November in an internal memorandum that fast reactors were "not credible" as a solution to Britain's plutonium problem because they had "still to be demonstrated commercially" and could not be deployed within 25 years.

PRISM PLUTONIUM FUEL IS VULNERABLE TO TERRORIST THEFT OR ATTACK, COULD BE USED TO MAKE NUCLEAR BOMBS


Simper is also concerned that the plutonium metal, once prepared for the reactor, would be even more vulnerable to theft for making bombs than the powdered oxide. This view is shared by the Union of Concerned Scientists in the U.S., which argues that plutonium liberated from spent fuel in preparation for recycling "would be dangerously vulnerable to theft or misuse."The argument about proliferation risk boils down to timescales. In the long term, burning up the plutonium obviously eliminates the risk. But in the short term, there would probably be greater security risks. 

COST OVER RUNS AND LATE DELIVERY IS THE NORM, NOT THE EXCEPTION WITH ANYTHING NUCLEAR; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY HAS A BAD HABIT OF OVER PROMISING ON EVERYTHING AND THEN UNDER DELIVERING, OR NOT DELIVERING AT ALL

Nuclear power is the most expensive fuel on the planet, bar none. Now more money must be thrown at the problem to 'solve' the problem which was created by the nuclear industry. 

The nuclear industry norm is delivering "late and wildly over budget — and often not delivering at all....John Sauven, director of Greenpeace UK, and Paul Dorfman, British nuclear policy analyst at the University of Warwick, England, argued recently that this made all nuclear options a poor alternative to renewables in delivering low-carbon energy. "Even if these latest plans could be made to work, PRISM reactors do nothing to solve the main problems with nuclear: the industry's repeated failure to build reactors on time and to budget," they wrote in a letter to the Guardian newspaper. "We are being asked to wait while an industry that has a track record for very costly failures researches yet another much-hyped but still theoretical new technology."

On top of that, why does this dirty, polluting, lying and deceptive industry deserve taxpayer corporate welfare payments just to keep them in business?

W.I.N. NUCLEAR LOBBYIST CORRUPTION EXPOSED in the UTAH STATE CAPITOL, IT IS A UNIVERSAL PROBLEM THROUGH THE WHOLE NUCLEAR INDUSTRY

Kevin Blanch speaks about corrupt nuclear lobbyists proposing SMR nuclear reactors 
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/sYLiFzotUHc   2 min

LET THE FACTS SPEAK;; kevin D. blanch 801-452-1908 http://www.thepostignoranceproject.com/ 

W.I.N. READ THIS 240,000 IN KICKBACKS YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK
Kevin Blanch Utah home of the cowards, the killers lead there flock to the cancer slaughter houses:

W.I.N. FOR PROFIT, LEFT, RIGHT, RED GREEN, DEM., GOP, ATOMIC KILLERS FOR PROFIT;; they call it W.I.N.
keivn D. blanch THE POST IGNORANCE PROJECT 801-452-1908;; http://www.thepostignoranceproject.com/

UTAH, OREGON, WASHINGTON,CALIFORNIA, MORMON CHURCH, Governor of the STATES OF UTAH, AND OREGON INVOLVED CHURCH LEADERS, INVOLVED UTAH STATE ATTORNEY GENERALS INVOLVED, U.S. SENATORS AND CONGRESS INVOLVED, and I can prove ALL OF THIS;;

http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics...


BLUE CASTLE NUCLEAR CARTEL EXPOSED


BLUE CASTLE NUCLEAR CARTEL EXPOSED
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/VP4DoIXSBMc  6 min

Blue castle nuclear cartel exposed part II
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/c5WFKW61xGU  3 min

Mike lee lies 
VIDEO: https://youtu.be/LR9fOuc5Lzs  4 min

DIRTY HERBIE THE UTAH GOV. IN ACTION 

SAN ONOFRE CALIFORNIA TOP PUBLIC OFFICALS; HOMES RAIDED BY CALIFORNIA POLICE, FOR  NUCLEAR INDUSTRY CORRUPTION


“UAMPS expects to decide by April whether to move forward with the project known as the Western Initiative for Nuclear, or WIN, in partnership with NuScale Power of Corvallis, Ore., and Energy Northwest in Washington State. The proposed site for the plant is at Idaho National Laboratories, where the first electric power from nuclear energy was generated on Dec. 20, 1951.”

“Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems may decide in 2015 whether to proceed with development of small modular reactors. UAMPS is teaming with developer NuScale Power of Corvallis, Ore., and Energy Northwest of Washington State. Promoters see SMRs as more affordable and scalable applications of nuclear power. The project was announced in 2013 as the Western Initiative for Nuclear. Image: NuScale.”

Palko Environmental Ltd. provides hydrocarbon waste management and resource recovery solutions to the upstream and midstream oil and gas industry in western Canada.

“Edelman is the leading independent global PR firm. We’re pushing the boundaries of traditional PR, using the latest social media and digital tools to establish a new era of public engagement between organizations and their constituents. With offices in Montreal, Toronto, Calgary and Vancouver, and affiliates from coast to coast, Edelman Canada is helping to re-define 21st century communications for local and national clients across the country. - See more at: http://edelman.ca/#sthash.G84wipEu.dpuf

BY THE WAY I TAGGED THIS UTAH FOR SALE BEFORE WE FOUND OUT OUR ATTORNEY GENERAL HAD FOR SALE TAPPED TO HIS DOOR, BEFORE HE WAS ARRESTED BY THE F.B.I. AND CHARGED WITH 13 FELONIES, UPDATE 2/15/15 
VIDEO:https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list...

WHAT YOU CAN DO; RESEARCH THE DARK SIDE OF THE NUCLEAR MONOPOLY

A Green Road Journal has the largest, most organized, deepest set of articles, videos and pictures exposing the dark side of the nuclear monopoly in the world.

Zero Nuclear Weapons Peace And Justice Project; First Strike Policy, Ban Nuclear Bombs, DU, Down Winders, Acute Radiation Sickness, Nuclear War, Dirty Bombs, Bomb Shelters

Zero Rads In Children And Adults Eco Justice Project - Negative Effects Of Chronic, Cumulative Man Made Radiation Exposure

Zero Rads Extraction Eco Justice Project; Uranium Mining, Enrichment, Nuclear Fuel Chain, Open Air Testing, Fracking

Zero Internal Rads Eco Justice Project; Negative Effects Of Internal Radiation Exposure, Risk Models, Hormesis, Radiophobia, Radiation Monitoring Networks

Making Invisible Heavy Metal Radioactive Poison Visible Eco Justice Project; Ionizing Heavy Metal Poisonous Radiation In Food/Water/Products, Geiger Counters, Dosimeters, Radiation Readings, Test Labs, Conversions, Global Detector Network

Zero Harm To Animals, Insects, Birds And Plants Eco Justice Project; Negative Effects Of Chronic, Cumulative Man Made Heavy Metal Radioactive Poisons In Animals, Insects, Birds And Plants

Zero Nuclear Power Plant Threat Eco Justice Project; Accidents, Recycling Nuclear Fuel, Movie Reviews, Next Generation Nuclear Plants, Terrorists

Radiation Research, Education, Database Eco Justice Project; Individual Radioactive Elements/Isotopes, USA Radiation, Radiation Exposure Prevention, Reversal, Chelation

Eco Justice Art - Artists As Activists; Art, Aging, Poetry, Lyrics And Lawsuits Project; Lawsuits, Aging Nuclear Reactors, Recertification, Music, Lyrics, Poetry

Zero Rad Waste Eco Justice Project; Long Term Storage Of Nuclear Waste, Decommissioning, Ocean Dumping, Incineration, Decontamination, Water Contamination, Dry Cask Storage


WHAT YOU CAN DO; ENDORSE, LEARN, TRANSFORM, DONATE, SHARE, SUPPORT, SPONSOR, CONNECT, COMMENT, AND/OR COLLABORATE

DONATE

Please help AGRP get this news out... thanks for your generous and very appreciated support! What you support grows and expands. What you withhold support from shrinks, shrivels and disappears. Even .50 cents per month is a great help. What is teaching the science of sustainable health worth?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Donate To A Green Road Project; Help Dr. Goodheart Teach How To Make A Positive Difference For Seven Future Generations Of Children, Animals, Plants And The Planet

TRANSLATE

Click to Translate; 60 languages - German, French, Russian, Spanish

JOIN THE NETWORK OF OTHER ACTIVISTS; PLUG INTO AGRP


* Join the AGR Network. Forward this or any other article by clicking on the social media facebook, google plus and/or twitter buttons below any AGRP article. The first step for activists is to bring awareness of an issue to the public, by being informed yourself. Which news and information network do you prefer to plug into and network with?








 Email AGRP

RSS Feed

Subscribe to; A Green Road Project Magazine, monthly issues
It is easy to join the AGRP network, and your email will never be rented, sold or shared.

Subscribe/sign up, give feedback, or offer news tips or story ideas by sending an email to agreenroad@gmail.com . Subscribe by typing the word subscribe in the subject line.

COPYRIGHT

Wayne Dyer - What You Think, You Become (Wayne Dyer Meditation)

"Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, "ALLOWANCES ARE MADE FOR FAIR USE" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute, that otherwise might be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use." For more info go to:www.lawcornel.edu/uscode.

Copyright protected material on this website is used in accordance with 'Fair Use', for the purpose of study, review or critical analysis, and will be removed at the request of the copyright owner(s). Please read Notice and Procedure for Making Claims of Copyright Infringement.

WHAT YOU CAN DO: SHARE THIS ARTICLE

A Green Road; Teaching the Science of Sustainable Health. 

Keep asking - what works for 7 future generations without causing harm? 

Support AGR and share this article via by copying and pasting title and url into;

Website and contact page

Index, Table Of Contents

End

PRISM Liquid Sodium Cooled, Small Modular Nuclear Reactor (SMR) Problems And Issues Analyzed - WIN Nuclear Lobbyist Corruption - Nuclear Industry Is Trying To Turn Plutonium Into Gold Via Delusion Magic Spells On The Public And Avalanches Of Money Poured Into Nuclear Monopoly
Reactions:
Share this post: