Quiet” emissions from the nuclear power plants

Under existing international standards even in an event of absolute reliability and absence of accidents on any nuclear power plants, gaseous and aerosol, emissions of radioactive nuclides from the operating nuclear power plant are the permitted, but they should be licensed. Therefore, for example, 434 reactors that are operating now, have the right to throw out (during 25 years of their work) and throw out caesium - 137 (one of the most hazardous radioactive nuclides!) in 16 times more, than it has been thrown out because of Chernobyl accident. In addition, in fact it, as they say, «in a peace time», that is without any accidents or «extraordinary situations».

What is the price to all these demagogical declarations that catastrophes, similar to Chernobyl, are so improbable that they practically cannot repeat? It appears that the population of the Earth each one and a half year receives on their heads the same that Chernobyl has given to us!

In a reactor of any nuclear power plant as a result of fission of atoms of uranium - 235 will derivate about 300 various radioactive nuclides from which more than 30 are thrown out in an atmosphere. Among them: iodine - 129 (a half - life/HL/16 million years), carbon-14 (HL – 5.730 years), caesium - 137 (HL – 30 years), krypton - 85 (HL–10,6 years), etc. Each of radioactive nuclides is hazardous in own way. So, for example, danger of krypton - 85 will be, that it ionises an atmosphere. On the data of academician Legasov reduction of electrical resistance of an atmosphere under operation of krypton - 85 results in increase of number of thunderstorms, hurricanes, tornados, typhoons, downpours, and snow - falls. It is necessary to think why for the last years the number of such cataclysms, which with each year become more powerful and more terrible, has sharply increased. Today they already in a condition to sweep away the whole cities. In addition, if earlier all this was somewhere away from Europe today such visits of hurricanes, downpours and other «pleasant surprises of nature» for Europe ceasing to be a rarity. What expects us in the near future? Whether the Humankind prepares itself for a doomsday?

On this theme, we shall talk more in detail.

In addition, radiocarbon-14, thrown out in an atmosphere by reactor is the strongest mutagen, oppressing and delaying the growth of trees and plants. In addition, biologists have already noticed such phenomena.

The global problem is represented with continuously increasing quantity of the spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste. In the world it is already accrued over 200 thousand tons of the spent nuclear fuel and annually this quantity increases on 10 thousand tons.

It is necessary to remind, that the spent nuclear fuel has nothing common, for example, with the slag formed at combustion of mineral coal or other fuel. Slag can be thrown of in a terrace or to direct it on the enterprise producing slag units. So free reversion is categorically impermissible with waste products of nuclear fuel. If the fuel compositions loaded into a routine power reactor, are practically safe for environment than after it is spent in a reactor it becomes lethally radioactive. Not casually speak, that an atomic reactor produces first not the electric power but the most dangerous for the person and all alive on the Planet – radioactive waste.

In addition, it is not all of “charm” of atomic energy. Except of the spent fuel the atomic reactor “produces” infinite quantity of the most various liquids and solid radioactive waste. On each ton of utilized fuel it is necessary 4,5 cubic meters of waste products of high-activity, 150 cubic meters of medium active waste products and 2.000 cubic meters of low active, but nevertheless very hazardous waste.

In 15-20 years when there will come time to close nuclear power plants, because of spending of life time, the Humankind will face most serious and complex problem, created by him – extremely huge quantity of the spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste both their noxious and lethal influence on health of people and biosphere.

In any state questions of waste disposal, decommission of the nuclear power plant, handling of the spent nuclear fuel are not decided. In IAEA special report [17] «Liquidation of radioactive waste: global experience and problems» is marked, that the platform for radioactive wastes disposal should satisfy to rather extensive list of conditions. However, even if it will be possible to select a platform conforming to all these conditions, nobody can give safeguards that after a while these waste products will not prove somewhere and in any kind.

The interesting moment: than more active atomic lobbyists try to convince us that problems of safe disposal of the spent fuel and radioactive waste are already almost decided, than it unreality becomes more explicit, to be exact, impossibility of solution of this problem. And in the next “very convincing” article of Olga Maksimenko «The Uranium in a glass cage» are exhibited simply fantastic perspectives of works of academician Boris Mjasoedov who has thought up, «how to save from liquid waste in the near future at all, and now – to reduce essentially their radioactivity» [94].

First of all, at once the natural question appears: why have started to think about development of ways of “safe disposal» of radioactive substances which unambiguously should appear during work of any atomic reactor, not before start-up of the first reactor that would be not only natural, but also simply necessary. Why scientists are engaged in it not before but after hundred thousand tons of radioactive waste has already captivated the Planet? It appears, that atomic lobbyists “have deliberately exposed” us with the “peace” reactors, knowing that the basic questions connected to their exploitation and with our safety, are only not decided but also even approaches to their solution are not explicit.

In addition, second, what is the sense to calm us with various “newest” and even “revolutionary” developments that probably give some results in laboratory conditions? Alas, not any «laboratory development» could technically solve a problem of processing literally enormous quantity of the most dangerous waste products in substantial, not laboratory conditions for Humankind.

Thirdly, why authors of “optimistic” articles do not attempt at all to ask about what price it is necessary to pay in an event of utilization in practice of these ideas and developments? Looking at what the author of indicated article [94] Olga Maksimenko admires, cost of developed way of processing and disposition of radioactive wastes can be astronomical. If it was done before, start-up of the first reactor cost of such techniques should be added to its high cost. It would be advisable then to evaluate cost of decommission of reactor, the missed profit from contamination of huge territories and many other things. Then would become clearly, whether there is a sense to be bound with it.

Fourthly, may be enough to duplicate thought that the spent nuclear fuel will allow receiving «plutonium which will give power in a reactor on fast neutrons». But in fact from 11 breeder reactors (on fast neutrons), created in the world, three have not been opened up, and 5 for a long time are inferred from exploitation because of principal and technical imperfection both of the idea, and its realization, because of operational unreliability and danger of reactors. Today in the world remained only three of “working” breeders:

In France with the capacity 233 MW with charge coefficient of 50 %;

In Russia with the capacity 560 MW with charge coefficient about 70 %;

In Kazakhstan with the capacity 70 МW with charge coefficient, lower than 50%.

Alas, even integral capacity of these three reactors – 863 MW – is less, than the capacity of one most widespread today reactor in 1000 MW. Furthermore and loading of them is much lower than planed.

So about what fuel for these «pity leftovers» of breeder programs we can speak? All right still, when atomic lobbyists led by ministers (former and present) of atomic energy of Russia speak and write about it. They, certainly, know that reactors on fast neutrons in are practically not present in the world and will not be. However, they need to deceive us and deputies of the State Duma (The Parliament of Russia) of Russia, inspiring thought that they are going to import not extremely hazardous waste of other’s atomic reactors, but very valuable raw material for supplying reactors on fast neutrons by fuel. Who will be interested there, whether there are such reactors today and whether they will be hereafter? Main – to deceive today! Probably, such “operation” is very favourable to them. But it is not decent to journalists to participate in this provocative “operation”, to put it mildly. What kind of journalist is she, if she helps to deceive the readers?

By the way, one interesting detail from the same article [94]. It appears, that offered technologies are connected to emission into an atmosphere of the carbonic gas. In addition, in fact atomic lobbyists permanently repeat that advantage of atomic energy is that it does not pollute an atmosphere by this “greenhouse” gas. Frankly speaking, it is not the truth. Whether in the issue it is not too important if the reactor throws out a carbonic gas or it is thrown out in “before reactor” (production and processing of ore, manufacturing of fuel cells) and “after reactors” (processing and recycling of reactor waste products) productions. Similar, as in this plan «ecological purity» of atomic energy appears the next myth.

By the way, why atomic lobbyists so actively become to care of a climate of the Earth? They are similar to those who, escaping from a pursuit, cry, «Catch the thief!» Whether a they have stolen something much more serious, being masked by emissions of the carbonic gas and greenhouse effect? That is something to think about.

For now, nevertheless, once again we shall return to “greenhouse effect”. One frights us with it too much in the last years. May be the devil is not so terrible as he is painted?

Recently scientists had made interesting attempt to glance in past – only on 650 thousand years [55]. For this purpose have drilled a chink in Antarctica up to the most continental ground. Also have studied the air traps “inhibited” in thickness of ice. And so, as to connection between concentration of a carbonic gas and climate fluctuation here not all has appeared overvalued. Corresponding member of the Academy of sciences of Russia Andrey Kapitsa is sure: strengthening of a carbonic gas does not conduct to greenhouse effect. Restoration of a climate of the Earth including on the Antarctic core samples, testifies that dependence revertive: the warming called by other causes, in the past epoch result to strengthening of a carbonic gas. In addition, this gas was secreted from its main storehouse – waters of the World Ocean. In addition, the cause of it was rise of temperature of air and water. Than higher is temperature of water, the less of carbonic gas it is capable to retain. In addition, in comparison with a carbonic gas secreted with oceans releases of this gas by an industry of all Earth appear completely scanty. The result of these researches results diametrically opposite theories than greenhouse effect.

Similar, that in active campaign of atomic lobbyists for “purity” of our air is hidden a secret sense known only to atomic lobbyists. About one of possible answers to this question, we also shall talk more in detail.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14