Bradwell Power Station nuclear discharge 'experiment' fear

[penfold]

Where have they said they are actually discharging it? I haven't done an exhaustive search, but what I have read about the FED process only mentions Cs137, H3 doesn't get a mention; my knowledge of reactor physics is hazy but I'm reasonably sure the FED has little or no tritium in it and dissolving in acid can't change that. Having permission to discharge isn't the same thing; Bradwell's site licence may well be the same as it was when it was running, but the actual emissions are much lower. This technique is used by the ban-the-bombers to make a noise about discharges at Faslane, they quote the maximum allowable discharge on the site licence rather than the actual amount discharged because it's a bigger number.

 

[nortada]

The above is a BBC headline. It seems that BANNG have got to the BBC now, although I notice the article is full of quotes from Tim Deere-Jones, who describes himself as Musician, poet, marine pollution consultant, environmental journalist: also done time as boat builder, roofer, organic market gardener, willow grower, willow worker, and is now calling himself a Marine scientist, although he has no nuclear qualifications

What does BANNG stand for?

 

[MoodySabre]

Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group
http://banng.info/

 

[DavidofMersea]

I wish there was somebody we could talk to that could provide authoritive unbiased information.

There is, as Burnham Bob says "The whole process is safe and has been cleared by the Office for Nuclear Responsibility, Magnox and the Environment Agency". BANNG dismisses them with "They are lying, we know differently"

 

[tillergirl]

Where have they said they are actually discharging it?

That's it. That's the question. BAANG have 'suggested' that they are discharging harmful waste - let's not rehearse that again. We know that they have either repaired the discharge pipe or built another one (it's in their plan). I think all the majority of local residents want to know is what is being discharged down that pipe. The Local Town Council Committee appear relaxed about it. BAANG and the new Guardian of Mersea (or is it Mersea Guardians?) do not. There you have it.

 

[NUTMEG]

David, if your happy to take their word for it I am pleased for you. Re my earlier post mentioning DDT, CFCs, TOBACCO plus a host of other instances when we have been fed a cocktail of half truths, lies and misinformation from govt, industry and other 'interest' groups. I would prefer to gather my own evidence and make my own mind up based on that evidence. I am not defending local pressure groups either, it is simply that too often I have found the truth to be very different from what our govt would have us believe. Weapons of mass destruction and many other examples.

So, you may believe,what you wish to believe but I urge you to find out the facts for yourself, please do not simply dismiss local pressure groups and blindly accept the official line. There may be an issue here or there may not.

I repeat my question. Who can laymen turn to for scientific facts, unbiased, agenda free and impartial?

I fear I know the answer to that one already!

 

[DavidofMersea]

I urge you to find out the facts for yourself,

How? Who do I ask? and how do I know they are not lying?

Like most other people, including BANNG, I know nothing of Nuclear Physics

 

[Bru]

The tritium has to be discharged somewhere

The intermediate level waste has to be stored somewhere

The problem, of course, is that everybody wants these activities to take place "somewhere else"

We could and should have had a deep repository for the intermediate and high level waste twenty years ago (in Cumbria). It hasn't been built due to local resistance and lack of finance (the energy industry won't pay for it because it's much much cheaper to store waste above ground)

Yet despite the fact that the radioactive waste problem doesn't go away for a very very long time many people still advocate building new nuclear power stations

 

[Rum Run]

The French, who have the same problem but bigger, have been experimenting with deep geological storage in the clay strata north of Paris (According to Radio 4). When asked if the method was applicable to the UK, the scientist said that the same very stable, deep clay strata was also under much of England south of Oxford. So that means it will be left in tanks on the surface in the distant, unpopulated and unimportant wastelands north of Watford.

Cheers
Rum Run

 

[Bru]

We;ve had the solution on the drawing board since the late 1980s. The Cumbrian deep repository, which woud be sited adjacent to Sellafield (which, by the way, is where all nuclear waste produced in the UK ought to have been dealt with if politics hadn't got in the way), is fully researched, designed and approved at every technical level. And yet a planning inspector with no specialist knowledge felt qualified to reject the planning application for the test facility on the grounds that the technlogy might not work (which is precisely why they wanted to construct the test facility) and the government hadn't the balls to overrule the decision

I have seen the plans and read some the outline documentation* and talked to some of the scientists and technical staff involved who were incensed by the cavalier methods used by the politicias and protesters. They were winding the operation down to little more than a caretaker status (my main role as a contractor was the removal of IT equipment from disused offices and securing any sensitive data prior to dispoal of the surplus equipment) and fully expected the repository to built "in a decade or so" when the need became pressing as the existing reactors started to be decommissioned

* I wasn't really supposed to but you can't help perusing the stuff! The detailed documention ran to umpteen terabytes of data and was far too heavy for me. Oh hell, I've probaby just confessed to a crime there (Official Secrets Act and all that) but hey ho

 

[penfold]

Pretty daft situation really, Allerdale and Copeland district councils were in favour of taking the longterm storage facility but were overruled last year by Cumbria county council; so they're stuck with the waste in the existing 'temporary' storage rather than dealing with it properly. The government are trying to change the law so the county council cannot veto the district councils' decision.

That's it. That's the question. BAANG have 'suggested' that they are discharging harmful waste - let's not rehearse that again. We know that they have either repaired the discharge pipe or built another one (it's in their plan). I think all the majority of local residents want to know is what is being discharged down that pipe. The Local Town Council Committee appear relaxed about it. BAANG and the new Guardian of Mersea (or is it Mersea Guardians?) do not. There you have it.

The waste plan lays out what's intended; it will take several years to dissolve all the FED, filter the solid active stuff out of the acid bath which will then be dried, put in a cask and placed in the ILW store.The acid will be further cleaned to remove dissolved activity(ion exchange I think) and whats left neutralised and discharged to the sea. It will have a variety of fission products in it in small amounts, but mostly it will be caesium 137. There will be little if any tritium. I can't find any other reference to liquid discharge from Bradwell, just the FED treatment.

 

[Burnham Bob]

I wonder why BANNG has not sent a carefully worded letter to Magnox under the Freedom of Information Act. Any confusion as to what is and what isn't being discharged can be elicited in a written reply.

Pace Tillergirl - I know you would not necessarily believe them, but if a properly worded letter is sent requesting information under the act, there is no wriggle room and we would have it in writing.

I'm amazed that BANNG have not done this - simply resorting to meetings and public protests. Maybe they know they are actually using this as propaganda in a broader anti-nuclear campaign, hoping that some of the blackwater mud will stick.

If anyone on the forum is genuinely concerned, PM me and we can draft a letter to Magnox, but I don't think it won't elicit any new information as there really isn't a big conspiracy to cover up a threat to the environment, children, fish, house prices or BANNG members. Having worked for nationalised and bureaucratic organisations I'm pretty good at getting through to them so if anyone really is worried PM me.

 

[DavidofMersea]

I wonder why BANNG has not sent a carefully worded letter to Magnox under the Freedom of Information Act. Any confusion as to what is and what isn't being discharged can be elicited in a written reply.

I have just sent this line to BANNG and asked them. I am sure that if Magnox replied with something BANNG did not like, they would say Magnox are lying

 

[NUTMEG]

I wonder why BANNG has not sent a carefully worded letter to Magnox under the Freedom of Information Act. Any confusion as to what is and what isn't being discharged can be elicited in a written reply.

Pace Tillergirl - I know you would not necessarily believe them, but if a properly worded letter is sent requesting information under the act, there is no wriggle room and we would have it in writing.

I'm amazed that BANNG have not done this - simply resorting to meetings and public protests. Maybe they know they are actually using this as propaganda in a broader anti-nuclear campaign, hoping that some of the blackwater mud will stick.

If anyone on the forum is genuinely concerned, PM me and we can draft a letter to Magnox, but I don't think it won't elicit any new information as there really isn't a big conspiracy to cover up a threat to the environment, children, fish, house prices or BANNG members. Having worked for nationalised and bureaucratic organisations I'm pretty good at getting through to them so if anyone really is worried PM me.

PM sent

 

[tillergirl]

I wonder why BANNG has not sent a carefully worded letter to Magnox under the Freedom of Information Act. Any confusion as to what is and what isn't being discharged can be elicited in a written reply.

Pace Tillergirl - I know you would not necessarily believe them, but if a properly worded letter is sent requesting information under the act, there is no wriggle room and we would have it in writing.

I'm amazed that BANNG have not done this - simply resorting to meetings and public protests. Maybe they know they are actually using this as propaganda in a broader anti-nuclear campaign, hoping that some of the blackwater mud will stick.

If anyone on the forum is genuinely concerned, PM me and we can draft a letter to Magnox, but I don't think it won't elicit any new information as there really isn't a big conspiracy to cover up a threat to the environment, children, fish, house prices or BANNG members. Having worked for nationalised and bureaucratic organisations I'm pretty good at getting through to them so if anyone really is worried PM me.

Oh I'm quite calm. Merely responding to questions in this thread. I merely think it's poor communication on the part of Magnox in that all their published stuff they don't say (as far as I can find) what they are discharging. Enough about crested newts etc but nothing about what goes down the pipe. I was concerned that waste was being brought to the site but the local Council committee say that cannot happen without new planning permission - so that's all right - isn't it?

 

[Marmalade]

I wonder why BANNG has not sent a carefully worded letter to Magnox under the Freedom of Information Act. Any confusion as to what is and what isn't being discharged can be elicited in a written reply.

Pace Tillergirl - I know you would not necessarily believe them, but if a properly worded letter is sent requesting information under the act, there is no wriggle room and we would have it in writing.

I'm amazed that BANNG have not done this - simply resorting to meetings and public protests. Maybe they know they are actually using this as propaganda in a broader anti-nuclear campaign, hoping that some of the blackwater mud will stick.

If anyone on the forum is genuinely concerned, PM me and we can draft a letter to Magnox, but I don't think it won't elicit any new information as there really isn't a big conspiracy to cover up a threat to the environment, children, fish, house prices or BANNG members. Having worked for nationalised and bureaucratic organisations I'm pretty good at getting through to them so if anyone really is worried PM me.

Is Magnox a public or publicly funded body? If not the FOI act may not apply...

 

[Burnham Bob]

You are right of course Marmalade. FOI letters will need to be sent to the ONR and Environment Agency - but I will copy Magnox.

 

[DavidofMersea]

I wonder why BANNG has not sent a carefully worded letter to Magnox under the Freedom of Information Act. Any confusion as to what is and what isn't being discharged can be elicited in a written reply.

I have just sent this line to BANNG and asked them. I am sure that if Magnox replied with something BANNG did not like, they would say Magnox are lying

... and BANNG's reply is "WE have, in fact, tried that".

 

[NUTMEG]

Just looked at BANNG's website and they do indeed claim to have asked the questions but had no reply as far as I can tell. Trying to avoid conspiracy theories/paranoia but if Magnox were whiter then white why would they not offer a full and frank reply? Do they indeed have something to hide? Hope not

Came across this little gem though at... http://www.marinet.org.uk/concern-a...-at-dungeness-bradwell-and-hinkley-point.html

And this at... http://www.marinet.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/MARINET-FED-Dissolution.pdf

Does rather make one wonder, very poor PR on the part of Magnox or is there really something to worry about. If I were an Oysterman I would want to know more.

 

[DavidofMersea]

Just looked at BANNG's website and they do indeed claim to have asked the questions but had no reply as far as I can tell. Trying to avoid conspiracy theories/paranoia but if Magnox were whiter then white why would they not offer a full and frank reply? Do they indeed have something to hide? Hope not

Came across this little gem though at... http://www.marinet.org.uk/concern-a...-at-dungeness-bradwell-and-hinkley-point.html

And this at... http://www.marinet.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/MARINET-FED-Dissolution.pdf

Does rather make one wonder, very poor PR on the part of Magnox or is there really something to worry about. If I were an Oysterman I would want to know more.

You are saying "BANNG's website and they do indeed claim to have asked the questions but had no reply as far as I can tell". I have asked BANNG what Magnoxs response was to BANNG's request for info, and BANNG has not replied, perhaps Magnox's response was an assurance that was not compatible with BANNG's objectives.

Your "Little gem" was written by Tim Deere-Jones, have you looked up TD-J CV? If so you will find that he is just a protesting hippy with no nuclear qualifications, and is just a self appointed expert saying what BANNG wants to hear.