Nuclear Power in the 21st CenturyCrystal Ball or Rearview Mirror?

David LochbaumDirector, Nuclear Safety Project

March 26, 2008

Nuclear Revival: Recycling 20th Century Problems

• Safety = vehicle + driver

• Standardization = > theory, < practice

• Safety in numbers ≠ these nuclear numbers

• NRC = MIA

Safety = vehicle + driver

The SL-1 (1961), Three Mile Island (1979), and Chernobyl (1986) accidents reveal the “nuclear casino” effect: three things must line up to lose the reactor safety gamble.

The first nuclear casino wheel is an initiating event (e.g., pipe break, fire, etc.). The second and third wheels involve equipment failure and worker error that make matters worse.

Not losing at the nuclear casino involves minimizing how often each wheel comes up bad, when in turn minimizes the chances of all three coming up bad at the same time.

Safety = vehicle + driver

Since the Three Mile Island accident in 1979, U.S. nuclear reactors have had to shut down 46 times for longer than one year to restore safety levels. (5 such outages before 1979).

Safety = vehicle + driver

35 of the 46 year-plus reactor outages were needed to remedy dozens, sometimes hundreds, of equipment problems and worker errors.

Point: The 2nd and 3rd casino wheels are coming up bad over and over.

Safety = vehicle + driver

Davis-Besse (2002-2004) was the most recent year-plus outage. The damaged reactor head could have been fixed in six months; fixing many other problems took 18 more months.

Point: Don’t buy lottery tickets in Ohio, their luck has been used up.

Safety = LUCK + vehicle + driver

In the three decades since the Three Mile Island meltdown, luck has been too large a safety factor.

Luck is good, and good luck is best, but we need to reduce our reliance on good luck.

Standardization = > theory, < practice

NRC anticipates orders for 33 nuclear power reactors of at least five different designs and possibly as many as eight different designs.

REAL standardization features an assembly line cranking out many reactors, not the proliferation of assembly lines!

Safety in numbers ≠ these nuclear numbers

Of the 253 nuclear power reactors ordered in the United States, about half never split a single atom and only about a quarter have operated without one or more year-plus safety outages.

Safety in numbers ≠ these nuclear numbers

By comparison:

The percentage of nuclear power reactors that “graduate” to operating status is far, far lower than the college graduation rate.

NRC = MIANRC = meek in action, or

NRC = meek inaction

• 1974 – AEC inspectors document that Browns Ferry violates fire protection regulations, but takes no action until after the March 22, 1975, fire damages two reactors.

• 1977 – NRC inspectors learn that the power-operated relief valve stuck open at Davis-Besse, complicating the response to a routine reactor trip, but takes no action until after the March 28, 1979, meltdown at TMI.

NRC = MIANRC = meek in action, or

NRC = meek inaction

• 1978 – NRC informs the President (Carter, not Bush) that a key backup safety system installed to protect the public in event of an accident won’t work if there is an accident. The problem is still unfixed at 62 of the 69 affected reactors.

• 2000 – NRC inspectors get handed color photos showing severe rusting on the reactor head at Davis-Besse, but do nothing (other than filing the photos away).

NRC = MIANRC = meek in action, or

NRC = meek inaction

• 2000 – NRC’s own lessons learned task force identifies 49 ways to prevent the next Davis-Besse. 94% involve merely enforcing existing regulations.

• 2007 – NRC receives a written letter in March from a former security manager about security guards sleeping at Peach Bottom, but does nothing about it until September when a TV reporter gets a videotape of the nappers.

NRC = MIANRC = meek in action, or

NRC = meek inaction

If accused of being an effective regulator, the NRC could not be convicted.*

* - even if the insanity plea were disallowed

Why it matters

All of today’s reactors are heading towards, if not already in, the wear-out phase. Any new reactors begin in the break-in phase. Nuclear risk will be increasing.

What it all means

• Due to mismanagement and poor oversight, about half of the nuclear power reactors ordered never operated.

• Due to mismanagement and poor oversight, about half of the nuclear power reactors ordered operated less safely and more costly than necessary.

• Because the mismanagement and poor oversight problems have not been corrected, nuclear power will continue to be less safe, less reliable, and more costly than necessary.