Fukushima vs Rancho Seco

Here's a look at Fukushima vs Rancho Seco in terms of I 131 in milk:

http://oaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_output?Llocation=Stat...

Rancho Seco had a history of serious problems and was shut down in 1989 by public referendum, as you can see reflected in statewide samples ND by 1990.

Thank you! Wow. That is a

Thank you! Wow. That is a fascinating read. You can see the spikes around June 1986 after the April Chernobyl explosion. interestingly, there is a very high spike in San Francisco in Feb of that year.

So, we've been eating and drinking this stuff for decades thanks to nuclear power plants. We've been exposed to more radionuclides from our own nasty power plants than from Fukushima.

Thanks NRC!

Nuclear Power = 0.03% Mother Nature

So, we've been eating and drinking this stuff for decades thanks to nuclear power plants. We've been exposed to more radionuclides from our own nasty power plants than from Fukushima.
=====================

Courtesy of the Health Physics Society at the University of Michigan:

http://www.umich.edu/~radinfo/introduction/radrus.htm

The amount of radiation exposure attributable to nuclear power ( nuclear fuel cycle in table ) is 0.03% of what a person normally receives.

The major source of radiation exposure BY FAR is Mother Nature.

No man does

Does mother nature produce cesium 137?

Does Mother nature produce

Plutonium?

Brother!! Did you set

Brother!! Did you set yourself up for THAT one!!!

The typical anti-nuke - so self-righteous, while all the while so WRONG!

Thanks for being the perfect example of anti-nuke mental acuity.

Mother Nature made Plutonium

Mother Nature made Plutonium in the natural fission reactor in Oklo, Gabon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_nuclear_fission_reactor

That's not the answer that the poster was expecting; but that's his problem for not knowing.

Actually, she does

Plutonium?
===============

Actually, SHE DOES!!! In trace amounts. Most of the Uranium is U-238.

There are stray neutrons produced by cosmic rays, and if a U-238 nucleus captures one of these stray neutrons, it turns into Plutonium-239.

You aren't going to dig up a lump of Plutonium-239, but it is there in trace quantities.

BTW - Thanks for asking

BTW - Thanks for asking!!

Strontium-90 in Sacramento Milk

It appears that Rancho Seco also had a problem with Strontium 90 releases:

http://oaspub.epa.gov/enviro/erams_query_v2.simple_output?Llocation=City...

How does coal measure up to Strontium 90?

You get 100X that from COAL

So, we've been eating and drinking this stuff for decades thanks to nuclear power plants. We've been exposed to more radionuclides from our own nasty power plants than from Fukushima.

Thanks NRC!
===========================

Courtesy of Oak Ridge National Laboratory:

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

For comparison, according to NCRP Reports No. 92 and No. 95, population exposure from operation of 1000-MWe nuclear and coal-fired power plants amounts to 490 person-rem/year for coal plants and 4.8 person-rem/year for nuclear plants. Thus, the population effective dose equivalent from coal plants is 100 times that from nuclear plants.

SMUD better off without nuclear power

22 years ago the voters shut down the Babcock/Wilcox 3 Mile Island clone, Rancho Mistako. Here is how SMUD is doing these days without coal or nuclear:

http://www.smud.org/en/news/press-releases/Pages/2011-08-09.aspx

Yes, going green can work well for a public utility.

SMUD power sources

Although SMUD advertises that it purchases "green" power, a lot of SMUD's power is purchased on the open electric power market. In the USA, about 50% of the power sold on the open electric power market is produced from coal.

As per the Oak Ridge National Laboratory report:

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/rev26-34/text/colmain.html

coal power plants put 100 times as much radioactivity into the air for us to breathe as does the nuclear power plant of equivalent power. This is due to the fact that coal contains trace amounts of uranium and thorium as detailed in the above report.

Therefore, to the extent that SMUD purchases dirty coal power; SMUD is responsible for a 100 times that percentage contribution to atmospheric radioactive vis-a-vis if SMUD had derived that same power from a nuclear power plant.

SMUD costs 50% more..

The cost of SMUD electricity from the following:

http://www.smud.org/en/residential/rates/Pages/rates-comparison.aspx

averages $91.07/month for 750 kw-h/month = 12.1 cents per kw-hour

Duke Power Company operates Oconee Units 1, 2, and 3 which are B&W clones of
Rancho Seco:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oconee_Nuclear_Station

Duke Power rates are 8.5 cents per kw-hour:

http://www.duke-energy.com/pdfs/NCScheduleRS.pdf

Sure it's easy to be green, when you charge 50% MORE