Trump administration wants to ease NRC regulations for new to build nuclear reactors

[hal2kilo]

The Trump administration is seeking new ways to accelerate the development and building of nuclear reactors with less evolvement of US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by firing key people from the NRC.
Donald Trump even seem to have stated that nuclear radiation is harmless.

Why the US must protect the independence of its nuclear regulator

Three former chairs of the US nuclear regulator explain how Trump's executive orders could have unintended safety consequences.

thebulletin.org

Small excerpt from text :
"
The White House has introduced radical changes that threaten to disrupt the effectiveness of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The agency was formed in 1975 to be an independent regulator, separating it from the promotional role pursued by its predecessor, the Atomic Energy Commission. The NRC has set safety requirements that have become the global gold standard for nuclear regulation. The White House actions threaten to undermine this record.

Conversations with fellow former NRC chairs and retired NRC experts reveal a shared concern that the changes will have unintended, dangerous consequences. In February, the White House issued an executive order that intruded on the traditional autonomy of independent agencies, thereby giving the White House the capacity to control NRC regulatory actions and allow politics to infect regulatory decision-making. A series of executive orders on nuclear matters issued in late May compounded the challenge. One of the executive orders focuses on the reform of the NRC. It would establish arbitrary deadlines for decisions on construction permits and operating licenses, regardless of whether the design offers new and previously unevaluated safety challenges. Other provisions demand the review of all the extensive NRC regulations within 18 months. The other executive orders allow the construction of nuclear power reactors on federal lands—sites belonging to the Energy Department and the Defense Department—without any review by the NRC.

Then, on June 13, the Trump administration fired Christopher Hanson, an NRC commissioner and former chair, without any stated justification. These actions all serve to weaken protections for those who work in or live near reactors. Given the anticipated expansion of reliance on nuclear power, the drastic staff reductions contemplated by the White House come at the wrong time.
"

You can build all the nukes you want as soon as you have a REAL plan for storing/neutralizing nuclear waste that lasts hundreds of thousands of years. Oh and figure out how to mine uranium without creating a permanent place where humans can't exist.

 

[William Gaatjes]

You can build all the nukes you want as soon as you have a REAL plan for storing/neutralizing nuclear waste that lasts hundreds of thousands of years. Oh and figure out how to mine uranium without creating a permanent place where humans can't exist.

See post #13 about subcritical reactors that can transmutate the nuclear waste, if that may be existing nuclear waste or new waste :

Trump administration wants to ease NRC regulations for new to build nuclear reactors

The Trump administration is seeking new ways to accelerate the development and building of nuclear reactors with less evolvement of US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by firing key people from the NRC. Donald Trump even seem to have stated that nuclear radiation is harmless...

forums.anandtech.com

From the myrrha website :
"

How will MYRRHA contribute to the best solution?​

MYRRHA, as an innovative research installation, can take nuclear waste treatment a significant step further. Using advanced partitioning processes, it is feasible to isolate the most heat-emitting, long-lived elements called minor actinides from spent nuclear fuel. One of the many benefits of an Accelerator Driven System with a lead-bismuth eutectic (LBE) cooled fast reactor is that it is capable of breaking down these minor actinides. This process is called transmutation. Simulations indicate that MYRRHA type reactors can function safely with up to 30% of these minor actinides as fuel. MYRRHA will therefore serve as the world’s first major prototype reactor that will produce significant insight into the transmutation of minor actinides.
"

 

[hal2kilo]

See post #13 about subcritical reactors that can transmutate the nuclear waste, if that may be existing nuclear waste or new waste :

Trump administration wants to ease NRC regulations for new to build nuclear reactors

The Trump administration is seeking new ways to accelerate the development and building of nuclear reactors with less evolvement of US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by firing key people from the NRC. Donald Trump even seem to have stated that nuclear radiation is harmless...

forums.anandtech.com

From the myrrha website :
"

How will MYRRHA contribute to the best solution?​

MYRRHA, as an innovative research installation, can take nuclear waste treatment a significant step further. Using advanced partitioning processes, it is feasible to isolate the most heat-emitting, long-lived elements called minor actinides from spent nuclear fuel. One of the many benefits of an Accelerator Driven System with a lead-bismuth eutectic (LBE) cooled fast reactor is that it is capable of breaking down these minor actinides. This process is called transmutation. Simulations indicate that MYRRHA type reactors can function safely with up to 30% of these minor actinides as fuel. MYRRHA will therefore serve as the world’s first major prototype reactor that will produce significant insight into the transmutation of minor actinides.
"

Many people in the LENR (CF) world are already seeing transmutation of elements as a side effect, to the point where some of the developers are focusing on that aspect.

 

[ivwshane]

It needs to be half way. Pure Socialism is not good. Pure privatization is also not good.

Isn’t socialism by definition half way?

 

[dank69]

I know. Let us hope for the advisors to read this thread then.

Sir, his advisors are WAY worse than he is.

 

[dank69]

Isn’t socialism by definition half way?

Depends what definition you're are using and what you mean by half way. Half way to communism?. Dictionary definition socialism is more than halfway to communism from capitalism as I understand the terms. There is definitely plenty of room between socialism and capitalism for a "half way."

 

[ivwshane]

Depends what definition you're are using and what you mean by half way. Half way to communism?. Dictionary definition socialism is more than halfway to communism from capitalism as I understand the terms. There is definitely plenty of room between socialism and capitalism for a "half way."

Socialism is capitalism with a cap on it. Capitalist are free to do many things but the things most important to society are done by the government. Water, power, and health care are the prime examples where socialism out shines capitalism in terms of taking care of a country’s people. Right now I’d say we have capitalism with a slight hint of socialism.

Therefore socialism is the marriage of democracy and capitalism where the government understands its roll as a check on capitalism. In our current setup, capitalism is only kept in check if the people vote for it.

Our system would be close to one extreme whereas communism would be the opposite of what we have, therefore socialism is the middle.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

You can build all the nukes you want as soon as you have a REAL plan for storing/neutralizing nuclear waste that lasts hundreds of thousands of years. Oh and figure out how to mine uranium without creating a permanent place where humans can't exist.

Shrug, we burned trillions of tons of CO2 without a plan on what to do with it. I don't see why I should give a shit about some alpha/beta emitters buried under a mountain.

 

[dank69]

Socialism is capitalism with a cap on it. Capitalist are free to do many things but the things most important to society are done by the government. Water, power, and health care are the prime examples where socialism out shines capitalism in terms of taking care of a country’s people. Right now I’d say we have capitalism with a slight hint of socialism.

Therefore socialism is the marriage of democracy and capitalism where the government understands its roll as a check on capitalism. In our current setup, capitalism is only kept in check if the people vote for it.

Our system would be close to one extreme whereas communism would be the opposite of what we have, therefore socialism is the middle.

You seem to be trying to logic your way into the definition of socialism, but it has an actual definition. Communism and socialism both mean the government controls the means of production. The difference between the two mainly lie on the distribution of the product. Unfortunately socialism has morphed into some sort of synonym for government regulation which unfortunately hurts public perception of government regulation.

 

[repoman0]

Shrug, we burned trillions of tons of CO2 without a plan on what to do with it. I don't see why I should give a shit about some alpha/beta emitters buried under a mountain.

Large swaths of the planet are about to be places where humans can’t exist and we are worried about a few puny uranium mines and some storage sites

 

[ivwshane]

You seem to be trying to logic your way into the definition of socialism, but it has an actual definition. Communism and socialism both mean the government controls the means of production. The difference between the two mainly lie on the distribution of the product. Unfortunately socialism has morphed into some sort of synonym for government regulation which unfortunately hurts public perception of government regulation.

Actually I was describing Democratic socialism. So you are right.

As to your point about socialism morphing into meaning government regulation and hurting the perception of government regulation, I think you have it backwards. Government regulation has always been the bogeyman of the right, socialism simply became shorthand for the right to mean anything they don’t like.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Donald Trump reading, lol.

CAN ANYONE CONFIRM AND SUBSTANTIATE MY OBSERVATIONS?

As substitute teacher, i actually taught and observed many secondary school students. I know my own progress at that age in terms of verbal acuity. Later, I taught a cumulative couple thousand Asian foreign students who had English as a second language.

I have observed Donald Trump since 2015. I have watched him hold forth to his audience at rallies while speaking impromptu -- thus, without a teleprompter. I have also seen him make deliveries while using a teleprompter.

There is a noticeable difference. With the teleprompter, he exhibits this deep breathing pattern as he reads sentences from the teleprompter. That is, both his breathing and his reading seem labored. One could say that reading from a teleprompter appears to noticeably stress Trump.

Trump has a reading disability which has continued since he left high-school. Lee Harvey Oswald was much more articulate in front of a microphone without any teleprompter than Trump has been with or without. Oswald demonstrated his dyslexia in his written work, but he was literate enough to write volumes. Trump had to use a ghost-writer for writing "Art of the Deal".

If Trump ever wrote anything of his own, it was his long and ongoing masterpiece -- "The Art Of The Tweet". And note that there has hardly ever been any president in modern history who did not at one time write an op-ed for any of the major city newspapers -- Washington Post, NYT, WSJ and so forth. Hardly any, that is, but for Donald Trump. Trump only writes Tweets.

If you want to see how far the nation has fallen with Trump as speech-making leader, you can of course compare to Barack Obama. But another good comparison would be a Republican, and I choose Dwight David Eisenhower with his Farewell Speech of January, 1961.

And another thing about Ike -- no less for several other presidents. Ike had Honor and he had a Code.

Trump had neither -- he had neither almost to a practiced and deliberate fault.

 

[you2]

Anyway the question is are the regulation needed and I believe they are because businesses constantly cut corners to save relatively little money - a very simple example is in Boston when they did the big dig; eng told them to use 4 screws to hold up panels in the tunnel; the business figured they could save a bit of money using only 2 screws. What happened - panels fell of the tunnel and killed a young woman. Now one death as tragic as it is - is well relatively small thing compared to a nuclear reactor when some brain dead manager sees he can get a $100,000 bonus if he cuts a few corners and 10 years later the thing blows up and kills 5 million people...

Anyway it is what it is but business in general - esp large corporation are all about cutting corners no matter what it cost as long as THEY don't pay the bill.

 

[HomerJS]

BTW - I'm not necessarily against regulation changes that reflect technology advancements. However, Trump can't be trusted with something so dangerous.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Sir, his advisors are WAY worse than he is.

Well, perhaps yes. But i am sure Donald Trump is adviced what to do and al he has to say is yes and it will happen or no and it will not happen. So pretty convincing advisors are needed.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Isn’t socialism by definition half way?

Capitalism (privatizing everything) is not good and communism is not good either. Half way. Perhaps socialism is half way.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Many people in the LENR (CF) world are already seeing transmutation of elements as a side effect, to the point where some of the developers are focusing on that aspect.

I doubt we are going to see cold fusion happening. Maybe 2 atoms per hour in nature. That is like normal background radiation.

 

[brycejones]

Well, perhaps yes. But i am sure Donald Trump is adviced what to do and al he has to say is yes and it will happen or no and it will not happen. So pretty convincing advisors are needed.

Sir we need to make changes to nuclear regulations to unleash American energy dominance.

Trump: Go for it

That’s all they need to say to get him to approve whatever

 

[William Gaatjes]

Sir we need to make changes to nuclear regulations to unleash American energy dominance.

Trump: Go for it

That’s all they need to say to get him to approve whatever

I am afraid so too.

 

[soulcougher73]

The former is largely a technical problem of how to recycle the materials in a cost effective manner or the least costly manner anyway. Quite a few companies are working on this. It may even prove advantageous to recover certain materials.

The political issue of spent fuel in the US is unlikely to be resolved in my lifetime. It's probably gonna sit on site forever and create future hazards.

Yeah the issue with spent fuel is not that we don't have a place to put it, it is nobody wants it transported thru their state to said location.

 

[Brainonska511]

Yeah the issue with spent fuel is not that we don't have a place to put it, it is nobody wants it transported thru their state to said location.

Also, states don't want to be known as the national repository for it.

The scientific solution would be to do what France does and reprocess fuel rods so they can keep being used to generate more electricity and reduce overall waste.

Ultimately, it's a political problem.

 

[dank69]

Actually I was describing Democratic socialism. So you are right.

As to your point about socialism morphing into meaning government regulation and hurting the perception of government regulation, I think you have it backwards. Government regulation has always been the bogeyman of the right, socialism simply became shorthand for the right to mean anything they don’t like.

Yes, government regulation has always been a bogeyman, but you can only take that so far. Most non-crazy people will admit at least SOME regulation is necessary. So, what do you do when you've already deregulated to the point that people are being hurt? Stop calling it regulation and start calling it socialism. Then Bernie comes along and starts calling socialized expenses "Democratic Socialism," playing right into right-wing attack narratives. He's attached a scary name to an otherwise good idea. It's the main reason he's never been able to break through. The name of the thing is just as important as the actual thing in a country full of fucking morons.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Also, states don't want to be known as the national repository for it.

The scientific solution would be to do what France does and reprocess fuel rods so they can keep being used to generate more electricity and reduce overall waste.

Ultimately, it's a political problem.

Is that reprocessing of fuel rods not done in breeder reactors ? Many people fear breeder reactors because it theoretically also allows for the production of plutonium. And plutonium is used for nuclear warheads.
That is the main problem many people have with nuclear fuel, not only uranium (i thought 238) for the bombs.

 

[Jaskalas]

If the world is going to shift away from fossils... you have to say nuclear in some capacity.

Sure, but in this case - MAGA, in erasing safety regulations, is in pursuit of exploding reactors and exclusion zones.

 

[Brainonska511]

Is that reprocessing of fuel rods not done in breeder reactors ? Many people fear breeder reactors because it theoretically also allows for the production of plutonium. And plutonium is used for nuclear warheads.
That is the main problem many people have with nuclear fuel, not only uranium (i thought 238) for the bombs.

Reprocessing in the US has been banned since the Carter administration because of concerns over nuclear proliferation. There were also likely some environmental concerns over older reprocessing facilities that were not exactly known for handling their hazardous waste with care.