Nuclear Kerfuffle
Seems to me we've known for months that the world appeared to be facing a distinct threat in the shortage of medical isotypes, used for diagnostic purposes. And just recently we've really been reminded of how critical these isotypes are to the medical community and to the patients they serve, since the spectre of the looming shortage became an actual fact.
Canada, it would appear, is a leading exporter of these isotypes, through the Chalk River nuclear reactor which supplies the high grade raw material that MDS Nordion of Kanata (Ottawa, Ontario) produces. Problem was, it would appear, there erupted a hissy-battle between AECL and the country's nuclear safety regulator.
Each dug in their heels and refused to budge, and the result was a panic-in-the-making at the looming shortage, since medical isotopes have a defined life, and cannot be stored for long periods. When the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission inspected Atomic Energy of Canada's NRU reactor it discovered that a safety redundancy it had been assured had been put in place, hadn't been, after all.
The CNSC castigated AECL, and the result was a temporary shut-down of the plant. A shut-down meant to be brief, but which was extended for the purpose of upgrading safety concerns. Which resulted in the impending shortage of medical isotopes. AECL had been instructed in 2006 to proceed with the upgrades, permitting the facility to operate while the changes were being put in place. But the changes just weren't done. And the regulatory agency was livid when it discovered it had been misled.
Because of the emergency to peoples' health inherent in the inability of medical professionals to use this irreplaceable diagnostic tool, the federal government became concerned and looked to itself to make a correction. Legislation was passed in the House of Commons and then in the Senate to allow for immediate resumption of reactor operations. And in so doing, the government took it upon itself to override the concerns of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
In the process infuriating Canadians who are already more than a little leery about outcomes with nuclear plants. The memory of previous nuclear disasters - at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, as distant as they are in the past - more than adequately reminds people just exactly how serious an impact a nuclear misadventure can have on a country. People are, understandably, upset and nervous.
But, we're told by an expert, a nuclear engineering professor who has great familiarity with the plant in question that even without the safety upgrades, the reactor is extremely safe. In fact the decision to shut it down to begin with owed more to pique between AECL and the regulator than a perceived need to shut it down.
In the words of Professor Richard Holt of Queen's University: "It's very safe, as safe as it's ever been. These redundant backup systems are something that modern power reactors are required to have. It's safe now, and it will be super-safe when the work has been completed."
Nice. Thank you ever so much, Professor Holt.
A whole lot of people have become near-hysterical over the consequences of the work not yet done and the reactor firing up again. On the other hand, it would appear that most people living in close proximity to Chalk River, which facility employs a good many people in the area, have no qualms whatever about the safety of the plant.
"I'm not concerned and I have full confidence in the people who run the reactor", said the mayor of Laurentian Hills, nearby Chalk River. "It is the livelihood of our whole community." Well yes, that would be a compelling reason.
As for the president of the Canadian Society of Nuclear Medicine, he feels the federal government made the correct decision in opting for a re-start of the reactor. "We're quite pleased that they are taking the strong and balanced approach and assessing the risk of operating the Chalk River facility versus the risk of Canadians not having access to an essential medicine service."
Still there are many excited voices on the other side, bemoaning the choice between the safety of Canadians living in a wide radius of the plant, should anything go awry. Weighing their safety against those of other Canadians requiring diagnostic tests for cancer and heart disease in support of their chances to continue living. Sometimes it's difficult to really get a handle on these things.
We worry, and we should be concerned. "You can say yes, it's not as safe as we want it to be. But in the grand scheme of things, I don't believe for a minute that it's unsafe", says Mr. Holt. We can only hope he's right.
He's the seasoned expert, after all. We're the unschooled worry-warts.
Canada, it would appear, is a leading exporter of these isotypes, through the Chalk River nuclear reactor which supplies the high grade raw material that MDS Nordion of Kanata (Ottawa, Ontario) produces. Problem was, it would appear, there erupted a hissy-battle between AECL and the country's nuclear safety regulator.
Each dug in their heels and refused to budge, and the result was a panic-in-the-making at the looming shortage, since medical isotopes have a defined life, and cannot be stored for long periods. When the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission inspected Atomic Energy of Canada's NRU reactor it discovered that a safety redundancy it had been assured had been put in place, hadn't been, after all.
The CNSC castigated AECL, and the result was a temporary shut-down of the plant. A shut-down meant to be brief, but which was extended for the purpose of upgrading safety concerns. Which resulted in the impending shortage of medical isotopes. AECL had been instructed in 2006 to proceed with the upgrades, permitting the facility to operate while the changes were being put in place. But the changes just weren't done. And the regulatory agency was livid when it discovered it had been misled.
Because of the emergency to peoples' health inherent in the inability of medical professionals to use this irreplaceable diagnostic tool, the federal government became concerned and looked to itself to make a correction. Legislation was passed in the House of Commons and then in the Senate to allow for immediate resumption of reactor operations. And in so doing, the government took it upon itself to override the concerns of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
In the process infuriating Canadians who are already more than a little leery about outcomes with nuclear plants. The memory of previous nuclear disasters - at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, as distant as they are in the past - more than adequately reminds people just exactly how serious an impact a nuclear misadventure can have on a country. People are, understandably, upset and nervous.
But, we're told by an expert, a nuclear engineering professor who has great familiarity with the plant in question that even without the safety upgrades, the reactor is extremely safe. In fact the decision to shut it down to begin with owed more to pique between AECL and the regulator than a perceived need to shut it down.
In the words of Professor Richard Holt of Queen's University: "It's very safe, as safe as it's ever been. These redundant backup systems are something that modern power reactors are required to have. It's safe now, and it will be super-safe when the work has been completed."
Nice. Thank you ever so much, Professor Holt.
A whole lot of people have become near-hysterical over the consequences of the work not yet done and the reactor firing up again. On the other hand, it would appear that most people living in close proximity to Chalk River, which facility employs a good many people in the area, have no qualms whatever about the safety of the plant.
"I'm not concerned and I have full confidence in the people who run the reactor", said the mayor of Laurentian Hills, nearby Chalk River. "It is the livelihood of our whole community." Well yes, that would be a compelling reason.
As for the president of the Canadian Society of Nuclear Medicine, he feels the federal government made the correct decision in opting for a re-start of the reactor. "We're quite pleased that they are taking the strong and balanced approach and assessing the risk of operating the Chalk River facility versus the risk of Canadians not having access to an essential medicine service."
Still there are many excited voices on the other side, bemoaning the choice between the safety of Canadians living in a wide radius of the plant, should anything go awry. Weighing their safety against those of other Canadians requiring diagnostic tests for cancer and heart disease in support of their chances to continue living. Sometimes it's difficult to really get a handle on these things.
We worry, and we should be concerned. "You can say yes, it's not as safe as we want it to be. But in the grand scheme of things, I don't believe for a minute that it's unsafe", says Mr. Holt. We can only hope he's right.
He's the seasoned expert, after all. We're the unschooled worry-warts.
Labels: Environment, Particularities, Whoops
posted by Pieface @ 5:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home