Ambient office  = 93 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 52 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 52 nanosieverts per hour

Organic carrot from Central Market = 107 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 54 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 45 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office  = 93 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 108 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 108 nanosieverts per hour

Bartlett pear from Central Market = 122 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 114 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 105 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient office  = 105 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 89 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 92 nanosieverts per hour

Beefsteak tomato from Central Market = 93 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 108 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 88 nanosieverts per hour

Dover Sole = 82 nanosieverts per hour

The U.S. manufactured nuclear weapons at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in south central Washington State. Approximately fifty-six million gallons of liquid waste left over from the production of nuclear warheads is currently stored in one hundred and seventy seven buried tanks. The liquid in the tanks is a witches’ brew of toxic chemicals and radioactive waste. Some of the tanks are leaking and a more permanent solution to the storage of the liquid wastes is being developed.
       In 2000, the Department of Energy chose Bechtel as the recipient of a $4.3 billion grant to construct a vitrification plant. The facility is intended to take the liquid wastes from the tanks and combine it with the ingredients of glass. When the mixture is heated, the glass solidifies and traps the radioactive materials. The glass, in the form of logs can then be safely buried.
       Bechtel began construction of the vitrification plant in 2002 and it was scheduled to be in operation by 2011. The intention was to vitrify all the contents of the tanks by 2028. In 2012, the U.S. Government Accountability Office issued a report that detailed a variety of unresolved technical and managerial problems at the facility.
        One major problem involved the need to keep the plutonium and enriched uranium in the liquids from creating a criticality accident before it was turned into glass. Another problem had to do with the generation of hydrogen gas which could cause an explosion and fire. A third problem involved vibration in the pipes caused by variations in the liquids being treated that could cause ruptures and spills of the liquids.
       Currently the vitrification plant is being subjected to “ongoing” reviews by the Government Accounting Office, Office of Inspector General, Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board and other agencies. The new estimate for total cost is about $16.18 billion with an expected completion date of 2023.
        Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) have just announced the successful demonstration of the continuous conversion of three gallons of liquid wastes from the buried tanks at Hanford into glass. This is the first time that liquid waste has been converted into glass in a continuous process as opposed to a batch process. It is an important milestone in the development of the process that will be used during full scale operation.
       The radioactive waste liquid was slowly pumped into a mixture of the materials used to make glass and heated to over two thousand degrees Fahrenheit. The test produced about twenty pounds of glass. The radioactive materials in the original liquid are chemically bound and sealed to the glass. If the lump of glass were broken, each piece of glass would still prevent the radioactivity from escaping. The vitrification test at the PNNL will assist in the development of the Direct Feed Low-Activity Waste (DFLAW) system that will be used during full operation of the facility when it is completed.
       Kris Colosi is the Washington River Protection Solutions project manager. He said that “Being able to run real tank waste instead of simulant through these tests provides valuable input for validating and refining our approach to the treatment of low-activity waste. It’s another important step toward the removal and disposal of a large portion of Hanford’s tank waste.”

Ambient office  = 112 nanosieverts per hour

Ambient outside = 91 nanosieverts per hour

Soil exposed to rain water = 90 nanosieverts per hour

Orange bell pepper from Central Market = 77 nanosieverts per hour

Tap water = 119 nanosieverts per hour

Filter water = 102 nanosieverts per hour

       I have written about nuclear power plant plants plans in specific African countries. Often there are critics of such plans because many countries just don’t have the demand and the infrastructure that would make nuclear power a reasonable investment.
       There are fifty-four different countries in Africa. The only currently operating nuclear power plant on the whole continent is the Koeberg plant in South Africa which produces 1.8 gigawatts of electricity. Rosatom, the state owned nuclear plant construction firm, claims to have signed nuclear power memorandum of understanding with Egypt, Kenya, Nigeria, Sudan, Uganda and Zambia.
       Most countries in Africa are experiencing severe shortages of electricity. The majority of African nations would need to double their generating capacity in order to meet the needs of their citizens and businesses. Kenya, Sudan and Zambia are dependent on hydroelectric power for their electricity. In order to double their generating capacity, a 2.4 gigawatt nuclear plant would be required for each. Nigeria depends on natural gas to generate electricity and it would take a 4.8 gigawatt nuclear power plant to double their electrical supply.
       South Africa recently decided against building more nuclear power reactors on the grounds that it would be too expensive. Since many African nations are very poor, how would they finance the construction of nuclear power plants? Bangladesh has finalized a deal with Rosatom for a nuclear project. Rosatom is loaning Bangladesh $12.65 billion. This loan will only cover the estimated cost of construction.  When interest accrual, possible cost overruns, operations and decommissioning are added to the cost, the estimated total cost would be around $30 billion. In negotiations with Egypt, Rosatom is offering a loan of $25 billion. As in the Bangladesh project, this is only enough for the initial estimated cost of construction.
       The interest rate for these two loans is about three percent. The loan is set up so that repayments only start in ten to thirteen years after the loan papers are signed. After payments start, they will continue for twenty-two to twenty eight years.
       Countries who sign up for loans for Russian reactor construction pay very little in the beginning which makes the deal attractive to government officials, especially those who may profit from the deals by commissions or bribes. However, when the repayment start, the country’s finances and power customers will be subjected to a huge debt that most African countries will never be able to pay. Over the life of the project, the three percent interest could increase the cost of the project by as much as forty percent.
       Every nuclear reactor project in the U.S. since the era of nuclear power began has run over budget and behind schedule. Countries who have contracted for Rosatom power plants could easily wind up having to pay back a higher than expected debt while not being able to recoup money from the sale of electricity.
      In light of the fact that Russia has shown itself to be willing to exert political and economic influence over countries that owe it money, it is likely that if an African country which found itself deep in debt to Russia, Russia could wind up exerting disproportionate influence over that country’s international affairs.
       Zambia is considering a Russian nuclear power plant similar in output to the Bangladesh plant. The ultimate cost of the plant is expected to be at least $30 billion. Zambia has a total annual budget of just over $7 billion. It is obvious that Zambia cannot afford such a plant.
       Given that nuclear power will be too expensive for most African nations, it would be much better for them to pursue energy sources such as wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal.