低線量被曝の影響の深刻さがだんだんと分かりはじめてきていて、つまり、低線量被曝の影響が数十年経っても軽減しないということがやっと分かってきて、日本での原発事故を望まない人たちがアメリカの権力中枢に出てきているのだと思う。当然、今までの計画通り日本に核廃棄物を埋めたいという人たちも依然としてかなり多く居て、その間の調整がまだ取れていないというのが現状なような気がします

フロリダ州の原発を廃炉へ　米電力最大手デューク・エナジー
2013/2/6 10:31

　【ニューヨーク＝小川義也】米電力最大手デューク・エナジーは５日、フロリダ州にあるクリスタルリバー原子力発電所を廃炉にすると発表した。2009年にトラブルで運転を停止した同原発は補修中だったが、費用が巨額で再稼働が困難と判断した。同社は「シェール革命」に伴う生産量増加で価格が大幅に下がった天然ガスを燃やす火力発電所の建設を検討。早ければ18年の稼働を目指す。

　クリスタルリバー原発は1977年に運転を開始。09年秋、加圧水型軽水炉の燃料補給と蒸気発生器の交換作業中に、格納建物のコンクリート壁の外層がはがれ落ちるトラブルが発生。11年にも別の場所で新たな剥離が起き、運転停止が長引いていた。

　デュークは昨年末、再稼働には最大で30億ドル（約2800億円）以上の費用と８年の年月を要するとの報告書を公表。ジム・ロジャース最高経営責任者（ＣＥＯ）は５日の声明で「非常に難しい決断だったが、正しい選択だ」と述べた。廃炉完了までの期間は40〜60年を見込む。

　11年３月の東日本大震災以降、原発に対しては安全性やコスト面で逆風が強まっている。米原発の廃炉決定は、昨年10月にドミニオン・エナジーが決めたウィスコンシン州の原発に続く。
＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊＊
http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/mysterious-booms-plague-wisconsin-town-120322.htm
Updated March 23: The U.S. Geological Survey has reported that the mysterious booms that shook the town of Clintonville, Wis., were the result of a 1.5-magnitude earthquake. Although not a huge event, the earthquake caused a swarm of several small quakes in a short time. Paul Caruso, a geophysicist from the USGS, told the local Fox News affiliate that most people wouldn't normally feel a 1.5-magnitude earthquake, but that the rock in Wisconsin is very old and well consolidated, allowing residents to feel otherwise sensitive rumblings. via Fox11
********************************
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/23/business/energy-environment/dominion-to-close-wisconsin-nuclear-plant.html?_r=0

Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor to Be Closed
By MATTHEW L. WALD
Published: October 22, 2012
FACEBOOK
TWITTER
GOOGLE+
SAVE
E-MAIL
SHARE
PRINT
REPRINTS

WASHINGTON ― The owner of a small nuclear reactor in Wisconsin said Monday that it would close the Kewaunee Power Station early next year because it was unable to find a buyer and the plant was no longer economically viable.

A blog about energy and the environment.
Go to Blog »
The decision was viewed as an early sign that the wave of retirements of old generating stations across the Midwest is now stretching from the coal industry into nuclear power, driven by slack demand for energy and the low price of natural gas.

After receiving a 20-year extension from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in February 2011 to continue operating Kewaunee, Dominion, based in Richmond, Va., put the power station up for sale. At 556 megawatts, it is about half the size of the largest plants now operating and is the only reactor at the Carlton site, rendering costs higher per unit of power than sites with two reactors. Dominion had hoped to buy several reactors in the Midwest that could share some overhead expenses with Kewaunee, but did not succeed.

“This was an extremely difficult decision, especially in light of how well the station is running and the dedication of the employees,” said Thomas F. Farrell II, Dominion’s chairman, president and chief executive, in a statement. “This decision was based purely on economics.”

He said nuclear power would be essential to the nation’s energy future ― just in other places. The company owns six other reactors at three sites, and will take a one-time charge of $281 million for the closure, which it expects in the spring.

The industry’s trade association, the Nuclear Energy Institute, tried to play down the significance of the Kewaunee closing, saying it was because of circumstances unique to Dominion. Marvin Fertel, the president and chief executive of the association, said that nuclear energy “remains a reliable, cost-effective producer of electricity for America’s homes and our economy.”

This did not explain, however, why no better-situated company came forward to buy the plant.

When Dominion bought the plant from local owners in 2005, it signed contracts to sell them the electricity, a common practice, but as those contracts expire, the plant faces selling electricity at the lower rates that now dominate the energy market.

Bruce Biewald, the founder and chief executive of Synapse Energy Economics, a consulting firm, said that low electricity prices were a severe problem for generators in places like the Midwest, where power is sold at auction. “You’re looking at margins that are declining in a really serious way,” he said.

Counting Kewaunee, there are 104 power reactors licensed in the United States. Kewaunee, which received its 40-year operating license in December 1973, will be the first reactor to retire since Millstone 1, near New London, Conn., in July 1998.

Annual capital costs on a 1,000 megawatt nuclear reactor range from $60 million to $70 million, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute; average annual costs for operation and maintenance plus fuel are $140 million to $150 million. And when the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is finished ordering improvements prompted by the Fukushima disaster of last year, some plants will face significant expenses. Perhaps more could decide that continuing to operate was not worth the investment given current revenues.

In some regions, the average selling price of a megawatt-hour today is less than $50 at times. But a survey of the industry by the Electric Utility Cost Group, an industry consortium, found that one quarter of nuclear plants with the highest costs were spending an average of $51.42 to produce a megawatt-hour from 2008 through 2010. And costs have gone up since then.

Other companies have also reported falling revenues, although they may not be on the verge of closing reactors because they are in regions where the market price of electricity is higher. Nearly all the operating reactors are approaching or have reached the end of their initial license periods, and have applied for extensions or received them. But the license may not indicate the lifetime of the reactor.

“No nuclear plant I know of has ever closed because it hit the end of its license,” said Peter Bradford, who served on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 1977 to 1982 and was later chairman of the New York State Public Service Commission. A nuclear plant needs a life expectancy of a few years for its owners to consider major new investments, he said in a telephone interview, but if low electricity prices persist, even that may not be enough.

A version of this article appeared in print on October 23, 2012, on page B1 of the New York edition with the headline: Wisconsin Nuclear Reactor To Be Closed.

＞あと、日本を核の廃棄物処理場などにしたならば海流や気流によりアメリカ本土に重大な影響があるような気がする。アメリカが作るなら中国の砂漠が本命ではないか。

　確かにアメリカとしても西風が吹く北半球で太平洋を隔てただけの日本列島よりももっと遠く離れたところの方がいいと考えているのだと思います。ただ、大陸部分に埋めてしまうと地下水が大規模に汚染される可能性があるのだと思います。地層処分は地下１０００ｍとか２０００ｍぐらいのところにしかできないようです。それ以上深くすると温度が高くなってしまい安定的な保管ができないということのようです。そして、地下２０００ｍぐらいですと、農業や工業用の地下水利用とちょうどかち合ってしまうのです。大陸は、普通、多くの場所が水不足ですから地下水利用がされていて、このために大陸での地層処分は無理だと考えられているのだと思います。
　
　ただし、既に北アメリカ大陸でもユーラシア大陸でも高レベル核廃棄物の地層処分は一部で行われているということです。つまり、アメリカではネバダ州だったと思いますが、軍事用の核物質の高レベル廃棄物の地層注入が、ソ連時代にシベリアで同じように高レベル廃棄物の地層注入が行われたという記事を読んだことがあります。なお、これについて、現在はやられてはいない様子です。

　何よりも、０３さんがおっしゃるように、日本は地震活動や火山活動の活発な国であり、日本に地層処分しても多少長期的に考えれば地球規模の汚染になってしまいます。日本政府や日本の電力事業者自身が日本に地層処分は無理だと世界的に宣言するべきですし、世界中の国々が高レベル廃棄物の処分方法がないことをもっと重くとらえるべきだと思います。