Clouding Maine nuclear issues

Almost 10 years ago the U.S. Department of Energy had a team in Maine holding public hearings on a congressional manadated “characterization” of Maine bedrock as a potential site for the long-term disposal of high-level nuclear waste. Outrage was universal and explosive. The only rational voice in the entire enterprise was John Day writing for the Bangor Daily News. His description of events and alternatives was clear, correct, and without acrimony.

John, with your record of thoughtful objectivity, how could you confuse things as badly as you did in your column of Jan 2?

“As warm as a heated swimming pool”! The water entering the bay is in the range of 1 to 4 degrees warmer than the bay itself.

“… Generated nearly three-fourths of state’s electric power.” About one-fourth of the electricity consumed in Maine comes from Maine Yankee.

“… Faked a computer simulation program.” This has not been demonstrated. The BDN could provide a real public service if it would conduct some interviews with people outside the nuclear debate; describe the emergency core-cooling system; and list some of the variables involved.

Day’s figure of $310,000 per day is attributed to the increased money the owners would make if the 10 percent increase in output could be achieved. That number has been quoted as the cost to Maine owners of Maine Yankee for replacement power. It has nothing to do with earnings associated with the increase in output.

Day also reports that costs have been rising while output has been falling. Not true. Improved generators, turbines, feed pumps, etc., have resulted in a steady increase in the output of the plant. Cost increases have been much below general inflation.

To speak of a Chernobyl-type accident in connection with Maine Yankee is an oxymoron. I have tried to reconstruct John’s figure that the radioactive cloud from Chernobyl was 50 times greater than that associated with the Three Mile Island accident. As near as I can tell, he has the ratio of the activity of the gas emitted, and ignores the fact that a large fraction of the core at Chernobyl blew out over the countryside. None of the reactor core left the TMI containment.

About one-third of the nation’s electricity comes from a combination of nuclear and hydro (11 percent hydro; 22 percent nuclear). These units are “base loaded” — they run whenever they can, the other two-thirds is made up of fossil fuels: oil, coal, and natural gas. People expressing concern over nuclear power should tell us what it is that they prefer. The environmental, economic, and reliability implications of the preferred option should be spelled out.

Richard C. Hill of Orono is professor emeritus of mechanical engineering at the University of Maine.