The General Electric-designed nuclear reactors involved in the Japanese emergency are very similar to 23 reactors in use in the United States, according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission records.
The NRC database of nuclear power plants shows that 23 of the 104 nuclear plants in the U.S. are GE boiling-water reactors with GE's Mark I systems for containing radioactivity, the same containment system used by the reactors in trouble at the Fukushima Dai-ichi plant. The U.S. reactors are in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Vermont.
In addition, 12 reactors in the U.S. have the later Mark II or Mark III containment system from GE. These 12 are in Illinois, Louisiana, Mississippi, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Washington state. See the full list below.
GE via NRC
GE's Mark I containment system.
(General Electric is a parent company of msnbc.com through GE's 49 percent stake in NBCUniversal. NBCUniversal and Microsoft are equal partners in msnbc.com.)
Msnbc.com sent questions Saturday to GE, asking whether the Japanese reactors differed from those of the same general design used in the U.S.
A GE spokesman, Michael Tetuan, referred all questions to the Nuclear Energy Institute, an industry trade and lobbying group. Tetuan said GE nuclear staff members in Wilmington, N.C., are focused on assisting GE employees in Japan and standing by to help the Japanese authorities if asked to help. The NEI on Sunday confirmed that the figure of 23 is correct.
Updates:
- On Monday, GE Hitachi Nuclear sent the following statement, in full: "The BWR Mark 1 reactor is the industry’s workhorse with a proven track record of safety and reliability for more than 40 years. Today, there are 32 BWR Mark 1 reactors operating as designed worldwide. There has never been a breach of a Mark 1 containment system."
- On Friday, GE posted rebuttals to the most common criticisms of the Mark I containment system.
The six reactors at the Fukushima Dai-ichi power plant, which had explosions on Saturday and Monday, are all GE-designed boiling-water reactors, known in the industry as BWRs. Five have containment systems of GE's Mark I design, and the sixth is of the Mark II type. They were placed in operation between 1971 and 1979.
A fact sheet from the anti-nuclear advocacy group Nuclear Information and Resource Service contends that the Mark I design has design problems, and that in 1972 an Atomic Energy Commission member, Dr. Stephen Hanuaer, recommended that this type of system be discontinued.
"Some modifications have been made to U.S. Mark I reactors since 1986, although the fundamental design deficiencies remain," NIRS said. The group has a commentary online describing what it says are hazards of boiling-water reactors: human invervention needed to vent radioactive steam in the case of a core meltdown, and problems with aging.
Since the earthquake struck Japan on Friday, the early statements by the industry's Nuclear Industry Institute have emphasized that only six plants in the U.S. have precisely the same generation of reactor design (GE boiling-water reactor model 3) as the first reactor to have trouble in Fukushima Daiichi. Problems then developed at different reactors of GE model 4.
But aside from the generation of reactor design, the following 23 U.S. plants have GE boiling-water reactors (GE models 2, 3 or 4) with the same Mark I containment design used at Fukushima, according to the NRC's online database:
• Browns Ferry 1, Athens, Alabama, operating license since 1973, reactor type GE 4.
• Browns Ferry 2, Athens, Alabama, 1974, GE 4.
• Browns Ferry 3, Athens, Alabama, 1976, GE 4.
• Brunswick 1, Southport, North Carolina, 1976, GE 4.
• Brunswick 2, Southport, North Carolina, 1974, GE 4.
• Cooper, Brownville, Nebraska, 1974, GE 4.
• Dresden 2, Morris, Illinois, 1970, GE 3.
• Dresden 3, Morris, Illinois, 1971, GE 3.
• Duane Arnold, Palo, Iowa, 1974, GE 4.
• Fermi 2, Monroe, Michigan, 1985, GE 4.
• FitzPatrick, Scriba, New York, 1974, GE 4.
• Hatch 1, Baxley, Georgia, 1974, GE 4.
• Hatch 2, Baxley, Georgia, 1978, GE 4.
• Hope Creek, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey, 1986, GE 4.
• Monticello, Monticello, Minnesota, 1970, GE 3.
• Nine Mile Point 1, Scriba, New York, 1969, GE 2.
• Oyster Creek, Forked River, New Jersey, 1969, GE 2.
• Peach Bottom 2, Delta, Pennsylvania, 1973, GE 4.
• Peach Bottom 3, Delta, Pennsylvania, 1974, GE 4.
• Pilgrim, Plymouth, Massachusetts, 1972, GE 3.
• Quad Cities 1, Cordova, Illinois, 1972, GE 3.
• Quad Cities 2, Moline, Illinois, 1972, GE 3.
• Vermont Yankee, Vernon, Vermont, 1972, GE 4.
And these 12 newer GE boiling-water reactors have a Mark II or Mark III design:
• Clinton, Clinton, Illinois, 1987, GE 6, Mark III.
• Columbia Generating Station, Richland, Washington, 1984, GE 5, Mark II.
• Grand Gulf, Port Gibson, Mississippi, 1984, GE 6, Mark III.
• LaSalle 1, Marseilles, Illinois, 1982, GE 5, Mark II.
• LaSalle 2, Marseilles, Illinois, 1983, GE 5, Mark II.
• Limerick 1, Limerick, Pennsylvania, 1985, GE 4, Mark II.
• Limerick 2, Limerick, Pennsylvania, 1989, GE 4, Mark II.
• Nine Mile Point 2, Scriba, New York, 1987, GE 5, Mark II.
• Perry, Perry, Ohio, 1986, GE 6, Mark III.
• River Bend, St. Francisville, Louisiana, 1985, GE 6, Mark III.
• Susquehanna 1, Salem Township, Pennsylvania, 1982, GE 4, Mark II.
• Susquehanna 2, Salem Township, Pennsylvania, 1984, GE 4, Mark II.
Other resources:
Details on each U.S. reactor are in the NRC list.
The NRC has an explainer on boiling-water reactors and the various GE containment designs.
Here's an earthquake hazard map of the lower 48 United States from the U.S. Geological Survey showing the areas with the greatest risks. More detailed state-by-state maps from the USGS are here.
Scientific American looks at the technical situation facing the engineers in Japan. And The Wall Street Journal describes how this emergency calls into question the redundancies that nuclear plant designers rely on.
The Wall Street Journal reported that Tokyo Electric tested the Fukushima plant to withstand an earthquake less severe than the one that struck last week:
Separately, company documents show that Tokyo Electric tested the Fukushima plant to withstand a maximum seismic jolt lower than Friday's 8.9 earthquake. Tepco's last safety test of nuclear power plant Number 1—one that is currently in danger of meltdown—was done at a seismic magnitude the company considered the highest possible, but in fact turned out to be lower than Friday's quake. The information comes from the company's "Fukushima No. 1 and No. 2 Updated Safety Measures" documents written in Japanese in 2010 and 2009. The documents were reviewed by Dow Jones.
The company said in the documents that 7.9 was the highest magnitude for which they tested the safety for their No. 1 and No. 2 nuclear power plants in Fukushima.
Simultaneous seismic activity along the three tectonic plates in the sea east of the plants—the epicenter of Friday's quake—wouldn't surpass 7.9, according to the company's presentation.
The company based its models partly on previous seismic activity in the area, including a 7.0 earthquake in May 1938 and two simultaneous earthquakes of 7.3 and 7.5 on November 5 of the same year.
Video from NBC Nightly News:
NBC's Lester Holt speaks with nuclear energy expert Joe Cirincione.
Marvin-3180998
If these reactors have survived this long after being on top of an 8.9 quake, hit by a all that water and STILL they have not melted down. THIS IS A GREAT ARGUMENT TO BUILD HUNDREDS OF THESE IN THE USA. If they can survive this for this long...how safe are they in middle America? BUILD MORE HERE PLEASE!!!!!!!!
Shawnp1033
The alarmism on full display once again by the media, just like after the shootings in Arizona, is disgusting. It's like these networks and outlets are run by kindergarten children.
We have 23 over here too? Maybe if they all experience an 8.9 Richter scale quake immediately followed by a 30 foot tsunami, we might have an issue also.
Or maybe a meteorite might land right on top of one.
Or maybe a volcanic eruption might occur right under one.
Or maybe...
JKeyes
These reactors are over 40 years old. Thank a wacko environmentalist group for stopping any upgrades on Nuclear Power Plants.
HeckSpawn
G.E. They bring good things to Death.
OH MY GOD WE ARE ALL GOING TO DIE. WE NEED TO BAN NUCLEAR ENERGY AND DISMANTLE THOSE 100 PLANTS. The U.S. reactors are in Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebrask
a, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Vermont. All those places have earthquakes and violent uprisings and terrorists could blow them up and are in highly populated areas. This is horrible. Oh God. What have we done? We need wind energy and solar energy!
general clone benson
OMG OMG
suggestivo
doesn't matter if you are liberal or conservative, right wing nut or left wing nut, engineer or layman, at Fukushima, there are a large number of dry, hot fuel rods right now...
Congo-Charlie
The firm, of which I was employed, manufactured a device that severed the containment rod's supportive cable for the GE Reactors. In case of an emergency this would allow the control rods to be instantly separated from the reactor, and 'drop' into a cooling tank; and at the same time sealing off the possibility of any contamination leakage. As a matter of curosity, were these ever placed into the systems?
What I find interesting is that those nuclear facilities are located by the coast for access to unlimited amount of cooling water to make the reactors safer. As it turns out it, closeness to the water has contributed to reactors demise.
eyes wide open-441969
Water cooled plants are an old concept taken from the days of nuclear submarines. They are definately more dangerous and out-dated.
The problem is the US cannot de-commision these plants because we have not built any new plants in 40 years. And we need the energy. The clean energy of nuclear. We don't need to burn any more coal and natural gas has lots of environemental problems.
We need more Nuclear infrastructure in our country... especially education.
And the press needs to get educated instead of trying to sell news on fear.
If we do that we can develop Fast Breeders with liquid Sodium cooling.... much safer and much better with the waste issue.
Combined with Solar and Wind.... we can have a bright future and maybe make a difference on global warming.
Continue on the do nothing path.... we can watch India and France lead the world in energy efficiency and innovation.
mike-3181569
First- for all you idiots comparing this to three mile island- 3 mile's containment unit did EXACTLY what it was supposed to do, Ive read the reports directly from the NRC and independent researchers, contain the reactor and fuel rod assemblies... The amount (directly from the reports, and indepent veification) of radiation released was less than an x-ray, and that ammount was pulled from the complex itself.
Second- These BWR's are 1st gen designed systems. All the reactors having issues right now were built in the late 50's. GE has upgraded the older plants in the US on a regular basis.
Third- The problem wasnt with the reactor itself. The problem was with the location and installation of the backup generators to keep the pumps running. Most US reactors now are no longer BWR types that require constant pump use to cool. Most now use natural convection as a backup, and dont generate the steam in the primary reactor loop (look up pressurized water reactor aka PWR. for those of you who compare this to chernoybl, that reactor was a RBMK design, made to produce plutonium as well as energy, which is a totally different design)
Get your facts straight people before you comment... And the failure rate of GE's reactors is not 90% as a poster stated earlier... If that were the case, every nuclear sub and ship in the US navy would glow in the dark...
sham debate
Microscopic plutonium fallout inhalation.
10 years of constant lies from US government,
10 years of constant lies from controlled media
bobd45
"Yellow Journalism" at its best - MSNBC. Scare everyone when their is no reason to do so. BTW. any of the "sisters" located on an active quake vault like those in Japan? Should we not depopulate all coastal areas just in case of a mega tidal wave caused by a quake in some far off place? How about the known dead from windmills? They have "sisters" too. How about tour buses and their "sisters"? The NY incident where 20 were killed proved buses are unsafe. "Yellow Journalism"
mickrussom
Well, the eco-terrorists have made maintaining and rebuilding and making new nuclear infrastructure impossible but the eco-terrorists burn gas and energy like mad. So we have 40 year old reactors that cant survive a 9 magnitude (they did admirably so far containing a total failure) - but we have the technology with pebble bed and generation iV+ reactors to get rid of more of the risks.
Take your pick. Coal, Natural Gas, Nuclear, Oil. Nuclear is the least damaging due to the fact waste stays in one place (rather than being put into the atmosphere) and with new designs even more risk is averted. But the eco-terrorists want to use this to make "green" seem more appealing. Its a sad time where disasters are used by these sick people to push their eco-terrorist agenda.
Its ridiculous since no one was worried about radiation on the west coast after Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic blasts and they shot radiation well over 30,000 feet and there was no evidence of that radiation coming here. And if you read about Bikini and Enewetak Atoll (or Eniwetok Atoll) blasts - we even did a 15 megaton blast in open air called the castle bravo shot. The mushroom cloud reached a height of 47,000 feet (14 km) and a diameter of 7 miles (11 km) in about a minute; it then reached a height of 130,000 feet (40 km) and 62 miles (100 km) in diameter in less than 10 minutes and was expanding at more than 100 m/s.
Some local radiation resulted. The point is, nuclear weapons aren't as bad as the media is making nuclear power to be yet the media and the rat eco-terrorists have no real solutions other than grab a pitchfork and live like the Amish.
Again, the radical progressives and environmentalists cause all these disasters. We could have new pebble bed reactors but Obama, Pelosi and Reid gave Unions 800 billion dollars.
Obama's buddies built these things - send them to Somalia
robin-6
Bull@!$%# detectors are meltingdown. You're full of it dude.
2L84thepolarbears
AAAAAHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
How could GE build those unsafe reactors in the USA!!!! How can they get away with it??? My god they might have an ACCIDENT!!!!! The only thing this @!$%# is good for is CNN. They have broadcast that the reactors were spewing radioactive gas into the atmosphere since SATURDAY! They even had there expert "Bill Neigh" the science guy testify for them...
What a joke
Ask GE how old the software is running these systems. I tried to sell them better software years ago. No one wanted to spend the money. It's scary how old these systems are and it comes down to dollars...
Mike_in_Kyiv
Seems to be a lot of emotion out there about this. Everyone take a deep breath and read the following link. There are updates for the 14th and 15th as well. The GE system is highly redundant to control the heat in the core. What happened according to this account was the back up generators were washed away with the tsunami. Next the battery back up can only go for so long. They tried to bring in more generators on by truck but weird twist of fate - these new generators could not immediately be plugged into the system at the plant - like trying to plug a 110V American plug into a socket in Europe - different male/female connectors!
As usual MSMBC has pointed a finger - it's guilt by association simply because GE made these boiler reactors. This GE system has long reliable - trouble is when you get a double whammie of a 9 magnitude earth quake and a 30 foot wall of water following, it brings new meaning to the word "disaster". Pray for all in Japan.
This is silly. Making such comparisons is like saying because someone died in a freak car crash that everyone who owns that same model should be afraid.
paul scipio-3082423
Isn't this just great we have 23 of the vary piles of General Electric JUNK in this country that is spewing radioactivity haphazardly all over Japan. This was never supposed to have happen and just ask those SOB's at GE and they will tell you that this will never happen...Well it did!
Our country has natural gas and coal coming out of our eye balls, we are swimming in it, we do not need Atomic Power, it's dangerous, requires an extraordinary amount of added security and I for one do not want to live next door to one of these monstrosities. We as a nation need to start phasing these 40 year old ticking time bombs out and replacing them with natural gas and clean coal fired plants before this happens again; over here.
AV234
What's the point of this article? Fear mongering to generate some clicks I suppose. Who cares if the same design is in the US? Are we supposed to be afraid of a 9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami ravaging Illinois?
A reactor with a containment system design that has succeeded in doing what it is engineered to do despite a 1-2 punch from one of the worst natural disasters in the last century also is in America... Oh. My. God.
Why not report on how the explosions at the reactor are predictable and aren't an indication of failure or loss of integrity to the containment?
Tomnuclear20yrsplus
In reference to the 23 sister plants in the U.S. I performed QA/QC inspections at the GE Brownsferry Plant just outside Athens AL, Hatch Plant outside Baxley GA and the Enrico Fermi plant outside Monroe MI. In addition I spent the better part of twenty years travelling the nuclear industry during the construction, start-up, operation and refueling shutdowns throughout the eastern US. In addition to the "sister plants" listed I worked on 17 additional nuclear reactor sites. While performing inspections at the Brownsferry Unit 2 I discovered one of my coworkers was signing off critical work without performing the required inspections. This came to light after I was contacted to perform an inspection which required a trip into a high radiation zone. This meant I had to have health physics personnel with me for entry and change into anti-contamination clothing. When I reached the high rad zone for controlled entry one of my coworkers was standing there, in his street clothes, and informed me that the inspection had been completed. When I inquired about how he had completed this work he indicated the inspection point had been signed off without actually witnessing the work. I verified that he had not made entry (via the control point log) and found out later this was his status quo for performing inspection. Irriatated that I had went through the required protocol to properly execute my duties and his total disregard for the safety of the plant I reported this to our GE supervisor who promptly swept it under the rug. So I upped the stakes and went to the GE project management and Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). This was a mistake because I immediately was dismissed and investigated by the TVA US attorney general. TVA is the owner of this fine facility and didn't appreciate me holding up progre$$ in the name of safety. To make a long story longer the individual was reassigned and I was charged by the attorney general on some drummed up nonrelated charge. In the nuclear world Brownsferry is truly an accident waiting to happen. How many more instances of inspection falsification exist. Hundreds, thousands or more?
sham debate
Japan radiation
BP’s Gulf of Mexico
9/11 mass murder scam
Doug57
Has anyone considered the possiblity of an EMP knocking out batteries, generators, AND AC at US plants? A terrorist act could generate such an EMP. If you don't think EMP generation is possible, you need to do some research. There doesn't have to be an earthquake and tsunami to eliminate the electricity necessary for control. What happens if ALL electricity is cutoff at any plant in the US? How would any plant survive?
So if a guy drove off a cliff and he owns the same make car as I do, should I be afraid to drive it? The old reactor design is maybe not up to today's standards, but the problem in Japan was the lack of electrical power from damage by a 30' wave. Now, we can plan for this problem.
an observer
Bill... I get the same garbage about "usage restrictions" (at about 40% of MSNBC reports on this issue... Yahoo works fine... FWIW) - I'm currently in Poland (so much for world-wide access to the MSNBC news while travelling with my notebook PC...oh yeah, it must be the Polish blocking access... wink wink)
an observer
GE nuclear reactors are inspected and certified by the NRC... kinda like the oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico are inspected by the Department of the Interior (remember? those guys doing lines of coke on the photocopiers after filling out/receiving inspection forms in pencil for/from BP Oil...)
an observer
oh yeah... it wasn't BP... it was Halliburton, or TransOcean... or somebody else... Hitachi Nuclear isn't associated with GE...or???
an observer
Are the Japanese (Hitachi) allowed to have control of nuclear material? or did they need an American contractor (GE) in order to be licensed?
hmmm...
an observer
Google: EBASCO (vs Hitachi Nuclear)...
an observer
it's much bigger than just 'pro-nuke' folks...
an observer
What is the relationship between GPU Energy and GE? (Ron Paul, any ideas??)
northalabama
I live 30 miles west of Browns Ferry, as the nuclear cloud blows, and am sorry to hear about this. Thanks for the heads up.
northalabama
oops, I meant 30 miles east of Browns Ferry...
Shawn Gipperich
I am so curious as to why Japan can't just shut off the damaged Nuclear reactors, and if so, shouldn't that stop the reactors from producing any more radiation? The reason I ask is because I repair Microwave ovens, as well as X ray machines, and these 2 items produce radiation, but only when powered on and in use. Now when a Microwave, or x ray unit is not powered on or in use, well there is no radiation being produced from these units, so my question is why can't these damaged nuclear reactors be de-energized, thus stopping the radiation? Or is this a different type of radiation that can't be stopped even if powered down? Just curious, most certainly if it's protecting the people of Japan most certainly they could live with out electric power till the problem with the reactors are repaired.
Mark-3190385
in Japan, it's true that it took an earthquake and tsunami to knock out backup power to the plant..
do you think there are no other scenarios that can knock out all backup power?
the lesson is that whatever backups you may have in place, a nuke plant is very vulnerable to loss of power...
Mark in PA
Former Navy Nuc
There appear to be exactly 2 Nuclear Power plants in the US that have any liklihood of being hit by a similar combination of earthquake and tsunami as the Fukushima plants in Japan. Both are in CA and neither are designed by GE. Might be a good time to decide what we're going to do with spent fuel rods however.
LCH77
My understanding is the diesel generators ran for about an hour on their day tanks after the tsunami hit. The diesel fuel storage tanks were breached by the tsunami and the fuel was contaminated with seawater. When the contaminated fuel reached the diesel generators, they quit. This Plant was designed for a 6.5 meter wave. This one was reported to be 7 meters.
Diesel fuel storage tanks in the US are underground and therefore better protected.
A question: I read that TEPCO was considering drilling a hole in the vessel to relieve pressure. To whom would I send a suggestion that would be easier and might work, depending on the pressure?
Cindy Serio
first of all, there is no known way of safely disposing of nuclear material, period. beyond that, there is no place to recycle, store, or dispose safely of radioactive materials, period.
that should be the end of any debate.
the real issue now is what to do with all of the radioactive material that exists all over the earth.
the current situation was predictable. it is hard to imagine just what our supposed smart people were thinking.