nuclear-news

National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Nuclear Weapons Testing,

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 03:17:23 +0000

http://kcpw.org/blog/local-news/2012-01-27/victims-of-nuclear-testing-radiation-remembered/ Victims of Nuclear Testing Radiation Remembered, 01.27.2012 by Jeff Robinson (KCPW News) It was 61 years ago today that nuclear testing began on the Nevada Test Site, as many residents of Salt Lake Cityand more rural areas like Kane County know too well. That’s why local leaders are marking a National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Nuclear Weapons Testing, which was designated by the U.S. Senate, to commemorate the lives of downwinders, those who were exposed to the radiation. Local resident Mary Dickson is one of them. She shared her downwinder story with KCPW’s Jeff Robinson.

America’s ineffective white elephant Blue Ribbon Commission on nuclear wastes

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 03:14:56 +0000

The Commission has entirely ignored the immense evidence that DOE’s plans for disposal of several types of defense waste pose much greater threats to water resources, most especially at Hanford

“I am dismayed that the Commission saw fit to recommend that the Department of Energy (DOE) have a large upfront role in both the next steps for repository program, … DOE was in large part responsible for the mess the program is in now,

Radioactive Wastes From Nuclear Bomb Program Given Short Shrift In Blue Ribbon Commission Report EnEws Park Forest, TAKOMA PARK, MD–(ENEWSPF)–January 27, 2012. Arjun Makhijani, Ph.D., President of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, today commented on some of the recommendations of the final report of the Presidential Blue Ribbon Commission (BRC) on America’s Nuclear Future.

The commission was created to address U.S. nuclear waste issues after the Obama administration cancelled the Yucca Mountain program….

….On wastes from the nuclear bomb program:
Makhijani: “It is tragic that the Commission did not substantively address the most pressing radioactive waste contamination threats to precious water resources – for instance hundreds of times the drinking water limit at Hanford, Washington on the banks of the Columbia River.
The Commission had a charter to conduct a ‘comprehensive’ review of the nuclear waste problem, including defense wastes from the nuclear bomb program. Yet, it simply said it did not have the resources to deal with all the problems and punted the nuclear weapons waste issue to Congress while focusing on commercial spent fuel at nuclear reactor sites.”

“I am even more dismayed that the Commission suggested that Congress
consider the possibility of leaving the defense waste disposal in the
purview of the Department of Energy (DOE). The Commission has entirely
ignored the immense evidence that DOE’s plans for disposal of several
types of defense waste pose much greater threats to water resources,
most especially at Hanford, than from even Yucca Mountain, a poor
repository site.”
On reprocessing and breeder reactors:

The commission acknowledges in its report that:

“…no currently available or reasonably foreseeable reactor and fuel
cycle technology developments—including advances in reprocess and
recycle technologies—have the potential to fundamentally alter the
waste management challenge this nation confronts over at least the
next several decades, if not longer.” (p. 100)

Makhijani: “The Commission did reject some reprocessing advocates’
claims by recognizing that it will not eliminate the need for a
repository and that no form of reprocessing is economical today. But
it left the door open for reprocessing existing spent fuel at some
future date. Reprocessing spent fuel from existing reactors will
multiply risks and costs. There is simply no economic or technical
case for that, and the Commission was provided with ample evidence to
that effect. Even if the chosen path is breeder reactors, it would be
technically better and economically far superior to use the half
million tons of depleted uranium that already exist, enough to fuel a
U.S. reactor fleet at the present size for 5,000 years. The Commission
unfortunately chose to ignore these facts.”

“To its credit the Commission did recognize that reprocessing is not
an answer to the waste management problem (as indicated by quote
above) and that use of plutonium fuel creates an ‘increased
proliferation risk’ (p. 105) both as currently practiced in France
and as it might in the future be practiced with breeder reactors.”

“Despite having been presented with ample evidence of the failure of
the sodium-cooled fast neutron reactor program – $100 billion has been
spent worldwide on the technology and yet it is nowhere near
commercial – the BRC is suggesting more of the same. This is
unwarranted when there are so many renewable energy options that are
far closer to reality and far safer.”
On spent fuel storage:

Makhijani: “The Commission used the Fukushima tragedy to punt on the
question of hardened dry rather than wet storage of spent fuel at
reactor sites. The National Academies had already concluded well
before Fukushima that dry storage was safer; Fukushima has only made
the risks of wet storage clearer. Nothing we learn from it will
indicate that wet storage is safer than dry storage. Yet, the
Commission, citing lessons yet to be learned from Fukushima called for
yet another study instead of hardened on-site dry storage that has
been urged by dozens or organizations.”

“IEER calls on the Administration and Congress to mandate that all
spent fuel aged more than five years be moved to hardened dry storage
on site, and the remaining spent fuel kept in low-density storage in
reactor pools. Nuclear Waste Fund monies should be used for on-site
hardened dry storage.”….
Makhijani: “I am dismayed that the Commission saw fit to recommend
that DOE have a large upfront role in both the next steps for
repository program, “including R&D on geological media” (p. 118) and
for the Interim Storage site before a new organization is put in place
to take over the responsibility. DOE was in large part responsible for
the mess the program is in now, which began well before Congress cut
off the process in 1987, pointing to Yucca Mountain alone. On the one
hand the Commission has cautioned against haste; on the other hand, it
has encouraged haste in a really ill-advised way by recommending a
continuing DOE role in critical activities better left to an
independent agency.”…
The Institute for Energy and Environmental Research provides
policy-makers, journalists, and the public with understandable and
accurate scientific and technical information on energy and
environmental issues. IEER’s aim is to bring scientific excellence to
public policy issues in order to promote the democratization of
science and a safer, healthier environment.

http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/science-a-environmental/30464-radioactive-wastes-from-nuclear-bomb-program-given-short-shrift-in-blue-ribbon-commission-report.html

Growth of anti-nuclear movement in Asia

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 03:10:28 +0000

Anti-nuclear movement growing in Asia Though nuclear power still has a strong foothold in Asia, anti-nuclear sentiment and protest are growing from Mongolia to South Korea to Taiwan and even – in modest ways – in China. Christian Science Monitor, By Winifred Bird, January 27, 2012 YOKOHAMA, JAPAN
Heonseok Lee has a simple way of describing how public sentiment toward nuclear power has changed in South Korea since the disaster at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant last March 11. “Before 3/11, I’d post an article criticizing the nuclear power industry, and right away there’d be hundreds of really nasty comments. After 3/11, there’ll still be a few dozen. But not hundreds,” says Lee, a full-time anti-nuclear activist in one of the world’s most pro-nuclear countries.
Though nuclear power still has a strong foothold throughout the region, and public opinion is mixed, activists across Asia have anecdotes like this to show that anti-nuclear sentiment and protest are slowly growing from Mongolia, to South Korea to Taiwan and even – in modest ways – to China.
This month, activists from Japan and South Korea announced plans for a new East Asian civil society network to promote renewable energy and oppose nuclear power.
“The more we share information on the dangers on nuclear power and spread technology and wisdom regarding natural energy, the more East Asia will become the center of peace, not conflict; of life, not destruction,” the network’s initial declaration reads, referring to frequent clashes in the region on the governmental level.

Organizers are recruiting 311 prominent pop-culture figures, activists, politicians, and scientists to sign the declaration in time for a March 11 launch (they have 200 signatures so far). Eventually, they hope to coordinate actions, hold joint events, and share information region-wide. ……
In the past 10 months, religious groups, unions, co-ops, and professional associations have joined the South Korean anti-nuclear movement, which had previously been composed mainly of environmental groups. In December, protesters demonstrated in Seoul and other areas after the government announced it had picked sites for two new nuclear plants.

The anti-nuclear movement has grown in Taiwan as well, according to long-time activist Sun-han Hong. Protests in late April drew a record 15,000 participants, and in December President Ma announced the lifetime of three existing nuclear plants would not be extended – a policy reversal for his party…..
Developments have been similarly mixed in Mongolia, which has no nuclear reactors but does have extensive uranium deposits. After news articles last spring revealed negotiations between US, Japanese, and Mongolian officials to dump spent nuclear fuel in Mongolia, the Mongolian Green Party spearheaded protests against the plans by holding press conferences, demonstrating when Vice President Biden visited the country, and delivering over 6,000 signatures to the National Security Council. President Tsakhia Elbegdorj eventually ordered a halt to the negotiations. Uranium exploration increased in 2011, however, according to domestic news reports.

And then there’s China, the country with the most ambitious plans to expand both nuclear and alternative forms of energy.

After Fukushima there were some media reports but no real public debate. Nuclear power is not on the agenda of civil society [nationally],” said Tao Fu, a civil-society movement researcher and editor of the journal China Development Brief.

Shuling Cheng, a project officer at the environmental organization Blue Dalian in eastern China, said her group has begun to focus on the issue but faces difficulty. “There’s almost no information, human resources, or money. The government is very sensitive about the issue,” she says.

So far, activists across the region haven’t been able to make their biggest case effectively.

“For now, Asian governments can continue to ignore calls by anti-nuclear power activists because their size remains tolerable,” said Christopher Len, a research fellow at Stockholm-based Institute for Security and Development Policy. “Asian governments will only reduce their reliance on nuclear power if they can be convinced there are viable alternative energy sources that can be implemented at the industrial level and within reasonable costs.” http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2012/0127/Anti-nuclear-movement-growing-in-Asia

Florida’s nuclear cost fiasco is a wake up call to Iowa

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:59:06 +0000

Nuclear Cancellation In Florida Is Warning To Iowa Legislators Florida utility seeks to cancel nuclear construction plans while leaving customers on the hook for hundreds of millions as Iowa legislators consider allowing a similar
swindle IOWA --(ENEWSPF)–January 27, 2012. News that Florida utility Progress Energy plans to cancel the construction contract for its proposed nuclear reactors in Levy County — and will leave customers with a bill of hundreds of millions of dollars — should convince Iowa
legislators to finally abandon a proposal by MidAmerican Energy that could bilk consumers across Iowa, said Friends of the Earth.

“Allowing advance rate increases for nuclear reactors has turned into
a nightmare for Florida consumers, and Iowa legislators need to heed
this warning,” said Mike Carberry, nuclear campaigner in Iowa for
Friends of the Earth. “If we can’t learn the lessons of history then
we are doomed to repeat them.”

In 2006, the Florida legislature passed a bill that allowed
investor-owned utilities to charge ratepayers for construction costs
for new nuclear reactors before they were built and producing
electricity. So far, Progress Energy has spent $1.1 billion on
planning and development for the Levy nuclear project. Progress’
ratepayers had already footed $545 million of this bill through the
end of 2011 and they will be forced to pay the remaining $555 million,
despite the increasing possibility the reactors will never be
constructed.

The Iowa Legislature is currently considering similar legislation (HF
561) that would allow MidAmerican Energy to force Iowa consumers to
foot the bill in advance for nuclear reactors, and let MidAmerican
keep the money regardless of whether they are ever constructed. A
recent analysis of an amended version of the House bill by the Iowa
Utilities Board staff confirmed that this bill fails to protect
consumers and actually creates incentives for utilities to behave in a
manner contrary to the public interest.

“Iowa senators must stand up for the public and reject MidAmerican’s
attempt to fleece consumers,” said Carberry.

The Iowa Senate Commerce Committee will again take up HF 561 on
Tuesday, January 31. Friends of the Earth is asking the committee to
protect the consumers of Iowa by rejecting the bill.
http://www.enewspf.com/latest-news/science-a-environmental/30450-nuclear-cancellation-in-florida-is-warning-to-iowa-legislators.html

12 $billion new Hanford nuclear waste facility has safety flaws

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:55:23 +0000

Safety at Wash. Nuclear-Waste Site Scrutinized, SciTech Today, By Peter Eisler January 27, A new plant meant to stabilize and contain 56 million gallons of radioactive waste is coming under fire by the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. A chief concern is that abrasive and corrosive particles in the waste could erode pipes and mixing vessels used to pretreat the material for vitrification, ultimately causing leaks. A federal oversight panel is raising new concerns to the Department of Energy about potentially serious flaws in the design of a first-of-its-kind, $12 billion waste treatment plant that is being built for the nation’s largest radioactive cleanup.
The Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board wants more tests and
analyses to validate the designs for key components of the plant,
which is meant to stabilize and contain 56 million gallons of
radioactive waste at the Hanford Site, a former nuclear weapons
production complex in Washington state. The concern is that the
components could fail, crippling the plant long before its 30-year
mission is done.
The warning adds hurdles to the government’s 20-year effort to clean
up the waste, which threatens to pollute the Columbia River, a major
water supply in the Pacific Northwest.

The board’s recommendations, outlined in a Jan. 20 letter to Energy
officials, echo those of senior project scientists who warned about
problems with the plant’s design in a USA TODAY report last week.
Lawmakers vowed to examine the design issues, as well as cost overruns
and schedule delays the newspaper documented.

“I have serious ongoing concerns about the safety culture the
technology, and the schedule the (Energy) Department is pursuing at
Hanford, in addition to spiraling costs,” said Rep. Rodney
Frelinghuysen, R-N.J., who chairs the House subcommittee that controls
Energy spending. “The Hanford cleanup will be explored during our
upcoming budget hearings.”….
The waste at Hanford, stored in 177 deteriorating underground tanks,
was left by 45 years of plutonium production at the site, where
scientists helped build the nation’s first atomic bombs during World
War II. The treatment plant will blend the waste into a molten glass
– a process called vitrification — and inject it in steel canisters
to solidify. Once running, the plant should take about 30 years to
finish its work, producing tens of thousands of glass-filled
canisters.

The treatment plant is more than half-built; start-up has been pushed
back from 2011 to 2019…..
http://www.sci-tech-today.com/news/Nuclear-Waste-Site-Scrutinized/story.xhtml?story_id=123006WC6OSO

Japan’s nuclear plant stress tests – “flimsy” and unreliable

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:51:32 +0000

“I don’t view their evaluation as something that is trustworthy or carries any weight,” ”The last time the IAEA inspectors came to Japan, they simply inspected sites and documents and left saying everything was fine. They submitted a flimsy report, and I fear the same will be the case this time.”

Experts cast doubt on Japan nuclear plant tests, Justin McCurry in Tokyo, guardian.co.uk, 27 January 2012 Japanese government ordered tests on all reactors after Fukushima meltdown, but advisers say they do not prove a plant is safe Advisers to Japan‘s nuclear safety agency have said power plant stress tests do not prove that a nuclear plant is safe, as the country faces the prospect of a summer without a single nuclear reactor in operation.

Last year, the Japanese government ordered the nuclear authorities to conduct tests on all Japan’s reactors after the 11 March meltdown at Fukushima Daiichi raised questions about the safety of nuclear power, particularly in a country prone to earthquakes and tsunami.

Earlier this week, a team of experts from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) began a review of the safety tests but said it was up to the Japanese government whether or not to approve the restart of idle reactors.

Currently only three of Japan’s 54 reactors – just over 6% of its total nuclear capacity – are in operation after the Fukushima accident forced the closure of active reactors for safety checks. The latest closure came on Friday when a reactor at a plant near the Japan Sea was shut down for inspection…….

Masashi Goto, a former nuclear power plant designer, said the stress tests at Ohi and elsewhere were next to useless.

“It is a misunderstanding to believe these tests prove that a nuclear plant is safe,” he said. “The reality is that the inspectors only look at the reactors’ design and then factor in possible problems, such as earthquakes and tsunami of a certain size.

“They do not take into account the various malfunctions that can result in a disaster, including human error and equipment failure.”

Hiromitsu Ino, an emeritus professor at Tokyo University and a fellow member of the nuclear safety agency advisory panel, said the tests were flawed because they had been introduced before the full facts of the Fukushima disaster were known.

“The stress tests are being presented as a comprehensive survey of the safety of Japan’s nuclear power plants, but the reality is very different,” Ino said. “They only look at potential problems in isolation, and the process of testing is exactly the same as it was before the March earthquake.”

No one had presented definitive evidence that the fuel meltdowns in three of Fukushima Daiichi’s six reactors were caused by the magnitude nine earthquake that struck north-east Japan or the 14-metre tsunami that followed it.

Goto and Ino said it would be impossible to appraise the causes and consequences of the Fukushima disaster unless the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power, released all the relevant data that could then be used to perform a simulation.

Ino said he had little confidence in the IAEA team, which is due to present its latest report at the end of the month.

“I don’t view their evaluation as something that is trustworthy or carries any weight,” he said. “The last time the IAEA inspectors came to Japan, they simply inspected sites and documents and left saying everything was fine. They submitted a flimsy report, and I fear the same will be the case this time.”

Japan has already abandoned plans to generate more than half its electricity supply through nuclear energy by 2030, but the prime minister, Yoshihiko Noda, has said it needs to retain some nuclear plants until alternative sources of energy are developed. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/27/experts-japan-nuclear-plant-tests?n

Bombing Iran – not the smartest way to go

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:47:47 +0000

Bomb Iran? Yes we can: a US plan that couldn’t possibly go wrong, SMH, Bill Keller January 28, 2012 ”…..An attack on Iran is almost certain to unify the Iranian people around the mullahs and provoke the supreme leader to redouble Iran’s nuclear pursuits, only deeper underground this time, and without international inspectors around.
At the Pentagon, you sometimes hear it put this way: Bombing Iran is the best way to guarantee exactly what America is trying to prevent.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/bomb-iran-yes-we-can-a-us-plan-that-couldnt-possibly-go-wrong-20120127-1qlqx.html#ixzz1kmwgt4eV

China remains inscrutable on nuclear safety

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:46:00 +0000

China denies nuclear accident Telegraph, 27 Jan 12, China has moved swiftly to deny it has become the latest nation to experience a nuclear accident, after claims that it was forced to shut down its newest nuclear reactor last year. By David Eimer in Beijing 27 Jan 2012 A report from Japan’s Atomic Energy Agency said the China Experimental Fast Reactor (CEFR) stopped generating electricity in October following an accident. With Japan already reeling from the meltdown at the Fukushima nuclear plant in March last year, the incident sparked alarm there and in South Korea over the prospect of radiation leaking from the CEFR.

Those fears were intensified by Beijing’s failure to report the accident or release details of what happened, according to a Tokyo newspaper which cited the Japanese Atomic Energy Agency’s investigation.
The same report highlighted worrying safety lapses at the China Institute of Atomic Energy (CIAE) outside Beijing, which houses the CEFR. Safety standards were said to be “very low”, with a lack of devices to measure potential radiation leaks, while the main control room of the reactor was equipped with beds which workers rested on when they were on duty.
Wan Gang, the director of the CIAE, denied there had been an accident or any cover-up…..
China has never experienced a major nuclear accident, although there
have been small leaks of radiation from some of its nuclear power
stations. The last occurred in May 2010 in Shenzhen in southern
China’s Guangdong Province at the Daya Bay plant, the oldest of
China’s 13 operational nuclear reactors. Managers at the plant failed
to inform the public of the leak until three weeks later.
Subsequently, Beijing denied that radiation had escaped but it was
confirmed by a Hong Kong power company with a share in Daya Bay…..
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/9044537/China-denies-nuclear-accident.html

UK’s Dounreay nuclear site still radioactive

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:41:36 +0000

Contamination found at nuclear site, Google News, (UKPA) 27 Jan 12, Traces of radioactive contamination have been found on the shoes of workers demolishing a former nuclear power station. It was detected on around a dozen people on Thursday as they prepared to leave a building which they were preparing for demolition.
Dounreay Site Restoration Limited (DSRL), which is overseeing the decommissioning of the site in Caithness, has launched an investigation.
It said that the building is in a “controlled” area, where contamination is possible, and controls are in place to manage it.

Dounreay’s nuclear reactor was shut down in 1994 and work to decommission the site has been under way since then as part of a £2.6 billion project. It was the only plant in Britain to use liquid metal instead of gas or water in the cooling circuits.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5gVcbsn-jVhJMOoqqQOYXqz-NAfaA?docId=N0166121327661398947A

Japan can manage summer electricity without nuclear power

Christina MacPherson — Sat, 28 Jan 2012 02:37:47 +0000

Japan says can avoid summer power cuts even if nuclear By Kentaro Hamada TOKYO Jan 27, 2012 (Reuters) - Japan will be able to avoid power cuts this summer even if the nation’s last few nuclear reactors cease operating due to public safety fears after the Fukushima crisis, the government said on Friday….

“We would have to call for conservation of electricity, but there’s an excellent chance (the power lost if all nuclear plants are shut this summer) can be overcome without placing curbs on electricity consumption,” he added.