nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

You are being lied to about pirates

Johann Hari: You are being lied to about pirates

Some are clearly just gangsters. But others are trying to stop illegal dumping and trawling

THE INDEPENDENT Johann Hari, Monday, 5 January 2009

“………………………………..In 1991, the government of Somalia collapsed. Its nine million people have been teetering on starvation ever since – and the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country’s food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas.

Yes: nuclear waste. As soon as the government was gone, mysterious European ships started appearing off the coast of Somalia, dumping vast barrels into the ocean. The coastal population began to sicken. At first they suffered strange rashes, nausea and malformed babies. Then, after the 2005 tsunami, hundreds of the dumped and leaking barrels washed up on shore. People began to suffer from radiation sickness, and more than 300 died.

Ahmedou Ould-Abdallah, the UN envoy to Somalia, tells me: “Somebody is dumping nuclear material here. There is also lead, and heavy metals such as cadmium and mercury – you name it.” Much of it can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to “dispose” of cheaply. When I asked Mr Ould-Abdallah what European governments were doing about it, he said with a sigh: “Nothing. There has been no clean-up, no compensation, and no prevention.”

At the same time, other European ships have been looting Somalia’s seas of their greatest resource: seafood. We have destroyed our own fish stocks by overexploitation – and now we have moved on to theirs. More than $300m-worth of tuna, shrimp, and lobster are being stolen every year by illegal trawlers……………………………”.

Johann Hari: You are being lied to about pirates – Johann Hari, Commentators – The Independent

January 6, 2009 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

Bradwell nuclear leak trial begins (From Maldon and Burnham Standard)

Bradwell nuclear leak trial begins

(From Maldon and Burnham Standard)5th January 2009

BOSSES at Bradwell nuclear power station have gone on trial over the disposal of radioactive waste at the site.

Magnox Electric Ltd, formerly Nuclear Electric Ltd, denied a total of 11 charges brought by the Environmental Agency when the firm’s representatives appeared at Chelmsford Crown Court on Monday January 5.

The charges concern the disposal of radioactive waste otherwise than in accordance with authorisation granted by the Environmental Agency.

The court heard the charges span a time period between March 1990 and February 2004.

Bradwell nuclear leak trial begins (From Maldon and Burnham Standard)

January 6, 2009 Posted by | safety | Leave a comment

No New Coal or Nuclear Plants!

No New Coal or Nuclear Plants!
gather.com  by Ethan G.January 05, 2009  “……………………Advocates for clean coal and nuclear always say that we need to invest in those technologies, however risky, because it’s the American way to solve large-scale technological challenges. Yet somehow they never seem to advocate this vision for the far cleaner and more certain alternatives of wind and solar power.

Instead, solar and wind advocates are laughed off as foggy headed idealists and those alternative energies are dismissed as too far from ready.  What these skeptics—often lobbyists for the coal, oil, and nuclear industries—fail to account for is the interaction between various kinds of alternative energy and systems that deliver them.  If built right, the whole will greatly enhance the sum of the parts.

In fact solar and wind, with appropriate stimulus to encourage their growth, are ready to go a great way toward solving our energy problems.  To maximize their potential will take major new investment in the electrical grid, both to move alternative energy to where it’s most needed, and to create a “smart” grid that can deliver the energy at the best times.
Solar and wind are often criticized as having an intermittency problem—they can’t be counted on all the time and we don’t have good storage systems.  Yet solar thermal systems don’t have this problem: they store the energy they generate.

True wind and the more familiar photovoltaic solar do have an intermittency problem; yet for these sources the “smart” grid will allow us to use energy far more efficiently.  Computer systems will charge more when energy is less available, allowing people to do, say, laundry and dishes, when excess energy is available.

The development of electric cars promises even more out of alternative energy. People will plug in their cars at night, and the “smart” grid will deliver energy as available.  The automobiles will act as a kind of widespread storage system.  In cases where electrical energy is not available, these cars would then use old-fashioned gasoline.  Still, overall, our dependence on foreign oil would be greatly reduced.

No New Coal or Nuclear Plants! | Gather

January 6, 2009 Posted by | ENERGY | Leave a comment

The Promise of Wind : Embracing America’s Fastest-Growing Form of Renewable Energy (By Joe Provey)

The Promise of WindEmbracing America’s Fastest-Growing Form of Renewable Energy Emagazine.com By Joe Provey 6 Jan 09 “……………………..

Big Possibilities

Power production aside, wind is one of the most environmentally friendly energy sources. Estimates by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) show that wind currently generates as much electricity as nearly 30 million tons of coal or 90 million barrels of oil. In 2008, wind displaced about 34 million tons of carbon dioxide, equivalent to taking 5.8 million vehicles off the road. In 20 years, if we reach the industry goal of supplying 20% of our national energy from wind, it will be the equivalent of taking 140 million vehicles off the road. Unlike oil, wind will not pollute our waterways or contaminate our national wildlife refuges. Unlike coal, it doesn’t release mercury into the air or leave permanent, ugly scars across the landscape. And unlike nuclear, there is no spent fuel to bury or protect from terrorist threats.

In addition to the obvious environmental benefits, there are other compelling arguments for promoting wind power. First, the resource is huge. “There’s something like 600 gigawatts of wind that can be developed in the U.S.,” says Jim Walker of Enxco, a company that develops wind farms in North America. That’s about 60% of our current electricity consumption, according to the Energy Information Administration.

And the cost is already competitive with gas. Says Walker, “Wind energy can be developed for under 10 cents per kilowatt hour, about the same as gas.” This assumes the continuation of production tax credits that contribute about two cents for each kilowatt-hour produced.

Perhaps most impressive is that wind is one of the few energy sources that can be brought online quickly. Says Walker, “You can build a 400-million-dollar, 200-MW wind plant in nine months. And you know exactly what it’s going to cost.” You can’t say that for a nuclear plant or even one of the newer coal plants that are designed to capture pollutants.

The build-out of wind has some important economic fringe benefits, too, including a lot of new jobs.

The Promise of Wind : Embracing America’s Fastest-Growing Form of Renewable Energy (By Joe Provey)

January 6, 2009 Posted by | ENERGY | Leave a comment

Chris Goodall on the rising costs of UK nuclear energy | Environment | guardian.co.uk

The rising costs of UK nuclear energyThe fall in the pound’s value undermines any financial case for nuclear energy, writes Chris Goodall from Carbon Commentary, part of the Guardian Environment Network 6 Jan 09
“……………………………Since the government’s paper, nuclear power has suffered two huge blows. First, the pound has declined in value against the euro. This makes the core components of a nuclear power station more expensive as they are priced in the European currency. Second, the construction of the new nuclear power station in Finland has descended almost into farce as costs have ballooned and progress has slowed. The Finnish power station is much the more advanced of the two new nuclear plants currently under construction in Europe. If Finland is any guide, nuclear power is far more expensive than anybody expected……………………………………….

The Finnish debacle
The French nuclear specialist Areva signed a fixed price contract with the Finnish consortium TVO. The value was about €3bn, in addition to the costs that TVO incurred readying the site for construction work and taking the plans through the Finnish approval processes. Areva has since taken several financial provisions in its accounts, reflecting the problems it has faced in completing the work to its initial budget. A provision is a way of recognising that a firm is going to make a future loss on a contract. So, for example, banks make provisions when it is apparent that a loan to a near-bankrupt company is unlikely ever to be repaid.

Areva is largely owned by the French state, although some of its shares are held by investment institutions and others. In the Anglo-Saxon world, having private shareholders would oblige the company to state the absolute size of these provisions. In France it is different and Areva has consistently refused to state their actual size. But the French press recently offered the opinion that total provisions may now be €1.5bn, suggesting that Areva thinks that the total cost of fulfilling the contract is already €4.5bn, a rise of 50% on the initial price.

This will not be the end of the matter. Areva has recently indicated that the final completion date of the plant will be sometime in 2012, making the station over three years late. Any further construction problems will raise the total eventual cost yet further……………………………..The value of the euro
If the Finnish construction costs were replicated in the UK, and the euro/pound exchange rate had remained at around £1/€1.50, the cost of the project would imply a cost to generate electricity of over £50 per megawatt hour. This is more than the current wholesale price in the UK (although the wholesale price has been much higher than this figure for most of the last 12 months).

Chris Goodall on the rising costs of UK nuclear energy | Environment | guardian.co.uk

January 6, 2009 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment