nuclear-news

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

Oil Giants Say No to Renewable Energy

Oil Giants Say No to Renewable Energy
AllGov May 12, 2009

……………………………….According to Michael Eckhart, president of the American Council on Renewable Energy, an industry trade group, the top five oil companies have spent around $5 billion over the last 15 years to develop sources of renewable energy—a mere 10% of the roughly $50 billion funneled into the clean-energy sector by venture capital funds and corporate investors during this period. “Big Oil does not consider renewable energy to be a mainstream business,” Eckhart told the New York Times. “It’s a side business for them.”

It’s become even less than that for some companies. Royal Dutch Shell has decided to freeze its research and investments in wind, solar and hydrogen power, and focus its alternative energy efforts on biofuels. It also has sold off much of its solar business and pulled out of a project last year to build the largest offshore wind farm, near London.

BP, a company that has spent nine years saying it was moving “beyond petroleum,” has been getting back to petroleum since 2007, paring back its renewable program.

“In my view, nothing has really changed,” Rex W. Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobil, said after the election of President Obama. “We don’t oppose alternative energy sources and the development of those. But to hang the future of the country’s energy on those alternatives alone belies reality of their size and scale.”

http://www.allgov.com/ViewNews/Oil_Giants_Say_No_to_Renewable_Energy_90512

May 14, 2009 Posted by | 2 WORLD, ENERGY | | Leave a comment

Foreign Policy: Electing the Nuclear Pope

Foreign Policy: Electing the Nuclear Pope

NPR 14 May 09by Charles D. Ferguson

………………………..the ElBaradei legacy weighs heavily. He shared the Nobel Peace Prize with the IAEA in 2005, vindicating the director-general’s belief that he is on a mission to prevent war. Although some countries welcomed ElBaradei’s activist approach — he passionately disputed the Bush administration’s claims about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, for example — others would surely prefer someone less controversial. That difference of opinion often falls along economic lines, with richer countries pushing for a technocrat and the developing world advocating a peacemaker…………………. Whoever finally gets the nod will have to continue ElBaradei’s work of building the agency up from a traditionally underfunded and understaffed one to an international powerhouse of legitimacy and technical capability.

May 13, 2009 Posted by | 2 WORLD, weapons and war | , | Leave a comment

Nuclear is not the answer

Nuclear is not the answer
By Rina Jimenez-David
Philippine Daily Inquirer
First Posted 00:37:00 05/13/2009
“………………………………….To forestall the reopening of the BNPP, Greenpeace has brought in Yves Marignac, an international consultant on nuclear and energy issues, who is executive director of WISE-Paris, an organization dedicated to “promoting independent information and well-informed decision-making” regarding the use of nuclear energy for power generation………………

…………….A mathematician by training, Marignac says he has been going around the world talking about the French “experience” with nuclear energy because French President Nicholas Sarkozy “has been aggressively promoting the French nuclear industry,” convincing governments in the developing world to invest in nuclear power with the help of French-built machinery and expertise……………………………

France is extraordinarily committed to nuclear power generation, with 50 reactors around the country, and some still under construction. But a report on the French nuclear industry, published by Global Chance, an association that includes among its members several of France’s independent nuclear experts, shows that “France’s nuclear promises are a dangerous illusion … locked into nuclear power in a way that presents an obstacle to the development of renewable energy and energy efficiency measures.”

As Marignac puts it, the French nuclear power industry “hasn’t delivered even against its own set targets.”………….

………..Marignac has many tables and charts to show how power generated by nuclear plants provides only a small percentile of the total energy required by the French people, mainly because so much of this demand is created by reliance on gasoline……………………………

BUT the main drawback to an energy program dependent on nuclear power, says Marignac, is that “it approaches the problem from the wrong end.”

In his view, any long-term solution to cut dependence on fossil fuels must be addressed from the “demand side,” that is, reducing dependence on electricity and fuel by cutting down electricity use. Not only is nuclear power dangerous, expensive and wrought with untold health and security issues, it ultimately will not bring an end to the threat of climate change. As France has shown, even with 50 nuclear power plants, the French remain as dependent on fossil fuels as ever.

Nuclear is not the answer – INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos

May 13, 2009 Posted by | France, spinbuster | , , , | Leave a comment

Britain’s farmers still restricted by Chernobyl nuclear fallout

Britain’s farmers still restricted by Chernobyl nuclear fallout The Guardian by Terry Macalister and Helen Carter 12 may 09 Environmentalists say controls on 369 farms highlight danger of plans to build nuclear plants around UK Nearly 370 farms in Britain are still restricted in the way they use land and rear sheep because of radioactive fallout from the Chernobyl nuclear power station accident 23 years ago, the government has admitted……………………………..

Critics of the nuclear industry expressed alarm at the latest numbers, which they believed would increase public unease about the highly toxic and long-term impact of radioactivity.

David Lowry, a member of Nuclear Waste Advisory Associates, said the figures demonstrated the “unforgiving hazards” of radioactivity dispersed into the environment, whether from Chernobyl in Ukraine, thousands of miles away and 23 years ago, or over decades from the Faslane nuclear submarine base in Scotland, as revealed by the Guardian last month…………………………

…………Revelations about the continuing impact of the Chernobyl accident come weeks after three different sites were bought in auction by EDF and other power companies for building new atomic plants in Britain.

Britain’s farmers still restricted by Chernobyl nuclear fallout | Environment | guardian.co.uk

May 13, 2009 Posted by | environment, UK | , , , | Leave a comment

Tritium leaks at Oyster Creek not easily contained

Tritium leaks at Oyster Creek not easily contained APP.com By PETER HIBBARD • May 12, 2009The recent reports of tritium being found in monitoring wells at the Oyster Creek nuclear plant in Lacey are deeply disturbing. Once a contaminant gets into the aquifer, it is nearly impossible to remove it. Water in the aquifer moves slowly, but it moves……….

…………..Oyster Creek is the oldest nuclear plant of its type in the nation. It has one of the highest leak rates in the country. Project Tooth Fairy measured Strontium 90 in children by examining baby teeth, and estimated the leakage has been going on for many years. Growing teeth can be checked for age of exposure, like rings on a tree.

Tritium leaks at Oyster Creek not easily contained | APP.com | Asbury Park Press

May 13, 2009 Posted by | environment, USA | , , , | Leave a comment

Seismic activity makes nuclear power unsafe, says geologist

Seismic activity makes nuclear power unsafe, says geologistP  ALOMA MIGONE – Herald-Tribune staff  13 May 09 – “……………………

The most recent earthquake occurred near the proposed nuclear plant site in Peace River on Feb. 19 with a magnitude of 3.2.

There was another earthquake recorded near Fort St. John in the ’80s and another near Snipe Lake, which is east of Valleyview, in the ’70s.

“This would be the most foolish place in Alberta to even think of putting a nuclear plant,” he said.

The concern is that over the course of many small earthquakes, a nuclear power plant would suffer “fractures,” weakening the structure and making it unsafe.

‘ADDED DANGER’

“The facilities of the nuclear plant, the concrete, the piping, over time they corrode, they get weaker and this is simply an added danger to the safety of the plant.”

Adele Boucher Rymhs from Citizens Against Nuclear Development said agreeing to a nuclear plan now would pass the problem to residents’ kids and grandchildren.

“Thirty years, 40 years from now, they are the ones who will suffer from problems if they occur.”

Seismic activity makes nuclear power unsafe, says geologist – Grande Prairie Daily Herald Tribune – Alberta, CA

May 13, 2009 Posted by | Canada, safety | , , | Leave a comment

Put waste dump in advocate’s back yard

Put waste dump in advocate’s back yard Las Vegas Sun  Archie Weitman, North Las Vegas Mon, May 11, 2009. Now that it looks like the Yucca Mountain project is not going to happen, have the scientists or whatever group is responsible for finding a new and suitable location for nuclear waste thought about checking into a Texas locale?
After all, George W. Bush was all in favor of having a dump somewhere. What better place than his back yard. He could strut around in a hazmat suit and a hard hat, saying “nuc-u-lar” to his heart’s content.

Put waste dump in advocate’s back yard – Las Vegas Sun

May 12, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Quick answer unlikely for nuclear hot potato

Quick answer unlikely for nuclear hot potato TriCity Herald  by Rick Larson, 11 May 09  A piece of President Obama’s budget that hasn’t drawn as much attention as other high-profile programs would finally bury the controversial Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project in Nevada.Scrapping Yucca Mountain will leave a $13.5 billion hole in the ground, which is how much the Department of Energy has spent on the project since 1983, and it leaves unanswered the question of what to do with waste from nuclear power plants. It’s a question the nation has struggled with for some 30 years………………………………

Scrapping Yucca Mountain isn’t as simple, however, as just walking away from a massive hole in the ground. The problem of what to do with the 55,000 tons of used nuclear fuel sitting in 39 states in “temporary” storage at nuclear power plants — including the Energy Northwest plant at Hanford — remains.

And lawmakers from states with nuclear plants are getting angry, threatening to stop or reduce their payments to the federal government for nuclear waste management until a solution for nuclear waste emerges. The New York Times reported in April that at least four states — Maine, South Carolina, Michigan and Minnesota — were considering measures.

All of this comes as nuclear power plants are being promoted as potential sources of clean and reliable base power……………………

Quick answer unlikely for nuclear hot potato – Ask the Editors | Tri-City Herald : Mid-Columbia news

May 12, 2009 Posted by | politics, USA | , , , , | Leave a comment

Where Warmth is A Threat

The Threat of Climate Change The Yale Globalist Catherine Hart 11 May 09

Shifting weather patterns have produced deep fears as well as serious immediate consequences for the Inuit.

Peter Kulchyski, professor of Aboriginal Studies at the University of Manitoba, worries that the eventual environmental, economic, and cultural costs of climate change in Canada’s arctic will outweigh any gains the region can make through development……………………………………………Increased access to uranium deposits also threatens hunting. The Inuit living in Baker Lake, one of the few communities in inland Nunavut, recently allowed Aurora Energy Resources Inc., a fast-growing local mining company, to acquire the rights to explore the surrounding land for uranium. With the mines would come jobs and revenue for the province. But the mines could poison wildlife and divert caribou herd migration patterns. Such a development would devastate hunting and likely leave the land barren for years.

The Yale Globalist – Where Warmth is A Threat

May 12, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

political risks for uranium mining

Q+A-Eurasia Group on political risks for global mining

REUTERS 11 by Andrew Marshall May 0 9  “……………………………Q – What are the implications of the economic downturn on the expansion of nuclear energy and uranium mining projects?

A – Generally bad news across the board. The absence of new loan guarantees for new reactors in the UK and the U.S. will undermine the growth of the nuclear power sector. Emerging market nuclear programs… will also face funding pressures…………….

May 12, 2009 Posted by | 2 WORLD, business and costs | , , , , | Leave a comment

UNPO – Aboriginals of Australia: Climate Change Threat

Aboriginals of Australia: Climate Change Threat  Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation (UNPO) 11 May 2009 Climate change will further marginalise Australia’s Aboriginal communities, forcing them out of their traditional lands, destroying their culture and significantly affecting their access to water resources, indigenous rights advocates warn.

from IPS NewsClimate change will further marginalise Australia’s Aboriginal communities, forcing them out of their traditional lands, destroying their culture and significantly affecting their access to water resources, indigenous rights advocates warn.

“As coastal and island communities confront rising sea levels, and inland areas become hotter and drier, indigenous people are at risk of further economic marginalisation, as well as potential dislocation from and exploitation of their traditional lands, waters and natural resources,” said Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Social Justice Commissioner Tom Calma.

Indigenous people have been living in close affinity with nature for thousands of years, preserving the environment and protecting the biodiversity. “Dispossession and a loss of access to traditional lands, waters, and natural resources may be described as cultural genocide; a loss of ancestral, spiritual, totemic and language connections to lands and associated areas,” said the Human Rights Commission’s 2008 Social Justice and Native Title reports launched this week [May 2009]……………………….“The cruel irony is that indigenous people have the smallest ecological footprint but are being asked to carry the heaviest burden of climate change,” Commissioner Calma added. …………..Indigenous rights to water are not adequately recognised by Australian law and policy.

UNPO – Aboriginals of Australia: Climate Change Threat

May 12, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Safety threat to planned nuclear power stations

Safety threat to planned nuclear power stations Devastating blow as leaked letter shows regulator could pull plug on proposed UK reactors because of ‘design errors’

THE INDEPENDENT By Geoffrey Lean, 10 May 09

Britain’s plans to build a new generation of nuclear power stations have been thrown into jeopardy by startling official safety fears. The nuclear regulatory body in Finland, where the first of the reactors is being built, has taken the extraordinary step of threatening to halt its construction because it has not been satisfied that key safety systems will work.

STUK, the Finnish government’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, says that “evident errors” have not been corrected more than a year after it raised its concerns and condemns the “lack of professional knowledge” of people working for the firm responsible for its design and construction.

This is an unexpected, and potentially devastating, blow because one of the main selling points of the new European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) has been that its safety systems will work far better than those in current reactors. It is particularly important that they do because, as The Independent on Sunday reported in February, they will produce many times as much radiation that could be rapidly released in the event of an accident…………………………….

Safety threat to planned nuclear power stations – Green Living, Environment – The Independent

May 11, 2009 Posted by | safety, UK | , , , | Leave a comment

Nuclear waste in N.B. unacceptable

Nuclear waste in N.B. unacceptable

Times and Transcript  Friday May 8th, 2009 Premier Shawn Graham, Energy Minister Jack Keir and every other politician of whatever stripe in New Brunswick need to be told and to clearly understand that New Brunswickers do not want and will not accept a national nuclear waste dump in this province no matter how deep underground, how many jobs it creates or how many glib assurances are given about its safety………………

……..There is no reason why the province should “take one for Canada” on this issue. The province is simply an unsuitable location. It is geographically small, well populated and though not without environmental issues, still relatively environmentally healthy. To leave the door open to nuclear waste flies in the face of the premier’s own “green” policies and initiatives.

Bureaucratic talk of “process”is misleading. It can be the best process in the world, but it will make no difference if the outcome is unacceptable. This is a time-honoured way to try to keep people quiet or co-opt them and move things along until it is too late for the public to stop a project. There is no reason for New Brunswick to play along.

These efforts also highlight the increasingly clear fact that nuclear power (and our premier is working hard towards a second reactor even though the first continues to be costly, its refit is well behind schedule and it will cause power rates to rise again) is not a cost effective energy answer. The underground waste dump is expected to cost from $16-24 billion just to build. That massive amount must be included in any calculation on the costs of nuclear power. And expect the cost to rise substantially by the time any decision is made.

New Brunswickers have correctly and overwhelmingly rejected uranium mines, even if the government hasn’t. They will reject a national nuclear waste dump too.

timestranscript.com – Nuclear waste in N.B. unacceptable – Breaking News, New Brunswick, Canada

May 11, 2009 Posted by | Canada, wastes | , , , | Leave a comment

‘Useless’ Trident is an obscene waste of money

“………………………..In the bloated, overfunded world of nuclear “defence” (now there’s an oxymoron if every I heard one) plans to replace the Trident nuclear-armed submarine fleet continue apace, as if nothing has happened.The current estimate for replacing Trident starts at about £20 billion (the government figure) and rises to £75bn (the figure from groups such as Greenpeace). And yes, I did say “billion” with a “B”, not million.The government is absolutely committed to replacing Trident. Supposing we were all starving in the gutter, the government would still press ahead…………………….

The fact of the matter is this. Trident is useless, in the sense that it can never be used. If it was used, the retaliation would be so massive that it is unlikely there would be any life left on the planet afterwards.

The world has enough nuclear weapons to kill every person on the planet. I guess they want to allow for the possibility of resurrection, because the level of overkill is such that we have enough nuclear weapons to kill every person on the planet not just once, but several times over……………………in the current financial climate, the idea of spending such enormous sums of taxpayers’ money on replacing Trident is simply obscene.

‘Useless’ Trident is an obscene waste of money – The Inverness Courier

May 9, 2009 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | , , | Leave a comment

Echoes of Amchitka

40 Years After America’s Biggest Nuclear Blast, the Damage Continues Echoes of Amchitka counterpunch 10 May 09 By JEFFREY ST. CLAIRAmchitka Island sits at the midway point on the great arc of Alaska’s Aleutian Islands, less than 900 miles across the Bering Sea from the coast of Russia…………………………ecological wonders were swept aside in the early ’60s when the Pentagon and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) went on the lookout for a new place to blow up H-bombs. Thirty years ago, Amchitka was the site of three large underground nuclear tests, including the most powerful nuclear explosion ever detonated by the United States.

The aftershocks of those blasts are still being felt. Despite claims by the AEC and the Pentagon that the test sites would safely contain the radiation released by the blasts for thousands of years, independent research by Greenpeace and newly released documents from the Department of Energy (DOE) show that the Amchitka tests began to leak almost immediately. Highly radioactive elements and gasses, such as tritium, americium-241 and plutonium, poured out of the collapsed test shafts, leached into the groundwater and worked their way into ponds, creeks and the Bering Sea.

At the same time, thousands of Amchitka laborers and Aleuts living on nearby islands were put in harm’s way. Dozens have died of radiation-linked cancers. The response of the federal government to these disturbing findings has been almost as troublesome as the circumstances surrounding the tests themselves: a consistent pattern of indifference, denial and cover-up continues even today.

Jeffrey St. Clair: Echoes of Amchitka

May 9, 2009 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment