THE GAMES PEOPLE PLAY- Arnie Gundersen and a secret recording of the NRC (Audio)

Arnie met with the NRC this week concerning  his analysis of what went wrong and how the problems were foreseeable.  In this podcast, Arnie discusses how the NRC and Southern California Edison deliberately withheld information to make his technical analysis more difficult to accomplish.  

Fairewinds taped the meeting……..

Click here for podcast:

January 23, 2013 Posted by arclight2011 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

UK enough radioactive waste to fill 27 Olympic-sized swimming pools. -Meeting in Bristol

 bristol | the environment | event notice  Monday January 21, 2013 15:52 by SOUTH WEST AGAINST NUCLEAR swanactive at gmail dot com 

“We shouldn’t build any new nuclear reactors if we can’t deal with the radioactive mess that’s already been created.”

In the UK we have enough high and intermediate level radioactive waste to fill 27 Olympic-sized swimming pools.

Bristol SWAN meeting 24th Jan Kebele

The meeting starts at 7.30pm  before meeting   from 6pm drop in/open invite around the wood burning stove! informal loose discussion Probably show relevant film  BRING SOME FOOD TO SHARE 

Meeting 7.30  nuclear train through Bristol,  the situation in Cumbria,  Hinkley  Nuclear Free Local Authority Witch Watch where do we go from here? ALSOwe have been invited to Cumbria wed 30 Jan  to support the demonstrations against a new nuclear dump in Cumbria, please get in touch if you want to go ASAP. 
The more people who write to the Cabinet and ask to make representation with a question or statement the better.

(MORE INFO http://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2013/01/08/make-30th-jan-ditch-the-dump-day/ )
Cumbria County Council who represent the WHOLE of Cumbria and will have right of veto over any decisions made by Allerdale and Copeland.

The Cumbria Cabinet meeting will be in Carlisle at 10am (venue tbc)
Campaigners will be there at 9am to stage a demonstration opposing the plan and urging the Cabinet to respect the wishes of its constituents, councillors and the majority of Parish and Town Councils who have already and repeatedly said NO

PLEASE SIGN PETITION FOR NUCLEAR FREE BRISTOL….check the website

 http://nuclearfreebristol.wordpress.com/

January 23, 2013 Posted by arclight2011 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Uranium: Energy Solution and Risk-On Opportunity “..but only if supply is reliable…”

Cecil Musgrave of InvestorsGuru.com sees nuclear power as a bridge to a renewable energy mix—but only if supply is reliable.

JANUARY 22, 2013 8:45 PM

Wall Street Sector Selector

The Energy Report: Let’s talk about the state of the international market for uranium. Profit margins for producers are still slim. Do you see a possibility that prices will rise this year?

Cecil Musgrave: Uranium prices sold off sharply after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plantaccident in March 2011, and have steadily drifted lower since then, from around $70 per pound ($70/lb) to its current price of around $43/lb. My charts say that uranium may have put in its bottom last November before bouncing over 10% on the back of Japan’s election in December.

Since Fukushima, market sentiment for anything nuclear power related, like uranium, has been risk-off. While time was needed to stress test nuclear plants worldwide, the market’s main concern was how the media, the public and governments around the world would react. But the facts continue to be on the side of nuclear power as a practical solution for a growing world that requires abundant, low-cost and environmentally safe energy.

Despite uranium’s long-term fundamentals, which have never looked better, markets hate short-term uncertainty. I see this as mainly a timing issue. The World Nuclear Association shows there are 435 operable nuclear reactors today, with 65 more under construction, 167 in the planning stages and 317 more proposed as of January 2013.

Markets tend to exaggerate trends, both up and down. After a steep selloff in uranium that lasted almost two years, sentiment seems to be starting to swing positively again. Japan now has a pro-nuclear government; two of Japan’s reactors are back online and the recent elections may accelerate this process. Last February, the U.S. approved the construction of a two-unit nuclear power plant at the Vogtle complex in Georgia—this is the first new nuclear reactor to be built in the U.S. in over three decades.

China will be a key uranium demand driver—16 reactors are operating now, 29 under construction, 51 planned and 120 proposed. Other demand-generating countries include India, Russia, the U.A.E., Ukraine, the U.K., Canada and South Korea.

The supply side is also bullish. Lower prices have put the brakes on several large uranium developments.BHP Billiton Ltd. (BHP:NYSE; BHPLF:OTCPK) deferred the expansion of its Olympic Dam mine in Australia—the world’s largest-known single deposit of uranium. Cameco Corp. (CCO:TSX; CCJ:NYSE)deferred its Kintyre project—also located in Australia. Paladin Energy Ltd. (PDN:TSX; PDN:ASX)deferred an expansion at its Langer Heinrich mine in Namibia. Kazatomprom and Uranium One Inc. (UUU:TSX) decided it would be uneconomic to mine at its Zarechnoye South deposit in Kazakhstan. Many smaller uranium miners are in the same situation.

I doubt that the absence of this previously anticipated supply has been factored into uranium’s current price. Keep in mind that the 2007 uranium price spike to $137/lb was probably due in part to flooding and production delays at Cameco’s Cigar Lake mine in Canada—the world’s largest undeveloped high-grade uranium deposit. Mine commissioning is now expected mid-2013.

Continue reading →

January 23, 2013 Posted by arclight2011 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

French uranium mines in Africa and Europe -A health and safety nightmare for local communities!

“…At all the French uranium mines where it made radiological surveys, the CRIIRAD laboratory discovered situations of environmental contamination and a lack of proper protection of the inhabitants against health risks due to ionizing radiation. 

This is due to the lack of proper regulations, a poor awareness of the radiological hazards associated with uranium and its by products, insufficient monitoring practices, the lack of controls by the local and national administration, etc.

 
When the mines are shut down, the radioactive waste remains, and it seems that the costs for managing this radioactive legacy will have to be largely supported by the society, not the companies.
If such a situation occurs in a so-called “developed country” one should fear what could actually happen in other parts of the world.

The preliminary mission made by CRIIRAD to Niger confirmed this fear. In Gabon, the improvement of the conditions in which tailings are disposed is being paid for by the European Community and not by the mining company.

The former workers and local population do not benefit any more from medical care and they receive no compensation when they become sick, years and decades after the mine shut down….”

Radiological hazards from uranium mining
Bruno Chareyron

CRIIRAD (Commission de Recherche et d’Information Indépendantes sur la Radioactivité), Immeuble CIME, 471 av Victor Hugo, 26 000 Valence, FRANCE, Email : bruno.chareyron@criirad.org

Abstract. At all the French uranium mines where it made radiological surveys, the CRIIRAD laboratory discovered situations of environmental contamination and a lack of proper protection of the inhabitants against health risks due to ionizing radiation. Radiological problems are not only to be addressed during mining or milling operations but also on the longer term after mine closure.

Uranium and its by-products

All natural uranium isotopes (238U, 234U, 235U) are radioactive. The most common isotope, 238U, decays naturally into a succession of 13 other radioactive nuclides. All are metals (thorium 230, radium 226, lead 210, polonium 210, etc) except one, radon 222, which is a radioactive gas.
Uranium and its decay products emit various ionizing radiation such as alpha and beta particles and gamma radiation.

The Earth’s crust has a typical 238U activity of about 40 Becquerels per kilogram (Bq/kg). Since the creation of the Earth, this level of radiation has decreased by two-fold because 238U half-life is very long and equal to the age of the planet earth (4.5 billion years).
This presence of natural uranium in the Earth crust, and therefore in numerous building materials made out of natural minerals, is the main source of exposure of mankind to ionizing radiation.
This is especially due to the diffusion of radon gas from the soil and materials containing uranium- and its accumulation in the air inside buildings and dwellings.
This radiological hazard is now well documented and International (The International Commission on Radiological Protection, ICRP) and European (Euratom) regulations determine recommendations and action levels in order to lower radon concentration inside buildings and reduce cancer risks.
The health impacts of ionizing radiation even at low doses include the increase of various types of cancers, genomic instability, life-shortening and negative impacts on all the body functions.

Radiological situation before extraction
The activities of uranium ores have an important variability. Typical ore with a uranium content of 0.2 % has a 238U activity of about 25,000 Bq/kg. The total activity, including all the 238U by-products and the 235U decay chain will therefore exceed 360,000 Bq/kg. Such material should be managed with a great deal of caution due to the risks of exposure to ionizing radiation.
As long as the ore remains buried underground – the depth being a few tens and even a few hundreds of meters – the radiation levels at the surface of the earth remain low and usually have the same order of magnitude as of typical natural radiation levels. Except in places where the ore reaches the ground surface (typically a few square meters), the protection offered by the soil is usually sufficient to reduce the risks for the people living in the area.
Indeed, alpha and low energy beta particles are stopped by a thin layer of soil (much less than 1 cm.). Even penetrating gamma radiation does not cross a layer of soil of a few meters. Regarding the radiological characteristics of air and water, the situation is more complex. Nevertheless before mining activities most of the radon gas remains trapped inside the soil. Because of its short half-life (3.8 days) a lot of the gas atoms will disintegrate inside the soil during their migration before reaching the biosphere.
The amount of nuclides in underground water may remain low if the minerals containing uranium are trapped in unpermeable layers.

Radiological situation during uranium extraction 

The radiological situation is reversed as soon as the uranium extraction begins. There are many reasons for this.

Radioactive dust is transferred to the atmosphere by mining operations, extraction and crushing of ore, uranium milling, management of waste rocks and tailings. This has to be emphasized because some of the nuclides contained in the uranium decay chains (such has thorium 230) are very radiotoxic when inhaled.

For example, when inhaled, a given activity of actinium 227 (part of the 235U decay chain) gives a radiation dose 5 times higher than the same activity of plutonium 238 (Euratom 1996).
Radon gas is transferred to the atmosphere by the vents of the mines and by diffusion from radioactive rocks and tailings (Chareyron and Castanier 1994).
Surface and / or underground water is contaminated by uranium and its by products. Some of them are very radiotoxic when ingested (Chareyron and Castanier 1994). Lead 210 and polonium 210 for example are among the most radiotoxic elements. When ingested, a given activity of polonium 210 gives a radiation dose 4.8 times higher than the same activity of plutonium 239 (Euratom 1996).

Continue reading →

January 23, 2013 Posted by arclight2011 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment