Strange thyroid cysts in 30% of Fukushima children
Former head doctor of National Cancer Center,”Thyroids of Fukushima children look like honeycomb from too much cysts” http://fukushima-diary.com/2013/06/former-head-doctor-of-national-cancer-centerthyroids-of-fukushima-children-look-like-honeycomb-from-too-much-cysts/ by Mochizuki on June 28th, 2013
Dr. Matsue is the chief of this clinic. He stated thyroids of Fukushima children have countless numbers of cysts to look like honeycomb. <Translate>
(In the thyroid test of Fukushima children) Shockingly about 30% of the children have thyroid cysts. It was also 35% from Fukushima prefectural government’s test. Prefectural government’s test probably misses small cysts of 1~2mm because their test is too quick, but the cysts rate was almost the same. However, <Translate>
Countless numbers of small cysts were found in the thyroids of about half of those 30% children, which is not reported in the prefectural government’s test. I thought it was like “honeycomb”, I have never seen such a thing.
Recently, a clinic in Kobe tested the thyroid of the children who evacuated from Fukushima..
<Translate>
The doctor in Kobe also reported about the “honeycomb looking thyroids”. What the world is that ? It’s no less than the half of the thyroids. The half-life of I-131 is 8 days, but it’s not strange if it causes any thyroid abnormality. Rationally thinking, it has something to do with radiation. <Translate>
“Accumulated I-131 might have changed the structure of the thyroid.” http://togetter.com/li/481810?page=1
Lethal MOX fuel to be removed from Fukushima reactor No.3 starting in 2020
Kyodo: Melted fuel from Fukushima Reactor 3 “is the highly lethal mixed uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX)” — Unit to be last to attempt fuel removal says new plan http://enenews.com/kyodo-melted-fuel-fukushima-reactor-3-highly-lethal-mixed-uranium-plutonium-oxide-mox-be-removed-last-new-plan
Title: Melted fuel removal at Fukushima plant seen optimistically starting in 2020
Source: Kyodo News
Date: June 28, 2013
Work to remove melted fuel from the three crippled reactors at Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant could start in 2020, the government and Tepco optimistically said Thursday, based on a revised, albeit vague, plan to decommission the stricken complex, a process expected to take decades. […]
The second phase of the decommissioning, based on the revised plan, will entail the removal of the melted fuel from crippled reactors 1 and 2 starting in fiscal 2020 if possible, followed by work to start removing the melted fuel inside reactor 3 in the latter half of fiscal 2021 at the earliest. Reactor 3′s fuel is the highly lethal mixed uranium-plutonium oxide (MOX) fuel. […]
The extractions may be delayed if proper equipment isn’t available to deal with the three stricken reactors, whose levels of damage and radiation differ. […]
Another scenario points to starting the fuel removal of reactor 1 in fiscal 2022, that of reactor 2 in fiscal 2024 and reactor 3′s fuel in fiscal 2023. […]
See also: Asahi: Locations and condition of melted Fukushima fuel unknown — Mainichi: 450 tons of scattered radioactive rods… unknown where holes in reactors are… plans may be delayed
A critical review of nuclear advertising film “Pandora’s Promise”
Finally (as Beyond Nuclear and other watchdog groups have noted), relying on nuclear power to mitigate CO2-driven climate change is unaffordable and impractical since it would require putting a new reactor online every two weeks……
Ultimately, Pandora’s Promise comes across as a well-executed but disingenuous exercise in special pleading. Instead of devoting 89 minutes to honestly and fully assessing the pros and cons of renewable technologies alongside the risks and benefits of new, untried nuclear power systems,Pandora’s Promise promotes a narrow agenda. As a result, the film winds up as little more than a tunnel-vision exercise in “plutonium Pollyannaism.”
Another Take on Pandora’s Promise EARTH ISLAND JOURNAL BY GAR SMITH – JUNE 28, 2013 Pro-nuclear power film obscures as much as it reveals You’ve got to give the producers of Pandora’s Promise credit for gumption. It takes a lot of chutzpah to release a pro-nuclear polemic in the wake of the triple meltdown in Fukushima, Japan. The film also suffered the ignominy of opening the same week that the owners of California’s troubled San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station announced the permanent shutdown of the facility’s two crippled reactors. Even the film’s title takes a bit of nerve; it was Pandora’s Box, after all, that unleashed a host of once-contained evils into the world.
So, given the extensive history of nuclear mishaps and near-catastrophes, how do the producers of Pandora’s Promise manage to spin their counter-narrative of a “safe, green” nuclear future? Basically by: (1) at first accepting the criticisms of traditional nuclear power and then (2) arguing that the solution lies in “new, improved” nuclear reactors. Like a smart defense attorney, director Robert Stone begins by admitting all of the defendant’s worst foibles up front, thereby depriving the prosecution of an opportunity to score points by revealing these issues later…….
The filmmakers pronounce the radioactive contamination “infinitesimal” and proclaim there has been “no evidence of medical consequences.” No citations are offered to support this positive conclusion. The fact that 40 percent of Fukushima’s evacuated children have subsequently developed thyroid abnormalities goes unmentioned. Continue reading
Germany’s nuclear waste “depository site law”
What to do with nuclear waste? DW 28 June 13 Fifty years after Germany began using nuclear power, the country is once again looking for a suitable nuclear waste storage facility. Search priorities include transparency, safety and scientific criteria.
The German government, together with the opposition, hopes to approve a so-called depository site law for nuclear waste ahead of federal elections in September. The Bundestag, Germany’s lower house of parliament, on Friday (June 28) will vote on the planned legislation.
After a nearly 35-year controversy over the suitability of a salt mine in Gorleben in northern Germany as a potential site for storing high-level nuclear waste, the search for a storage site will begin again. The bipartisan compromise is considered historic. Continue reading
Renewable energy to exceed gas and nuclear, says IAE
IEA: Renewables To Exceed Natural Gas, Nuclear Energy By 2016, Energy Collective 26 June 13 Natural gas is widely considered the bridge to take us from fossil fuel dependence to a clean energy future – but that bridge may be a lot shorter than anyone could have predicted. The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts power generation from renewable sources will exceed natural gas and be twice the contribution from nuclear energy globally by 2016 – just three short years from now.
IEA’s second-annual Medium-Term Renewable Energy Market Report (MTRMR) forecasts renewable generation will grow 40% in the next five years despite difficult economic conditions.
Wind And Solar Power The Renewables Charge
Renewable energy is now the fastest-growing sector of the global power market, and will represent 25% of all energy generation worldwide by 2018, up from 20% in 2011. In addition, renewable electricity generation is expected to reach 6,850 terawatt-hours (TWh) and total installed renewable capacity should hit 2,350 gigawatts (GW), both by 2018.
Wind and solar photovoltaic generation is powering this jump, and non-hydro renewable power will double from 4% of gross generation in 2011 to 8% in 2018. IEA cites two main drivers for their incredible outlook: accelerating investment and deployment, and growing cost competitiveness versus fossil fuels.
Strongest Growth In Developing Countries
Even though government funding has been inconsistent, private investment has remained strong, especially in developing economies. Rural electrification, energy poverty, and rising demand have been major challenges for policymakers in these countries, and renewables have become an increasingly attractive option for diverse and non-polluting power…….http://theenergycollective.com/silviomarcacci/242601/iea-renewables-will-exceed-natural-gas-and-nuclear-2016
Westinghouse Corporation discovers Climate Change – to promote nuclear power
As Obama targets climate change, Westinghouse bangs the nuclear drum SHAWN MCCARTHY TORONTO — The Globe and Mail , Jun. 28 2013, “……For a generation, it has been the nuclear industry’s calling card – that only large-scale reactors can provide steady, base-load power that does not emit greenhouse gases. And with U.S. President Barack Obama’s pledge this week to heighten the battle against climate change and reduce the U.S.’s reliance on carbon-intensive, coal-fired power, Pittsburgh-based Westinghouse Electric Co. sees an opportunity to restart a renaissance that was promised a decade ago but has fizzled……
With the 2011 meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima plant still in the public’s mind, and the issue of how to permanently dispose of highly radioactive waste still unresolved, the industry faces the twin challenge of persuading the public that nuclear power is both safe and economical…….
In the United States, the much-hyped renaissance has stalled. The federal regulator has received applications for 24 new reactors, but few are currently proceeding. Duke Energy recently scrapped plans for two of the six reactors while NRG Energy cancelled two reactors in Texas in 2011, saying they couldn’t compete with gas. California recently announced it will not refurbish its aging San Onofre plant, near San Diego….. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/energy-and-resources/banging-the-nuclear-drum/article12891014/
Public needs to know the full costs of new Darlington nuclear plans
Make proposed nuclear bids public: NDP http://www.oyetimes.com/news/canada/45664-make-proposed-nuclear-bids-public-ndp Oye! News from Canada, 28 June 2013 by Justin Stayshyn NDP Energy critic Peter Tabuns urged the Liberal government to make public the full costs of two bids to build new nuclear reactors, including information about whether taxpayers will be on the hook for cost overruns.
Bids to build two new nuclear reactors next to the existing Darlington nuclear plans were submitted to the government today by Westinghouse and CANDU/SNC Lavalin. “The government must be open and transparent about the full costs and risks of building new nuclear reactors so that there can be an informed public discussion about whether the government’s nuclear-first energy plan is cost-effective,” said Tabuns, MPP for Toronto-Danforth.
A 2008 proposal to build a new nuclear plant at Darlington was said to total about $26 billion, and hence was abandoned by the McGuintygovernment.
“The government argues that nuclear power is affordable even though nuclear costs have soared since the Fukishima disaster and every nuclear project in Ontario has gone over budget by millions if not billions of dollars,” said Tabuns. “Ontarians need to know the full costs and terms of the two bids, including who will pay the inevitable cost overruns, so that potentially lower cost alternatives like importing hydro power from Quebec are considered before the government signs another misguided private energy deal.”
Eliminating USA’s useless nuclear weapons – a smart budget move
Smart Savings in the Nuclear Budget | Commentary Roll Call, By Terri Lodge June 28, 2013, As appropriations bills move through Congress, protecting important programs and eliminating wasteful spending is on everyone’s mind. When it comes to smart budget cuts, look no further than nuclear weapons programs.
The B61 nuclear bombs deployed in Europe are a particularly glaring example of a program that drains billions of dollars from the defense budget but does nothing to advance our security.
Nuclear weapons in Europe are an oddity, a footprint of the Cold War. But from a national security perspective, their usefulness disappeared with the Berlin Wall. We can’t afford to spend billions of defense dollars on programs that don’t defend us against today’s threats. Instead of supporting Cold War relics, we should be investing in tools to address 21st-century security challenges.
These challenges are very real and very different from those we faced 20 years ago. Today, we think less about the risk of major nuclear conflict between the United States and Russia. But we think more about the risk of nuclear terrorism. We don’t talk about communist spies infiltrating Congress. But we do talk about climate change, cyberattacks and other unconventional challenges to our security. We don’t do “duck and cover” any more. So why are we investing billions of dollars to keep nuclear bombs in Europe?
Cold War thinking and budget inertia have combined for the worst possible scenario: As the broad defense budget declines, the nuclear budget is about to explode. The United States is on track to spend more than half a trillion dollars on nuclear weapons and related programs over the next 10 years.
Expensive, unnecessary nuclear programs such as the B61 are threatening to squeeze critical defense programs out of the budget. We’re planning to spend more than $10 billion dollars on the B61, while underinvesting in important programs such as nuclear terrorism prevention and next-generation biofuels to reduce our dependence on oil.
Eliminating the B61 and other nuclear programs that don’t advance U.S. security interests will free up funding for other defense priorities. Cutting the B61 for tools our troops can actually use — that’s a tradeoff any smart military strategist would make….. http://www.rollcall.com/news/smart_savings_in_the_nuclear_budget_commentary-225999-1.html
A critical question – who pays for long term nuclear waste storage?
What to do with nuclear waste? DW 28 June 3 “……..Who pays? The forum Ecological-Social Market Economy has evaluated the Swiss study and, based on its findings, estimated the future costs for storing nuclear waste from Germany’s eight deactivated and nine active nuclear power plants. According to conservative calculations by the researchers, Germany can reckon with storage costs of about 18 billion euros in the future.
The German Atom Forum, comprised of all German nuclear power plant operators, intends to pay as little as possible for storage and rejected shouldering costs for the new site search. In their opinion´”there is no legal basis” for them to pay and all costs should be “financed by taxpayers.”
Environment Minister Peter Altmaier has a different view. He intends to have the nuclear plant operators take responsibility for the waste they generate. http://www.dw.de/what-to-do-with-nuclear-waste/a-16755844
Integral Fast Nuclear Reactor’s serious problems
Another Take on Pandora’s Promise EARTH ISLAND JOURNAL BY GAR SMITH – JUNE 28, 2013“…….Problems with the IFR Looking beyond the ballyhoo, there are significant concerns about IFRs that Pandora’s Promise fails to address. To date, no breeder reactor has been commercially viable. Arjun Makhijani, president of the Maryland-based Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, shares David McKay’s concern about the 250-plus metric tons of excess plutonium moldering away in storage sites around the world. Makhijani, however, believes the idea that “sodium cooled-fast neutron reactors [could] be built to denature the plutonium reveals a technological optimism that is disconnected from the facts.” While some IFRs “have indeed operated well,” Makhijani notes, “roughly $100 billion have been spent worldwide to try and commercialize these reactors – to no avail.”
Fueled by a uranium-plutonium alloy, IFRs can produce (“breed”) more plutonium than they burn. But this plutonium can be used to produce nuclear weapons, which poses serious diversion and proliferation risks. Also, IFRs are cooled by molten sodium, not water. Sodium can explode when it comes in contact with water and, when exposed to air, sodium ignites and burns furiously. Sodium-cooled reactors are prone to coolant leaks. Fast reactor accidents have occurred in France, Japan, Scotland, at the Fermi 1 reactor in Michigan, and twice at a Simi Valley reactor site in southern California.
Several competing nuclear power designs are cited in Pandora’s Promise, but they receive little screen time. There is a brief mention of Liquid Fluoride Thorium reactors, a Traveling Wave Reactor (Bill Gates’ pet project), and the government’s support for “mini-nukes” that could be installed underground and fired up to power urban skyscrapers. How practical and safe are they? Pandora’s Promise provides few answers. There is no in-depth analysis of the pros and cons of any of these alternatives….. . http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/elist/eListRead/another_take_on_pandoras_promise
Legal case over US government’s uranium mining ban near Grand Canyon
British Uranium Firm Sues U.S. for $132 Million Over Grand Canyon Mining Ban http://www.grandcanyontrust.org/news/2013/06/british-uranium-firm-sues-u-s-for-132-million-over-grand-canyon-mining-ban/ June 25, 2013 by gctrust WASHINGTON D.C.— On June 21st, British uranium firm VANE Minerals sued the United States in Washington’s U.S. Court of Claims over the Department of the Interior’s January 2012 decision to protect 1 million acres of public lands around Grand Canyon National Park from new uranium mining. VANE’s suit, which claims that uranium mining in Grand Canyon’s watershed “would have no adverse impacts,” seeks up to $132 million from U.S. taxpayers. This is VANE’s second attempt to bring such a suit against the U.S.
UK’s Minstry of Defence caused radioactive beach
Dalgety Bay radiation: Sepa says MoD was responsible for contamination, BBC News 28 Jue 13Diggers have excavated sections of the beach The Ministry of Defence has been found solely responsible for radioactive contamination at Dalgety Bay in Fife.
It follows an investigation by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) into the history of the contamination at the beach.
Its report said the MoD had routinely incinerated and disposed of aircraft dials in the bay before the town was developed.
The dials had been illuminated by paint containing radium-226.
The aircraft had been stationed at the nearby HMS Merlin airfield, which was commissioned in 1939 as a Royal Naval Aircraft Repair Yard and decommissioned in 1959 before being sold off through the 1960s……..
“Contamination on the foreshore at Dalgety Bay is the result of erosion of deposited material and subsequent re-working and re-deposition of contaminated marine sediments resulting from coastal erosion, a process which is considered to be a normal part of life.”
Significant amounts of material remain buried on the coast and continue to erode through coastal processes and re-contaminate the foreshore areas, the report added.
It concluded that Sepa considered the MoD to be the sole “appropriate person” for the contamination…….
The local MP and former prime minister, Gordon Brown, said the MoD was “merely delaying the inevitable” and had a “moral duty” to clean up the site.
“Having been named as the polluter, the Ministry of Defence must now agree to fund the clean-up of the area to remove the contaminated substances from the Dalgety Bay beach, and the work must start immediately,” he said……. The local MP and former prime minister, Gordon Brown, said the MoD was “merely delaying the inevitable” and had a “moral duty” to clean up the site.
“Having been named as the polluter, the Ministry of Defence must now agree to fund the clean-up of the area to remove the contaminated substances from the Dalgety Bay beach, and the work must start immediately,” he said.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-23098001
USA Senators votes obey their campaign donors
Senators’ Positions on Climate Change Reflect Their Donors’ Wishes ENN. 28 June 13 Earlier this week, President Obama followed up on the promise he made in his State of the Union Address, to take action on climate change even if Congress wouldn’t. Specifically, he said, “if Congress won’t act soon to protect future generations, I will.
Why would Congress be so recalcitrant on an issue of such vital importance as taking action to minimize (it’s too late to avoid) the impact of a crisis that could threaten the existence of civilization as we know it? A recent analysis performed by MapLight suggests the root of much of the underlying motivation for our elected officials is money. While this isn’t terribly surprising, it is stunningly disappointing to see how lacking in character those men and women we have elected to lead us appear to be — trading the broad interests of future generations for their own very narrow, self-serving interest in raising money to enable them to remain in jobs that, it would appear, they are morally unqualified to serve in.
Looking specifically at campaign contributions given to senators, Maplight found the following campaign contribution levels from industries whose short-term financial interests would benefit from no action being taken on climate change during the period from January 1, 2009—December 31, 2012, as well as from those who would stand to benefit from action being taken. (Source: Open Secrets)
The two tables show the name of the industry or interest and the amount contributed to senators…….
A number of bills have been submitted since 2007, mostly by Democrats attempting to deal with greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and these have either died in committee or been filibustered to death if they actually made it onto the floor.
So it should not be a surprise to learn that most of these financial contributions went to Republicans. That is certainly true if we look at oil & gas donors, which gave an average of $60,000 last year to Republican members of the House and Senate versus $10,000 given to Democrats. Total contributions last year, including individuals, PAC and soft money topped $65 million, more than doubling from 2010.
Coal mining interests gave out $17 million, almost all of it to Republicans, except for Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who received $222k, about the same as his Republican counterpart.
Electric utilities made contributions of $23 million to elected officials, alongside a whopping $140 million in overall lobbying (about the same as oil & gas). This was more evenly divided across party lines, with Republicans receiving roughly $14 million and Democrats $9 million.
The president has vowed to use executive authority, primarily through the EPA, to address carbon emissions, largely by limiting the allowable emissions from coal plants, which the Republicans will undoubtedly fight, either through the courts or through additional legislation. As President Obama preemptively pointed out in his speech, opponents always claim that this type of regulation will be bad for business and every time they have been wrong. The critics’ focus tends to be on the very short term changes that need to be made, rather than on the ultimate result of a cleaner, safer society being served by more efficient companies. Too often, as Ramez Naam points out in his excellent book, The Infinite Resource, the role that innovation plays is commonly underestimated.Continue Reading at Triple Pundit
The way forward for India’s energy development
India’s Coal Reliance And Global Warming Hypocrisy By Dr EAS Sarma & Shankar Sharma 28 June, 2013 Countercurrents.org“……..The way forward India is endowed with a vast potential in renewable energy sources. The ‘expert group on low carbon strategies for inclusive growth’ states that “solar power is one of the critical technology options for India’s long term energy security. Several parts of India are endowed with good solar radiation and deploying solar even on 1 percent of the land area could result in over 500,000 MW of solar power.”
Assuming an average of 1,000 Sq. ft of roof surface area for each of 30% of the houses in the country, the total potential for installing SPV systems on such a total surface can be about 1,000,000 MW @ 1 kW per 100 Sq. ft of roof surface. If even 10% of roof top surfaces in each of the other categories of building are considered for this purpose, the potential is enormous; running to millions of MW. Such a policy can transform our power sector scenario with minimum impacts on the land, water and the general environment.
Other renewable energy sources such as wind and bio-mass too have huge potential, and are much more suitable to Indian way of life than the conventional energy sources.
In this background the statements such as that by Dr. Pauchari’s advocating for more coal power capacity addition can serve only to defend a corrupt sector and its coal gate scandals. We, in India, need to take a much more holistic view of the energy needs of the people vis-à-vis all-round welfare of communities. We should build new clean energy sources regardless of what the West does because it’s the cheapest, cleanest, and best solution for our people. It’s time our ‘leaders’ focused on India’s clean energy future and dropped support for a corrupt dirty coal sector.
Dr EAS Sarma is Former Union Power Secretary
Shankar Sharma is a Power Policy Analyst http://www.countercurrents.org/sharma280613.htm
Fukushima News 6/28/13: Tepco to Shareholders-Fuku You; Hanford Plutonium In Unusual Places
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V96TAevNXzY
Published on 28 Jun 2013
Shareholders reject anti-nuclear power proposals
Nine Japanese utilities that own nuclear power plants held their shareholders’ meetings on Wednesday. Groups opposed to nuclear power asked shareholders to reject atomic energy.
Executives from all the utilities said that suspending operations at their nuclear plants has had a major impact on their businesses. This is due to an increase in fuel costs for running thermal power plants.
Four of the 9 companies, including Shikoku Electric and Kansai Electric, are preparing to restart their 6 nuclear plants.
At the Tokyo Electric Power Company meeting, a group of about 450 shareholders who are opposed to nuclear energy submitted a list of 9 proposals.
Offshore wind power generation starts in Kyushu
A major offshore wind turbine has started operating on a test basis off Japan’s southwest coast.
The turbine is 83 meters wide and stands 1.4 kilometers off the city of Kitakyushu.
It generates 5,500 megawatts of electricity annually, enough to supply 1,500 households for a year.
The turbine began rolling slowly as officials pushed the start button in Thursday’s ceremony. The project is a joint effort between the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization, or NEDO, and Electric Power Development Company, also known as J-POWER.
http://enenews.com/workers-at-u-s-nuc…
http://enenews.com/something-did-not-…
[Tritium overflow] Tritium detected from 11 locations in the sea, average 340,000 Bq/m3
Posted by Mochizuki on June 28th, 2013
[Express] “After 311, extremely radioactive debris removed by major construction companies, not Tepco or plant maker”
Posted by Mochizuki on June 28th, 2013
ENERGY OFFICIALS ARE DIVIDED OVER NUCLEAR AGENCY’S FUTURE
1 This Month.
5 January -Webinar-What is Trump’s Golden Dome?
New book – https://www.amazon.com/dp/1923372157?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
Now until to February 10, 2026 Radioactive waste storage in France: the debate is finally open! How to participate?
-
Archives
- December 2025 (223)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
- January 2025 (250)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
nuclear-news 