nuclear-news

Kevin Blanch versus the “I dont care” people in Times Square

CNBC and GE get stomped by

kevin blanch

“HOW ABOUT THE YOUNG GIRLS VOICE @ 2.31mins  “I DON’T CARE!””

Whats to care about? @ 1.30 mins from

ChrisNolandTV

October 3, 2013 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Rapid increase in thyroid cancer in Fukushima kids – cover-up of causes 福島の子供たちに甲状腺がんが急増―その原因を隠蔽

Wednesday, 2 October 2013

Posted by Mia

http://fukushimaappeal.blogspot.fr/2013/10/rapid-increase-in-thyroid-cancer-in.html

Image source ; http://rt.com/news/fukushima-children-thyroids-abnormalities-cancer-444/

Fukushima Cover-Up: Extraordinary amount of kids have thyroid cancer — Officials say NOT caused by Fukushima since Chernobyl’s cancers took 4-5 yrs to appear — Yet data shows it started soon after ’86 meltdown… number of cases still rising 25 years later

 http://enenews.com/fukushima-cover-up-extraordinarily-high-thyroid-cancer-rates-in-kids-officials-not-related-to-nuclear-disaster-since-it-took-4-or-5-years-to-show-up-after-chernobyl-yet-data-shows-it-appe
September 29th, 2013
Kyodo,, June 5, 2013: Researchers at Fukushima Medical University […] said they do not believe that the most recent cases are related to the nuclear crisis. They point out that thyroid cancer cases were not found among children hit by the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident until four to five years later.

[…]
Asahi Shimbun,

August 21, 2013:

A Fukushima prefectural government official said, “It is likely (the 44 children) developed tumours or lumps before the nuclear accident.” […] In the case of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, thyroid cancer cases started to soar four to five years later […] A number of residents have expressed strong dissatisfaction with the Fukushima prefectural government over its interpretation of the effects of radiation exposure, the accuracy of its thyroid testing and the way it discloses information.
Wikipedia::

As of August 2013, there have been more than 40 children newly diagnosed with thyroid cancer and other cancers in Fukushima prefecture as a whole, but these cancers are not attributed to radiation from Fukushima […] if Chernobyl is anything to go by the increase in thyroid cancer rates won’t begin until approximately 4–5 years after the accident.

Hiroshima to Fukushima – Data on Fukushima

,, Eiichiro Ochiai (2014 on website but should be 2013):

“12 out of 174.000 children”

[…]

is much higher than that seen in the Chernobyl incident

[…]

If 15 more likely cases were taken account of, the thyroid cancer incident rate among Fukushima children would be about 7.8/100.000/year, extraordinarily a high rate. (Note: this number is still an underestimate. This number would he 21/100,0110/y if the data is more properly analysed).

The authority denies that they were caused by the radiation released from the TEPCO Daichi NPP on the basis that thyroid cancer would emerge only 4-5 years after such an incident.

However, the data on the Chernobyl incident show that thyroid cancer did show up even just one year later (see Fig. 14.4)

[…]
Hiroshima to Fukushima – Data on Chernobyl, 

Eiichiro Ochiai (2014 on website but should be 2013):

[…]

a few cases of thyroid cancer seem to have occurred almost immediately within 1 year. In children, the incidence

[…]

has kept increasing, even after 25 years. A similar trend has been observed for the groups aged 15 years or more (Ukraine report 2011). This continuous rise suggests that radiation sources other than the short-lived I-131, such as I-129 and Cs-137 may also be involved.

In a highly contaminated area, Gomel in Belarus, the annual incidence of thyroid cancers among children 2-18 years of age in 1998 was 58 times higher than that in 1973

[…]
See also: Japan Professor: Fukushima crisis is leading to surge in thyroid cancers… First signs of health catastrophe — NHK: Trend seen in new cancer tests is ‘suspicious’ (VIDEO)

October 3, 2013 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Crowd sourcing – Pandoras Promise of MOX reprocessing using the USA`s PYREX system to Prime minister Cameron

Published by Arclight2011

2 October 2013

Nuclear-news.net exclusive

Below is a draft of an article i am working on.. Please feel free to add information or critique this post on the comments below.

My idea is to crowd source this information to develop a better understanding of the politics and processes that are moving behind the scenes, out of the public eye.

My main impression is that all the countries that are involved in the nuclear fuel cycle are pushed into the deals that are already on the table and those that have been agreed.

My thoughts on this as i researched this topic were to remind me of the Trans Pacific Partnership and the USA and European Trade Deal (that has been upset by the NSA hacking European institutions like the IAEA and European Parliament).

Creating more plutonium is a very stupid idea and will allow some psychopath (1 Psychopath to every 100 people) to let of a bomb some day.

My main concern about the PRISM and TEMPORA cyber warriors are able to undermine the democratic process by supporting these secret trade deals. Was the hacking of the European MP`s etc, to be able to use information that was stolen to bribe individuals and organisations to make the “right” decisions? A lack of transparency in this whole corporate campaign to use corporate law to manipulate democratic and other types of government?

I will leave you decide.. the links are not live yet as i wanted to see how the draft will evolve

And after the A2 film premier  in London that was not reported widely in the UK i wait with anticipation as to the media’s response to the terribly pro nuclear film “Pandoras Box” that is coincidentally being shown at 2 venues just after A2.. Media manipulation at its finest perhaps? We shall see!

The reasons for reprocessing

Originally it was because it was thought that there was a finite supply of uranium but as new mines open in the third world, causing a uranium glut, Uranium mining in the nuclear powered western countries are shutting down due to the ever dropping spot price of Uranium. This is likely a bid to push the price back up to ensure the MOX fuel process are more affordable.

Then it said that the waste could be handled and made safe within 500 years but the is the pollution from the processing worth it? Indeed will the technology be in place to process it all?

To reduce costs of decommissioning to the Tax Payer by some £300 million pounds sterling. (seems a small saving for such a huge project?)

The UK is now hoping that the new waste processing and fuel fabrication processes will be started at 2 sites one of which is at Bradwell UK

Secret meetings and redacted documents

The UK Government is curretly discussing its future for nuclear reprocessing in secret meetings with NGO`s for a number of years. No information has been released concerning this discussion.

The Low Level Radiation campaigns Richard Bramhall has been the spokesman for UK NGO`s and groups that are concerned about nuclear pollution from these decommissioning and fuel processing programmes. I am awaiting R. Bramhalls update media report explaining the progress made so far and will publish it here when the press release arrives.

The LLRC`s emails have been blocked over the past year (that I am aware of ) and a smear campaign against LLRC member, Prof Chris Busby after his appearences on the main stream media in the first days of the Fukushima tragedy. In fact George Monbiot seemed more worried about Chris Busby than of the 350,000 children and 20.000.000 adults that were under the initial plumes from the Daichi nuclear disaster site in the Miyagi and Fukushima Prefectures.

The problem with TEMPORA

The corporations have been accessing the TEMPORA data and in fact the police held back cases against the corporations for hacking during the Leveson enquiry. Instead the Leveson enquiry was used to dumb down the Fukushima tragedy by stopping independent scientists accessing the main stream media

The role of the Science Media Centres

The Science Media Centre has been used by DECC to get the “right” science to the public. In fact the SMC sent a psychologist to Australia to handle the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan. Working with Ogilvey and Maher (WPP group of companies) ensured an effective cover up of the disaster and that propaganda is still ongoing.

So, what is the problem with the discharge pollution?

Continue reading →

October 3, 2013 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Needless Nuclear Reprocessing: The Bridge to Unnecessary Risk

Rather than remaining stuck with policies popular in the 1960s, Japan needs to reroute its policies away from reprocessing toward more effective spent fuel disposal.

Chris Cote

Japan’s Other Nuclear Program

October 2, 2013

http://akiomatsumura.com/2013/10/needless-nuclear-reprocessing-the-bridge-to-unnecessary-risk.html

Introduction by Akio Matsumura

I decided to work full time on expanding the conversation on the Fukushima accident and cleanup process because of one reason:  nuclear power plant accidents have the ability to alter our land and society for tens of thousands years. We have seen major conflict over the last centuries, but even in the case of World War II, in which 60 million people died, our societies have proved resilient and recovered in a matter of decades, even if permanently altered. A full fuel pool fire would bring us a catastrophe like we’ve never seen.

The work of Frank von Hippel, a professor at Princeton University  and co-founder of the International Panel on Fissile Materials, has brought the issues of reprocessing spent fuel, another aspect of nuclear technology laden with risk, to my attention. Chris Cote, editor and contributor to this blog, summarizes a recent report by Frank von Hippel and Masafumi Takubo and describes the technology’s ability to be a bridge to further risk: the creation of plutonium, a nuclear weapon material. I’d like to thank Dr. von Hippel for his help in reviewing this summary for publication here.

Irradiated water continues to flow into the Pacific Ocean from Fukushima Daiichi, three reactors remain radioactive and unapproachable, and a fourth loaded with spent fuel could collapse under its own weight. Amidst this disorder, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s government has shifted attention away from the cleanup and at the same time is planning to expand Japan’s nuclear capabilities by opening the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant some 270 miles north of the Fukushima power plants.

Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant

As made clear by two members of the International Panel on Fissile Materials in a recent Asahi Shimbun special report, Japan’s reason for pursuing reprocessing (against the urging of the United States) likely has less to do with any fixed goal than it has to do with continuing to follow a tangled web of policies from which they cannot extricate themselves. Pursuing a policy that not only does not solve its targeted problems but leads to nuclear weapons material only because the government lacks an alternative is irresponsible. And now a workable alternative has been identified.

In “Ending Plutonium Separation: An alternative approach to managing Japan’s spent nuclear fuel,” Masafumi Takubo and Frank von Hippel show how utilities, local governments, and relevant federal agencies find themselves trapped in a complicated set of policies committing Japan to reprocessing as its nuclear spent fuel disposal policy, despite it being ineffective, costly, potentially dangerous, and destabilizing the international nuclear nonproliferation regime. Throughout the report they explain how strong central action can lead Japan to a better alternative that uses air-cooled dry casks to store spent nuclear fuel instead of reprocessing, a method that creates similar levels of waste as originally marked for disposal.

What will the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant do? If it opens in the next few months as planned — after sixteen years of delays — the plant will take spent nuclear fuel and separate out the plutonium that was created when the original uranium was irradiated by neutrons in the reactor.

“Plutonium is a nuclear weapon material and separating it makes no sense economically. In spent fuel, it is virtually inaccessible, but separated plutonium is an attractive target for would-be nuclear terrorists. The 8 tons that Japan plans to separate annually would be sufficient to make one thousand Nagasaki-type bombs.” -in “Ending Plutonium Separation”.  Read the whole report.

What uses does plutonium have? Reprocessing technology has had multiple purposes over its lifetime. Nuclear reprocessing was originally used to separate plutonium for use in nuclear weapons (plutonium doesn’t need to be enriched to high levels like uranium-235, the original ingredient in a nuclear reactor, and very small amounts can cause catastrophic damage in a bomb).  Countries pursued this path to nuclear weapons following World War II and now there are large separated plutonium stocks worldwide, especially in the United States and Russia. Japan owns 44 tons, a significant amount.

In the late 1960s world uranium reserves were thought to be small and an alternative nuclear fuel was sought. Breeder reactors, so called because they create more plutonium than they use, were developed. Scientists and policy makers thought they had found a cheap, perpetual electricity source. But the reactor technology proved to be unreliable and too expensive to use without heavy government subsidy. As reprocessing became costly, it also became unpopular politically. In 1977 U.S. President Jimmy Carter announced the United States would no longer pursue commercial reprocessing as part of its non-proliferation efforts (specifically to discourage countries such as South Korea).  With the failure of commercial breeders, countries decided to use the plutonium in Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel for ordinary reactors with only a small extension of the fuel resource.

For No Good Reason

Continue reading →

October 3, 2013 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

It takes courage to change the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w37V7ExqU9Y
ICANinAction

Published on 2 Oct 2013

October 3, 2013 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

No Nukes at the Tory Party conference starring Ann-archy Widdecombe

Charles Veitch

Published on 1 Oct 2013

Indigene and the re-wilding of humanity (daily articles coming soon, tonight even perhaps)
http://cveitc1.wix.com/indigene

h/t  Stop Plans for a Nuclear Dump Under the Lake District via Flipperty Gibbert

October 3, 2013 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

New START Data Shows Russia Reducing and US Increasing Nuclear Forces

The United States now is counted with 336 deployed nuclear launchers more than Russia.

Russia is already 227 deployed missiles and bombers below the 700 limit established by the treaty for 2018, and might well drop by another 40 by then to about 430 deployed strategic launchers. The United States plans to keep the full 700 launchers.

By Hans M. Kristensen

http://blogs.fas.org/security/2013/10/newstartsep2013/

October 2, 2013

While arms control opponents in Congress have been busy criticizing the Obama administration’s proposal to reduce nuclear forces further, the latest data from the New START Treaty shows that Russia has reduced its deployed strategic nuclear forces while the United States has increased its force over the past six months.

Yes, you read that right. Over the past six months, the U.S. deployed strategic nuclear forces counted under the New START Treaty have increased by 34 warheads and 17 launchers.

It is the first time since the treaty entered into effect in February 2011 that the United States has been increasing its deployed forces during a six-month counting period.

We will have to wait a few months for the full aggregate data set to be declassified to see the details of what has happened. But it probably reflects fluctuations mainly in the number of missiles onboard ballistic missile submarines at the time of the count.  

Slow Implementation

The increase in counted deployed forces does not mean that the United States has begun to build up is nuclear forces; it’s an anomaly. But it helps illustrate how slow the U.S. implementation of the treaty has been so far.

Two and a half years into the New START Treaty, the United States has still not begun reducing its operational nuclear forces. Instead, it has worked on reducing so-called phantom weapons that have been retired from the nuclear mission but are still counted under the treaty.

For reasons that are unclear (but probably have to do with opposition in Congress), the administration has chosen to reduce its operational nuclear forces later rather than sooner. Not until 2015-2016 is the navy scheduled to reduce the number of missiles on its submarines. The air force still hasn’t been told where and when to reduce the ICBM force or which of its B-52 bombers will be denuclearized.

Continue reading →

October 3, 2013 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | 6 Comments