COLUMN-Nuclear power is set to disappoint, again: Kemp By John Kemp Jan 21 (Reuters) – Nuclear power is the energy dream that refuses to die, despite serious accidents at Windscale (1957), Three Mile Island (1979), Chernobyl (1986) and Fukushima (2011).
Many of the arguments that were employed in favour of nuclear in the 1950s and 1960s as a solution to oil supplies running out are now being resurrected in favour of nuclear as a solution to climate change.
But the promise of safe, clean and reasonably priced nuclear power seems as far away now as it was 60 years ago. We are still waiting for the safe, cheap and reliable reactor designs that were promised in 1956…
EXCLUSIVE by Rob Edwards / Electricity prices in Ukraine are expected to double to help pay for a series of safety upgrades to old Soviet nuclear power stations, according to a leaked report by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD).
EBRD, a public sector bank investing in Eastern Europe and elsewhere on behalf of 64 countries and the European Union, last year announced a €300 million loan to the Ukrainian state nuclear power company, Energoatom. It is the largest nuclear safety loan the bank has made.
The loan is to help implement up to 87 improvements to each of the country’s 15 electricity-generating reactors, which were built in the 1970s and 1980s. The improvements, aimed at complying with today’s international safety standards, include new equipment, new controls and organisational overhauls.
Details, however, have been kept secret by the EBRD but a leaked copy reveals that major price increases are part of the package.
The 105-page report forecasts that the price of electricity in Ukraine will increase from 27.1 kopeks per kilowatt/hour in 2012 to 54.4 kopeks per kilowatt/hour in 2020. “Significant tariff increases will be required for Energoatom,” it says.
The bank expects the Ukrainian government’s electricity regulator, NERC, to insist on price increases to help pay for the loan. One of the loan’s conditions is that tariffs should be increased “to ensure cost recovery”.
The leaked report also reveals that the EBRD is expecting to make a profit of €30 million from the loan over the next six years. The loan was a “good and efficient use of the bank’s capital in Ukraine,” said the EBRD’s president, Sir Suma Chakrabarti.
Critics say that the price increases would hit hard-pressed consumers in Ukraine. “The tariff hike stipulated in the document is completely unacceptable for Ukrainian consumers, many of whom are struggling to pay bills at current prices,” said Iryna Holovko, Ukrainian energy campaigner with Bankwatch, a group that monitors financial institutions in Eastern Europe.
“Pushing such a hike is a huge if not impossible political bet for our authorities, particularly in times of turmoil as in Ukraine today. It’s really hard to imagine how the deal as depicted in this document can go through.”
Holovko also argued that the price increases exposed the myth that nuclear power was cheap. “They would make nuclear energy more expensive than renewables,” she said. “Why on earth would we bear the incalculable risks of nuclear energy then?”
The world’s worst nuclear accident took place in Ukraine on 26 April 1986, when a reactor at Chernobyl north of Kiev exploded and showed Europe with radioactivity. All reactors of a similar design have since been shut down in Ukraine, but the country is still heavily reliant on other nuclear stations.
Environmental groups criticise the EBRD for failing to invest in alternatives like renewables and energy efficiency. More wind and solar power “would make more sense and give better value for money than a continuing dependency on outdated nuclear technology,” said Jan Haverkamp of Greenpeace.
But Dmytro Naumenko from the Institute for Economic Research and Policy Consulting in Kiev disagreed. The projected price increases would not push the cost of nuclear power above renewables, he argued, and would make the EBRD loan profitable.
EBRD confirmed that the report was the basis for the decision to go ahead with the €300 million loan last February, but stressed that it was confidential. The bank denied, however, that the loan would force up electricity tariffs.
“The loan you are referring to has no requirement on tariffs,” said EBRD spokesman Axel Reiserer. “The figures you are quoting are taken from a hypothetical calculation model and in no way constitute a condition for the loan.”
Ukraine’s National Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) did not respond to a request to comment.
For the second consecutive year in 2013, the Committee to Protect Journalists has announced Turkey as the world’s leading jailer of journalists, followed closely by Iran and China.
This message and the following letter is sent from Turkey by NKP.
NKP is a broad and all-embracing alliance of NGO’s and activists against nuclear power in Turkey. It represents the largest joint effort in the environmentalist movement in the country.
Attached letter has been written for DIET members, to enable them to discover the backdrop of
“Agreement between the Government of Japan and the Government of the Republic of Turkey for Co-operation in the Use of Nuclear Energy for Peaceful Purposes “
signed by Mr. Abe and Mr. Erdogan in Istanbul.
We – the citizens-firmly believe this agreement must be scrapped when it is brought to the attention of the Japanese Parliament for ratification.
We also believe, as the leaders of a country who are still in battle against the Fukushima disaster, Japanese MP’s will act sincerely and reject ratifiying this agreement.
It is crucial that our motives for opposing this agreement are well understood by you,hopefully this letter conveys our message well .
In May 2013, Turkey and Japan signed an agreement to construct a nuclear power plant in Sinop on Turkey’s western Black Sea coast. Mitsubushi Heavy Industries and the French Areva are supposed to be working on this project jointly. In 2010, Turkey signed a similar agreement with Russia to build the country’s first nuclear power plant in Akkuyu. Questionable “build-own-operate” model of Russia is unusual in nuclear industry and leaves many uncomfortable questions in mind about safety.
As Turkey moves toward these serious, potentially hazardous projects in a hurry, it fails to factor in the social, geological and environmental implications and seem unaware of potential lethal risks for millions of people living in the region as well as the vulnerable ecological communities in case something goes wrong just as it did in Fukushima recently and Chernobyl earlier. Turkey’s active fault lines in its political and economic structure, coupled with its inefficiencies in the areas of technology, regulations, infrastructure and shortage of qualified personnel pose a big threat to the efficient and safe execution of any such project. Turkey, just like Japan is in a seismically very active geography yet unlike Japan, she is quite unprepared for the risks of major earthquakes. Turkish safety culture is very different from Japan’s and risk management concepts are also perceived differently. This alone massively amplifies the risks of operating nuclear power plants in Turkey.
Our letter is calling the MPs representing Japanese people to scrap the intergovernmental nuclear agreement with Turkey that will soon be brought to the attention of DIET members for deliberation. The reasons behind this sincere call are detailed in the following paragraphs.
Turkey is deviating from practices of a modern democracy, as it becomes more and more authoritarian under the current government; people’s will on vital issues is dismissed. Evading ecologically sustainable energy options, the government has imposed obscure nuclear plans on the nation without any due debates either within its party program or in the parliament.
The method of promoting these nuclear agreements are very much in line with the rest of the un-democratic practices of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), which has been in power for a decade.
Majority of Turkish people are against nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons. “Global Citizen Reaction to the Fukushima Nuclear Plant Disaster”, a survey conducted by IPSOS in April 2011 documents the fact that 80% of Turks are against acquiring nuclear energy.
Yet, people and NGOs cannot find outlets for voicing their true concerns or objections on neither nuclear nor other similarly vital issue; democratic channels through which the citizens may promote change are blocked by the AKP regime.
For the second consecutive year in 2013, the Committee to Protect Journalists has announced Turkey as the world’s leading jailer of journalists, followed closely by Iran and China.
Sister Megan Rice, left, with co-defendant Michael Walli on Sept. 12, 2012, at the Catholic Worker in Washington, D.C. Rice’s wrists were in casts because of a fall during her release following the initial set of charges for the 2012 break-in at Y-12. (photo by Mary Finnerty)
The recommended sentence against Sister Megan Rice, the Catholic nun who at age 82 traversed a ridge in the middle of the night and, along with two co-activists, broke into the inner-most sanctum of the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant and vandalized federal property, is 70 to 87 months. Her sentencing is set for the morning of Jan. 28.
As have the other defendants in the internationally followed case, Rice — who turns 84 years old this month – is seeking a lighter-than-recommended sentence for her conviction on felony charges of sabotage and depredation of government property related to the July 28, 2012 break-in at Y-12.
In a motion filed Jan. 14, Rice’s attorney, Francis Lloyd, said the sentencing for the nun “differs greatly” from other cases that follow the federal sentencing guidelines that are based on the seriousness of the crime to promote respect for the law and to protect the public from further crimes by the defendant.
“The Defendant Megan Rice is 83 years old, and has served most of her life as a sister of the Society of the Holy Child Jesus, a Roman Catholic order,” the motion states.
“Her conduct in this case was motivated by her unshakeable conviction, based on her studied and devoted understanding of Christian principles of nonviolence, that nuclear weaponry is inescapably evil. Megan Rice has been open throughout this case about her affiliation with the Plowshares Movement. Like-minded individuals in this movement have engaged in similar expressive conduct in the past, and no doubt will do so in the future.”
Here’s an additional part of the argument for a lighter sentence: “As the evidence at trial showed, Megan Rice nd her co-defendants were completely nonviolent when they were arrested. They used the occasion to present symbolically their passion for nuclear disarmament.”
The motion said the seriousness of the act does not match up with the seriousness of the charge in which the three were charged and convicted. According to the defendant’s filing, the federal charges do not recognize the difference between spray-painted biblical references that nations “shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruninghooks” and tossing a Molotov cocktail.
“The conduct that led to the convictions in this case was, of course, mostly trespass and graffiti, and nothing to do with explosives,” the motion states.
It concluded: “The requirements of promotion of respect for the law and just punishment therefore do not require even the advisory Guidelines terms of imprisonment in Megan Rice’s case. This elderly individual, committed unreservedly to her moral convictions, and possessed of wisdom gain through long experience and contemplation, has already been behind bars for months. The world has seen the law upheld through her incarceration. Additional imprisonment, especially to the extent recommended by the advisory Guidelines calculation in her case, would exceed the mandate . . .”
Thousands of letters and postcards and petition signatures and messages have been submitted to the U.S. District Judge Amul R. Thapar, who has presided in the case and will conduct the sentencing later this month.
Fukushima inner leaks possibly from cracks
Officials of Tokyo Electric Power Company say water leaks inside the No. 3 reactor building likely came from cracks in the containment vessel.
They said high radiation levels in the leaked water suggest the water is most likely from that used for cooling down melted fuel after the accident in March 2011.
They spotted the leak on the first floor of the reactor building last Saturday when watching images filmed by a camera on a remote-controlled robot.
They suspect the water is leaking from around an opening in the containment vessel which holds a steam pipe, as they found a puddle nearby.
They said the extra space around the opening had been tightly sealed with resin. But they said the substance may have deteriorated after being exposed to the heat of the melted fuel and to salt from sea water poured into the vessels immediately after the accident.
Volunteers Crowdsource Radiation Monitoring to Map Potential Risk on Every Street in Japan
Safecast is a network of volunteers who came together to map radiation levels throughout Japan after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster in 2011. They soon realized radiation readings varied widely, with some areas close to the disaster facing light contamination, depending on wind and geography, while others much further away showed higher readings. Safecast volunteers use Geiger counters and open-source software to measure the radiation, and then post the data online for anyone to access. Broadcasting from Tokyo, we are joined by Pieter Franken, co-founder of Safecast. “The first trip we made into Fukushima, it was an eye-opener. First of all, the radiation levels we encountered were way higher than what we had seen on television,” Franken says. “We decided to focus on measuring every single street as our goal in Safecast, so for the last three years we have been doing that, and this month we are passing the 15 millionth location we have measured, and basically every street in Japan has been at least measured once, if not many, many more times.” http://www.democracynow.org/2014/1/17…
Govt. lists candidate sites for radioactive debris
Japan’s Environment Ministry has chosen 3 possible locations for disposing highly radioactive materials spread by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster.
The 3 are in Miyagi Prefecture, north of Fukushima.
Ministry officials made the announcement at a meeting attended by local mayors from the prefecture on Monday.
Storage built on the site will contain contaminated ash and mud with more than 8,000 becquerels of radioactive cesium per kilogram.
Ministry officials say they chose the sites after taking into account the distance from water sources and residential areas. Environmental protection was also considered. Geological surveys will be conducted.
The government drew criticism after presenting candidate sites in 2 prefectures in 2012 without consulting local authorities.
The government reviewed its selection process and agreed to involve the mayors.
Miyagi is the first prefecture that has chosen candidate sites under the revised process.
The final plan is to build a storage site in Miyagi and sites in 4 other prefectures in eastern Japan.
Navy Sailor after Fukushima: I’m in a wheelchair, now it’s spreading to my arms and hands — Photo of skin with intense red burns after being in sun, suspects radiation intensified impact (AUDIO) http://enenews.com/navy-sailor-after-…
Physician: Canadian gov’t withholding testing data; “Less confident about eating Pacific seafood now” — Top Scientist: “Sense of potential widespread disaster” from Fukushima http://enenews.com/physician-canadian…
Officials by West Coast Speak Out on Fukushima: Concerns about cancer, illness from contaminated food — ‘Low-level’ radiation being reported in fish — “We cannot sit by and watch and wait” — National gov’t appears to not be taking it seriously http://enenews.com/officials-near-wes…
But my concern, all along, has been different. France is a nuclear state. The French president is a critical part of his country’s nuclear command and control system. Like the American president, he must authenticate a nuclear war order.
[….]
I mean, I understand why he felt he had to. But this particular situation is not zero-sum. He gets sexual and romantic companionship; France is endangered…..
Pity the historian who attempts to write about the way world leaders are bodyguarded. Every country, it seems, protects its dignitaries differently. How they protect them is as much a function of political culture as it is security.
Case in point: The contretemps over whether French President Francois Hollande’s bodyguards failed to adequately protect him before, during, and after his sexual liaison with a French actress. Reportedly, only two security agents from the presidential bodyguard, the GSPR, accompanied him. They failed to check out the apartment’s owners, who are (allegedly) connected to the Corsican mob. They failed to notice a photographer snapping pictures of the presidential party as he got off his unmarked scooter to go get off with his mistress.
I’ll get to the nitty-gritty of protective methods in a second. But my concern, all along, has been different. France is a nuclear state. The French president is a critical part of his country’s nuclear command and control system. Like the American president, he must authenticate a nuclear war order. The French keep secrets better than we do, and so the amount of public information about such matters is limited. The constitution, ratified in 1959, is clear about his essential role, however. No decision can be made without his assent, even though the army exists in the constitution as an independent entity. France is also a charter member of NATO, and I would assume that decisions about whether to use strategic and tactical weapons in Europe would be part of his portfolio.
So: Who carries the French president’s “football?” In the U.S., a military aide is always near the president’s side. During emergency situations, the Secret Service will (probably) crash the military aide along with the president before anyone else for obvious reasons. In France, even though the tryst apartment was close to the Elysee Palace, there seems to have been no military aide in sight. Mid-coitus, if the French president had to make a nuclear decision, could he do so over an unsecured phone line? When President Obama walks across the street to Blair House, the military aide, supported by a team of Emergency Actions officers, will be near him, within a few dozen feet at most. Unless Hollande’s chief bodyguard had a nuclear decision handbook with him and a secure, redundant telephone, the president’s irresponsibility is most manifest.
Russian President Vladimir Putin is considering visiting Japan at the request of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told a press conference Tuesday.
While the specific details have yet to be worked out, the leaders will discuss the visit when Abe travels to Russia next month to attend the Feb. 7 opening ceremony of the Sochi Winter Olympics.
When Abe visited Moscow last April and invited Putin to visit Japan in 2014, the two agreed to “accelerate negotiations to work out a solution acceptable to both sides” regarding the longstanding territorial dispute between the two countries………… Subscription only but there is this for free 🙂
Vietnam has outlined plans to build seven nuclear power plants by 2030, but there have been fears over nuclear power technology following the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan.
HANOI, Vietnam—Vietnam will delay the construction of its first nuclear power plant by six years, state media reported Thursday, amid concerns over safety and efficiency.Faced with increased demand for power, Vietnam needs to develop new energy sources as its domestic coal and hydropower production is levelling off. The Asian Development Bank has said domestic electricity demand may rise by up to 14 percent per year until 2015 and plateau at 11 percent growth until 2020.
The country had awarded the construction contract for its first nuclear power plant to Russian companies. The second was given to companies from Japan. Construction of the first plant in Ninh Thuan province on Vietnam’s central coast was originally slated to start this year.
However, Tuoi Tre newspaper on Thursday quoted Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung as telling a government conference that construction will probably have to be postponed until 2020 to ensure the highest safety and efficiency standards.
Dung ordered the Vietnam National Oil and Gas Group, also known as PetroVietnam, to ensure gas supplies to feed a planned 5,000 megawatt power plant to offset the 4,000 MW of delayed nuclear generation capacity, it said.
Vietnam has outlined plans to build seven nuclear power plants by 2030, but there have been fears over nuclear power technology following the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan.
The Supreme Council of the junior coalition partner, the Polish Peasants’ Party (PSL) has prepared a resolution calling for withdrawal from Poland’s plans to build its first nuclear power plant. According to unofficial sources of the Polish Press Agency , the Council – the party’s top authority – is due to vote the document during its next sitting in three months’ time.
According to the news agency, the resolution’s advocates include the Council’s head Jaroslaw Kalinowski (former vice-premier) and PSL’s parliamentary caucus head Jan Bury (former vice-minister of treasury).
Poland plans to launch the first 3000 MW nuclear power block in 2023 or 2024 and the second peer block – two years later. However, a few months ago, PM Donald Tusk admitted that this plan should be realised in a slightly more distant future.
The nuclear project is to be carried out by Poland’s biggest power utility Polska Grupa Energetyczna (PGE). Earlier, PGE signed a letter of intent concerning participation in the preparation, construction and operation of a nuclear power plant with blue-chip copper and silver producer KGHM and two other power utilities: Tauron Polska Energia and Enea. The document’s validity ended at the end of 2013, but the firms pledged to continue cooperation in this field.
Nuclear power plants won’t be coming to Indiana any time soon, after all.
A key state senator has pulled his bill that would have provided financial incentives to utilities to build nuclear plants.
Sen. James Merritt, R-Indianapolis confirmed today he won’t hold hearings on his bill this session, and said construction of a nuclear plant is “probably more than a decade away.”
The move amounts to a sudden reversal of Merritt’s push for nuclear energy in Indiana. Less than two weeks ago, Merritt introduced bill. Last week, the bill was sent to the Senate Utilities Committee, which Merritt chairs.
Senate Bill 302 would have allowed utilities to build a nuclear plant or a small modular reactor and pass along the engineering and construction costs to customers years before the plant goes into operation.
Indiana is one of the few Midwest states with no nuclear power plants. It has long relied on abundant coal reserves for energy.
In a statement today, Merritt said the bill would not be heard in committee or considered this session because no utility or large energy user, such as a steel mill, has shown interest.
“This topic, though, needs to be kept fresh in the minds of Hoosiers because the Environmental Protection Agency’s rules do not favor coal as a future energy source,” Merritt said in a statement. “Nuclear energy is expensive to build but cheap to operate. I am interested in nuclear power as a whole — both small and large power packs.”
Call Star reporter John Russell at (317) 444-6283 and follow him on Twitter @johnrussell99.
Bloomberg, Jan. 20, 2014: Highly radioactive water was detected inside the No. 3 reactor building at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant, Tepco said in yesterday’s statement. […] The latest leak threatens to undermine efforts by the company to distance itself from the March 2011 disaster […] Beta radiation levels of 24 million becquerels per liter were detected in the water from the first floor of the reactor building, the company said. The utility in December detected beta radiation levels of 57 million becquerels per liter in water beneath the same unit, [a Tepco spokesman] said. […] Ending radioactive water leaks along with groundwater and ocean contamination at the Fukushima plant may take more than five years, according to a report released by a government advisory body in December.
Asahi Shimbun,, Jan. 20, 2014: Radiation levels indicate the leak discovered within the stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant involves water used to cool melted nuclear fuel, [TEPCO] said Jan. 19. “The leaked water is highly likely to have come from the water that was already used to cool fuel rods, and not from leaked rainwater or cooling water (on its way to the reactor),” a TEPCO official said. […] The water sample contained 2.4 million becquerels per liter of radioactive cesium, while the reading for substances emitting beta rays, including strontium, reached 24 million becquerels per liter. […]
NHK,, Jan. 19, 2014: [TEPCO] says water leaking in the number 3 reactor building is most likely to have come from the containment vessel […] temperature is approximately 20 degrees Celsius [like] the water at the bottom of the reactor. TEPCO officials suspect the water for cooling melted fuel in the containment vessel is leaking for some unknown reason. They say they will continue their investigation to understand the condition of the melted fuel, as well as that of the containment vessel in their effort to find out how and where the water is leaking. Watch NHK’s broadcast here
The amount of atmospheric cesium being transported across the ocean via winds remains the unknown yet potentially greater factor. It partially explains the drastic difference in projections, as there are no monitoring stations for airborne radiation in the Pacific and no reliable methods of predicting the scale of its effects. Further, it has only recently been publicly admitted that 300-400 tons of contaminated water have been pouring into the Pacific per day since the meltdown began in March 2011.
International marine science organization releases report on radiation in Pacific OceanThomas Henry Natural News January 20, 2014 If you’ve heard about Fukushima radiation spreading to the Pacific Coast of North America but were “corrected” by sources both official and expert that this was based more on rumor than reality, then consider the information presented at the October 2013 North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES) annual meeting.
Researchers from Fisheries and Oceans Canada confirmed that the radioactive plume from Fukushima is indeed reaching the shores of Canada and the United States – and was detected at least six months ago – carried both in the ocean surface water and the atmosphere on similar but slightly different courses.
In a presentation titled “Communicating the forecasts, uncertainty and consequences of ecosystem change,” (read here: http://www.pices.int) the Canadian researchers gave evidence that the bulk of radioactivity from Fukushima is shifting almost entirely from the western portion of the North Pacific (Japan) to the eastern portion (North America) over the course of the next five years. As of 2012, it had already reached the central region of the Pacific Ocean, and a previously unpublished map shows that, as of 2013, it had reached the shores of Alaska and British Columbia, with the most intense area of the plume yet to arrive. Continue reading →
Nuclear Engineer: It’s a little alerting to see this many articles downplaying Fukushima health effects — You have to think, why is this happening? — Are they going to walk away from reactors and say sorry, there’s nothing we can do? (VIDEO)Chris Harris, former licensed Senior Reactor Operator and engineer, Jan. 16, 2014 (at 21:30 in):
This is not the first time I’ve seen an article lately about downplaying the health effects that we’re seeing due to any kind of elevated radiation that is coming from Fukushima, or from other sources that I’m not aware of. The whole problem is — it’s not that this [by itself] is a problem — the problem is, I’m seeing more and more of these kind of articles coming out […]
I think there’s misleading on both sides. It’s a little alerting when you start seeing many articles coming out downplaying the health effects. You have to kind of think, ‘Why is this happening?’ I’m wondering, is it because someone is going to start saying that there’s really nothing that they can do?
Maybe Tepco is saying that, especially since Tepco last week decided to change the name of their company and start going into the buying and selling of electrical generation. […] Remember, a long time ago I said I wouldn’t be surprised if Tepco got up and walked away from the mess saying, ‘Sorry guys, there’s nothing we can do, see you later.’
The “climate emissions” spin of nuclear power has been thoroughly discredited, as has the ongoing myth that wind and solar cannot generate stable, industrial base-load volumes of electricity. These technologies have matured, also generating many times the possible number of jobs compared with nuclear, while utilising our existing skill sets – something nuclear cannot do.
Radiation issue ignored in nuclear spin January 20 2014 The nuclear spin must be exposed. Muna Lakhani Earthlife Africa Cape Town Member of The South African United National Anti-nuclear Mobilisation Initiativehttp://www.iol.co.za/business/opinion/letters/radiation-issue-ignored-in-nuclear-spin-1.1633529#.Ut7pT9LTnMw It is a source of endless fascination, and not without a chuckle, reading the pontificating of people without any topical “technical” qualifications (other than that of spin doctor), who claim to understand the motivation of those who choose to fight plans for the massive nuclear expansion in our country. (With reference to “Might Russia still get the nuclear power station deal?” by Keith Bryer in Business Report, January 12
The critical issue of radiation is roundly ignored by the correspondent – the single most problematic part of the nuclear chain, for which no viable solution has been found after about 70 years.
Even a cursory glance at figures of radiation released from Fukushima gives the lie to the bald statement that Chernobyl was “the worst accident by far” – not only are the figures already far higher than Chernobyl, the potential release could go as high as 50 times that of Chernobyl (for the latest figures see tekknorg.wordpress.com/2014/01/11/ tepco-cooked-core-of-reactor-2-core-and-then-blew-it-out/) Continue reading →
nuclear-news 