IAEA backs controlled discharge of tainted water into sea from Fukushima plant
Feb. 17, 2014
TOKYO —
The U.N. nuclear watchdog has urged Japan to consider “controlled discharges” into the sea of contaminated water used to cool the crippled reactors at Fukushima.
The proposal was among recommendations outlined in a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency after its latest inspection of the worst nuclear accident in a generation.
“The IAEA team believes it is necessary to find a sustainable solution to the problem of managing contaminated water,” the 72-page report said.
Kazakhstan delegation presents the country’s anti-nuclear initiatives at an international conference in Mexico
During the event, participants discussed such issues as challenges of a nuclear weapon detonation to national, regional and global economic growth and sustainable development; the impact of such a detonation on global health; and the risk of nuclear blasts and other effects of the detonation of nuclear weapons.
http://www.inform.kz/eng/article/2631518
ASTANA. KAZINFORM A Kazakhstan delegation presented the country’s position on the need for further coordinated efforts of the international community to reduce nuclear weapons during the 2nd International Conference on the Humanitarian Impact of Nuclear Weapons, held in Nayarit, Mexico on February 13-14.
Diplomats from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs also informed conference participants about the actions of the republic to rehabilitate areas affected by nuclear tests, and the specific steps in the international arena aimed at facilitating the process of global nuclear disarmament, including an international initiative of the President Nursultan Nazarbayev, the ATOM Project, Kazinform cites the MFA’s press service.
During the conference, ambassador-at-large of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Kazakhstan Roman Vasilenko noted that
“the need to address the problems left behind by the Semipalatinsk test site is recognized by the international community. Since 1997, the UN General Assembly, recognizing the seriousness of the situation, has adopted six resolutions calling for international cooperation and coordination for the humanitarian and ecological rehabilitation and economic development of the Semipalatinsk region of Kazakhstan. Today we can say that, in view of the measures taken in the framework of the state-level, regional and sectoral programs, as well as in view of the international assistance, the need for more coordinated approach and a more active participation of the international community in this process has not lost its urgency.”
Speaking about the efforts under the ATOM Project, the Kazakhstan diplomat stressed that the peaceful call of the President of Kazakhstan has been met with broad international support, and today the ATOM Project’s online petition, urging governments of the world to achieve the entry into force of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), has been signed by about 80,000 people from more than 100 countries .
As noted, since the early days of independence of Kazakhstan the promotion of global nuclear disarmament has been one of the most important foreign policy priorities personally of President Nazarbayev and of Kazakhstan’s diplomacy which is reflected in the recently adopted Concept of Foreign Policy of the country for 2014-2020.
“We believe the more nations adhere to such principles of human relations, as dialog, mutual trust and mutually beneficial cooperation, and follow the examples countries that have already renounced nuclear weapons, the greater chance we will all have of breaking the vicious cycles of war, conflict and mistrust, and reaching the ultimate goal of building a safer world, a world without the threat of nuclear annihilation,” the representative of Kazakhstan said.
Conference participants were shown a brief documentary film prepared by the International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) with the contribution from the ATOM Project and dedicated to the tragic consequences of use and testing of nuclear weapons and the need for a total ban on nuclear weapons in the world.
This conference was the second such international forum. The first conference, attended by delegations from more than 130 countries, including Kazakhstan, took place in Oslo in March 2013. While the first forum provided an opportunity for government representatives to exchange views and identify further steps to promote the ideas of nuclear disarmament, this forum was focused more on the efforts and the exchange of experience at the expert level.
As noted by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Mexico, “It is important to deepen our understanding of the effects of nuclear weapons, by approaching the global and long-term consequences of a nuclear detonation, accidental or deliberate, from the perspective and variables of the 21st Century society. Governments, international organizations and civil society are invited to participate with multi-sectorial delegations, at expert-level, with specialists in areas such as public health, humanitarian assistance, environmental issues, and civilian protection, among others, as well as diplomats and military experts.”
Along with representatives from 146 countries, the conference was attended by experts from the UN and UN system organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO), the International Organization for Migration (IOM), UN Institute for Disarmament Research (UNIDIR), Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance (OCHA); leadership and experts of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW), the Mayors for Peace, research and non-governmental organizations from the UK, Norway, Switzerland and other countries. Mexican Foreign Minister José Antonio Meade Kuribreña opened the conference, while ICRC Vice-President Christine Beerlie gave a keynote address.
During the event, participants discussed such issues as challenges of a nuclear weapon detonation to national, regional and global economic growth and sustainable development; the impact of such a detonation on global health; and the risk of nuclear blasts and other effects of the detonation of nuclear weapons.
The conference resulted in the summary presented by its chairman, the representative of Mexico, who outlined specific approaches to further advancing the process of nuclear disarmament in the world.
The next such conference will be held in the autumn of this year in Austria, as announced by its Minister of Foreign Affairs Sebastian Kurz on February 13.
Firstpost India ‘Delay in nuclear deal with Japan may hit progress on atomic plants`
17 February 2014
New Delhi: Progress on atomic plants being built here by France and the US can be hampered by the delay in India’s nuclear deal with Japan where key components of these plants are manufactured and India now wants these countries to push Japan to conclude the agreement at the earliest
National Security Advisor Shivshankar Menon impressed upon French officials during his visit to Paris last month that France should take up the issue with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe when he travels there in May, sources said here. Menon told the French officials that Abe should be persuaded to fast-track the nuclear deal with India, the sources said. France is building a nuclear plant at Jaitapur in Maharashtra and a number of its components are manufactured by companies based in Japan. Until India and Japan have a nuclear deal in place, these companies cannot provide the components for the plant. Similarly, the US is also proposing to construct a nuclear plant in Mithi Virdi in Gujarat and will require components from Japan-based companies. For US and France, their companies – WestingHouse Electric Co, GE Electric and Areva – are building reactor for Indian nuclear power plants. The technology used by these companies requires equipment that could be sourced from Japan. For India, nuclear cooperation deal with France will open a range of avenues in the field of nuclear energy and cooperation. As the nuclear deal with Japan and India could not be signed during Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s recent visit to Delhi last month, sources point out that this could have an impact on the progress of two upcoming nuclear power plant projects in India.
Australia seeks to draw India into tighter embrace with nuclear deal
…A senior government official here, who did not wish to be identified , quoted Robert Zoellick, who was a top US state department official before becoming World Bank president, as saying, “It is in everyone’s interest to have China as a responsible stakeholder”….
February 17, 2014
http://www.asianews.co/australia-seeks-to-draw-india-into-tighter-embrace-with-nuclear-deal/
CANBERRA: Australia, which in the past has expressed serious reservations about New Delhi’s nuclear programme, appears extremely keen to close a deal to supply uranium to India. “We see it as a priority and want to move as quickly as possible. The political will certainly exists within this government,” Australia’s foreign minister Julie Bishop told reporters here even as the two countries were in the middle of their fourth round of talks for a civil nuclear cooperation agreement.
It’s a sentiment that finds resonance across the five-month-old Liberal-National coalition government of Tony Abbott. “We have a very strong commitment to making this deal happen. We want to be seen as a trusted partner of India,” trade and investment minister Andrew Robb said.
Both Bishop and Robb were critical of the Kevin Rudd-led Labour government for overturning Liberal predecessor John Howard’s decision to supply uranium to India. “The Howard government, in which I was a minister, had signed off on it. Unfortunately, the next government had a different policy,” Robb said. “I think it will provide a great opportunity for peaceful power generation. We have 40% of the world’s uranium deposits and have a great willingness to ensure that it is made available to India.”
Peter Varghese, secretary for foreign affairs and trade, made the same point, albeit with the nuanced cautiousness of a career diplomat, when he said, “I think we’ll get an agreement on uranium supplies. The Abbott government is very supportive of it. We are very optimistic.”
Rudd, who was considered an ‘Asianist’ (and was perhaps best known in the world of foreign policy for his knowledge of Mandarin), said no to uranium supplies to India primarily on the grounds that it is not a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). There are indications that the Abbott government might be willing to dilute some of Australia’s monitoring safeguards – for instance, end-user verification – which are actually more stringent than what the International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA) mandates and which India has little interest in agreeing to. According to Bishop, “The points of difference are narrowing, we have a couple of things to work through.”
While she would not elaborate, the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, of which Australia is a member, is said to be one of them. (There’s also a narrower self-interest in finding a new market for Australia’s uranium producers.)
Mobilizing Nuclear Bias: The Fukushima Nuclear Crisis and the Politics of Uncertainty
…..Now that the initial crisis phase has passed, the focus has turned to reconstruction and reform, but on the ground in the Tohoku region people face chronic uncertainty about the safety of food and the long-term effects of low-level radiation exposure. The government’s initial response was discouraging, and the nuclear village, when all is said and done, may remain substantially intact. But social activism is on the rise, bringing previously disengaged citizens into political movements that were previously the domain of activists, who are now being vindicated by recent events…..
The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 12, Issue 7, No. 4, February 17, 2014.
Kyle Cleveland
http://japanfocus.org/-Kyle-Cleveland/4075
Abstract
The nuclear disaster in Fukushima which followed in the wake of the 3/11 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami has given rise to one of the most significant public health crises in modern world history, with profound implications for how nuclear energy is perceived. This paper analyzes the most dire phase of the Fukushima nuclear crisis, showing how the level of risk was assessed by nuclear experts and state-level actors who worked largely out of view of public scrutiny. In addition to examining how the accident progression in the reactors was addressed and conveyed to the general public, the paper addresses how the exclusionary zones were determined by Japanese and foreign governments in Japan. As the crisis unfolded and efforts to bring the reactors under control were initially proving ineffective, concerns increased that radiation dispersion was unmitigated, and with radiation monitoring by the U.S. military indicating levels significantly beyond TEPCO’s conservative assessments, the United States broke with Japan, recommending an 80km exclusionary zone, and initiating military assisted departures for embassy staff and Department of Defense dependents from Japan. These actions deviated significantly from Japan’s assessments (which had established a 30km evacuation zone), creating a dynamic where the U.S. provided technical consultation for the nuclear response while striving to maintain a delicate diplomatic balance as they attempted to impose a qualitatively different crisis management response. Because this crisis had significant implications for Japan’s international relations, diplomatic considerations have helped to suppress the complex, often fractious relations between Japan and foreign governments – especially the United States – whose collective efforts eventually turned the tide from managing the nuclear meltdowns to ameliorating their long-term consequences. Based on interviews with political officials in both the Japanese government and foreign embassies in Japan, and nuclear experts and military officers who worked the crisis, the paper analyzes how technical assessments drove decision making and were translated into political policy.
Keywords: Fukushima nuclear accident, US Japan Alliance, SPEEDI, Radiation Assessment, Meltdown
Introduction
This paper analyzes institutional response to the Fukushima nuclear disaster, looking at how experts and key decision-making elites in the United States assessed the crisis and set policies as representatives of their organizations. In particular, it examines two related issues: the reactor meltdowns and the dispersion of radioactive fallout, and analyzes the political consequences of the divergent interpretations which developed in the first few days of the crisis around these issues. The framing of these central issues helped construct the general perception of risk that prevailed in this phase of the crisis, and provides a reference point against which to measure subsequent views as the crisis evolved over the longer term. The paper touches on the differences in perception between various foreign governments and examines the political implications of the crisis for international alliances in Japan.
In addition to examining how the accident progression in the reactors was addressed and conveyed to the general public, the paper will discuss how the exclusionary zones and evacuations from areas in close proximity to the Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) were determined by Japanese and foreign governments in Japan. As the crisis unfolded and efforts to bring the reactors under control were initially proving ineffective, concerns increased that radiation dispersion was significantly beyond what TEPCO was indicating, and as a result, the United States recommended a 80km exclusionary zone and initiated military-assisted departures for embassy staff and Department of Defense dependents from Japan. These actions deviated significantly from Japan’s assessments (which had established a 30km evacuation zone), creating a dynamic in which the U.S.provided technical consultation for the nuclear response while striving to maintain a delicate diplomatic balance as it attempted to impose a qualitatively different crisis management response.
This analysis is based primarily on in-depth interviews with diplomats in foreign embassies, military officials, journalists, nuclear scientists, and scholars, and examines how their collective narratives evolved in interaction with public sentiment as the crisis unfolded. The scope of the analysis is focused on the reflective perceptions of actors as they attempted to make sense of the crisis retrospectively after the 3.11 disasters. Because of diplomatic sensitivities and because some of the experts whose perspectives are represented in this analysis are constrained by organizational obligations that preclude them from revealing their identity, some of the sources remain confidential. In each case in which the identity of a source has been withheld, the information has been verified by independent sources.
“Meltdown” at Fukushima Daiichi
In the fitful hours after Japan experienced its largest ever recorded earthquake on March 11, 2011, the coastline of Tohoku lay in ruins from a tsunami that swept entire towns out to sea, resulting in the death of almost 20,000 people. As the world stood transfixed by the scale of devastation wrought by the tsunami, Japan ramped up its disaster management assets to address this crisis, coordinating its efforts with foreign governments and humanitarian relief organizations. While the international community initially mobilized to offer support for tsunami relief efforts in Tohoku, attention soon turned to the Daiichi nuclear power plant in Fukushima.
In retrospect, the condition of the Daiichi plant in the most dire phase of the crisis seems readily transparent, as an unending litany of bad news has cast the situation in such continuing negative connotations that, like Chernobyl, Fukushima has taken on talismanic connotations to serve as a symbol of nuclear dread. But in the first few days of the crisis, with little meaningful information being provided amidst the disorienting impact of the earthquake and tsunami, and TEPCO offering assurances that were uncritically passed on by the government and a docile press, hope remained that the situation could be brought under control. This wishful thinking was soon made irrational by the explosion of the outer containment structure of reactor #1, which was so powerful (the explosion broke windows 3km from the plant) that both plant workers inside the Daiichi complex and nuclear experts watching from afar initially believed that the reactor core itself had exploded.
With the explosion of the reactor #1 building there was no doubting the significance of this crisis, but calibrating the actual risk and danger that this presented to the general public was a moving target, with competing risk narratives that developed almost immediately after the initial news reports were released that the Daiichi and Daini nuclear power plants in Tohoku were in trouble. In the first few days of the nuclear crisis the information made available to the public was confusing, contradictory and frustrating. Despite a massive explosion that destroyed the outer, secondary containment structure of the Daiichi reactor #1 building, soon to be followed on the next day by a similar explosion of the reactor #3 building, TEPCO insisted that the primary reactor core containment was intact and that there were no releases of radiation that posed a threat to public health. Initially, conjecture held sway, with the foreign media challenging the Japanese press corps, who did little more than pass along TEPCO’s announcements, essentially serving as a PR agency for the utility.
By this time, the Japanese and foreign media reportage characterized the situation as dire, even as the TEPCO officials and government were staging press conferences that offered platitudes of assurance while conveying facts that contradicted these statements. For the reporters who covered the crisis, the information provided by the utility was incoherent, contradictory and alarming. At the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) offices in Tokyo, senior editors debated how to characterize the crisis. When the government spokesman Edano Yukio conceded on March 13th that one of the reactors might be in “meltdown,” the WSJ editors noted that the nomenclature of “meltdown” as a label to describe the situation was culturally distinct, with different nuances of meaning between the Japanese term “炉戸溶融 (ろしんようゆう)” and the Western notion of a “meltdown,” which carried more ominous connotations than the straightforward transliteration of the word “meltdown” into Japanese.1
The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the term “meltdown” as including “[1] the accidental melting of the core of a nuclear reactor; [2] a rapid or disastrous decline or collapse; [3] a breakdown of self control, (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2012), and the Oxford English Dictionary explains that “a meltdown was originally a catastrophic accident in a nuclear reactor, but this literal meaning has been swamped by the figurative sense of ‘a disastrous collapse or breakdown’. The term is now used metaphorically to refer to a chaotic loss of control, which is derived from the accidents at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island, where the reactors “ran away” from operator control, releasing significant amounts of radiation as a result of their errors. These accidents are now widely regarded as being the result of institutional failure, and TEPCO’s parsing of the term may have been a way to skirt the issue of responsibility by placing the emphasis only on the melting of nuclear fuel, rather than their own loss of control of the plant.
Crack Found in NE Ohio Nuclear Plant
Sunday, 16 February 2014
A spokeswoman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said that it’s too early to determine whether the gap found Thursday posed a problem.
Ed Davey fights back amid row over clean-up of Sellafield nuclear site
A damning report by KPMG last year showed that nine out of the 11 biggest projects to make Sellafield safe, including the construction of a storage facility to store radioactive sludge, were a combined £2bn over budget.
The situation on site was so dire that there was widespread speculation that responsibility for decontaminating Sellafield, which houses more than 1,000 nuclear facilities on a site of only six square kilometres, would be taken back in-house by the NDA
The Energy Secretary, Ed Davey, has hit back at critics over the Government’s apparent lack of oversight in the handling of Sellafield, one of the world’s most hazardous nuclear sites.
The Liberal Democrat peer Lord Avebury has written to Mr Davey demanding to know why ministers left the decision of whether to hand a contract extension to the private sector consortium running the clean-up of the site in Cumbria to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA), which owns Sellafield.
The decontamination is now set to cost more than £70bn, and the consortium, Nuclear Management Partners (NMP), has been heavily criticised for a vast number of delays and budget overruns.
In a recent parliamentary statement, the Government said the energy department was not in charge of awarding the extension last October as it was an “operational matter for the NDA”.
UK climate threat to nuclear sites a real and present danger?
….The Japanese government is taking away citizen freedoms and implementing jail sentencing for speaking about the nuclear disaster effects (5 to 10 years in Jail for the general population with 2 years in jail for doctors and nurses and gagging orders on the victims). This seems to be the reality behind large industrial incidents in the 21st century and was the reality in Belarus after the Chernobyl accident in the 20th century…
17 February 2014
OpEd by Arclight2011
Posted to nuclear-news.net
…..But the report makes a number of recommendations, requiring reviews of emergency procedures, of techniques for estimating radioactive source terms, and of the adequacy of the system of planning controls for commercial and residential developments off the nuclear licensed site, which will add to delays and costs for any developers.
It also charges the nuclear industry and the ONR to have “more open, transparent and trusted communications, and relationships, with the public”.
Obfuscation was a widespread criticism of the industry in Japan and worldwide, both before and after the tsunami. – http://www.eaem.co.uk/news/weightman-warns-nuclear-industry-do-more-research
“….. there is little quantified information currently available. ONR acknowledges that generation of this information was not practicable within the timescales of producing the stress tests reports. Significant work is required, particularly to evaluate margins to equipment failure against extreme wind and temperature” http://www.oecd-nea.org/nsd/fukushima/documents/UK_ST_Final_National_Report.pdf
The recent final national report concerning the UK`s nuclear power plants rediness to deal with Flood events looked at tidal surges and rising water levels but did not take into account extremely heavy rainfall causing flooding as a clear and present danger, in my opinion, and here is why.
The nuclear industry should in invest and take seriously these safety concerns and mitigate them if they want to continue their buisness. The ONR and DECC (UK government departments resonsible for nuclear issues), in recent meetings with green stakeholder groups actually made decisions behind the backs of the stakeholders, thereby wasting more tax payer time and money whilst the stakeholder groups were left shocked at this abuse of the democratic process and impact on the efficiency of health and safety procedure and practice.
Image source ; http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/458233/Shock-weather-warning-WORST-Atlantic-storm-of-the-winter-is-now-ROARING-towards-Britain
The big nuclear companies threatened DECC from withdrawing all co-operation concerning nuclear matters if they insisted on asking for information that was needed for the stakeholders to argue their points. So, DECC was actually blackmailed. Thats why the ONR said things like this;
“ONR’s view is that due to the relatively gradual effects of climate change, and uncertainty regarding its effect on design basis conditions, the effects of climate change can continue to be managed through the existing PSR process.”
As I write this article Britain is currently having flooding across a wide range of areas with the Thames in London flowing at a record breaking pace. These are caused by the multiple Storms coming in of the Atlantic that has been caused by the movement of the Jet Stream to move south over the UK. The storms hit Norway in recent years causing large rock slides that caused massive disruption to the road system and rail networks and infrastructure.
But the storms have not stopped being formed and currently there are 3 more huge storms heading towards the UK and France.
In the report from the review of nuclear power plants after the Fukushima nuclear meltdowns;
Finding number STF 7;
“Licensees should undertake a more structured and systematic study of the potential for floodwater entry to buildings containing safety ‐ significant structures, systems and components (SSC) from extreme rainfall and / or overtopping of sea defenses.” ONR
Extreme rainfall, snow, tidal surges, rising sea levels, surface flooding caused by extreme rainfall and mismanagement of local environments are a clear and present danger yet the report seemed to highlight the extreme effects of temperature and rising sea levels, in connection with climate change, yet little mention was found concerning possible record breaking rainfall and severe winds even though there are reports of just such flooding causing problems in the relatively near past.
but not all sites even knew of the meteorological conditions as;
“Consideration should be given to all stations receiving site ‐ specific weather forecasts “
And while the whole nations limited emergency transport and manpower is stretched past the limit even considering the army having to step in, what help or support the nuclear workers might expect to get if there was an event such as a loss of heatsink in a reactor or the spreading of nuclear materials from decommission and waste sites in a prolonged flooding situation with sub zero conditions fast approaching.
“Consideration should be given to the provision of additional station ‐ based robust means of personnel transport for extreme weather conditions”
In fact.. EDF NGL thought that there was no immediate issues that needed to be addressed from flooding issues (largely). It was agreed that EDF NDL would stay flexible and adapt to any unforseen situations and any future planning or research in this area could be avoided (likely as to keep the costs down). Though they did admit this;
“for example it has been identified that the extreme maximum ambient air temperature is likely to be beyond the current design basis within he lifetime of some stations. Suitable safety case amendments are being prepared.”
So EDF do not expect the temperature to change quickly either!
There is a lot of unusual rain damage effects happening in the UK such as the undermining of buildings likely caused by deep voids that the water is flowing into or underground streams. Also, charges are being raised against the government for not investing tax payers money in the right infrastructure projects that might help mitigate or avoid flood and severe weather damage caused by extreme wind speeds and gusts. The coast line is seeing very high waves that actually damage the buildings near the coastline. High winds are causing a lot of structual damage.
EDF to the ONR
“Due to the negligible risk posed by extreme weather conditions at Magnox defuelling sites, the licensees do not consider it necessary to further enhance structures on site against weather ‐ induced hazards” EDF – NGL
Groundwater at Fukushima nuclear plant has record levels of cesium
samples of water tested contained radioactive cesium at levels never seen before by the embattled utility.
Radioactive cesium levels “never seen before” at Fukushima — New record as amount in groundwater nearly doubles in 24 hours — Officials admit ‘may be new leak’ — IAEA urges ‘resumption’ of dumping contaminated water in ocean; ‘All options’ need to be on table (VIDEO) http://enenews.com/radioactive-cesium-spikes-over-past-24-hours-to-new-record-high-officials-admit-there-may-be-a-new-leak-iaea-urging-for-resumption-of-dumping-contaminated-water-into-ocean-all-options
AFP, Feb. 13, 2014: Fukushima should eye ‘controlled discharges’ in sea: IAEA — The [IAEA] urged Japan to consider “controlled discharges” into the sea of contaminated water […] “This would require considering all options, including the possible resumption of controlled discharges to the sea.” […] local fishermen, neighbouring countries and environmental groups all oppose the idea. […] radioactive groundwater […] leaking into the ocean [is] an ongoing problem that has stoked fears about dangers posed to marine life and the food chain. […]
Shanghai Daily, Feb. 13, 2014: TEPCO is still eyeing dumping toxic water into the Pacific Ocean as it fails to contain in makeshift storage tanks […] a massive daily influx of water needed to cool the battered reactors, while nuclear experts believe that other methods need to be traversed before contaminating the ocean. Dumping radioactive water into the ocean is of grave concern to local fisheries cooperatives as the potential for radioactive materials to spread to marine life remains a distinct possibility […] NRA Chairman Shunichi Tanaka […] said […] TEPCO is still utterly inept when it comes to taking accurate readings of radioactivity […] and “lacks a basic understanding of measuring and handling radiation.”
Xinhua, Feb. 13, 2014: [TEPCO] said Thursday that samples of water tested contained radioactive cesium at levels never seen before by the embattled utility. TEPCO [is] admitting there may be a new leak at the site of a well located just 50 meters from the adjacent Pacific […] [It] failed to locate the source of the leak, in another major failing […]
Tepco Handout, February 13, 2014: “The highest dose among the results previously announced” — Underground water at 130,000 Bq/L of Cs-134, 137. Previous record set Feb. 12 with 76,000 Bq/L of Cs-134, 137.
Legal cases loom for French govt over radiation caused illnesses from nuclear bomb testing
Map shows huge radiation spread from 1960s French nuclear tests,France 24, http://www.france24.com/en/20140214-map-shows-huge-radiation-spread-french-saharan-nuclear-tests/The radioactive spread from French nuclear tests in Algeria in the 1960s was much larger that the French army admitted at the time, stretching across all of West Africa and up to southern Europe, according to recently declassified documents
The documents were released in 2013 following appeals from military veterans who say their current ill health is linked to exposure to dangerous levels of radiation.
One map shows that 13 days after France detonated its first nuclear device – “Gerboise Bleue” (Blue Jerboa) – in February 1960, radioactive particles ranged from the Central African Republic to Sicily and southern Spain.
Gerboise Bleue, more than three times as powerful as the bomb dropped on Nagasaki in 1945, exploded in the sky above the Sahara Desert in southern Algeria. The test took place at the height of the former French colony’s independence struggle.
In the 1960s the norms governing acceptable levels of radiation were much less strict than they are now,” said Bruno Barillot, an expert in nuclear tests who is representing veterans’ groups. And the medical evidence we have now shows clearly that exposure to this radiation can set off serious illnesses more than three decades later,” he told French daily Le Parisien.
Barillot added that the declassified documents showed that the army at the time was aware that even the 1960s safety levels were largely surpassed and that significant quantities of airborne radioactive particles, particularly iodine 131 and caesium 137, could have been inhaled by large numbers of people in north Africa.
But he also complained that the government had been extremely selective in terms of what documents to release.Proof that France ignored or tried to hide the health effects of its nuclear testing could be extremely problematic for the French government.
There are already a number of civil cases lodged by Algerians against the French state.nd if it can be demonstrated that the fallout of the bomb tests spread dangerous levels radiation over large parts of North Africa, many more demands for compensation from individuals and from national governments could be in the pipeline.
Solar energy affordable now, nuclear fusion not likely to ever be
Would nuclear fusion be economically viable? THE WEEK, 14 Feb 14 Scientists have passed a crucial milestone on the road to nuclear fusion. But the final frontier for fusion isn’t scientific — it’s economic.
A team of scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California announced Wednesday that they have reached a key milestone in the development of nuclear fusion. Nuclear fusion is the process of atomic nuclei fusing to form a larger atom, which is how the sun emits heat and light.
Writing in the journal Nature, the scientists declared that for the first time ever they had yielded more energy out of fusion than what was needed to create the reaction. They used 192 lasers to compress a pellet of fuel, generating a reaction in which more energy came out of the fuel core than went into it.
But the goal of “ignition” — which is when more energy is yielded than was consumed in the entireprocess — remains distant……However, even ignition is not enough. The final frontier for nuclear fusion is not scientific, but economic — meaning, when it can compete price-wise with the alternatives. And humans already have lots of energy options for the future……
The twilight of the fossil fuel age is being spent developing renewable forms of energy. Some are inherently small-scale in nature, like wind and hydroelectric power………… the Sun, which each year casts down much greater quantities of energy onto the Earth than the total amount of fossil fuel beneath its surface.
For photovoltaic energy, we have already passed the threshold of “ignition,” with solar panels capturing more energy than it takes to produce them. Furthermore, solar energy’s prices are falling so rapidly that it is becoming competitive with fossil fuels……..or most purposes, it all comes down to efficiency. We still don’t know how efficient nuclear fusion reactors will be in practice. Right now, we do know that solar energy is already viable.John Aziz http://theweek.com/article/index/256500/would-nuclear-fusion-be-economically-viable
Offensive headline about Japanese women draws protests
‘How to date Japanese women who haven’t been exposed to radiation’ ,global post,14 Feb 14 Readers weren’t too happy with South Korea’s Maxim after they published an article with the inflammatory headline………An inflammatory headline, to say the least, and one that Korean readers were quick to point out as inappropriate given the sensitive nature of Japan’s continuing recovery after the 2011 tsunami and Fukushima disaster.
Japan‘s media caught wind of the controversy this week, and the rest is viral history.
The original article on Japan Today has been removed, but we’ve captured the cached versionfor you.Maxim Korea’s editor-in-chief said the article, in the February issue of the magazine, was about how to get a Japanese girlfriend, regardless of her exposure to radiation, and he apologized (sort of) for preying on readers with an egregiously provocative headline. ………http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/south-korea/140214/maxim-date-japanese-women-radiation-controversial-article
Diseconomics of nuclear power leading to more shutdowns
Group warns more nuclear power plants may shut down By Luther Turmelle, New Haven Register 02/14/14 The chief executive officer of a trade group representing the nuclear power industry warned Wall Street analysts Thursday that more power plants in the sector may be headed for shutdown…….Joel Gordes, a West Hartford-based energy consultant, said there are other issues beyond the way competitive power markets are structured that work against the long term viability of the nuclear power industry in the United States .
The ages of the existing plants isn’t conducive to attracting new investments,” Gordes said. “And (the nuclear accident) at Fukushima has created a whole new perspective on the nuclear industry.”
Another factor working against the long-term viability of nuclear power plants is the move toward distributed generation of power in the United States, he said. Distributed generation is a term used to describe the use of small-scale power producing technologies to generate electricity close to the end users of power.
“By their very nature, nuclear power plants require economies that only come in a very large scale,” Gordes said…http://www.nhregister.com/business/20140214/group-warns-more-nuclear-power-plants-may-shut-down
In space travel threats, radiation is the killer
How radiation rules Mars exploration PhsOrg. by Sheyna E. Gifford “…..we have known that space is a risky place to be, radiation being one of many reasons. We believed that once our explorers safely landed on Mars’ surface, the planet would provide shielding from the ravages of radiation. We didn’t how much, or how little, until very recently. Radiation and its variations impact not only the planning of human and robotic missions, but also the search for life taking place right now…….
Radiation and its variations impact not only the planning of human and robotic missions, but also the search for extraterrestrial life. Without a substantial atmospheric protection, powerful particles entering the air can penetrate straight into the Martian soil. On impacting the surface, the GCRs and SEPs from space produce cascades of other energetic particles. Of these newly produced particles, gamma rays and neutrons are easily capable of breaking molecular bonds in the soil, destroying evidence of past life, as well as any life that may be presenting trying to survive there…….
Deep space, the place of greatest exposure, remains an issue.
“Perhaps one of the areas they would be most vulnerable would be during a spacewalk [on the way] to Mars.”….Because of what we have learned, we can begin to establish weather prediction systems. We can tell explorers that there is an increased risk of cancer associated with a trip to Mars (approximately 5 percent over a lifetime).
In these ways, radiation rules the past, present and future of effective planetary exploration…….http://phys.org/news/2014-02-mars-exploration.html
Goldman Sachs geting out of failing uranium industry
Goldman Sachs Selling Uranium Trading Business Thursday February 13, 2014By Vivien Diniz Uranium Investing News Back in November, SparkSpread, an online energy publication, broke the news that Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS) would be putting its uranium trading desk up for sale due to lax prices for the material and stricter regulations relating to the bank’s commodities activities.
At the time, Goldman said it had no intention of exiting the commodities business. Fast forward several months, and it looks like the bank is substantiating the rumor with the sale of its uranium trading business.
As Reuters states, very few people know that Goldman Sachs has been in the business of trading raw uranium, or yellowcake as it is known. But the bank can trace its uranium business back to an apartheid-era South Africa-based trading corporation that sold Iran its only source of foreign yellowcake over 35 years ago.
However, over the course of the last four years, the bank has been collecting low-grade stockpiles of the nuclear fuel through its nuclear trading desk, known as NUFCOR International. The news outlet writes that Goldman’s stockpiles are currently larger than those held by Iran, and big enough to run China’s nuclear plants for about a year. Beyond that, Goldman has a deal to market a large portion of uranium production from AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE:AU), one of South Africa’s largest miners.
Banks pulling out of commodities
Goldman Sachs entered the uranium trading business in 2009, along with Deutsche Bank (NYSE:DB), the second-largest bank in Europe, when supplies were tight and prices were ready to spike. However, since Fukushima, the uranium price hasn’t returned to its previous highs…..http://resourceinvestingnews.com/66677-goldman-sachs-selling-uranium-trading-business.html
1 This Month
26 April – Chernobyl: Inside the Meltdown airs on National Geographic on Sunday 26th April from 4pm
29 April – Nuclear Expert Webinar #1 – Radiation Impacts on Families with Mary Olson and Cindy Folkers
- 12:15 PM MT – 1:45 PM MT
- Location: Virtual – REGISTER TODAY
4 May -West Suburban Peace Coalition to discuss Iran war at May Educational Forum
Monday, May 4, 7:00 – 8:00 PM Central Standard Time
Title: : How Trump’s Narrative Tries to Shape the Reality of the War on Iran.
Contact Walt Zlotow, zlotow@hotmail.com 630 442 3045 for further information
14 May – online event From Bombs to Data Centres: the Face of Nuclear Colonialism
Pine Ridge Uranium is the real threat, not Tehran- Tell Burgum: Stop the Extraction.
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (317)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 