Nuclear Forensics plans to Prevent Nuclear Terrorism
DHS Nuclear Forensics Efforts to Prevent Nuclear Terrorism Featured at IAEA Conference, Homeland Security, July 15, 2014 Huban Gowadia Director, Domestic Nuclear Detection Office:Last week, the Department of Homeland Security’s Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) joined the Departments of State and Energy, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and 335 international experts and officials from 88 member states to participate in the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) International Conference on Advances in Nuclear Forensics, Countering the Evolving Threat of Nuclear and Other Radioactive Material out of Regulatory Control in Vienna, Austria.
Conference participants were provided an overview of IAEA guidance on how nuclear forensics can be used to help ensure successful investigation of a nuclear security event. This guidance, which DNDO helped develop, promotes international cooperation in capability development as well as during investigations.
DNDO presented our National Nuclear Forensics Expertise Development program, which can serve as a model for other IAEA member nations. Established in 2008, the program is a comprehensive U.S. Government effort to grow and sustain the qualified technical expertise required to execute the nation’s nuclear forensics mission……..http://www.dhs.gov/blog/2014/07/15/dhs-nuclear-forensics-efforts-prevent-nuclear-terrorism-featured-iaea-conference
India working on mandatory renewable energy system
Power ministry, regulators contemplate ways to develop renewable energy By Mitul Thakkar, ET Bureau | 17 Jul, 2014 NEW DELHI: Electricity regulators and power ministry are contemplating steps to make it mandatory for conventional power project developers to set up renewable energy plants in future, while distribution firms may have to purchase more clean energy, but regulatory authorities are concerned that this may hurt loss-making utilities.
Anti science, climate denialism, championed by electing Australia’s Tony Abbott
History will condemn climate change denialists Robert Manne theguardian.com, Wednesday 16 July 2014 Tony Abbott was elected by the right-wing of his party for a single purpose: to destroy any meaningful action in Australia against the threat of climate change
The argument for radical action on climate change– which Australia will soon at least temporarily reject with the shameful decision to repeal the carbon tax – is embarrassingly simple.
For the past 200 years, western culture has granted science pre-eminent cultural authority. A quarter century ago, a consensus formed among contemporary scientists specialising in the study of the climate. The consensus comprised one principal idea: the primary source of energy on which industrial civilisation relied – the burning of fossil fuels – was dangerously increasing the temperature of the earth.
Thousands upon thousands of scientific studies have been conducted estimating the impact of this warming. Hundreds of outstanding books have been published making the conclusions of the scientists available to the general public. To anyone willing to listen, these scientists have explained that unless human beings derive their energy from sources other than fossil fuels, the future that we face over the next decades and centuries involves the rendering of large parts of the earth uninhabitable to humans and other species – through the melting of the ice caps and glaciers and thus steadily rising sea levels, the acidification of the oceans, the destruction of forests and coral reefs, and the increase in the prevalence and intensity of famines, insect-borne diseases, droughts, bush fires, floods, hurricanes and heat-waves.
Climate scientists also explained that radical action on climate change could not be delayed. …….
As global emissions increased, something surpassingly strange occurred in the realm of politics in the US – something without parallel in the history of the post-Enlightenment west since the Darwinian controversy. The emergence of a broad-based movement of thought challenging the sovereignty of science in one specialised field.
Anti-science climate change denialism began with money cynically and strategically supplied by the massive American fossil fuel corporations. From there it spread to the powerful US network of neo-liberal “think-tanks” whose purpose was to produce the ideas helping to make the world safe for the wealthiest members of the society – the so-called 1%. And from the think-tanks climate change denialism steadily spread downwards to American society more generally, thanks to rabid right wing media like Fox News, until it was powerful enough to capture, almost in its entirety, one of America’s traditional political parties, the republicans.
As a consequence of the spread of climate change denialism, tens of millions of American citizens now base their opinions on the kind of pseudo-knowledge manufactured by the climate change denialist blogs and disseminated daily by the right-wing media. They have come to treat the questions of whether the earth is warming, and if so why, as political matters concerning which those without any genuine scientific understanding or training are as qualified to form an opinion as professors who have devoted their lives to one of the disciplines of climate science.
Climate change denialism soon spread beyond the US, especially to the countries of the English-speaking world. As Australia is a country extremely sensitive to the cultural winds blowing in from the US, reliant on the export and consumption of coal, and where the denialist Murdoch newspapers exercise enormous unhealthy influence, it is hardly surprising that over the past decade climate change denialism quickly sunk deep roots here.,,,,,
The right-wing denialists, now dominant within the Coalition, often call themselves conservatives. They are not. At the heart of true conservatism is the belief that each new generation forms the vital bridge between past and future, and is charged with the responsibility of passing the earth and its cultural treasures to their children and grandchildren in sound order. History will condemn the climate change denialists, here and elsewhere, for their contribution to the coming catastrophe that their cupidity, their arrogance, their myopia and their selfishness have bequeathed to the young and the generations still unborn. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/16/history-will-condemn-climate-change-denialists
Climate Central shows you how hot future summers will be in USA
How hot will future summers be in your city? http://grist.org/news/how-hot-will-future-summers-be-in-your-city/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Daily%2520July%252011&utm_campaign=daily Fancy spending a summer in Kuwait City? That’s what scientists project summers will resemble in Phoenix by the end of the century. And summertime temperatures in Boston are expected to rise 10 degrees by 2100, resembling current mid-year heat in North Miami Beach.
Thanks to this nifty new tool from Climate Central, you can not only find out what temperatures your city is expected to average by 2100 — you can compare that projected weather to current conditions in other metropolises. The “1,001 Blistering Future Summers” interactive is based on global warming projections that assume the world takes little to no action to slow down climate change. But the nonprofit warns that even if greenhouse gas emissions are substantially reduced, such as through an energy revolution that replaces fossil fuel burning with solar panels and wind turbines, “U.S. cities are already locked into some amount of summer warming through the end of the century.” You might be feeling some of that warming already. Pass the ice cubes!
Today’s tweet attacks from pro Thorium Nuclear trolls
For your entertainment? 
These tweets are in response to news items that I have tweeted about problems with thorium nuclear reactors, and the benefits of renewable energy. These pro thorium tweeters make no attempt to answer that information. Their response is to repeatedly attack me personally. But in my opinion not very intelligently. I note that they use sexist and ageist language and pictures. (The pictures are taken ftom ny own graphics, but changed so as to insult me. I wouldn’t bother about all this – but I think it is good to expose the nuclear lobby’s tactics.
Look carefully at Noel wauchope’s DISHONEST tweets “It rained today. I got wet. No to #thorium” Really?!
That the person Noel Wauchope is MURDERING with her FUD was NOT exposed to #thorium is irrelevant to this DISHONEST person!
Noel Wauchope is STUPID. Using the MOST EXPENSIVE #nuclear power plant as reference, German solar is STILL 4 times as expensive! #thorium
Noel Wauchope is not more a critic of #nuclear power than my dog. All she has to offer is IGNORANT BIGOTRY!
Be carefiul of Noel Wauchope. Kills Japanese with glee [ ??? Editors exclamation] but cries boohoo when exposed. NO TO HER DISHONESTY!
Let’s be clear: Noel Wauchope aka @ChristinaMac1 is a Fossil Fuel Industry shill. People have died because of her actions.[ again ???]
Noel Wauchope cannot read let alone understand Science. Her IGNORANT BIGOTRY is all she has. STOP the #GrannyFUD!
brendan @totterdell91 Bwhahaha Noel Wauchopes sock puppets constantly defame everyone else, then have the hide to whine #whataloaofcockycrap #thorium
Lake Huron Is No Place for a Nuclear Waste Dump – David Suzuki
According to Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump, burying such highly toxic wastes in limestone next to 21 per cent of the world’s fresh water “defies common sense.” The group’s website notes, “There are no precedents anywhere in the world for burying radioactive nuclear waste in limestone. The repository must function to safely contain the nuclear wastes for over 100,000 years. No scientist or geologist can provide a 100,000 year guarantee.” The Great Lakes are only 12,000 years old
Posted: 07/16/2014
http://newsbritishcolumbia.ca/2014/07/16/lake-huron-is-no-place-for-a-nuclear-waste-dump/
Is dilution really the solution to pollution — especially when it’s nuclear waste that can stay radioactive for 100,000 years? A four-member expert group told a federal joint review panel it is.
The panel is examining an Ontario Power Generation proposal to bury low- and intermediate-level nuclear waste from the Darlington, Pickering and Bruce nuclear plants in limestone at the Bruce site in Kincardine, beside Lake Huron. According to the Toronto Star, the experts reported that 1,000 cubic metres of contaminated water could leak from the site, although it’s “highly improbable.” But even if it did leak, they argued, the amount is small compared to Lake Huron’s water volume and the quantity of rain that falls into it.
If the materials were instead buried in Canadian Shield granite, any leaking waste would be diluted by active streams and marshes, the experts claimed: “Hence, the volumes of the bodies of water available for dilution at the surface are either immense (Great Lakes) or actively flowing…so the dilution capacity is significant.”
Others aren’t convinced. The Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump group has more than 62,000 signatures on a petition opposing the dump. Many communities around the Great Lakes, home to 40-million people, have passed resolutions against the project, including Canadian cities Toronto, Mississauga, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Kingston, Thunder Bay, Sault Ste. Marie, Windsor and more, and local governments in the states of Michigan, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York and Ohio. The United Tribes of Michigan, representing 12 First Nations, is also opposed.
Michigan’s Senate recently adopted resolutions to urge President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and U.S. Congress to intervene, and for the International Joint Commission, the Great Lakes Commission and all Great Lakes States and Ontario and Quebec to get involved.
According to Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump, burying such highly toxic wastes in limestone next to 21 per cent of the world’s fresh water “defies common sense.” The group’s website notes, “There are no precedents anywhere in the world for burying radioactive nuclear waste in limestone. The repository must function to safely contain the nuclear wastes for over 100,000 years. No scientist or geologist can provide a 100,000 year guarantee.” The Great Lakes are only 12,000 years old!
On top of that, retired Ontario Power Generation research scientist and chemist Frank R. Greening wrote to the review panel stating that OPG has “seriously underestimated, sometimes by factors of more than 100” the radioactivity of material to be buried.
Greening says the company acknowledged his criticism but downplayed its seriousness, which he believes raises doubts about the credibility of OPG’s research justifying the project. “Their response has been, ‘Oops we made a mistake but it isn’t a problem’ and that really bothers me as a scientist,” he told Kincardine News. “It is rationalizing after the fact.”
According to the newspaper, “a radiation leak at a nuclear waste site in New Mexico — cited by OPG as an example of a successful facility — is further fuelling criticism of the project.” In February, radiation was detected in vaults and in the air a kilometre from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, where radioactive materials from the nuclear weapons program are stored. The facility, the world’s only deep geologic repository, had only been in use for 15 years and is closed for now. The cause of the leak isn’t yet known.
Those and other factors led the joint review panel to re-open hearings beginning September 9. They initially ended October 30, 2013. A federal cabinet decision is expected sometime next year.
This “out of sight, out of mind” mentality must end. We can’t continue to dump garbage into the oceans, waterways and air or bury it in the ground and hope it will disappear. If we can’t find better ways to use or at least reduce waste products, we must stop producing them.
In the meantime, this project must be halted. The Great Lakes are already threatened by pollution, agricultural runoff, invasive species, climate change and more. We can’t afford to add the risk of radioactive contamination to one of the world’s largest sources of fresh water.
Written with Contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington. Learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.
Fukushima nuclear plant now a radioactive swamp
Japan Nuclear Prof.: Fukushima plant now a ‘swamp of radioactive material’ — Can’t stop pumping in more water because they don’t know where melted fuel went — Build roof over entire site? — Asahi: Continued presence of water threatens construction of ice wall around reactors http://enenews.com/japan-nuclear-prof-fukushima-plant-is-now-a-swamp-of-radioactive-material-cant-stop-pumping-in-more-water-because-tepco-doesnt-know-where-melted-fuel-went-build-roof-over-entire-site-t?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&
Interview with Professor Hiroaki Koide, Kyoto University Reactor Research Institute, translated by Fukushima Diary, July 13, 2014: Fukushima plant is now like a swamp of radioactive material due to the contaminated water […] Tepco should quit cooling with water since one year ago. However from Tepco’s assumption, it is impossible to shift to air cooling because they can’t identify the exact locations of molten fuel.
More from interview with Professor Koide,translated by Google: I think of that accident of Fukushima […] the human race has been encountered for the first time […] Rather than the cooling in the water, shouldswitch as soon as possible to the cooling method of another I think. […] I thought the most part rain is falling on the site […] so, I cut off the rain. In other words, it is such as paving the entire site. I think I think in some cases, that I would build a roof on the entire site […] in the premises of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, but is in a state such as the swamp of radioactivity […]
Asahi Shimbun, July 9, 2014: 11,000 tons of contaminated water [are in] underground trenches connected to the No. 2 and No. 3 reactor turbine buildings. […] contaminated water began seeping into them after the onset of the March 2011 nuclear crisis. If the contaminated water is not removed from the trenches, it could eventually leak out. The Nuclear Regulation Authority instructed TEPCO to promptly remove the water, calling it the “most serious source of concern.” […] But TEPCO officials said the ice walls failed to form because of the constant flow of a maximum 2 milliliters of water per minute around the connecting points. Toyoshi Fuketa, an NRA commissioner, has instructed TEPCO to come up with steps to resolve the matter by the end of July, arguing that the frozen walls should be able to withstand certain levels of water flow under normal circumstances. The continued presence of water threatens to prevent the creation of outer frozen soil walls encircling the No. 1 through No. 4 reactors, which are a central part of TEPCO’s plans to reduce the amount of contaminated water at the plant.
Full interview with Prof. Koide available here (Japanese only)
The whopping great financial mess that is Finland’s Olkiluoto nuclear power plant
French auditors slam Areva for Olkiluoto nuclear project in Finland http://yle.fi/uutiset/french_auditors_slam_areva_for_olkiluoto_nuclear_project_in_finland/7358244?origin=rss 16 July 14, The French nuclear contractor Areva is at the centre of a storm of criticism by French government auditors over its operations. Finland’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority STUK says it still hasn’t received all of the new paperwork relating to nuclear safety for the long-delayed Olkiluoto 3 nuclear power plant currently at a standstill in western Finland. And the company remains locked in a cycle of recrimination with the plant’s owner. A 122-page report by French government auditors has not yet been officially published but the financial paper Les Échos has quoted liberally from the account, which details major fiascos, billion-euro losses and the dissemination of misleading information by the French nuclear power plant contractor Areva.
The progress of the Olkiluoto 3 nuclear reactor in Eurajoki western Finland forms a central part of the narrative. Areva was selected in 2003 — as part of the Franco-German joint venture Areva-Siemens — to deliver the Finnish nuclear reactor.
“Areva was ready to do anything to win the Olkiluoto deal, including downplaying project management deficiencies. They had also previously delivered and commissioned nuclear reactors but they had never undertaken an entire project end-to-end, since the main French contractor had always been the EDF Group (Électricité de France), explained Les Échos editor in chief Pascal Pogam in an interview with Yle’s A-Studio current affairs program.
Based on accounts by parties such as the Olkiluoto owner-operator, the Finnish power consortium Teollisuuden Voima or TVO, Areva is said to have lied about the possibility of constructing a nuclear reactor within the agreed schedule.
“During the time of the Olkiluoto agreement Areva and Siemens (Areva’s former German joint venture nuclear partner) assured TVO that they had the required expertise to see the enterprise through to the end. On hindsight, TVO has speculated that Siemens and Areva minimised their difficulties and covered up their shortcomings to get the deal,” Pogam continued.
Bottomless pit of financial losses However the Olkiluoto reactor turned out to be a bottomless pit of financial losses for Areva, with the project languishing seven years behind schedule and racking up nearly 3.5 billion euros in deficits for the French contractor.
French government auditors took Areva to task for its inability to accurately estimate the cost and timetable required to complete the project.“It’s difficult to blame Areva alone, which is now locked in a futile dialogue with TVO and STUK. The parties can no longer communicate. The future of the project remains wide open because there seems to be no solution to the dispute. Currently Areva and TVO are only communicating via their lawyers. That’s not helping and no one can say when the project will be completed or at what cost,” Pogam remarked.
“According to the report the uncertain situation could get out of hand and the final bill could be massive. However I wouldn’t blame Areva entirely, it’s more a question of each side holding the other to ransom in a situation where each is equally to blame,” Pogam added.
Escalating arbitration battle
For the last couple of years Areva and TVO have been engaged in a pitched arbitration battle before the International Chamber of Commerce, with each side ratcheting up compensation claims over construction delays and unpaid fees.
In late October last year, Areva slapped an additional 700 million euros to bring its claim to 2.6 billion euros for the voided nuclear reactor deal. In its turn, TVO has claimed 1.8 billion euros in compensation for construction delays.
Meanwhile according to the most optimistic estimates the reactor is expected to be ready for firing up at the beginning of next year – many years behind the original completion schedule of 2009. However TVO has said Olkiluoto 3 won’t be operational until one year later in 2016 – and it’s anybody’s guess what the final price tag will be.
Japan’s legal void. Nobody has authority to order restart of nuclear reactors
Decider Hard to Find in Japan Nuclear Restarts http://blogs.wsj.com/japanrealtime/2014/07/15/decider-hard-to-find-in-japan-nuclear-restarts/ Back in Japan’s feudal days, commoners would protest from time to time over burdens such as heavy taxes or forced labor. Samurai overlords might grant relief but would typically kill the protest ringleader.To avoid that consequence, the commoners developed the idea of the “umbrella covenant”: Those who joined the protest signed their names in a circle resembling an open umbrella, making it hard to tell who signed first.
The situation over Japan’s nuclear restarts brings to mind that history, taught in Japanese grade schools, because it’s hard to tell who is the ringleader in bringing the nation’s 48 nuclear reactors back online.
As we reported today, the Nuclear Regulation Authority is set to say Wednesday that two Kyushu Electric Power Co. reactors in Satsuma-Sendai, Kagoshima prefecture, have complied with tougher post-Fukushima safety regulations.
The regulator says it is merely checking compliance with regulations, not verifying the complete safety of the reactors. Members of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s cabinet say they defer to the regulator when it comes to verifying safety. Leaders in Satsuma-Sendai say the city needs the central government’s approval before agreeing to restarts.
“The decision is too big. They are afraid of being responsible,” said Miwa Kiwaki, a volunteer helping a civil group in the Fukushima prefecture that has been petitioning the central government for criminal prosecution of those responsible for the Fukushima accident.
“The problem is nobody in Japan has any legal authority to enforce nuclear-power operations. Mr. Abe has to do something about the legal void if he thinks nuclear power is necessary,” said Junji Annen, a professor at Chuo University and the head of a government panel that discusses electricity prices.
Industrial electricity users say they hope for action soon to bring down power prices, which have risen because the nation is importing fuel to replace nuclear power. “A number of companies have already closed down, gone bankrupt, or decided to go overseas and cut staff,” 11 associations of manufacturers said in a joint statement in late May.
Public oplnion could put a spanner in the works of Japan’s nuclear power restart.
CBRN Assessmen t Public opinion likely to affect timeline of Japan’s nuclear restarts, despite safety clearances IHS Jane’s Country Risk Daily Report 14 July 2014 Japan’s Nuclear Regulatory Authority (NRA) said yesterday (14 July) that it will approve an initial safety test to the Sendai nuclear plant in Kagoshima prefecture, in a step towards the gradual restart of nuclear power plants (NPPs) following the 2011 Fukushima disaster.
After the NRA has approved upgraded design and safety features of the Kyushu Electric Power Company-operated 1,780-megawatt (MW) plant, it will seek public comments for one month and carry out further on-site operational checks. Currently, all of Japan’s 48 nuclear reactors remain idled, awaiting NRA safety approvals before they can recommence operations.
Although the NRA’s move is a positive indicator that the Sendai plant could be restarted later in the year, as expected by local nuclear experts, considerable uncertainty remains over when a majority of NPPs will begin to come back online…. (full article – subscribers only) http://www.janes.com/article/40803/public-opinion-likely-to-affect-timeline-of-japan-s-nuclear-restarts-despite-safety-clearances
Japan should not be hosting 2020 Olympics
Why Japan should resign as host of 2020 Summer Olympics OpEdNews 7/15/2014
By carol wolman, MD (about the author) In September 2013, the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) met in Buenos Aires to elect a host city for the 2020 Summer Olympic Games. Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe assured the IOC that “the situation [at Fukushima Daiichi] is under control”, and convinced them to hold the Games in Tokyo.
Abe was lying. Unforunately, the site is nowhere near “under control.” Fukushima Daiichi, the nuclear reactor complex damaged by the earthquake/tsunami of March 2011, continues to spew forth radioactivity today. The groundwater, which connects with the Tokyo aquifer, picks up unacceptable levels of radiation from the molten reactor cores. There are radioactive hot spots all over northern Japan, including in Tokyo. The practice field for athletes is only 20 kilometers from the Fukushima Daiichi. If the 2020 Olympics do take place in Tokyo, Japan will be exposing the world’s finest young athletes to potentially harmful soil and water.
Siting the 2020 Olympics in Tokyo involves a huge risk. There are so many things that can still go wrong at Fukushima Daiichi over the next 6 years, that one wonders why the IOC was willing to go along with the obvious lies told by Abe-san. The answer is also obvious- the world economy and current political makeup depends on Japan’s stability, as Japan has the third largest economy on the planet, and is the linchpin of US policy in the Far East. Moreover, the powers that be are heavily invested in nuclear power, and want it to appear safe. The Olympic decision is meant to reassure everyone that Japan is fine and nuclear power is not to be feared, so as to maintain the status quo.
There is a systematic pattern of lying and coverup about conditions at Fukushima Daiichi.
Occasionally we hear that readings were wrong and there is 1000x as much radiation in the groundwater as we were told. Respected national and international groups such as the World Health Organization assure us that there are no deaths or cancer increases from the accident. This, despite the 80 cases of childhood thyroid cancer in the area after only three years, and despite the sick American sailors who were first responders, and despite the many people with nosebleeds, cancers, etc. Japan has a law prohibiting doctors from reporting radiation related diseases. And people who report radiation problems are likely to be prosecuted under the new security law.
So many things can go wrong at Fukushima Daiichi! There’s a 400 foot tower, damaged, that could fall at any time, and is too radioactive to approach and repair. Another huge earthquake, tsunami, typhoon, could destabilize any one of the damaged reactor buildings, topple a spent fuel pool, lead to another explosion. The precarious process of removing damaged rods from the spent fuel pools could fail, leading to an unquenchable nuclear fire. The underground melted cores from reactors 1, 2 or 3 could reach a critical mass. The ground could settle and cause the buildings to fall. Etc., etc, etc. Any of these mishaps could force workers to abandon the site, so that the cooling would stop and the complex would spread radiation over a wide portion of Japan, including Tokyo. If any of these things happen, the Olympics will have to be moved, when there is too little time to build a new complex somewhere else.
On April 1 st , 2014, a new management team was put in place, devoted to decommissioning and decontaminating the plant. It’s telling that it took Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) 3 years to make such an obvious move. One can only speculate that a combination of denial, corruption, and stupidity prevented this necessary reorganization. http://www.opednews.com/articles/Why-Japan-should-resign-as-by-carol-wolman-MD-Fukushima_Lying_Olympics_Radiation-140715-303.html
Japan’s consumers to be rewarded for reducing use of electricity
Kepco to pay customers to switch off in effort to reduce demand Ft.com 15 July 14 By Jonathan Soble in Tokyo On hot days this summer, some Japanese electricity customers will begin receiving an unusual offer from their energy supplier: a de facto bribe to get them out of the house and away from their air conditioners.
Kansai Electric Power, a utility in western Japan that is struggling to meet demand as a result of the post-Fukushima shutdown of nuclear plants across the country, has announced the experimental reward programme for about 800,000 customers whose homes are equipped with smart meters that monitor usage.
Utilities worldwide have long used financial incentives to induce customers to spread electricity consumption more evenly throughout the day, typically by charging different rates for daytime and night-time use. But Kepco, as the company is known, is taking the idea a step further: it plans to pay customers not to use electricity during peak daytime hours……….
Utilities have avoided outages thanks to nationwide power-saving campaigns – many office air conditioners are set to a far from chilly 28C – but supply is tight nonetheless……….in the aftermath of Fukushima much of the public remains wary of restarting plants: polls show a majority favour eliminating nuclear power for good. http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/5670af9e-0b22-11e4-9e55-00144feabdc0.html#axzz37ghBiVwG
The risks of stolen nuclear materials
Stolen uranium compounds not only dirty bomb ingredients within ISIS’ grasp, say experts By Perry Chiaramonte July 15, 2014 FoxNews.com Plenty of materials for a potential dirty bomb are likely scattered throughout the area of Iraq controlled by ISIS, and pulling off an attack that spreads even a minor amount of radiation could be a huge PR coup for the terror group, experts told FoxNews.com.
Last week, the Iraqi government in Baghdad warned the UN that ISIS operatives had stolen 88 pounds of uranium compounds from Mosul University. Even though many experts said the research materials were not enough to cause widespread harm, spreading fear is even more important to terrorists than a big body count, one terrorism expert said. And with ISIS in control of a huge swath of northern Iraq and parts of Syria that includes research labs, hospitals and industrial sites, ingredients for radiation-spreading bombs are within its grasp.
“Obtaining radiological material from places like universities or hospitals is relatively easy if you have the firepower, a chaotic situation and jihadists willing to sacrifice their health handling it,” said Ryan Mauro, national security analyst for The Clarion Project, a think tank that studies Islamic extremism. “We aren’t talking about producing a nuclear bomb; just combining an explosive with radioactive material.”……..
the risk posed by the lower-level nuclear materials potentially within ISIS’ reach is shared by the group itself. Handling of nuclear materials is extremely dangerous, a fact underscored last December when a truck containing highly radioactive cobalt-60 was stolen en route from a Mexican hospital to a disposal site. The theft triggered alerts throughout Mexico, as well as international notifications to the U.S. and the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna and stoked fears the material could have been stolen to make a dirty bomb. …..http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/07/15/stolen-uranium-compounds-not-only-dirty-bomb-ingredients-within-isis-grasp/
Doubtful that Japan’s nuclear reactors will restart, even with safety clearance
Safety Clearance for Japan Reactors Won’t Guarantee Restarts WSJ, By MARI IWATA July 14, 2014 Gaining Local Approval Could Be Stumbling Block TOKYO—A victory by an antinuclear candidate in a local election points to the difficulty of restarting Japan’s nuclear reactors, all 48 of which are currently offline until they can pass new safety standards and gain local approval for restarting.
The nation’s nuclear regulator said Monday it was planning to release its review of two reactors in southern Japan’s Kagoshima prefecture on Wednesday, an indication of progress in efforts to get nuclear power in Japan back in operation. People on both sides of the nuclear debate have said the two reactors are likely to pass the technical review. But even then, the two units face local opposition and aren’t certain to restart soon. Japan’s other reactors likely face longer waits.
The election of antinuclear candidate Taizo Mikazuki as governor of Shiga prefecture on Sunday is a reminder of the continuing opposition to nuclear restarts in many areas bordering regions that host nuclear plants. Shiga prefecture is located next to Fukui prefecture, home to more than a dozen nuclear reactors. Mr. Mikazuki defeated a candidate backed by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and succeeds an incumbent with antinuclear views who had insisted on having a say about restarting the Fukui reactors………..the government would continue to back restarts of nuclear reactors deemed safe by the nation’s Nuclear Regulation Authority.
The regulator, however, has said its decisions shouldn’t be treated as authoritative proof of safety……….
Some towns near the Kagoshima reactors have expressed concern about restarts. In one city within 30 kilometers (about 19 miles) of the two units, more than half of the approximately 30,000 residents signed a petition seeking to keep the units closed until better evacuation plans are adopted. The city council of another nearby city on Friday passed a motion objecting to restarts of the units.
Junji Annen, a professor at Chuo University and the head of a government panel that discusses electricity prices, said the current approval system is likely to produce gridlock since no single entity is in charge of pressing the nuclear-restart button. “The problem is nobody in Japan has any legal authority to enforce nuclear-power operations. Mr. Abe has to do something about the legal void if he thinks nuclear power is necessary,” Mr. Annen said.
The prime minister may hesitate to get heavily involved in decisions to restart nuclear reactors because his approval ratings have fallen recently after his unpopular decision to expand the potential role of Japanese military in international conflicts……….
In a poll by Jiji Press in early June, 51% of respondents supported Mr. Abe’s cabinet, but 52% said they were against restarting nuclear-power plants even if they were approved by the NRA.
—Toko Sekiguchi contributed to this article.http://online.wsj.com/articles/safety-clearance-for-japan-reactors-wont-guarantee-restarts-1405340244
Pathways to stopping climate change – report from UN Climate Summit
Efficiency, renewables, biofuels key to stopping climate change ABC News 14 July 14 The positive message from a scientific report for the UN Climate Summit is that the tough task of cutting greenhosue gas emissions to limit global temperature rise to below two degrees is definitely achievable by following a set of bold, practical steps
The 15 national pathways examined in the report all show the importance of three factors for achieving radically lower carbon emissions.
The first is greatly increased efficiency and conservation in all energy use.
The second factor is taking the carbon out of electricity by using renewable sources, “such as wind and solar, as well as nuclear power, and/or the capture and sequestration of carbon emissions from fossil-fuel burning”.
Nuclear energy still attracts widespread and determined opposition, and carbon capture and sequestration (trapping CO2 emissions and storing them underground or beneath the sea floor) has not yet proved that it can work on a commercial scale.
The third factor involves replacing fossil fuels in transport, heating and industrial processes with a mix of low-carbon electricity, sustainable biofuels, and hydrogen…… http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2014/07/14/4045481.htm
-
Archives
- February 2026 (228)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
-
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 