Russian naval officer who saved the world from nuclear war
You (and Almost Everyone You Know) Owe Your Life to This Man. CURIOUSLY KRULWICHA Blog by Robert Krulwich NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC, FRI, 03/25/2016 “……The world owes an enormous debt to a quiet, steady Russian naval officer who probably saved my life. And yours. And everyone you know. Even those of you who weren’t yet born. I want to tell his story.The sub is hiding in the ocean, and the Americans are dropping depth charges left and right of the hull. Inside, the sub is rocking, shaking with each new explosion. What the Americans don’t know is that this sub has a tactical nuclear torpedo on board, available to launch, and that the Russian captain is asking himself, Shall I fire?
This actually happened.
The Russian in question, an exhausted, nervous submarine commander named Valentin Savitsky, decided to do it. He ordered the nuclear-tipped missile readied. His second in command approved the order. Moscow hadn’t communicated with its sub for days. Eleven U.S. Navy ships were nearby, all possible targets. The nuke on this missile had roughly the power of the bomb at Hiroshima.
“We’re gonna blast them now!”…….
Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov steps into the story…. He was Savitsky’s equal, the flotilla commander responsible for three Russian subs on this secret mission to Cuba—and he is maybe one of the quietest, most unsung heroes of modern times.
What he said to Savitsky we will never know, not exactly. But, says Thomas Blanton, the former director of the nongovernmental National Security Archive, simply put, this “guy called Vasili Arkhipov saved the world.”
Arkhipov, described by his wife as a modest, soft-spoken man, simply talked Savitsky down.
The exact details are controversial. The way it’s usually told is that each of the three Soviet submarine captains in the ocean around Cuba had the power to launch a nuclear torpedo if—and only if—he had the consent of all three senior officers on board. On his sub, Savitsky gave the order and got one supporting vote, but Arkhipov balked. He wouldn’t go along.
He argued that this was not an attack……
The debate between the captain and Arkhipov took place in an old, diesel-powered submarine designed for Arctic travel but stuck in a climate that was close to unendurable. And yet, Arkhipov kept his cool. After their confrontation, the missile was not readied for firing. Instead, the Russian sub rose to the surface, where it was met by a U.S. destroyer. The Americans didn’t board. There were no inspections, so the U.S. Navy had no idea that there were nuclear torpedos on those subs—and wouldn’t know for around 50 years, when the former belligerents met at a 50th reunion. Instead, the Russians turned away from Cuba and headed north, back to Russia……..
the world is very, very lucky that at one critical moment, someone calm enough, careful enough, and cool enough was there to say no. http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/25/you-and-almost-everyone-you-know-owe-your-life-to-this-man/
‘Innovation’ – greenwash buzzword from the nuclear lobby
Innovating Canadian Nuclear Greenwash, Graham’s Green Design, 9 Apr 16
“…..We need to focus and invest on green solutions that will deliver the best ROI* for Canada, not what is being sold as green. Is government doing enough? For now, I do not think so.
With climate change neatly spotlighted in the Justin Trudeau showcase of environmental spending, a lot of money is leaving fossil fuels and innovating towards green energy. Even the big dogs are buying into solar and wind energy, even after the big dogs were recommending another Stephen Harper Government for Canada. Funny how those that fought green energy are now buying in and getting grants with our tax dollars. Should Canada allow corporations that fought climate, pollution and basic economics benefit from Canada’s new manifesto? Can we trust groups that thoughtlessly delayed critical action? Is it smart to risk our only chance to succeed with teaming up with the groups that delayed and fought all progress?
Greenwash?
When it comes to green energy, the next generation in poor ideas is being touted as a climate saviour — the same folks that denied climate change two years ago are now recommending nuclear energy as a solution for climate change. Big nuclear has been quietly patient. Nuclear energy has a carbon footprint that’s hidden — just because there are no smokestacks doesn’t mean complex analysis finds nuclear energy is a poor long-term solution. As I say on Twitter, “#DoTheMath“. The nuclear lobby has been quietly doing the green dance, waiting for the next gravy wave to cut-in with their “green” climate solution.
I have noticed the nuclear lobby slowly working the room for the past 5 years, minting new cheerleaders, some asserting that #Fukushima had no health impacts. One nuclear troll even asserted that nuclear pollution doesn’t hurt people — wow. Aside from nuclear being more expensive, having a larger carbon footprint than renewables, the large grid model of modern energy distribution seems to be obsolete. Large generation and large transmission seem elegant by design, but are expensive, and less profitable, versus smaller local distributed generation that leverage green energy storage systems and #smartgrid energy management technology. …….
I am glad that Justin Trudeau didn’t announce big investments in new nuclear, but the nuclear lobby is still working our room. Recently hearing Paul Wells spoke at the Canadian Nuclear dog and pony show — mostly smearing Justin Trudeau, he fails to make a clear case for nuclear energy. A ten year old girl can probably tell you why solar energy is cleaner than fossilfuels, but Paul doesn’t seem to have a home run case for nuclear — telling……
I noticed Paul didn’t provide any hard metrics to quickly and clearly demonstrate why nuclear is a superior choice for Canada. Has Paul been reading up on a nuclear greenwash site? I respect his consideration towards improving climate and energy security, but being in a position of influence, I thought he would bring a strong argument — missing, just cheerleading from what I saw.
I thought his endorsement was weak. It isn’t easy to compare solar, wind, and nuclear energy, I will give Paul Wells that. Seeing his talk empty of any valid analysis makes me wonder how he came to his conclusions. Is Paul using the latest in LEAN Manufacturing Business Intelligence systems? Does Paul think it’s Justin Trudeau’s responsibility to help support the future failure of nuclear energy? We see fossil fuels suffering this fate now, can’t compete on price — green is cheaper and doesn’t create pollution while generating energy.
When it comes to comparing nuclear to the “others”, it’s smart to remember that big nuclear is being idled in America as it’s not cost competitive with mixed energy markets. Nuclear loses money when competition is added. For me, a manufacturing specialist, it is easy to understand why nuclear is more expensive — more complexity, security & risk equals a higher cost of energy delivery. Understanding how big nuclear energy is a poor fit in future mixed energy markets is a good method to see that nuclear isn’t green, it’s greenwash. http://www.grahamsgreendesign.com/blog/2016/3/3/green-vs-greenwash-nuclear-toronto-canada-design-innovation-climate-security-cities
Australia reduces aid to Africa, while promoting dodgy mining companies there
Last year, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists released a report called Fatal Extraction: Australian Mining Companies Digging a Deadly Footprint in Africa. It reported that Australian mining companies were the most rapidly expanding of all mining investors in Africa. From 2000 to 2009, prospecting licences held by Australian companies in Botswana alone increased from 14 to 260.
According to the report, Australian mining companies were responsible for multiple cases of negligence, unfair dismissal, violence and environmental law-breaking across Africa. It claims that since 2004 more than 380 people have died in mining accidents or in offsite skirmishes connected to Australian mining companies in 13 countries in Africa.
In comparison with Australia, African tax regulations are relatively flexible, while wages and working conditions, environmental protection, and occupational health and safety laws are weak.
Last year Foreign Minister Julie Bishop announced that the Australian government would actively promote the interests of the mining sector ahead of economic aid to Africa.
Australian miners in South Africa In the wake of a local activist’s murder, Australian mining interests in Africa are being called into question. https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/resources/2016/04/09/australian-miners-south-africa/14601240003106 PHILLIP WALKER 9 Apr 16 Thee assassination of South African community activist Sikhosiphi “Bazooka” Radebe was shocking but sadly not surprising.
On the night of his death – March 22 – Radebe had warned his colleagues in the Amadiba Crisis Committee of a hit list. An hour later, two men masquerading as police arrived at Radebe’s house and shot him eight times in the head.
Radebe had been opposing titanium mining at Xolobeni, on the ancestral land of the Pondo people on South Africa’s east coast. The mining company involved is Australian-based Mineral Commodities Limited.
At Radebe’s funeral last weekend, Chief Cinani, representing the Queen and the Royal House of the amaMpondo, criticised the government’s acceptance of Australian investment and investment from the Indian business family the Guptas. “I am blaming the government because the government gave permits for those Australians, while people were saying ‘no’ to the government . It is clear that the business community is ruling the government. It is not only about the Guptas. Now we have seen the Australians. People are coming here with huge sums of money to divide the people.”
Through its director, Mark Caruso, Mineral Commodities Limited (MRC) and its South African subsidiary, Transworld Energy & Minerals Resources (TEM), have long been in dispute with the Amadiba community. The latest tragedy marks an escalation of hostility in a conflict now entering its 10th year.
There were hopes that the international condemnation drawn by the assassination of Radebe might stem the violence, but it is now alleged that after Radebe’s funeral “pro-mining thugs” assaulted three journalists.
Following the killing of Radebe, Caruso issued a statement on behalf of MRC declaring that it was “in no way implicated in any form whatsoever in this incident … This company will not engage in any activity that incites violence.” The Saturday Paper does not suggest Caruso had any involvement in Radebe’s death or any other illegality.
In an email sent last October regarding a taxi contract for the Tormin mine, however, Caruso said he felt “enlivened by the opportunity to grind all resistance to the [sic] my presence and the presence of MSR [another MRC subsidiary] into the animals [sic] of history as a failed campaign.”
In the same email, he cited Ezekiel 25:17: “And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon thee.”
Elsewhere, he raged against the “group of colluding malfeasant, recalcitrant people and groups who chose to use underhanded nefarious elements to achieve their self-interested objectives”.
The correspondence ended: “It is easier to support us, than work against us.”
The South African Department of Environmental Affairs has reported MRC’s Tormin mine, on South Africa’s west coast, for several contraventions including mining in no-go areas and the use of unauthorised roads. MRC also stands accused of poor environmental practices by allowing a cliff face to collapse, and engaging in substandard land rehabilitation.
At both Tormin and Xolobeni, evidence suggests that MRC and its South African subsidiary are creating communities at war with themselves. Families, communities and tribal authorities are pitted against each other through the selective allocation of benefits and favours.
During a public consultation, subheadman elder Samson Gampe captured local feeling when he declared: “A cow that is a stranger in the herd is always chased by the rest of the herd by showing it horns. This is what we have done today, to tell the world that people of Kwanyana do not want this foreign ‘cow’ – this mining proposal … We need a proposal that brings us together, not the one that brings us conflict.”
Through Transworld Energy & Minerals Resources, MRC seeks to mine 2900 hectares at Xolobeni on South Africa’s Wild Coast. The Amadiba Crisis Committee, representing the local community, has blocked mining licence applications on environmental and ownership grounds.
The communal land in question is held in trust by the minister of land reform on behalf of local residents under communal land tenure. The crisis committee is committed to community-owned ecotourism as a more viable option for themselves and the land. Permission to mine one of the five “blocks” was rescinded on appeal last year…….
Last year, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists released a report called Fatal Extraction: Australian Mining Companies Digging a Deadly Footprint in Africa. It reported that Australian mining companies were the most rapidly expanding of all mining investors in Africa. From 2000 to 2009, prospecting licences held by Australian companies in Botswana alone increased from 14 to 260.
According to the report, Australian mining companies were responsible for multiple cases of negligence, unfair dismissal, violence and environmental law-breaking across Africa. It claims that since 2004 more than 380 people have died in mining accidents or in offsite skirmishes connected to Australian mining companies in 13 countries in Africa.
Among the most notorious incidents is the case of Anvil Mining in south-eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. In 2005 Anvil vehicles transported Congolese troops under the command of Colonel “Double-Bladed Knife” Ademar to the village of Kilwa, which had been taken the previous day by rebels.
Most villagers had already fled by the time Colonel Ademar’s troops arrived, and the rebels fled within hours. There were reports that Ademar ordered, “Kill everything that breathes.” It is known that 73 men, women and children were summarily murdered.
Following public outcry, Anvil issued a statement saying: “The DRC military requested access to Anvil’s air services and vehicles, to facilitate troop movements in response to the rebel activity. Anvil had no option but to agree to the request”.
Neither Anvil Mining nor any employee has been found guilty of any crime.
In comparison with Australia, African tax regulations are relatively flexible, while wages and working conditions, environmental protection, and occupational health and safety laws are weak. Mining companies attribute conflict to corrupt or brutal officials, or to local issues, rather than acknowledge the role of the mine in these conflicts.
Many mining companies are tempted to use their association with Australia and its friendly reputation to gain a competitive advantage while avoiding the ethical and operational standards that prevail within Australia.
Last year Foreign Minister Julie Bishop announced that the Australian government would actively promote the interests of the mining sector ahead of economic aid to Africa.
“Australia’s aid program has been reshaped in line with our belief that the best way to help countries grow their economies and improve the living standards of their people is to focus on prosperity…” she said. “Mining has made, and continues to make, a substantial contribution to economic development and poverty alleviation in Africa.”
Australian aid to Africa has been slashed since 2014. The mining sector is the only remaining means for Australian embassies to build relationships and promote their public profile in Africa. Even the remnants of the scholarship scheme named Australia Awards have been aligned to suit the mining sector.
Last year, at the Africa Down Under mining conference held in Perth, it was claimed that in Africa “ground discoveries made by Australian companies amount to $687 billion of value”, while investment was only 10 per cent of that amount. Clearly there is significant profit to be made mining in Africa.
While most mining companies may operate in accordance with national laws and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative – the minimal standards apply – outrages such as the murder of Sikhosiphi “Bazooka” Radebe undermine any promotional value Australia may seek to achieve.
In his funeral oration, Chief Cinani said: “There is no crisis which can take more than 10 years. A crisis should take place for quite a short time and then the authorities should resolve the problem. The King has said, ‘This must stop.’ Today we are here to say Bazooka has died with the key in his hand, so whoever would like to continue this must go and dig the key from his grave. He has gone with it. That simply means there will be no mining here.”
Murder of South African activist: Australian mining company denies involvement
Australian mining company denies role in murder of South African activist
Campaigners claim death of Sikhosiphi Rhadebe is an escalation of violence against opponents of a mine owned by Perth’s Mineral Commodities Limited, Guardian, Joshua Robertson, 25 Mar 16 An Australian-owned mining company has denied any link to the murder of an activist leading a campaign against its plans to mine titanium in South Africa.
Sikhosiphi “Bazooka” Rhadebe was gunned down at his home in Xolobeni on South Africa’s Wild Coast on Tuesday, in what fellow activists claimed was an escalation of violence and intimidation against local opponents of a mine owned by Perth-based Mineral Commodities Limited (MRC).
MRC, which has repeatedly denied inciting violence involving its supporters, said it was “in no way implicated in any form whatsoever in this incident”.
Mzamo Dlamini is a fellow activist who believes he is among the “prime targets” on the anti-mining Amadiba crisis committee following Rhadebe’s death.
Despite fearing for his life, Dlamini vowed to continue organising resistance to a project that campaigners said would force the relocation of an estimated 100 households and up to 1,000 people.
“The assassination affects us all,” he said. “There will be more Bazookas long after we have died.”
Six people associated with the mining venture were subject to court orders last May after a clash over land access, during which a TEM director fired a “warning shot” in the air.
Four people, including an alleged employee of another MRC mine at Tormin, are due to face court next month over alleged assault and intimidation, including with firearms, of mining opponents in Xolobeni in December. These allegations are yet to come before a court and there is no suggestion these or any other employees were involved in Rhadebe’s murder……..
Lawyer Henk Smith of the Legal Resources Centre, which has acted for landholders opposing MRC’s Tormin mine, said the killing of Rhadebe, a “principled democrat”, had likely ended the prospect of conciliation meetings between the miner and its opponents.
“I think the company has made a few statements condemning the violence but it comes after the event and the company has never taken any steps to encourage conciliation or mediation or consultation even a meeting,” Smith said.
“In fact the company shies away from meeting the community which as a result, there’ll be little chance of simply starting a process of meetings now.
“For the rest, they’ve got [to] swallow what the company offers.” http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/mar/25/australian-mining-company-denies-role-in-of-south-african-activist
April 10 Energy News
Opinion:
¶ The “Careful, Thoughtful” Approach to Indian Point Is to Close
It • Given the facts, the careful, thoughtful approach to Indian Point is to close it. Last month, 227 of the 832 bolts holding the inner walls of the reactor core together were found to be missing or damaged. But a list of problems goes on. [AlterNet]
Indian Point nuclear plant. Photo by mandritoiu / Shutterstock
Science and Technology:
¶ University of Washington researchers have developed technology that enables sensors and small electronics to be entirely powered wirelessly from TV, radio, cell phone, and Wi-Fi signals. The miniature devices don’t require a battery or any wiring because energy in the signals. [OilPrice.com]
World:
¶ Many African countries are facing energy crises. Since the mid-1990s, external finance to Africa’s power sector has averaged only around $600 million per year. But countries are increasingly able to supply power…
View original post 480 more words
Autoradiograph: radioactivity after the 3/11 quake
By Masamichi Kagaya (Photographer) and Dr. Satoshi Mori (University of Tokyo)
As a consequence of the Great East Japan Earthquake and ensuing tsunami on March 11, 2011, the cores of the first to third nuclear reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant underwent meltdowns as external power for the cooling pumps was lost. As a result, a huge amount of radioactive particles was released into the air. These particles were carried by southeasterly winds to Iitate Village, Fukushima City, and Nakadori, a central region of Fukushima Prefecture, leaving high levels of radioactive contamination in their wake. The particles were further carried along multiple routes creating radioactively contaminated areas in regions from Ibaraki to Tokyo and Kanagawa Prefecture, as well as in Northern Kanto and the Tohoku Region (Northeastern Japan).
Whether we are in Tokyo, Fukushima, or even in front of the damaged nuclear reactor buildings, we are exposed to radiation that we are unaware of. It is too small to see, it cannot be heard and it is odorless. Therefore, despite living in a region contaminated with radioactive particles, to this day, we are not consciously aware of the radiation. NaI (TI) scintillation detectors and germanium semiconductor detectors are used to measure the amount of radioactive contamination in soil, food, and water in units called Becquerels (Bq). Radioactivity is further measured in Sieverts (Sv), which is an index of the effects of radioactive levels in the air, doses of exposure, and so on. Nevertheless, from such values, it is impossible to know how the radioactive particles are distributed or where they are concentrating in our cities, lakes, forests, and in living creatures. These values do not enable us to “see” the radioactivity. Thus, radioactive contamination has to be perceived visibly, something that can be done with the cooperation of Satoshi Mori, Professor emeritus at Tokyo University. Professor Mori is using autoradiography to make radioactive contamination visible.
Today, dozens of radiographic images of plants created by Professor emeritus Mori since 2011 are on display together with radiographic images of everyday items and animals. This collection of radiographic images (autoradiographs) is the first in history to be created for objects exposed to radiation resulting from a nuclear accident. I hope that visitors will come away with a sense of the extent of contamination in all regions subject to the fallout — not just those in and around Fukushima. At the same time, I hope that this exhibition will remind visitors of the large region extending from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant to Namie Town, Iitate Village and the dense forests of the Abukuma Mountain Area that, to this day, remain restricted areas. The radiation affects animals that continue to live in these areas and be exposed to heavy radiation, as well as the 140,000 people that had to evacuate and who lost personal assets (homes, property, work, interpersonal relationships). These people are in addition to the victims who directly breathed in the radioactive materials, subjecting them to internal exposure — victims that include anyone from the residents near the plant to people in Tokyo and the Kanto Region.
Although what can be done is limited, new progress has made it possible to record the otherwise invisible radioactivity and make it visible. The history of needless nuclear accidents occurring in the United States, the Soviet Union (Russia) and Japan over the last several decades may still potentially be repeated elsewhere in the world, but hopefully future generations will see the cycle be broken. Through exhibitions and other means of disseminating knowledge about radioactivity, future generations may learn to leave behind dependence on nuclear power and be free from the dangers of nuclear accidents and nuclear waste.
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/asia/japan/2016/04/10/463030/Autoradiograph-radioactivity.htm
Tell World Leaders: No Fukushima 2020 Olympics
ON BECQUEREL AWARENESS DAY, SUNDAY, APRIL 10, 2016, FUKUSHIMA FALLOUT AWARENESS NETWORK (FFAN) LAUNCHES ITS PETITION/CAMPAIGN TO URGE WORLD LEADERS TO SAY NO TO HOSTING THE 2020 JAPAN OLYMPICS/PARALYMPICS IN FUKUSHIMA PREFECTURE!
Children are now in training to compete at the 2020 Japan Olympics in close proximity to the most devastating and ongoing nuclear and industrial disaster in world history. Our children are our most beloved and cherished gift; and as such, we know they are the most vulnerable to the generational damaging effects of man-made radiation in air, soil, food and water. On March 11, 2016, on the occasion of fifth anniversary of the Fukushima triple nuclear meltdowns, Japan’s 2020 Olympic Minister, Toshiaki Endo, stated to the Associated Press that preliminary softball, baseball and possibly other games like soccer, would very possibly be moved from the host city of Tokyo to Fukushima Prefecture!
FACTS:
1) The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) guideline for the public is 1mSV/year compared to Japan’s at 20mSv/year due to the disaster. By hosting the 2020 Olympics, Japan is willing to expose not only their own citizens but also children, their families and coaches worldwide to higher than publicly acceptable levels of radiation per the ICRP.
2) There is no safe dose. The Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation 7 (BEIR 7) Report unequivocally states that there is no threshold of exposure below which solid cancers are not induced.
3) Even after thirty years, the 30km area around Chernobyl remains an exclusion zone. This fact makes holding the 2020 Olympics in Fukushima even more shocking. There is no possible way to return Japan to normal in 2020 after the triple nuclear meltdowns, as explosions and ongoing ensuing leaks and incineration of radioactive waste are still happening in the wake of Fukushima Daiichi.
FFAN stands in solidarity with the children and families of Japan and is committed to educating the public about the dangers of man-made radiation. In our effort to raise awareness worldwide, FFAN is asking people everywhere to SIGN and SHARE this PETITION to Japanese Ambassador Caroline Kennedy, the State Department, UNICEF and other world leaders HERE: http://chn.ge/22j0Xko
Holding the Olympics and Paralympics in Fukushima, or in fact anywhere in Japan, will not make the problems of radioactive contamination go away. To the contrary, it will only spread cancer and other diseases farther afield worldwide. Let them know the whole world is watching this most dangerous game.
(Please RSVP here and join us on our EVENT PAGE: https://www.facebook.com/events
11 April: the week in climate, nuclear and corruption news
This week, I stray even further away from the narrow focus on things nuclear. It’s impossible not to notice the achievements of investigative reporters, collaborating across the globe, to reveal widespread corruption in the oil industry, and in the finance industry. In both cases, hundreds of journalists worked for a year in bringing these facts together. I’m glad I’ve been watching the BBC series John le Carre’s “The Night Manager” – helped me to understand how corruption works, including legalised corruption. But I digress even worse.
There’s another massive global corruption going on, and this is the corruption of science. Our grandchildren and great grandchildren will have cause to blame us, as governments, industries, media, join in complacency, or even downright denial, of the reality of anthropogenic climate change. A major source of information on climate change is ra ra at http://www.ecoshock.org/ – where you will learn that that there really is no time to lose: climate change may be happening faster than we all thought.
Equally important, but “under the radar”, is corruption in the nuclear industry. That hasn’t been investigated yet, but are we to believe that the nuclear industry is squeaky clean? At least two aspects of science corruption are lies promoted by the industry – the lie that nuclear power will save the climate, and the lie that low dose ionising radiation is harmless, even good for you. I suspect that there is more to come.
CLIMATE CHANGE – happening faster than we expected.
Surprise surprise ! The UNAOIL and the Panama corruption crises are interlocked.
IN BRIEF.
- Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists analyses outcome of The Nuclear Security Summit.
- Renewable energy and new technologies undercutting price of nuclear power.
- Self styled “Pro Nuclear Environmentalists (PNEs) are just not credible on Chernobyl radiation.
- France suggests UK’s Hinkley Point nuclear project could still be postponed.
- Nuclear confidence trick: the ‘swap’ of UK’s nuclear wastes for ‘medical isotopes’. UK sending nuclear wastes to America – dangerous and unwise.
Japan’s poor nuclear security is a global danger
Japan Nuclear Plants Are Vulnerable to Terror Attacks, The Daily Beast, JAKE ADELSTEIN MARI YAMAMOTO, 8 Apr 16,
Poor nuclear security is endemic at Japanese power stations. It’s a ludicrous risk, not only for the Japanese, but for the world.
TOKYO — Given the febrile global security atmosphere, recent revelations that those responsible for the Brussels attacks also scoped out Belgium’s nuclear facilities have, understandably, caused great consternation in many countries.
In Japan, however, the issue of nuclear security is treated with a strangely insouciant attitude by the authorities; unarmed guards keep watch outside of nuclear facilities, there is poor surveillance of sites and, incredibly, there are no mandated background checks on workers, allowing members of organized crime gangs access to radioactive material.
There is growing awareness that this is a problem not just for this island country, but for the world.
There is every reason to believe Japan is a target of the so-called Islamic State, which was behind the horrific slaughter in Parisin November and in Brussels in March.
Early last year, amid worldwide outrage about the Charlie Hebdo attacks in France, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe made a speech in the Middle East vowing assistance to states “contending” with ISIS. That led to a de facto declaration of war against Japan by the jihadists and may have contributed to the death of a journalist they held captive.
Yet there is no serious effort to rethink the nuclear security issue. National Police Agency told The Daily Beast, on condition of anonymity, “The game has changed. We are not keeping up. We can’t trust the utility companies to deal with internal threats by themselves—they have neither the willpower nor the capability. We don’t have to worry so much about terrorists breaking down doors and blowing up nuclear power plants—we have to worry about them filling out job applications and just walking in.”
Japan has a large number of nuclear facilities staffed by guards who carry no weapons and who are otherwise poorly equipped to handle a terrorist attack. Past U.S. State Department cables note police officers who are asleep, express shock that Japanese guards are unarmed, and criticize the government for staging unrealistic training exercises while essentially outsourcing nuclear security to the utility companies.
Meanwhile there have been companies with ties to the yakuza crime organizations dispatching workers—in some cases, active yakuza members—to the plants. “Generally speaking, you don’t want sociopathic criminals around nuclear materials. Not a good idea,” deadpanned a Japan Nuclear Regulation Authority official, speaking on background, of course.
The guards do not carry weapons because Japan’s incredibly stringent gun laws make it almost impossible for civilians, including private security guards, to have them. This is good in that it keeps Japan’s annual gun-related deaths down to single digits. It’s bad in that unarmed men are probably unlikely to stop armed terrorists from storming the facilities. Some plants have armed police cars parked outside them at regular intervals, but few plants are fully guarded.
what is most disturbing to Japan’s law enforcement community is that long-debated plans to mandate background checks on nuclear facility workers in conjunction with the police have been effectively scrapped since the accident—even though they may be needed now more than ever.
Japan’s Nuclear Reprocessing Center at Rokkasho, in Aomori Prefecture, which is supposed to restart operations this year, is designed to produce eight tons of plutonium annually—enough to fuel more than 2,600 warheads. The International Atomic Energy Agency is supposed to ensure that plutonium cannot be removed or leak from the Rokkasho plant without detection. But the system it has installed there is only 99 percent accurate, meaning that, theoretically, enough plutonium for over 20 nuclear bombs a year could still be spirited away without a trace………http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/07/when-will-nuclear-terror-hit-japan.html
No penalty for Entergy’s faked nuclear inspections
Entergy nuclear plant avoids violations for faked inspections, By Littice Bacon-Blood, NOLA.com | The Times-Picayune April 08, 2016 Entergy‘s Waterford 3 nuclear plant on the west bank of St. Charles Parish has been given nine months to address shortcomings that let contractors falsify fire inspection records for almost a year. Company officials could face criminal prosecution and fines if they violate a new agreement that Entergy has reached with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The commission said it won’t issue a violation notice or civil penalty for the faked inspections, in light of the “significant corrective actions” Entergy already has taken in addition and the targets that the commission has required the company to address in the coming months. “The NRC is satisfied that its concerns will be addressed by making Entergy’s commitments legally binding through a confirmatory order,” according to a commission letter dated Wednesday (April 6).
“Any person who willfully violates, attempts to violate or conspires to violate any provision of this confirmatory order shall be subject to criminal prosecution … Violation of this confirmatory order may also subject the person to civil monetary penalties.”
Nuclear plant contractors faked 10 months of inspection records
In disclosing the results of its investigation in December, the commission gave Entergy the opportunity of requesting a “pre-decisional enforcement conference” or an “alternative dispute resolution,” before the commission decided on enforcement penalties. Entergy chose alternative dispute resolution, and an agreement was reached in February. The confirmatory order contains the corrective actions that the company must take.
The 15-month investigation of the Waterford 3 plant at Taft indicated that seven contractors knowingly falsified the hourly fire inspection watch logs to indicate that inspections had taken place. The inspections were actually skipped and the records falsified between July 2013 and April 2014, according to the commission.
The hourly fire watch tours are required to assure that no fires break out in parts of the nuclear power plant building where sensitive equipment is located. These areas include wiring and piping that is used to operate the nuclear reactor during accidents or emergencies.
In addition, the investigation found that on Jan. 13, 2014, a contract manager “willfully failed” to provide complete and accurate information about the trustworthiness and reliability of a person applying for unescorted access to Waterford 3 as a fire watch inspector.
Entergy did not dispute those findings……… http://www.nola.com/environment/index.ssf/2016/04/entergy_avoids_violations_for.html
Self styled “Pro Nuclear Environmentalists (PNEs) are just not credible on Chernobyl radiation
Evidence of PNE ignorance abounds. For the most part, PNEs had a shaky understanding of the radiation/health debates (and other nuclear issues) before they joined the pro-nuclear club, and they have a shaky understanding now.
the WHO, IAEA and other UN agencies estimated 9,000 deaths in ex-Soviet states in their 2005/06 reports, and more recently UNSCEAR has adopted the position that the long-term death toll is uncertain.
Radiation harm deniers? Pro-nuclear environmentalists and the Chernobyl death toll, Ecologist, Dr Jim Green 7th April 2016 “……….the self-styled pro-nuclear environmentalists (PNEs). We should note in passing that some PNE’s have genuine environmental credentials while others – such as Patrick Moore and Australian Ben Heard – are in the pay of the nuclear industry.
James Hansen and George Monbiot cite UNSCEAR to justify a Chernobyl death toll of 43, without noting that the UNSCEAR report did not attempt to calculate long-term deaths. James Lovelock asserts that “in fact, only 42 people died” from the Chernobyl disaster.
Patrick Moore, citing the UN Chernobyl Forum (which included UN agencies such as the IAEA, UNSCEAR, and WHO), states that Chernobyl resulted in 56 deaths. In fact, the Chernobyl Forum’s 2005 report (p.16) estimated up to 4,000 long-term cancer deaths among the higher-exposed Chernobyl populations, and a follow-up study by the World Health Organisation in 2006 estimated an additional 5,000 deaths among people exposed to lower doses in Belarus, the Russian Federation and Ukraine.
Australian ‘ecomodernist‘ academic Barry Brook says the Chernobyl death toll is less than 60. Ben Heard, another Australian ‘ecomodernist’ (in fact a uranium and nuclear industry consultant), claims that the death toll was 43.
In 2010, Mark Lynas said the Chernobyl death toll “has likely been only around 65.” Two years earlier, Lynas said that the WHO estimates “a few thousand deaths” (actually 9,000 deaths) but downplays the death toll by saying it was “indiscernible” in the context of overall deaths. Yes, the Chernobyl death toll is indiscernible … and the 9/11 terrorist attacks accounted for an indiscernible 0.1% of all deaths in the US in 2001.
There doesn’t appear to be a single example of a PNE – or a comparable organisation – providing a credible account of the Chernobyl death toll. They’re perfectly entitled to follow UNSCEAR’s lead and argue that the long-term death toll is uncertain. But conflating or confusing that uncertainty with a long-term death toll of zero clearly isn’t a defensible approach.
The Breakthrough Institute comes closest to a credible account of the Chernobyl death toll (which isn’t saying much), stating that “UN officials say that the death toll could be as high as 4,000”. However the Breakthrough Institute ignores:
- the follow-up UN/WHO study that estimated an additional 5,000 deaths in ex-Soviet states;
- scientific estimates of the death toll beyond ex-Soviet states (more than half of the Chernobyl fallout was deposited beyond the three most contaminated Soviet states);
- scientific literature regarding diseases other than cancer linked to radiation exposure;
- and indirect deaths associated with the permanent relocation of over 350,000 people after the Chernobyl disaster.
Cherry-picking
Cherry-picking is abundantly evident in PNE accounts of the Chernobyl death toll. In a review of Robert Stone’s ‘Pandora’s Promise’ propaganda film, physicist Dr Ed Lyman from the Union of Concerned Scientists writes: Continue reading
“Dirty” nuclear bomb – the weapon of mass disruption
What does “nuclear terrorism” really mean? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Elisabeth Eaves, 7 Apr 16 “………….– we’re far more likely to see the second scenario—a dirty bomb attack—than a nuclear explosion in the near future.
So what will that look like? Nothing like the aftermath of a nuclear weapon attack. As the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission explains, “A dirty bomb is in no way similar to a nuclear weapon.” The latter relies on fission or fusion to create an explosion millions of times more powerful than the former. A nuclear bomb could spread radiation over hundreds of square miles, whereas a dirty bomb could only do so over a few square miles. Dirty bombs have more in common with nuclear medicine than nuclear war.
A dirty bomb wouldn’t immediately kill any more people than an ordinary explosive. It is a weapon ideally suited to terrorism, though, part of the very purpose of which is to sow fear. In fact, in the perverse psychology of terrorism, a mere claim that a bomb had spread radioactive material would have some of the same effect as a bomb that actually did so.
That said, getting hold of the sort radioactive material needed to make a dirty bomb isn’t difficult; it has occasionally even been stolen by accident. Literally thousands of sites, in more than 100 countries, contain the kind of sources required, which have many uses in agriculture, industry, and medicine. Radioactive isotopes are commonly used, for example, to irradiate blood before transfusions and treat cancer tumors…………
Once the public knew the bomb was radioactive, it would be hard to stop fear and chaos from escalating. Authorities would have to decide whether to let people flee, which could reduce their radiation exposure and begin an evacuation, but might also spread radiation through the city and let perpetrators escape.
So many variables would be involved in a possible dirty bomb attack that it’s hard to definitively predict an outcome. The IAEA divides radioactive materials into five categories, from Category 1, which is so harmful that exposure for only a few minutes to an unshielded source may be fatal, to Category 5, which poses a relatively low hazard. But Category 5 materials—such as the americium-241 found in lightning detectors or the strontium-90 used in brachytherapy cancer treatment—are more readily available, and if enough are brought together in one place, they can add up to a harmful dose. An early task for first responders would be to figure out what kind of radioactive material was used.
Then there’s fear of the big C. Radioactive isotopes are associated with an increase in various cancers, but by how much and over what time period isn’t perfectly known. A great deal depends on the concentration to which a person was exposed. Much ofwhat scientists have learned about radiation-caused cancer comes from studying the aftereffects of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster.
Various cities and government agencies, including the US Department of Homeland Security and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, have produced studies and briefings on how to respond to a dirty bomb attack, and many of these focus on the costs of evacuation and decontamination. “A radioactive dirty bomb would not cause catastrophic levels of death and injury,” the Nuclear Threat Initiative report says, “but depending on its chemistry, form, and location, it could leave billions of dollars of damage due to the costs of evacuation, relocation, and cleanup … Buildings could have to be demolished and the debris removed. Access to a contaminated area could be denied for years as a site is cleaned up well enough to meet even minimum environmental guidelines for protecting the public.” Businesses would close, shipping would halt, wages would be lost. This kind of upheaval has earned dirty bombs the moniker “weapons of mass disruption.”………http://thebulletin.org/what-does-nuclear-terrorism-really-mean9309
France is dangerously ill-prepared to deal with a nuclear accident – report
France is ‘not prepared for a nuclear accident’, report says http://www.thelocal.fr/20160407/france-
unprepared-for-nuclear-accident , according to a worrying new report, that the Swiss and Germans will want to read with interest.
- France’s oldest nuclear plant ‘to close this year’ (06 Mar 16)
- Germany demands France shut old nuclear plant (04 Mar 16)
- Swiss sue French over ‘dangerous’ nuclear plant (03 Mar 16)
That’s the conclusion of a new report by France’s ANCCLI commission that reports on the state of the country’s nuclear facilities.
“France is not ready to face a serious nuclear accident,” warned the commission’s president Jean-Claude Delalonde. “Even though a national response plan was made public in February 2014, nothing has been put in place,” he said.
The report comes after both Switzerland and Germany have expressed concerns about the safety of some of France’s 19 nuclear power stations, with authorities in Geneva even launching legal action.
According to Delalonde’s association the French government has not learned the lessons from previous disasters like Chernobyl that was presented as a “Soviet” accident.
The Fukushima disaster in Japan prompted the French to improve certain safety measures around nuclear reactors but ANCCLI want more.
They want the “emergency zone” around nuclear power stations, where measures are put in place in the event of accident, extended from the current 10km radius to 80 km.
The fact this hasn’t been done already creates a dangerous situation for Europe, the report says.
For example France distributes iodine tablets, which protect against the potentially cancer-causing effects of radioactivity, to those living within the 10km radius of a nuclear reactor, but in Belgium the same measure is taken within a 20km radius.
After Fukushima, the radius was extended to between 20km and 50km in Switzerland. The entire state of Luxembourg is part of an emergency zone even though there are no nuclear power stations on its territory. It’s due to the fact the Cattenom reactor in France is close to the border.
The duchy has previously forwarded to the European Commission a study commissioned by Germany’s Greens party, which according to Luxembourg “listed the Cattenom plant’s security problems”.
ANCCLI wants French authorities to work out a plan and carryout “digital simulations” for how Iodine tablets would be distributed to the whole of France before a radioactive cloud passes and also how the population would be evacuated in the event of a disaster.
The extent of the problems France would face in the event of a disaster are made clear by the fact more than 1.25 million people live within 30km of the Bugey power plant near Switzerland and over one million live around the Fessenheim power station – the oldest in the country.
Delalonde points out that India’s contingency plans are far more developed than they are in France.
“They anticipate the amount of food that will be needed, the number of emergency beds needed, blankets and even how many saris would be needed,” he said.”This power plant is very old, too old to still be in operation,” said a spokesman for Germany’s Environment and Nuclear Safety Minister Barbara Hendricks.
Meanwhile, the Swiss canton of Geneva on Wednesday filed a complaint against French nuclear plant Bugey located in the neighbouring French region of Ain, claiming that it “deliberately puts in danger the life of others and pollutes the waters”.
A future of litigation doesn’t augur well for Japan’s nuclear industry
Japan’s nuclear restart stymied by courts Reactors switched on and off in campaign of litigation launched by activists Ft.com APRIL 6, 2016 by: Robin Harding in Tokyo
A welter of conflicting legal decisions has left Japan’s nuclear reactors in a state of limbo as national energy strategy clashes with the courts.
The reactors are being turned on and off like light switches as activists file lawsuits, highlighting the tension between safety fears and energy supply, and raising questions about the role of courts in nuclear regulation………The Takahama shutdown was a particular blow to the industry because a court in the district that hosts the reactor had lifted its injunction against the plant. That showed how plaintiffs can try different judges, given the wide areas potentially affected by an accident.
The stop-start court decisions are a huge frustration to government policymakers, who last year set a goal of restoring nuclear power to 20-22 per cent of Japan’s energy mix……..
“We tried leaving everything to the experts and what we got is Fukushima,” he says, arguing that one way or another, Japan’s nuclear experts are tied to the industry.
“The courts don’t consider energy strategy, they just consider whether a reactor should start or stop,” Mr Kawai says. “Thinking too much about energy strategy and government policy is what leads courts to error.”
Kenichi Ido, a former judge who issued an injunction against a nuclear power station in 2006 — well before the Fukushima disaster — said it was not surprising Japan’s courts kept coming to different opinions given the widely different views in society………That leaves Japan’s reactors facing a future of constant litigation — and Mr Kawai is revelling in it. “We’ll aim to get injunctions against any reactor that tries to restart,” he says.
With the Sendai plant operating, he recognises his alliance of lawyers may not stop them all. But, he promises: “There’s no chance of all Japan’s reactors starting up again.” https://next.ft.com/content/1c92b5ac-fbbb-11e5-b3f6-11d5706b613b
Nuclear competition between India and Pakistan is now a global threat
Nuclear Winter on a Planetary Scale: The Biggest Threat to Mankind Virtually No One Is Talking About, ALTERNET, By Dilip Hiro / TomDispatch April 8, 2016 A war between India and Pakistan could produce human suffering the likes of which the world has never seen before…….
When it comes to Pakistan’s strategic nuclear weapons, their parts are stored in different locations to be assembled only upon an order from the country’s leader. By contrast, tactical nukes are pre-assembled at a nuclear facility and shipped to a forward base for instant use. In addition to the perils inherent in this policy, such weapons would be vulnerable to misuse by a rogue base commander or theft by one of the many militant groups in the country.
In the nuclear standoff between the two neighbors, the stakes are constantly rising as Aizaz Chaudhry, the highest bureaucrat in Pakistan’s foreign ministry, recently made clear. The deployment of tactical nukes, he explained, was meant to act as a form of “deterrence,” given India’s “Cold Start” military doctrine — a reputed contingency plan aimed at punishing Pakistan in a major way for any unacceptable provocations like a mass-casualty terrorist strike against India.
New Delhi refuses to acknowledge the existence of Cold Start. Its denials are hollow. As early as 2004, it was discussing this doctrine, which involved the formation of eight division-size Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs). These were to consist of infantry, artillery, armor, and air support, and each would be able to operate independently on the battlefield. In the case of major terrorist attacks by any Pakistan-based group, these IBGs would evidently respond by rapidly penetrating Pakistani territory at unexpected points along the border and advancing no more than 30 miles inland, disrupting military command and control networks while endeavoring to stay away from locations likely to trigger nuclear retaliation. In other words, India has long been planning to respond to major terror attacks with a swift and devastating conventional military action that would inflict only limited damage and so — in a best-case scenario — deny Pakistan justification for a nuclear response.
Islamabad, in turn, has been planning ways to deter the Indians from implementing a Cold-Start-style blitzkrieg on their territory. After much internal debate, its top officials opted for tactical nukes. In 2011, the Pakistanis tested one successfully. Since then, according to Rajesh Rajagopalan, the New Delhi-based co-author of Nuclear South Asia: Keywords and Concepts, Pakistan seems to have been assembling four to five of these annually.
All of this has been happening in the context of populations that view each other unfavorably. ……….
India’s Two Secret Nuclear Sites
On the nuclear front in India, there was more to come. Last December, an investigation by the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity revealed that the Indian government was investing $100 million to build a top secret nuclear city spread over 13 square miles near the village of Challakere, 160 miles north of the southern city of Mysore. When completed, possibly as early as 2017, it will be “the subcontinent’s largest military-run complex of nuclear centrifuges, atomic-research laboratories, and weapons- and aircraft-testing facilities.” Among the project’s aims is to expand the government’s nuclear research, to produce fuel for the country’s nuclear reactors, and to help power its expanding fleet of nuclear submarines. It will be protected by a ring of garrisons, making the site a virtual military facility.
Another secret project, the Indian Rare Materials Plant, near Mysore is already in operation. It is a new nuclear enrichment complex that is feeding the country’s nuclear weapons programs, while laying the foundation for an ambitious project to create an arsenal of hydrogen (thermonuclear) bombs.
The overarching aim of these projects is to give India an extra stockpile of enriched uranium fuel that could be used in such future bombs. As a military site, the project at Challakere will not be open to inspection by the International Atomic Energy Agency or by Washington, since India’s 2008 nuclear agreement with the U.S. excludes access to military-related facilities. These enterprises are directed by the office of the prime minister, who is charged with overseeing all atomic energy projects. India’s Atomic Energy Act and its Official Secrets Act place everything connected to the country’s nuclear program under wraps. In the past, those who tried to obtain a fuller picture of the Indian arsenal and the facilities that feed it have been bludgeoned to silence.
Little wonder then that a senior White House official was recently quoted as saying, “Even for us, details of the Indian program are always sketchy and hard facts thin on the ground.” He added, “Mysore is being constantly monitored, and we are constantly monitoring progress in Challakere.” However, according to Gary Samore, a former Obama administration coordinator for arms control and weapons of mass destruction, “India intends to build thermonuclear weapons as part of its strategic deterrent against China. It is unclear, when India will realize this goal of a larger and more powerful arsenal, but they will.”
Once manufactured, there is nothing to stop India from deploying such weapons against Pakistan. “India is now developing very big bombs, hydrogen bombs that are city-busters,” said Pervez Hoodbhoy, a leading Pakistani nuclear and national security analyst. “It is not interested in… nuclear weapons for use on the battlefield; it is developing nuclear weapons for eliminating population centers.”
In other words, as the Kashmir dispute continues to fester, inducing periodic terrorist attacks on India and fueling the competition between New Delhi and Islamabad to outpace each other in the variety and size of their nuclear arsenals, the peril to South Asia in particular and the world at large only grows.
1 This Month
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
of the week–London Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (114)
- 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 