The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

20 Years of Alleged Fraud at US National Lab: Includes Uranium Testing and Much More – Office of Inspector General Report

Mining Awareness +

This alleged fraud included a study about “uranium in the environment” and included ISL samples (In situ leach uranium), “uranium environmental task force” and much more. It is unclear if the ISL research was for proposed ISL uranium mining or for historic or both. One specific study mentioned was “assessment of uranium in the environment in and around Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona for possible groundwater restoration“.
Grand Canyon NPS
Anyone who has followed this blog for awhile has learned, if they never knew it before, that you can’t trust the US government, nor its agencies. Some within them may be honest, but once there is so much dishonesty you can’t trust any of them anymore.

Thus, there could be several things going on with this alleged fraud. Firstly, it may be true. In this case it appears to be. Secondly, the lab person(s) could be…

View original post 576 more words

July 5, 2016 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

July 5 Energy News


Science and Technology:

¶ The Energy Transitions Commission, made up of corporate, government, academic and non-profit groups, is now working on analysis to enable a high penetration of renewable energy onto energy grids. Its early findings have said intermittent renewable power can contribute up to 70% of grid electricity. [Business Green]

West of Duddon Sands West of Duddon Sands

¶ Research from MIT says various different energy storage options make economic sense at current prices for some renewable energy projects. The energy storage options profiled by the study included: battery systems, pumped hydroelectric storage, and compressed air energy storage, among others. [CleanTechnica]


¶ The wide-scale deployment of solar energy technologies in Ireland would see the generation of over 7,300 “high-value” jobs and would also slash fines from the European Union by more than €300 million a year onward from 2020, according to a new report from the Irish Solar…

View original post 476 more words

July 5, 2016 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

July 4 Energy News

#auspol NO #coal Thorium #uranium #nuclear


Science and Technology:

¶ Vestas has produced the initial kilowatt-hour from its multi-rotor wind turbine demonstrator in Denmark. The manufacturer said the milestone test site installation produced satisfactory results. The machine, which features four nacelles supported by a single tower, will continue to be put through its paces. [reNews]

Vestas multi-rotor wind machine. Vestas image. Vestas multi-rotor wind machine. Vestas image.


¶ Households account for about 18% of total energy use in the Beijing region but produce 50% of black carbon emissions and 69% of organic carbon emissions, according to research by institutions including Princeton, the University of California Berkeley, Peking University and Tsinghua University. [Science 2.0]

¶ The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development said that in response to growing demand it has provided $110 million in new funds to Akbank to finance private companies investing in renewable energy and efficiency projects in Turkey. Its goal is to diversify Turkey…

View original post 467 more words

July 5, 2016 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

A Massive Campaign of Disinformation to Trivialize Fukushima Health Risks


I am being nice, I did not add a 4th monkey to this picture, to represent the selling-out “scientists”….

5 years have past, we are now submerged by a massive campaign of lies, spinned propaganda, that everything is now fine about Fukushima. Some articles spreading plain nonsense, lies without any fear to be accused to be lying. Some our friends even sharing those B.S. articles on their FB pages or FB group without even having the intelligence to write an introduction to those articles, exposing the lies of those articles.

As an example, this article “Scientists Find New Kind Of Fukushima Fallout” where they say: ““He cautions that any internal radiation from particles containing cesium-137 would be much less than the doses people got from external radiation, which would come from cesium-137 and other radioactive elements in the soil or the environment around them.”

Which is absolute bullshit, nonsense, a lie, It completely ignores what science and multiple studies have already well established, that internal radiation is 100 times more harmful than external radiation.

Also the recently released report from the conclusions of a major 5 year review, with multi-international authors who are all working together as part of a Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR) Working Group. The report is being presented at the Goldschmidt geochemistry conference in Japan.

Which says: ” Uptake by marine life. In 2011, around half the fish samples in coastal waters off Fukushima had radiocesium levels above the Japanese 100Bq/kg limit, but by 2015 this had dropped to less than 1% above the limit. High levels are still found in fish around the FDNPP port. High levels of 131I were measured in fish in April 2011, but as this has a short radioactive half-life, it is now below detection levels. Generally, with the exception of species close to the FDNPP, there seem to be little long-term measurable effects on marine life.”

It takes 12 years for the TRITIUM to lose half of its radioactivity and 120 years for it to lose it all, And 30 years and 300 years for CESIUM, and tens of thousands of years to the PLUTONIUM etc But according to their report the Pacific is now clean just after 5 years.

That report also says: “Risk to Humans. The radiation risk to human life is comparatively modest in comparison to the 15,000 lives were lost as a result to the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami. So far, there have been no direct radiation deaths. The most exposed FDNPP evacuees received a total dose of 70 mSv, which (if they are representative of the general population) would increase their lifetime fatal cancer risk from 24% to 24.4%. However, there are still over 100,000 evacuees from the Fukushima area, and many industries such as fishing and tourism have been badly hit.”

Thus that report is completely ignoring the well proven harmful effects of a constant low dose radiation on human life, and of course completely omitting to talk about the dangers of internal exposure by contaminated food and liquid for the Fukushima population.

When I shared this report on my blog, I wrote an introduction saying: “This report raises certainly a lot of questions about today’s scientific community unbiasedness and independance from governmental and corporated powers.”

A marine biologist came to argue with me on Twitter, reproaching me to not accept science. I answered to him that I do respect science but I won’t stand for bias, for that “science” which is being influenced, bought, twisted or silenced by financial and political interests.

July 5, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Reuse of radioactive soil feared to trigger illegal dumping

re-use july 5 2016.jpg

Piles of black bags containing radioactive soil are seen at a temporary storage site in Minamisoma, Fukushima Prefecture, on June 11, 2016. The Environment Ministry is set to conduct a demonstration experiment there possibly later this year, in which radiation doses will be measured on mounds using soil generated from decontamination work.

Reuse of radioactive soil feared to trigger illegal dumping

An Environment Ministry decision to allow reuse of radioactively contaminated soil emanating from the Fukushima nuclear disaster in public works projects has prompted experts to warn against possible dumping of such soil under fake recycling.

The ministry formally decided on June 30 to allow limited use of soil generated from decontamination work after the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant disaster in mounds under road pavements and other public works projects, as long as the soil contains no more than 8,000 becquerels per kilogram of radioactive cesium. The decision was made despite questions raised during a closed meeting of the ministry over incompatibility with the decontamination criteria for farmland soil.

The Act on the Regulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors sets the safety criteria for recycling metals and other materials generated from the decommissioning of nuclear reactors at no more than 100 becquerels per kilogram, and requires materials whose radiation levels exceed that level to be buried underground as “radioactive waste.” The figure of 100 becquerels is derived from the International Commission on Radiological Protection’s standards that annual radiation exposure of up to 0.01 millisieverts poses negligible health risks.

However, the Fukushima disaster has disseminated radioactive materials outside the crippled nuclear plant across far wider areas than expected. Under the special measures law on decontamination of radioactive materials, which was fully put into force in January 2012, waste whose radiation levels top 8,000 becquerels per kilogram is called “designated waste” and must be treated by the government, while waste with radiation levels of 8,000 becquerels or lower can be treated in the same way as regular waste. The figure of 8,000 becquerels comes from the upper limit of annual radiation exposure doses for ordinary citizens under the reactor regulation law, which is set at 1 millisievert. Regarding the double safety standards of 100 becquerels and 8,000 becquerels, the Environment Ministry had earlier explained that the former is for “reuse” and the latter for “waste disposal.”

However, the recent Environment Ministry decision to allow the reuse of contaminated soil in public works projects runs counter to its earlier explanation. The ministry is trying to reconcile that difference by insisting that the radiation levels of tainted soil could be kept under 100 becquerels if mounds using such soil were covered with concrete and other materials to shield radiation. During a closed meeting of the ministry that discussed the matter, some attendants raised questions over inconsistencies with the decontamination criteria for farmland soil.

In April 2011, in the aftermath of the Fukushima meltdowns, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries restricted rice planting in paddies whose radiation levels topped 5,000 becquerels per kilogram of soil. While the restriction was effective for just one year, the same criteria has been in place for ensuing decontamination, where surface soil of more than 5,000 becquerels is removed and surface soil under that level is replaced with deeper layers.

It is inconsistent to strip away soil of more than 5,000 becquerels while recycling soil with the same level of radiation. However, attendants of the closed meeting never discussed the matter in detail, nor did the issue come up for discussion at an open meeting.

The radioactivity concentration of contaminated soil is higher than that of earthquake debris, whose treatment caused friction across the country on the heels of the Fukushima crisis. Therefore, officials attending an open meeting of the ministry discussed the introduction of incentives for users of tainted soil, with one saying, “Unless there are motives for using such soil, regular soil would be used instead.”

Kazuki Kumamoto, professor at Meiji Gakuin University specializing in environmental policy, criticized the ministry’s move, saying, “There is a high risk for inverse onerous contracts, in which dealers take on contaminated soil in exchange for financial benefits.” There have been a series of incidents involving such contracts, in which waste was pressed upon dealers under the guise of “recycled materials,” such as backfill material called ferrosilt and slag generated from iron refining.

“If contaminated soil was handed over under inverse onerous contracts, there is a risk that such soil could be illegally dumped later. Reuse of tainted soil would lead to dispersing contamination,” Kumamoto said.

July 5, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , , | Leave a comment

How about a bit of Fukushima sake?


Cups of sake are distributed to visitors at a tourism facility in Fukushima on May 18, after Fukushima Prefecture won the most awards at the Annual Japan Sake Awards.

Nuclear disaster a ‘springboard’ for Fukushima sake brewers

FUKUSHIMA–After a change in preference among the nation’s imbibers, Fukushima Prefecture rapidly gained ground as the top sake-producing area in Japan.

And then the nuclear disaster struck in March 2011.

But the triple meltdown that forced entire towns to flee and scared consumers off Fukushima products ended up fueling the rise of sake brewers in the prefecture.

Using its traditional system of public-private cooperation, Fukushima Prefecture not only took over the sake-brewing crown from Niigata Prefecture, the northeastern prefecture has also widened its lead.

Any sympathy that sake brewers had for their Fukushima rivals after the nuclear disaster has now been replaced by competitive words in the field.

Inokichi Shinjo, 65, chairman of the Fukushima Prefecture Sake Brewers Cooperative, could not hide his delight on May 18 while seeing the results of the Annual Japan Sake Awards.

This achievement will help establish Fukushima’s reputation as the best sake-producing area in the country,” Shinjo said.

In the contest, in which the quality of young sake is judged, 18 products from Fukushima Prefecture were among the 227 brands that won the gold prize for having exceptionally good quality.

It was the fourth straight year for Fukushima to be the top prefecture in terms of number of gold prize-winning products in the competition.

The Annual Japan Sake Awards started in the Meiji Era (1868-1912), and sake from Hiroshima and Hyogo prefectures, as well as other traditional sake-producing areas, dominated the competition until the 1980s.

In the 1990s, more consumers turned to “tanrei karakuchi” (clean and dry) sake. Niigata Prefecture, known for its tanrei karakuchi products, placed first for four consecutive years starting in 1998.

Most of the sake entered in the contest are specially brewed for the occasion. But Fukushima Prefecture has overwhelmed Niigata Prefecture in the Sake Competition, where commercially available sake are evaluated.

Last year, 20 breweries in Fukushima Prefecture entered the Sake Competition.

The prefecture topped the list, with 18 brands from Fukushima, including Aizu Chujo, Nagurayama, Sharaku, Aizu Homare and Hiroki, among the 103 products selected as winners. None of the products from the 13 breweries from Niigata Prefecture were chosen.


Fukushima-brewed sake rose in popularity after drinkers switched to “hojun amakuchi” (mellow and sweet) sake, noted for a natural flavor of rice, from tanrei karakuchi.

The turning point came in 1994, when the Juyondai sake brewed in Yamagata Prefecture, north of Fukushima Prefecture, was marketed and introduced in a magazine. The sake immediately won high praise, and prompted many brewers to produce hojun amakuchi sake, particularly in other parts of the Tohoku region.

The “Fukushima-style” system, in which citizens and public officials work together, was established to improve the quality of sake through the effective use of advanced brewing technologies.

The characteristics of rice for sake change each year, depending on the climate.

Under the system, the Aizu-Wakamatsu technical assistance office of the prefecture-run Fukushima Technology Center analyzes the year’s rice in advance and advises each brewer on the best way to produce sake.

The mechanism enabled breweries to produce high quality sake unlike in the past,” said Kenji Suzuki, 54, head of the office’s brewing and food division.

Kenji Hiroki, 49, president of the Hiroki Shuzo Honten brewing company in Aizu-Bange, which makes Hiroki, one of the most famous sake brands in Fukushima Prefecture, said the system has also helped to prevent a trend that has hampered other traditional businesses: a lack of successors.

Young people in their 20s and 30s have returned to local breweries to take over their parents’ businesses,” Hiroki said.

He also noted that many sake products brewed in Fukushima used to be traded at very low prices.

The trend encouraged brewers to share their techniques to improve their circumstances together,” Hiroki said. “Even the (2011) nuclear crisis worked as a springboard for us.”


After the March 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami triggered the disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, companies in the prefecture had difficulty selling products because of persistent fears of radiation contamination.

The prefecture’s sake brewers cooperative has been emphasizing the safety of Fukushima-made sake, saying “both rice for sake and water are carefully examined according to strict standards.”

Such thorough checks also helped to ensure the rice and water were top quality.

Noted Fukushima breweries started joint advertising campaigns to sell their products in Tokyo. The publicity not only helped to increase sales but also spread the word about high quality of Fukushima Prefecture’s sake.

Rivals in other parts of Japan have been inspired by the efforts of Fukushima sake makers.

Brewers from Fukushima Prefecture always point out each other’s problems when they meet, and it provides me with a good stimulus,” said Tadayoshi Onishi, 41, president of the Kiyasho Shuzo brewery in Mie Prefecture, which produces the popular Jikon brand.

Although sake production has generally declined around Japan, Fukushima brewers’ production is 10 percent higher than the level before the nuclear accident.

Shuichi Mizuma, 66, representative director of the Niigata Sake Brewers Association, expressed confidence that his prefecture would reclaim the title of “the kingdom of sake.”

The tide often changes,” he said.

Koichi Hasegawa, 60, president of Hasegawasaketen Inc., a major sake retailer in Tokyo, said Fukushima Prefecture’s top position is not secure.

People will soon be fed up with hojun amakuchi sake,” he said. “Shochu recently made waves as well. And Japanese consumers are frighteningly swayed by the latest trends.”

fukushima pride.jpg

July 5, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , | Leave a comment

Mayor opposes reactor restarts in Saga; utility pushes ahead


Imari Mayor Yoshikazu Tsukabe

Mayor opposes reactor restarts in Saga; utility pushes ahead

IMARI, Saga Prefecture–The mayor of Imari expressed opposition to Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s plan to restart a nearby nuclear power plant, but the city in southern Japan has no legal authority to keep the reactors offline.

I was worried about the ramifications on the local economy and the livelihoods of local residents when the Genkai nuclear plant suspended operations (after the Fukushima nuclear disaster),” Mayor Yoshikazu Tsukabe said at a news conference on July 4. “Five years on, there have been no large disruptions. The prevailing sentiment in this city is that the plant does not need to go back online.”

Tsukabe’s comments came after Michiaki Uriu, president of Kyushu Electric, told a June 28 news conference that the utility is keen to restart two reactors at the Genkai plant.

We are aiming to reactivate them by the end of the current fiscal year,” he said.

Imari, a city of 57,000 people, lies within a 30-kilometer radius of the plant in the town of Genkai, Saga Prefecture.

That means Imari is required, under central government standards compiled after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, to prepare an evacuation plan for a possible nuclear disaster at the plant.

However, the utility does not need the city’s permission to restart the reactors.

Kyushu Electric, a regional monopoly, has a nonbinding “safety agreement” with the Saga prefectural government and the Genkai town government, requiring their consent before the plant can be restarted.

The company must also obtain prior approval from the two governments for any change in its business plan under the pact.

Imari, which does not host the plant, has no such agreement with Kyushu Electric.

After long negotiations, Kyushu Electric in February did agree to provide Imari with full explanations about plans for the Genkai plant in advance and give due regard to the city’s stance on resuming reactor operations.

Imari also exchanged a memorandum with the prefectural government that said Saga Prefecture will give full consideration to Imari’s opinion in terms of carrying out the safety agreement with Kyushu Electric.

However, the prefectural government’s stance is that the memorandum does not cover reactor restarts.

Masahiko Ishibashi, an official in charge of prefecture’s department overseeing industry and labor, stopped short of taking a clear position on Mayor Tsukabe’s opposition to the resumption of the Genkai plant’s operations.

We take it as an opinion,” Ishibashi said.

Tsukabe said he sees no reason for his city to actively cooperate with Kyushu Electric in its business plan.

Imari residents do not need to bottle up their anxieties about the plant restart for the sake of a portion of Genkai’s economy,” he said.

Regardless of Imari’s opposition, Kyushu Electric will continue its preparations to restart the reactors at the Genkai plant, which is close to the final stage of safety screening by the Nuclear Regulation Authority.

The utility also operates the Sendai plant in Kagoshima Prefecture, the only nuclear power plant currently in service in the nation.

Local mayor vows not to approve restart of Genkai nuke plant

IMARI, Saga — Imari Mayor Yoshikazu Tsukabe said on July 4 that he had no intention of approving a plan to restart the Genkai Nuclear Power Plant in Saga Prefecture.

The Saga Prefecture city of Imari falls within 30 kilometers from Kyushu Electric Power Co.’s Genkai nuclear power station. Imari Mayor Tsukabe said at a regular news conference, “I have no intention of giving consent to restarting (the nuclear plant).”

It is the first time for the head of a municipal government among eight municipalities in three prefectures of Saga, Fukuoka and Nagasaki that are within 30 kilometers from the Genkai nuclear plant to voice such opposition.

Tsukabe said, “If a nuclear accident occurs, we can’t recover from it,” adding, “I will state my opposition (if I am questioned by the prefectural government).”

July 5, 2016 Posted by | Japan | , | Leave a comment