USA had secret plans to place nuclear weapons in Iceland
US Debated Deploying Nuclear Weapons in Iceland, Iceland Review, 16 Aug 16 BY VALA HAFSTAD
The documents are discussed on the website of the National Security Archive, but until now, they have been classified. On the website, it is noted that this is not the first time clues have been discovered about such plans.
Historian Valur Ingimundarson had previously argued that a weapon storage facility built in Keflavík in the 1950s was intended for nuclear weapons. Furthermore, during the 1980s, historian William Arkin reported that a presidential directive from President Richard Nixon’s period in office treated Iceland as one of several conditional deployment locations for nuclear weapons in the event of war……..http://icelandreview.com/news/2016/08/16/us-debated-deploying-nuclear-weapons-iceland
Environmental concerns about the Olympic Games
This article looks at Brazil’ s environmental situation, particularly regarding the Amazon forest.
I wonder what concerns will be raised for the next Olympics – 2020 in Tokyo ?
2016 Olympic Games and the environment, Independent Australia 16 August 2016, Dr Anthony Horton questions how much consideration is given to environmental considerations when Olympic Games host cities are selected.
RECENT MEDIA ATTENTION on the parlous state of the environment in the vicinity of the Rio de Janeiro Olympic Games sites, and Brazil more generally, piqued my interest in researching the extent to which environmental issues are taken into account when deciding which city hosts the Olympic Games.
A report entitled ‘The 2016 Olympic Games: Health, Security, Environmental and Doping Issues’ published by the United States Congressional Research Service on 28 July 2016, highlights the environmental commitments made by the Rio de Janeiro Organising Committee for the 2016 Olympic Games and the assessment process that each city must successfully navigate in order to be awarded the right to host the Games.
This report was quite an eye opener for me and after considering the findings, I can only conclude that environmental concerns must be more heavily weighted in future decisions regarding which city hosts the Olympic Games…….
Based on the Congressional Research Service report and the Council on Foreign Relationsinteractive report, I cannot help but conclude that environmental concerns must be more heavily weighted in future decisions regarding which city hosts the Olympic Games. https://independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/2016-olympic-games-and-the-environment,9359
World’s biggest offshore windfarm on track in UK
Second phase of world’s biggest offshore windfarm gets go-ahead Multibillion-pound Hornsea Project Two, 55 miles off Grimsby coast, would see 300 turbines span an area five times size of Hull, Guardian, Josh Halliday, 16 Aug 16, Plans for the world’s biggest offshore windfarm off the Yorkshire coast are to be expanded to an area five times the size of Hull after being approved by ministers.
The multibillion-pound Hornsea Project Two would see 300 turbines – each taller than the Gherkin – span more than 480 sq km in the North Sea.
Fifty-five miles off the coast of Grimsby, the project by Denmark’s Dong Energy is expected to deliver 1,800MW of low-CO2 electricity to 1.8m UK homes. The development would represent a large boost to the UK’s wind energy industry, with Dong Energy pledging to invest £6bn in the UK and create more than 2,500 jobs……https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/16/hornsea-project-two-windfarm-second-phase-grimsby
Safety problems at Fennovoima nuclear power firm revealed by audit
Safety audit flags shortcomings by Fennovoima nuclear power firm, Yle Uutiset, 16.8.2016
An audit by radiation and nuclear safety watchdog STUK has highlighted possible deficiencies by the Fennovoima power company as it prepares to build a nuclear power plant in Pyhäjoki, western Finland. Yle obtained a copy of the STUK audit, in which workers complained of poor management, workplace discrimination, and a tendency to downplay safety issues. Fennovoima has denied the allegations.
A report by Finland’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority STUK has flagged employee concerns over the quality of management at the Finnish-Russian nuclear power firm Fennovoima. Workers interviewed for the audit claimed to have been put under pressure, sidelined, or even “smoked out” for drawing attention to safety concerns or questionable practices.
The findings were detailed in a safety audit that STUK began in late autumn last year and which is still ongoing. Fennovoima needs a clean bill of health from the audit to qualify for a construction permit in 2018. The company hopes to complete the nuclear power plant in 2024.
In an initial report that it completed in December, STUK expressed concerns about whether or not safety was a priority for Fennovoima, and whether or not the company’s management team had adequate experience in the nuclear energy sector………
Signature changes, amateur managementThe employee survey responses also revealed suspicions that the company had changed the signatures on documents relating to nuclear safety. The report indicated that “some documents” had been approved by changing signatures, if the original experts had not agreed to sign off on them. According to STUK several respondents corroborated this claim…….
STUK: Audit report not publicYle called on STUK to provide a copy of the shortcomings flagged in the report it drew up last December. However the nuclear safety watchdog refused to hand it over, saying that the audit was still ongoing…….http://yle.fi/uutiset/safety_audit_flags_shortcomings_by_fennovoima_nuclear_power_firm/9099368
UK: renewables far better value for tax-payers than nuclear is
UK green energy sector needs nurturing over nuclear, Guardian, Larry Elliott, 16 Aug 16,
Technological advances mean the cost of renewables is coming down, representing far better value for taxpayers’ money
ritain’s need for a coherent long-term energy strategy has been woefully neglected by governments of both left and right. One example is the furore over the plan for a new and hugely expensive nuclear power station atHinkley Point. Another is provided by the latest official statistics on the sort of energy the UK uses and where it comes from.
The good news is that Britain is consuming 17% less energy than it was in 1998, and more of what is used is coming from renewable sources. But don’t get too excited. Green energy has increased from 1% of the total to just 9%……
The way forward is obvious. Put energy policy at the heart of the new industrial policy. Technological advances mean the cost of renewables are coming down all the time, and they represent far better value for taxpayers’ money than Hinkley Point C. The government should use tax breaks, procurement and its ability to borrow long-term at historically low interest rates to nurture a new green energy sector. This should have been done years ago, but it is not too late. https://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2016/aug/15/uk-green-energy-sector-needs-nurturing-hinkley-point-nuclear
August 16 Energy News
Science and Technology:
¶ The tropical glaciers of South America are dying from soot and rising temperatures, threatening water supplies to communities that have depended on them for centuries. But experts say that the slow process measured in inches of glacial retreat per year also can lead to a sudden, dramatic glacial lake outburst flood. [CTV News]
Tourists walk near the Tuco glacier in Peru. (AP / Martin Mejia)
¶ Greater scrutiny needs to be placed on the mining industry’s energy use, if millions of dollars are to not be wasted, according to the Rocky Mountain Institute-Carbon War Room. The goal of this is to accelerate reduction of CO2 emissions. In gold mines, energy use accounted for an average 22% of overall operational costs. [Mining Technology]
World:
¶ Van Oord has completed installation works on 90% of the wind turbines at the 600-MW Gemini offshore wind…
View original post 661 more words
Letter: Moorside Turning up the Heat on the Irish Sea by 14 degrees
The following excellent letter on the insanity of Moorside appears in this week’s Whitehaven News. It has been written by Ian Hawkes whose investigative work can be seen on the Toxic Coast website.
“Regarding the two letters in last week’s edition, entitled “Singular Views”, especially the response from NuGen’s spokesperson, I would raise the following points:
NuGen’s representatives seem not to know answers to some of the questions asked; appearing to make up responses which are disputed even by other members of their staff at the same event.
How many individuals have taken part in the consultation? Do repeat visits count as new attendances?
Even accepting at face value that “3,000 people have been given the opportunity to ask questions”, that still only equates to less than 0.6% of Cumbrians; restricting the catchment area to a combination of Allerdale and Copeland increases the figure to 1.8%, whilst reducing the catchment…
View original post 1,249 more words
Fire at H-Area of the Savannah River Nuclear Site, August 7th 2016?
US fire satellite mapping reported on Sunday August 7, 2016, 16.20 UTC – a little after noon local time, what seems to have been a fire at the H-Area of the Savannah River Nuclear Site.
Note the tree-like shape of the “Par Pond” allowing identification of H-Area as the site of the apparent fire.
Apparent fire area. Note what appears to be piping near the yellow dot.
Fire location exported from: http://activefiremaps.fs.fed.us/index.php SRS icon exported from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savannah_River_Site
Fire area without yellow and rotated to better see piping and more of the building area. Although the dot is on the parking lot, it would seem more likely that the fire would be in the area of the corner pipe or elsewhere, unless it occurred unloading.
Apparent area of fire – note parking lot, fans, chimneys.
H-Canyon seems to be center left with the parking lot-chimneys, etc. of apparent fire to the…
View original post 1,038 more words
August 15 Energy News
Opinion:
¶ “A green path to industrialisation” • At recent economic forums in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia, N’Djamena in Chad, Rabat in Morocco, Abuja in Nigeria, even New York in the United States, and elsewhere, Africa’s experts have been expressing their support for green industrialization, with careful use of the Earth’s resources. [The New Times]
Wind turbines in Mahe, Seychelles. / Internet photo.
¶ “EPE scam to avoid renewable energy requirements” • The most efficient new natural gas power plant costs 7.5¢/kWh over its lifetime. Solar power is routinely offered for long-term purchase power agreements at 4¢/kWh and falling. Wind power contracts are approaching 3¢/kWh. But El Paso Electric builds gas plants. [Las Cruces Sun-News]
¶ “Britain’s vast national gamble on wind power may yet pay off” • Wind power has few friends on the political Right. No other industry elicits such protest from the conservative…
View original post 528 more words
Fukushima Disaster’s Victims
I decided to translate this particular article because this article for a change talks about the Fukushima disaster victims and in details how their everyday lives have been affected.
In most of the Fukushima related articles from websites and mainstream media, the writers usually focus on the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant and its technical failures, about its continuous leaking into the Pacific ocean etc. but somehow they almost always forget to talk about the plight of the victims, the victims who are at the forefront of this tragedy.
August 12, 2016
Article written by Evelyne Genoulaz, from a lecture given by Kurumi Sugita,
translated by Dun Renard.
Source : Fukushima Blog de Pierre Fetet http://www.fukushima-blog.com/2016/08/fukushima-les-vies-sinistrees.html
March 11, 2016, Kurumi Sugita, social anthropologist researcher and founding president of the association “Our Far Neighbors 3.11”, gave a lecture entitled “Fukushima disaster’s lives” in the Nature and Environment House (MNEI) in Grenoble, Isere, an inaugural lecture for the commemoration of the “Chernobyl, Fukushima disasters”.
The speaker outlined the concrete and current situation of the victims of the Fukushima disaster, particularly on health issues. Attached to Japan, committed, Kurumi monitored the situation of 60 affected people, for several years, visiting each once a year to collect field data for her associative actions. It is the project “DILEM”, “Displaced and Undecided Left to Themselves”, from the nuclear accident in Japan – the life course and geographical trajectory of the victims outside of the official evacuation zone.
I offer a written return of this conference, courtesy of Kurumi who also was kind enough to add data to date on her return from Japan in June 2016.
Evelyne Genoulaz
I. The contaminated territories
After the disaster the authorities declared a state of emergency and to this day Japan is still “under that declaration of a nuclear emergency state (genshiryoku kinkyu Jitai sengen).” But over time, the zoning of the contaminated territories has been increasingly reduced by the authorities, as shows the chronological overview on these maps (METI).
II. The return policy
Starting this month of March 2016, in fact, many areas were “open”. The return to TOMIOKA is programmed by authorities after April 2017; OKUMA partially in 2018. Only FUTABA is labeled “no projection”. Do note that zoning maps were delineated at the beginning of the disaster zoning by concentric circles, while the radioactivity is deposited in “leopard spots” and today, programmed to be returned to areas are gradually getting geographically closer to the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant even though these areas are dangerous!
The government is preparing to lift the evacuation order at 20 mSv / year, and areas from 20 to 50 mSv / year will enter the opening schedule after spring 2017 establishing strategic points for reconstruction ( fukkô Kyoten).
To speak only of Iitate, which was the most beautiful village in Japan, its mayor is in favor of return, but today the situation there is poignant: it was decontaminated up to 20 meters of the houses, but as it is surrounded by mountains and forests, the radioactivity will remain dangerous …
Measures delegated to individuals
The control measurement of environmental radioactivity will now be based on the individual rather than on space. Thus, everyone is invited to measure himself or herself, to measure what is consumed, so that if the individual is contaminated it will only be blamed upon his or her own negligence!
The absurd and arbitrary at work in the calculation of dose rates
Official figures on the geographical contamination, dose rates displayed, are using a biased calculation.
Usually to measure in the field a dose rate, we get a figure in mSv / h then multiply it by 24 (hours) x 365 (days) to obtain the annual rate. But this is not the calculation undertaken by the authorities.
The authorities makes first a difference between the level of contamination on one hand inside the housing, and on the other hand on the outside. They decided to consider that an individual spends only 8 hours outside. It is also estimated (official rules) that “the radiation inside a building is reduced to 40% of the radiation reading outside.”
Yet, in Minamisoma for example, studies have shown that the contamination inside was at best 10% lower than the outside, sometimes even worse inside!
That is to say that the authorities uses a biased calculation that ultimately determines if we take an example, a dose rate of 20 mSv / year whereas the actually measured dose rate is 33 mSv / year!
Residents who did not evacuate are distressed because they now know fear, for example those of Naraha who no longer recognize their city because it has changed since the disaster: vandalism, insecurity soon as night falls, since it is now black in the streets, some girls were abused …
Furthermore, Naraha is a coastal town with a seaside road and all night – especially at night – they hear the noise of the incessant and disturbing road traffic of the trucks loaded with radioactive waste, without knowing precisely what is carried …
What motivates the return policy? According to Kurumi Sugita, in view of the Olympic Games coming to Japan in 2020, the government pursues a staistics dependent objective: it comes to lowering the numbers! If the evacuees or the self-evacuees leave the “assisted housing”, they are no longer counted as “evacuees”….
III. Works and Waste
The whole territory of Fukushima Prefecture today is littered with waste bags. Everywhere, at the turn of any road you’ll encounters mountains of waste bags, sometimes piled up so high! It is a sorry sight for the residents. And space lacks where to store them, so much that the authorities have even created dumps that they call “temporary intermediary storage areas! “
A “temporary intermediary storage area” in Iitate
A row of uncontaminated sandbags is added around the perimeter of the “square” of the most contaminated bags, so as to reduce the number of the dose rate!
As of March 2016, there were no less than 10 million bags and 128,000 temporary dumpsites in Fukushima Prefecture. Waste bags are omnipresent, despite the residents’ distress; near schools, and even in people’s gardens.
Contaminated waste bags at someone’s house
Short of sufficient storage space, the authorities are forcing residents to an intolerable alternative: if the resident does not want to store the waste on his property, it is his right. But in this case it will not be decontaminated! The resident requesting “decontamination intervention” must keep the waste on his property! This is why we see here and there, everywhere in fact, bags near buildings or in private homes.
According to the “Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law” (Genshiro tô kiseihô), the recycling threshold of “nuclear waste” is 100 Bq / kg. However, on June 30, 2016, the Ministry of Environment has officially decided to “reuse” waste below 8000 Bq / kg (1).
In practical terms, this waste will be used in public works, covered by cement and land in order to lower the ambient radioactivity.
In order to “reduce the volume” of waste, “temporary incinerators” were built to incinerate nuclear waste and to “vaporize” cesium.
Map of Fukushima prefecture showing the nuclear waste processing establishments locations (shizai-ka center) – Legend: the icons differentiate the various incinerators; red = in operation – blue = under construction – gray / yellow = planned – gray = operation completed
Everywhere on village outskirts there are incinerators of which people know nothing! They often operate at night for two to three months and then everything stops. People wonder what is being burned… Not to mention a rumor about a secret experimentation center where much more contaminated waste would be burned…
Even more frightening, waste processing plants …
At the “Environmental Design Centre”, a poster about the revolving furnace” which decontaminates waste, debris, soil, etc, transforming them into cement”.
For example, the Warabidaira waste processing plant located in the village of Iitate or the Environment Creation Center (Kankyô Sôzô Center) opened in July 2016 in the town of Miharu, treat contaminated waste (ashes above 100 000 Bq/kg) and contaminated soil coming from land decontamination work.
Now these last two categories are not covered by the Waste Management Law (1) so they have no constraints associated with their treatment… To reduce their volume and to make them … “recyclable”!
In addition, these establishments are registered as “research institutes” and, as such, they are exempt from the building permit application commonly mandated in the framework of the waste management law!
We see inconsistencies and even contradictions between laws. We have already seen the contradiction between the limit of 100 Bq / kg set by the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law and the 8000 Bq / kg recently adopted by the Ministry of Environment.
IV. Residents, displaced and returned
Citizen radiation measuring. Mothers, and also dads, explore the everyday environment to identify hot spots so as to modify if necessary the route recommended for children, for example “the way to school” (as in Japan all children walk single file).
For that purpose associations use “hot spot finders”. Well aware of the health risk to which children are exposed, they attach sensors connected to GPS on their strollers to walk routes and the way to school or to explore parks.
That system is well thought out: it is a vertical rod 1 meter long that leaves the ground and consists of a measuring device at 10 cm from the ground, another one at 50 cm, and a third at 1 meter to take into account the different sizes of children. If a hot spot is located, others are warned of its location and the children are required to change their route, and authorities are asked to decontaminate. For parents, this work is endless …
Hot spot finders
People organize citizen actions thru Internet. These independent citizen online databases are many,
and one of them is even translated into English since November 2014. It is the “Minna no Data”: ambient radioactivity measures, soil measurements, food analyzes (2).
Some associations’ logos:
V. Protest actions
The trial against the three former TEPCO executives which began in spring 2016 is the first criminal trial to take place; it could last ten years …
However, in Fukushima Prefecture, there are many other trials at different levels also taking place. For example, in March 2016, a lawsuit was initiated by 200 parents brought against the Fukushima Prefecture, to “get children out of contaminated areas.” People protest to have the “thresholds” lowered. In their opinion the issue of “thresholds” go beyond the strict framework of Japan. They fear that the thresholds of Japan will end up being generalized overseas, which is highlighted in some of the maps captions eg “against the generalization and the externalization of the 20 mSv / year threshold”. Some victims require, as after Hiroshima, “an irradiation book” (personal records) to be used for their access to treatment.
Radiation free health holiday
To send children on a health holiday is now more and more difficult, because people tend to believe that the disaster is already over therefore requests for help have become complicated.
In the city of Fukushima, for example, referring to the nuclear disaster is now taboo …
VI. Social and family catastrophe
It causes “conflicts” among neighbors (one example, one person’s place is decontaminated while its adjoining neighbor’s place is not), between beneficiaries and others, between the displaced and the residents of the hosting location (there are misunderstandings on the issue of compensations; the self-evacuated are not receiving any compensation, but the hosting city locals think they are).
So today many prefer to return their evacuated Fukushima resident card and acquire the resident card of their hosting town (in Japon you are résident of the village from which you keep the residence card) so as to “turn the page” because they can no longer bear to be called “evacuees”. They want to integrate into the community where they moved. Only older people remain unswervingly committed to their original residence; it is mostly the elderly who intend to return.
In many families of the Fukushima Prefecture men stayed by necessity to keep their jobs to provide for their families, while mothers with children evacuated to put them out of danger; but as time has passed, more than five years already, many families have disintegrated… The father visiting the family rarely, often for lack of resources, the marriage falling apart, resulting in many divorces and suicides.
Women are showing remarkable energy, they are on all fronts, openly, and even heavily involved in actions and trials, so that even the articles of the so-called “feminine” press today are often dealing with topics related to the nuclear disaster. Young women in particular are very active in the protests and rallies. This is a significant change in Japanese society.
(1) Waste Management and Public Cleansing Law, Haikibutsu no shori oyobi seisô ni kansuru hôritsu, law N°137 from 1970, last amendment in 2001 https://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/recycle/01.pdf
Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law (Genshiro tô kiseihô).
“Act on the Regulation of Nuclear Source Material, Nuclear Fuel Material and Reactors” (kakugenryô busshitsu,kakunenryô busshitsu oyobi genshiro no kisei ni kansuru hôritsu)
law N°166 from 1957(2) –
English translation of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Law.
http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=1941&vm=03&re=01
(2) – Minna no Data Site (MDS) : http://en.minnanods.net/
_____________________
After his lecture, I asked a simple question to Kurumi Sugita:
Why has she founded the association « Nos Voisins Lointains 3.11 » (“Our Distant Neighbors 3.11”)? …
In France, where lives Kurumi, several Japanese associations exchange about the disaster.
But Kurumi Sugita founded on January 8, 2013 in Lyon, the association « Nos voisins lointains 3-11 » also to inform the French and francophones who do not read Japanese.
The website of the association publishes valuable and moving testimonies, translated into French.
Thanks to donations, the association helps concretely, as much as possible, some affected families in Japan.
To know more
The website of Kurumi Sugita’s association:
http://nosvoisins311.wix.com/voisins311-france
You may find the victims testimonies on her Facebook page:
And general informations on the Fukushima nuclear disaster:
https://www.facebook.com/Nos-Voisins-Lointains-311-555557711144167/
Fukushima tourism making strong progress on “recovery”
This is an article from the Fukushima Minpo News, the Fukushima local newspaper which is the propaganda organ of the Japanese central government. Therefore everything announced in this article should be taken with a grain of salt. Or maybe those tourists are the ones who enjoy sightseeing the numerous contaminated soil bags dump sites.
Tourism in Fukushima Prefecture approached a milestone in fiscal 2015 after recovering to nearly 90 percent of where it was before the nuclear disaster unfolded in March 2011, the prefectural government said in a recent tourism report.
In the year ended March 31, the prefecture saw 50.31 million tourists visit its resorts, sightseeing spots and leisure facilities, data compiled by the Fukushima Prefectural Government showed earlier this month.
That’s an increase of 3.42 million on the year before and nearly 90 percent of its tourism tally in fiscal 2010, when 57.17 million tourists visited, the report said.
It is also the first time the annual threshold of 50 million has been achieved since 2011, when the Great East Japan Earthquake tipped the Fukushima No. 1 power plant into a triple core meltdown on March 11.
Fukushima officials praised their promotion drive, dubbed the “Fukushima Destination Campaign,” for bearing fruit. The campaign allows its municipalities to tap the transport resources of the Japan Railway group across the country.
“We will work to draw more tourists by analyzing the effect of the Destination Campaign,” said a Fukushima prefectural official in charge of tourism promotion.
In a surprise, the Soma-Futaba region in eastern Fukushima, along the Pacific coast, drew 2.65 million tourists in fiscal 2015, up 59.9 percent from last year, the report said. Officials say the opening of a key part of the Joban Expressway between the Tomioka and Namie interchanges in March 2015 facilitated the surge. Indeed, the number of people who used drive-in facilities was 33.4 percent higher than last year, the report said.
The opening of new leisure facilities and the resumption of some onsen (hot spring) spas that suspended business in the wake of the disasters also contributed, the officials said.
Tourists were most attracted by the grand nature of Fukushima Prefecture, the data showed. The top spot in fiscal 2015 remained the Bandai Kogen highlands in the north, which drew 2.18 million visitors, up 4.6 percent from the year before.
Trump, Clinton – neither of them have a safe nuclear weapons policy
Trump, Clinton and our nuclear wake-up call By Kingston Reif, August 13, 2016 (CNN) The possibility of Donald Trump winning the presidential election this November has renewed media and public interest in one of the most important responsibilities of the president: commanding America’s massive nuclear arsenal and averting nuclear war.
Yet what has been lost in the angst that Mr. Trump might soon have the authority to launch nuclear weapons is the equally unnerving reality that the U.S. nuclear posture is already unnecessarily dangerous and redundant. Neither Trump nor Hillary Clinton have explained how they would seek to put U.S. doctrine on a safer footing and reduce global nuclear weapons risks……
The sun setting on UK’s nuclear industry? Time for clean energy
The international race toward universal grid parity may see an unsubsidised tipping point next year. Frontrunner Australia is expected to achieve a renewable energy scenario which is cheaper than conventional supply, says a recent report from Deutschebank.
UK nuclear sunset? http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20160814/environment/UK-nuclear-sunset.622012 Anne ZammitIt’s coming up to six years since badgers were relocated to make way for Britain’s next nuclear power station on the Somerset coast. In the pipeline for nearly a decade, plans for Hinkley Point took an unexpected turn in July.
Last month, as Britain’s Prime Minister, Theresa May was advised by her Chief of Staff to put a contract for the French/Chinese-backed Hinkley Point nuclear power station on hold, subject to review.
Mrs May was barely a year old when Britain’s worst ever nuclear disaster spread radioactive dust across northern Europe.
Windscale was built after WWII, to produce plutonium for England’s nuclear weapons programme. A bunker mentality still hung about the facility even after it became a provider of electric power to the public in 1956.
The following year a fire broke out at the plant and burned for three days before it could be contained. In the weeks that followed, milk from cows grazing within a 500 kilometre radius was diluted and destroyed.
Windscale, renamed Sellafield in attempt to erase dark beginnings, was put out of commission in 1973 after a dangerous 
leak capped a long history of incidents. The facility switched to reprocessing of nuclear fuel. This drew bitter opposition from Ireland and Scandinavia over dumping of contaminated water into the Irish Sea.
Ireland’s complaint to the UN was verified by a UK government study which found traces of radioactive substances in salmon bred at fish farms near the plant.
Sellafield was shut down completely in 2005 after uranium and plutonium spilled from a broken pipe. (Since then an American-led multinational corporation has been overseeing the closure process which could drag on into the next century.)
That same year, advisors to Tony Blair urged that emissions targets would best be met with more nuclear power stations. This ran contrary to the UK government stance taken three years earlier when energy efficiency and renewables were tagged as the most cost efficient path to meet immediate energy priorities.
Commenting on Mrs May’s decision to put the Hinkley Point contract on hold, energy economist Tooraj Jamasb of Durham University noted that the new government has not had time to develop a new coherent energy policy.
A 2002 review of UK energy policy veered away from further government subsidies and passed the baton to the private sector. As the UK government gave the go-ahead for a new generation of nuclear power stations to be built, environmentalists alleged unlawful State aid for the nuclear power industry in Britain, filing a complaint with the European Commission. Scotland made it clear that it would not accept any new power stations on Scottish soil.
The time has come for policymakers to shift their focus to clean energyAfter the 2011 Fukushima power plant disaster France vowed to scale down the share of electricity from nuclear sources and Germany announced a phase out of nuclear power by 2022.
Germany’s Federal Environment Agency has declared that the technology to make the switch to 100 per cent renewable energy is already available but requires that electricity is produced and used more efficiently. Meeting climate change targets can be done without nuclear if there are stronger efforts toward demand reduction and lifestyle changes.
The international race toward universal grid parity may see an unsubsidised tipping point next year. Frontrunner Australia is expected to achieve a renewable energy scenario which is cheaper than conventional supply, says a recent report from Deutschebank.
Viewed as covert factories for materials to build apocalyptic weapons, nuclear power stations also face resistance from groups such as the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. As pointed out by CND-UK the cost of nuclear power has continued to rise as the cost of renewable energy has fallen sharply.
A 2006 review by the Office of Nuclear Regulation, which led to assessment of reactor designs ahead of choosing sites, was challenged in court by Greenpeace as “seriously flawed”. Key details of the economics of nuclear power were not published until well after the review was final.
Hinkley Point nuclear power station has undergone a number of reincarnations since the first phase was built in 1956. Reactors on Hinkley Point ‘A’ were shut down permanently after an inspectorate found defects too expensive to fix in 1999. De-commissioning of a successor, Hinkley Point ‘B’ (built 1967) should have happened this year but has been extended to 2023.
The Hinkley Point C proposal by Électricité de France (EDF) and Chinese investors commits British consumers to pay more for nuclear-generated electricity than it costs to buy electricity from offshore windfarms.
Yet a study by Britain’s National Audit Office published last month cited calculations from the National Infrastructure Commission which show that if five per cent of current peak demand were met by demand flexibility then power saved would be equal to a new nuclear power station.
Households and businesses could use electricity more flexibly, using less during times of peak demand and more during times of low demand. Cutting down on use of electricity at peak times reduces the megawatt capacity needed.
The NAO also noted that the expected subsidy for Hinkley Point C has doubled to £37 billion in the past three years.
It is not just the economics of nuclear which now plague decision makers at Whitehall. As former Home Secretary and overseer of MI5, Theresa May approaches the nuclear question from a security perspective.
Security experts have expressed concern that the Chinese could use their role in the project to build weaknesses into computer systems allowing them to shut down Britain’s energy production at will.
Fears that China could engage in cyber-sabotage may have been overblown. The bomb of public subsidy running into billions is the real gremlin in the Hinkley Point contract.
A cross-party Commons Energy and Climate Change Committee fears that failure to build new nuclear capacity by 2025 would mean greater reliance on imported gas in the medium term. This would affect energy security and force a review of how UK carbon emission targets are to be met.
On the other hand, the committee identified risk factors which could jeopardise proposals like Hinkley Point C. Sudden policy changes by the UK government, an inconsistent approach, poor transparency and lack of long-term vision have created uncertainty for investors.
Delaying or cancelling the Hinkley Point project threatens Britain’s relations with China and France. Joel Kenrick, a former advisor to the Energy Secretary, believes that the contract for Hinkley Point C will go ahead come autumn. However, he expressed doubt over whether it would actually be built with EDF’s poor track record in delivering big
projects.
Corporate finance leader at EY Global Power & Utilities and RECAI editor Ben Warren believes that the time has come for policymakers to shift their focus to clean energy. “Market access, fair play, technology improvements and cost curves will lead to a level of renewables deployment not even imagined,” says Mr Warren. www.energypost.eu/renewable-energy-versus-nuclear-dispelling-myths
Japans dodgy deep geological nuclear waste disposal hopes and fears 2016.
Highly radioactive waste, dangerous for as long as 200,000 years, has to be isolated and guarded in every country that has dabbled in nuclear energy. Cartoon credit: www.sanonofresafety.org/nuclear-waste/
Japan is a place where not two, not three, but four plates meet with no geographical stability. Volcanoes are erupting all the time, new islands pop up in the sea and there are daily earthquakes. Forty thousand years ago, the coast line was totally different and nuclear waste storage is supposed to be safe there?
The issue of transparency
there seems to be a lack of information on the Japanese plans to bury their nuclear High Level waste. Very little has been discussed on this latest OECD report from May, However, on the JAIF website it has been given a brief mention in a very recent report from JAIF (10 August, 2016)
“When completing its report, the group also took into consideration an international peer review by the OECD/NEA in May of this year, as well as opinions and comments from relevant academic societies and other bodies.” – http://www.jaif.or.jp/en/report-completed-on-criteria-for-scientifically-promising-hlw-disposal-sites/
The issue of definition
It would appear that the Japanese Government is trying to play down the adverse comments from the OECD/NEA report from May 2016. Awkwardly enough, The NUMO report came out in March 2016 and seemed to rely on earlier findings in an older OECD/NEA report.
Well, moving on, The main issue found was with the definition and clarity of the Japanese experts terminology in making points within the report. This issue was brought up in the earlier OECD/NEA report and the March 2016 NUMO report had it had tackled the problem. This was not true as the May 2016 OECD/NEA report still mentions issues of clarity in definition.
The issue of democracy
Another issue includes allowing the public to have a say (in the NUMO, JAIF and the OECD/NEA reports) whilst at the same time, denying the public choice and instead allowing scientists to make the decisions to choose a suitable site for the geological repository. The option to self determination of local communities is being sidelined because the most of the Prefectures have resoundingly declared that they do not want to have a nuclear waste dump near their homes. But that hasnt stopped NUMO;
“In May 2015 NUMO abandoned the idea of waiting for a volunteer[Prefecture]. Instead, scientists will nominate suitable regions. According to NUMO, Japan wants to start construction of a repository in 2025 and have the facility operational by between 2033 and 2037”. – http://www.nucnet.org/all-the-news/2016/08/12/japan-plans-to-identify-multiple-candidate-sits-for-repository
The issues of Research and being thorough
Nestled some 500 meters underground are Japans existing deep Underground research Laboratories;
Mizunami Underground Research Laboratory Granite opened in 2004- Run by Jaea JAEA
Horonobe Underground Research Center opened in 2005- Run by JAEA
It might be worth noting that these two deep research labs will be initially used for research and then later will be kept open because they can do things in the underground research laboratories that they will not be able to do in the final disposal facilities. So will there be an ongoing hidden cost (to the tax payer) when the repositories are being priced for costs, perhaps?
Compared to this years measly 50 page report on Geological nuclear waste disposal in Japan written by the OECD/NEA, we can compare it with this years Swedish report (Some 170 pages long) for the same thing;
“In other words, the reactor company itself does not have the long-term capability to fulfil the obligations defined by the Nuclear Activities Act regarding safe decommissioning and dismantling of the facilities and management and disposal of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear waste” http://www.karnavfallsradet.se/sites/default/files/sou_2016_16_eng_webb.pdf
It is worth noting, that unlike the lengthy and inclusive Swedish report, that there are many areas that have seemingly not been addressed in the latest OECD/NEA report and we shall have to wait for JAIF to make public the full report in the near or distant future. So far as this article is showing that even the limited remit of the OECD/NEA report is showing signs of cracks appearing in the plan.
The issue of spontaneous volcano creation and Magma intrusion
Image source; http://www.jma.go.jp/jma/en/Activities/earthquake.html
Japan had to act after the Fukushima Prefecture suffered the nuclear catastrophe. The worlds best minds were brought to bare on this disaster and a newly formed Nuclear Regulation Association (NRA) was born. However, the only expert on geology was soon ejected from the committee because of differences in opinion. He was not replaced by another Geologist as it as found that Geologists did not know enough about Nuclear Physics. Then the worry of Pyroplastic flows blew away and Japan was able to restart a couple of reactors (but both have since been re-shut down ).
Hidden deep in the OECD/NEA report though, is this slightly worrying sentence;
“The Interim Summary acknowledges that the current understanding of magmatic processes indicates that future volcanic hazards to a repository may be present even in areas with no known Quaternary eruptive centres “
Meaning that Magma could move through previously safe areas. Surely, like Japans Tsunamis, however rare, this should be taken into account? As an example we can see the arrogance of Japans Nuclear Regulatory Association (NRA) in relation to volcanic threats as seen here;
“The NRA ruled out a major eruption over the next 30 years until the reactors reach the end of their usable life span. The surprise eruption of Mount Ontake on the border of Gifu and Nagano prefectures on Sept. 27 has renewed concerns about the volcanoes in the region. “It is simply impossible to predict an eruption over the next 30 to 40 years,” Fujii said. “The level of predictability is extremely limited.” https://nuclear-news.net/2014/10/19/sendai-reactors-vulnerable-to-eruptions-state-picked-volcanologist-warns/
And apart from the nuclear lobby and groups getting the science wrong we see basic data not being added to the report and we can only wait to see if this issue is addressed in any later JAIF reports.
“ It would be informative to provide more explanation of the data uncertainty regarding the geothermal gradients, given that relevant maps appear to be available for Japan, such as the cited Geothermal Gradient and Heat Flow Datareport (AIST, 2004). This would help explain the lack of a prescribed value to assess the thermal “areas to be avoided”.”
The issue of practicality
The definitions are important and will lay down the exact routes that need to be decided. And after Fukushima we would think that the “best” sites would be the safest sites but this is not exactly the case.
“The intent to select a site that meets Japan’s current safety standards, but not necessarily selecting the “most suitable (best) site”, is considered practical and consistent with international best practices and recommendations.”
Cost before Safety perhaps? Or are there any “best” sites in Japan?
The issue of belief in the atom
In the OECD/NEA report it talks of the need for long term protection of the deep vault by generations of specialists that could look after the vault and stop human intrusion and deal with any pollution threats. The best comparison is from Planet of the Apes that showed people worshipping a nuclear bomb many generations after a nuclear war.
It might be worth noting that because of a shortage of nuclear engineers that it would be very difficult to maintain a work force in a fixed location for some 200,00 years. However, the reports generally talk about the vague term “Mid-term” storage (maybe some hundreds/thousands of years?) concerning the expected time needed for manning the location. Without a doubt there are huge fences to hurdle in how Japan deals with its High level nuclear waste and of course the so called “lesser” contaminated waste as well, but, well… thats a whole other story.
Source to OECD/NEA report from May 2016 ; http://www.oecd-nea.org/…/2…/7331-japan-peer-review-gdrw.pdf
Source to NUMO March 2016 report; https://www.numo.or.jp/en/reports/pdf/TR-15-02.pdf
The JAIF report is in the article (2 links)
Posted by Shaun McGee aka Arclight
Posted to www.europeannewsweekly.wordpress.com
h/t Satsuki Gotto
Fukushima Daiichi Still Outgassing Radionuclides
It’s still steaming away 5 1/2 years later and with the tent roof removed from Reactor 1 its poison continues to be widely dispersed.
Unit 1 side : 2016.08.14_00.00-03.00
Unit 4 side : 2016.08.14_15.00-18.00
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 (139)
- 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 