nuclear-news

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

Britain’s Atomic Weapons Establishment (AWE) wants to increase its radiation releases by over 2,000 per cent.

Morning Star 27th Jan 2018, Fury as scandal-hit nuclear agency demands 23-fold radiation emissions
increase. CAMPAIGNERS have gone nuclear after the Atomic Weapons
Establishment (AWE) applied this week to increase radiation output from its
Berkshire site by over 2,000 per cent.

AWE, which produces Trident nuclear warheads, had two sites placed in renewed special measures last August over
safety concerns. Now the company is asking the Environment Agency to raise
the 4.4 megabecquerel radiation limit to 100MBq for tests it claims will
help counter nuclear terrorism.

But the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
(CND) said it was nuclear proliferation that increases chances of dangerous
material falling into hostile hands. The group also sounded the alarm over
the risk to public health. CND radiation expert Ian Fairlie said: “While
radiation amounts appear relatively low in the application, they represent
a 23-fold increase. If radiation is released into the water supply in
spikes, this could present a danger.”

https://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/article/fury-scandal-hit-nuclear-agency-demands-23-fold-radiation-emissions-increase

January 29, 2018 Posted by | radiation, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Busting the nuclear lobby’s lies about renewable energy: its faster, and more scalable than nuclear

Renewable Energy Is Much Faster To Install & More Scalable Than Nuclear Power  https://cleantechnica.com/2018/01/28/renewable-energy-much-faster-install-scalable-nuclear-power/ January 28th, 2018 by Jake Richardson 


This article is part of our “CleanTechnica Answer Box” collection. For some reason, there are certain anti-cleantech talking points that get thrown around over and over again that are absolute bunk. We got tired of dealing with the same myths repeatedly and also saw that many other people could use some support responding to these untruths — in discussions on CleanTechnica and elsewhere. So, at the suggestion of a reader, we created this resource in the same vein as Skeptical Science’s responses to global warming & climate change myths.


Myth: We need to build more nuclear power if we want to cut electricity emissions quickly and turn off coal and natural gas power plants.

Short answer: Renewables can grow fast because they can be installed practically everywhere rapidly and simultaneously. Renewable capacity in the magnitude of 1 TW can in principle be added every year. Germany installed 3 GW of PV in one single month in December 2011. Germany has roughly 1% of the world’s population. So, if the entire world installs only 20% the amount of PV that Germany did 5 years ago, it would be at 720 GW per year. At a single utility-scale-PV plant, 120 MWp per month was installed. If only 10% of all cities worldwide installed utility-scale-solar at this scale at the same time, it would lead to approximately the same number just for utility-scale-solar (the world has 4,412 cities with a population of at least 150,000). In fact, if the world only installs one PV module per person per year, this already leads to 1,850 GW per year. Nuclear power plants, meanwhile, take several years to build — and are much more expensive.


One major advantage renewable energy has over nuclear power (and fossil fuels) is that it can typically be installed much faster. Nuclear power plants can require 5–15 years to complete and some have taken 20 or more. (Constructing a new coal power plant cantakes 4 years or more. Building a new gas-powered plant generally takes several years as well.)

Installing a solar power farm can be completed in a number of months, depending upon the size and complexity of the project. Obviously, the much larger ones will require more time, but even they often can be finished in a year or less.

The same is true of wind farms. A 10 MW wind farm can be built in about 2 months and a 50 MW in approximately 6 months.

The speed at which renewables can be built and made operational is impressive. In the year 2017 alone, China installed about 52 GW of solar power. When it comes to wind power, China may install about 403 GW over the next 10 years. As with a large number of any type of construction project, the limiting factor in speed is generally one of financing, will, and labor, and that is certainly no less true with highly distributed wind and solar power projects.

The cost of renewables will likely continue to decrease with greater adoption and acceptance, especially as fossil fuel usage declines. Greater demand and adoption can spur further innovation to make renewables even more efficient, which enhances their effectiveness and the speed at which you can get large amounts of power onto the grid. With renewables, it is possible to have a virtuous cycle which drives increasing affordability and performance, whereas with fossil fuels we have a vicious cycle of climate change emissions, air pollution that harms and kills humans, rising seas, more severe weather, massive coral die-offs, and the contamination of air, soil, water, and food. Nuclear power costs, meanwhile, have risen in recent decades and are priced out of any free market or semi-free market.

Another advantage is that installing solar and wind power is not nearly as dangerous as building a nuclear or coal power plant. In India, an accident at a construction site for a new coal plant killed 32 people and injured many others. A similar accident in China killed 74. Installing solar power and wind power farms almost never results in fatalities.

Renewable energy is more scalable and a better fit to address global warming than nuclear because it costs much less, takes less time to install, and doesn’t carry the burden of potentially causing catastrophic damage — which also comes with sophisticated safety guards that take much time to implement, monitor, and keep up to date.

Electricity produced from sunlight and wind are scalable because these sources are abundantly available and will never run out. In order to combat climate change, we all need clean, renewable energy that can be quickly built and put into operation, but that will also never run out of the primary fuel source.

Another reason why renewables are scalable is their portability and ability to fit the scale needed, no matter how small or how large. Renewable energy systems can be sized precisely to the needs, whether at the small scale where people might use diesel generators or at the gigawatt scale. Community solar projects only require a capital investment and some land near the place where the electricity will be used. Renewables can easily power one community, one home, or even one device (like a light). Consumers can get solar power systems for their RVs, vans, or boats as well.

Because solar power costs have declined dramatically, more and more homeowners are going solar, and they will save money over the long term. (Home energy storage is making this scenario feasible for even more homeowners year by year.) While individual projects are not notable amongst a large grid and generation fleet, the aggregation of small projects that can go up in a matter of weeks or months is considerable.

On a bit of a larger scale, many companies are choosing to install solar power for cost-saving as well as environmental reasons and have shown that sensible, fast renewable energy installations can save huge amounts of money. Again, these projects can go up in a matter of weeks or months — unlike nuclear — and the aggregate of them means a large and quick increase in the amount of clean power on the grid. There’s a reason or two why large corporations don’t install nuclear power plants instead.

Mainstream American companies like PepsiCo, General Motors, Apple, Facebook, Amazon, and Walmart have been using more renewable energy and saving billions of dollars in the process while cleaning up the air and atmosphere.

Renewable energy can be employed by just about anyone at any time if they have the means to do so. Sunlight and wind are free. Installations can be on a watt scale or a gigawatt scale. If we want clean power added to the grid quickly, nothing can come online faster than renewables. In certain places, depending on market penetration and infrastructure, transmission lines or energy storage may be an important complement, but that still doesn’t change that renewables are the quickest option for new and cheap clean power capacity.

January 29, 2018 Posted by | 2 WORLD, renewable | Leave a comment

Nuclear fraud in Nigeria

INVESTIGATION: At Nigeria’s abandoned nuclear centre, failed projects, idle staff and ‘fraud’ [Part 2] Premium Times, Kemi Busari Awarded at over N400 million in 2009, what was supposed to be a radioactive waste management facility at Nigeria’s Nuclear Technology Centre never came to life.

Instead, a building overgrown with scrubs lies east of the gamma irradiation facility. Waste management plants and equipment comprise various devices and machines used for treating, converting, disposing and processing wastes from various sources.

The construction of low/medium radioactive waste management facility was awarded at the contract sum of N401.4 million to Commerce General Limited and so far, N312 million has been paid to the contractor, the Nigeria Atomic Energy Commission (NAEC) said in response to a Freedom of Information request made over a month ago.

The project, according to NAEC, was 78 percent complete and has “only suffered delays.”

“The project was not abandoned. It only suffered delays due to factors outside the control of the commission,” the agency said.

The delays, NAEC said, include; “inadequate funding of capital projects generally, over the years, modification of the original design, as recommended by IAEA experts, which has resulted into changes in the BOQ figures and this development is being discussed with the contractor,” and also, “no outstanding Interim Payment Certificate on the project.”

A staff of the NTC, who was privy to the contract and execution since 2009, said the project had been used to embezzle money from government since the time of award.

“It is true that they changed the plan of the plant but they’ve never done anything meaningful there since they mounted these blocks,” he said.

“The contractor is not qualified and along the line, he got stuck in the project and we’ve not seen or heard about him for many years now.”

PREMIUM TIMES’ efforts to reach the management of Commerce Nigeria Limited were unsuccessful as the company has no website or any visible record.

Its recorded address at Plot 3, Railway Avenue, Kachia Road, Kakuri, Kaduna South, Kaduna, does not exist, this paper found out during a visit there.

“We’ve never heard of that place,” several residents of Kachia told this reporter after attempts were made to locate the company.

In Nigeria, it is not uncommon for ‘brief case’ contractors, most times in connivance with the awarding entity, to register a company for the sole purpose of bidding for contracts and making quick money.

As alleged by staff of the centre, this may be the case as even the figures quoted in FOI response by NAEC are contradictory.

While the commission said the project was 78 percent complete, a visit to the facility told a different story: an expanse of land overgrown with weeds and a construction no way near half-way complete which, in no way, justified the commission’s claim of paying almost 80 percent of the total contract sum to the contractor.

If the contract was awarded at N401. 4 million and N312 million had been paid so far, the balance should be about N89 million. But NAEC quoted N329 million.

‘Abandoned’ nuclear instrumentation laboratory

One of the components of the masterplan of the centre is the nuclear instrumentation laboratory which is supposed to serve as workshop for students, researchers and others in the nuclear field.

The project was awarded at the cost of N829.6 million to Trois Associate Limited in 2012 and it is 68% complete, NAEC’s response to an FOI stated………….

Nigeria joined IAEA, an international body for cooperation in the nuclear field in promoting safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear technologies, in 1964.

The IAEA safety standards, was enshrined to ensure protection of people and the environment against radiation risks, safety of facilities and activities that give rise to radiation risks. The world body recognised this to include, safety of nuclear installations, radiation safety, the safety of radioactive waste management and safety in the transport of radioactive material.

The world body listed some fundamentals which must be observed by member states in section 3.30 of the safety standard………

As presented in the first part of this story, PREMIUM TIMES investigation has revealed that the centre has violated the core of safety principles expected at the centre and thus, risk withdrawal of its license……..https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/headlines/256828-investigation-nigerias-abandoned-nuclear-centre-failed-projects-idle-staff-fraud-part-2.html

January 29, 2018 Posted by | Nigeria, secrets,lies and civil liberties | Leave a comment

British plan to provide household electricity by plutonium – in Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

 

Times 28th Jan 2018, Britons could be taking showers and warming homes with hot water piped
directly from a nuclear reactor, under proposals to build small atomic power stations in cities. Urban nuclear reactors, similar in size to those
in nuclear submarines, could generate not only electricity but also hot water, suggests a report by Policy Exchange, a think tank.

The paper reflects government thinking, as the National Nuclear Laboratory hasalready drawn up plans for a first “small modular reactor” at Trawsfynydd in north Wales. The Department for Business, Energy andIndustrial Strategy has also supported the idea. Such reactors could befuelled by plutonium, a waste product of Britain’s existing nuclearindustry. Stockpiles exceed 100 tons.   https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/mini-nuclear-reactors-could-heat-homes-pxk3h8nkl

January 29, 2018 Posted by | - plutonium, Small Modular Nuclear Reactors, UK | Leave a comment

Abe’s government moving towards abandoning Japan’s no-nuclear weapon policy?

Is Japan moving to renege on no-nuclear weapon policy? http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/opinion/30337363, opinion January 29, 2018  , By Cai Hong ,China Daily , Asia News Network , Tokyo    Beatrice Fihn, executive director of the 2017 Nobel Peace Prize-winning International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons, was denied a meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe during her recent visit to Japan.

Visiting Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Fihn urged Japan, the only country to have suffered nuclear attacks, to play a leading role in the campaign aimed at abolishing nuclear weapons.

It is not difficult to understand why Abe shunned Fihn. She has appealed to the Japanese government to join the nuclear weapons ban treaty. But on January 17, Japan and the United States allowed their agreement on nuclear cooperation to automatically renew in July, when it is supposed to expire. The agreement, signed in 1988, gives Japan blanket approval to reprocess spent nuclear fuel for weapons-grade plutonium. Japan adopted nuclear power in the 1950s (one of the first countries to do so) at the urging of the US. In fact, the US began engaging with Japan on nuclear energy soon after the end of World War II, as it was eager to promote and sell its nuclear reactor technology around the world.

Japan had to return some 300 kilograms of plutonium, provided by the US, Britain and France decades ago for what was described as research purposes, to the US in 2016. Thanks to the US-Japan cooperation agreement on peaceful uses of nuclear energy, Japan now owns 48 tonnes of separated plutonium, most of which is in Europe, where it was reprocessed. And Japan has no clearly defined use for this huge amount of nuclear material. Japan once hoped fast reactors would help meet its energy security needs, take care of its surplus plutonium and solve its spent fuel problem. But that hope has faded. Commercialising of fast reactors is still decades away. Surplus weapons-grade material have always worried arms control experts. In 1977, believing that nuclear weapons could be made from plutonium extracted from spent nuclear fuel in Japan’s light water reactors, the US conveyed its view to Tokyo, according to Japanese diplomatic documents declassified in 2013.

Now, despite having surplus plutonium, Japan is planning to open a massive spent reactor fuel reprocessing plant at Rokkasho, the country’s large commercial reprocessing facility, in the autumn of 2018. It is designed to produce 8,000kg of weapons-usable plutonium enough to make 1,000 nuclear weapons a year, according to International Atomic Energy Agency standards. The ostensible reason for operating the plant is recycling spent fuel to supply power reactors and a fast reactor.

In their Foreign Policy article on August 17, 2017, Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Centre, and William Tobey, a senior fellow at Harvard Kennedy School, said Japan has five reactors on line and terminated its only fast reactor project. So Japan cannot operate Rokkasho in the northern part of the country without piling up tons of plutonium for years on end. The Rokkasho plant would significantly increase Japan’s existing plutonium surplus. A potential linkage between Rokkasho’s product and nuclear weapons has been hanging over the project from the start. Japan will only be able to burn a fraction of the huge amount of nuclear material extracted there. Japanese reprocessing plants will produce reactor-grade plutonium, but they will have high weapons’ potential.

 Japan has a “three Nos” national policy on nuclear weapons: no possession, no manufacture and no allowing nuclear weapons on Japanese territory. But there is no lack of Japanese politicians talking about nuclear weapons. Former Japanese defence minister Shigeru Ishiba, seen as a possible successor to Abe, said in September that Japan should have the technology to build a nuclear weapon if it wants to do so. He added, though, that he is not taking the position that Japan should have nuclear weapons.

Japan’s plutonium surplus goes against its principle of not possessing the material without a specified purpose.

January 29, 2018 Posted by | Japan, politics, weapons and war | Leave a comment

America is unprepared for medical consequences of a nuclear attack

U.S. not medically prepared for nuclear threats, http://www.thegazette.com/subject/opinion/guest-columnist/us-not-medically-prepared-for-nuclear-threats-20180128  Alan Moy, 28 Jan 18

 The recent false alarm in Hawaii underscores the threat from nuclear devices. While there has been media attention placed on how the United States is taking military and diplomatic action against North Korea from launching a nuclear strike, there is little media attention given to how well the United States is medically prepared for a nuclear attack. According to a recent report in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, U.S. cities are not medically prepared for a nuclear detonation. This report, written by Dr. Jerome Hauer, who was the former assistant secretary for the Office of Public Health Emergency Preparedness at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, asserts that the United States is completely unprepared to manage the aftermath of a nuclear detonation. We are at a moment in history where nuclear terrorism is an unfortunate reality. North Korea and Iran have established nuclear capabilities, and Pakistan has stockpiles of highly enriched uranium.

These countries have a history of supporting terrorist groups. It has been acknowledged by our government that highly enriched uranium can be smuggled into this country to build a 10-kiliton improvised nuclear bomb, like that dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. A nuclear threat would even include a dirty bomb that combines a conventional explosive with radioactive isotopes, which could contaminate an area and leave a residual radioactive “hot zone” that is too dangerous for even first responders to enter. Also, radioactive particles can disperse into the air and create a “plume” that could extend hundreds of miles away from ground zero and create a contamination area that would last for years.

A nuclear blast would instantly release a massive pressure wave and heat that would incinerate everything within half a mile and kill an estimated 75,000 to 100,000 people. Another 100,000 to 200,000 would suffer complexed radiation burns, while others would be exposed to high doses of radiation that would cause acute radiation syndrome that is characterized by bone marrow failure and gastrointestinal, cardiac, neurological and pulmonary toxicity. The starkest fact about a nuclear bomb attack is that it destroys the capacity to respond from a medical and civil service perspective. There will be a loss of local government services from firefighters, police and hospitals, along with loss of water, sewage and utilities. There will be a loss of communication systems to direct survivors where to evacuate for treatment.

The management of mass casualties from nuclear detonation is far more complex than for natural disasters. Hot zones are too dangerous for first responders to enter to render medical assistance to casualties. Yet, victims would still need to be evacuated somehow. According to the report, most U.S. cities lack medical preparedness to manage the aftermath of a nuclear explosion. FEMA has not devoted enough attention to address this issue. This makes it important for cities and states to develop plans for the worse case scenarios. Each state should have a plan of preparedness that includes special medical triage centers; coordinated schemes from state military and local police to provide mobile communication assets and protection against civil unrest; and specialized trained hospitals that can medical manage the injuries associated with a nuclear bomb. There needs to be a statewide plan from the governor’s office from each state, along with each state’s department of public health, to ensure there is sufficient medical preparedness.

Several government officials stated they were unable to take steps forward out of being accused of inciting fearmongering. However, developing a comprehensive preparedness program against nuclear threats should not just stop with military action but should include a medical preparation program regardless of how politically undesirable the subject may be. Preparedness should be mandated at every local and state government level.

• Alan Moy is CEO of Cellular Engineering Technologies and scientific director of the John Paul II Medical Research Institute.

January 29, 2018 Posted by | health, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

High incidence of birth deformities in Pacific communities exposed to French nuclear bomb testing

French overseas minister open to nuclear study https://www.onepng.com/2018/01/french-overseas-minister-open-to.html, 1/26/2018   The French overseas minister says she is not opposed to calls for a study into the possible genetic consequences of the French nuclear weapons tests in French Polynesia.

Annick Girardin has told journalists in Tahiti that there will be an answer to the recently raised calls for such a study.Last week, a child psychiatrist, who had worked in French Polynesia for years, suggested that an independent investigation be carried out after noticing a high incidence of disturbed and deformed children among the off-spring of people exposed to radiation from the atmospheric tests.

Girardin has acknowledged the concerns, saying it has to be established how to deal with the question and to see if it is possible to work on it with other countries.

The minister has restated that the former president Francois Hollande recognised two years ago in Papeete the French legacy and assumed responsibility.

She has also launched a project in Papeete to build an institute of archives and documents related to the tests.
She has also frozen the sale of land in the city previously used by the navy for its command for it to be able to be used for a memorial site.The head of the nuclear test veteran’s organisation Roland Oldham is dismissive, saying this will only see the light of day once people are dead.

He has continued to urge Paris to compensate the nuclear test victims suffering from poor health.

Until 2009, France claimed its weapons tests were clean but then passed a law accepting compensation demands.

Hundreds of applications have been filed since but almost all have been thrown out.

January 29, 2018 Posted by | children, France, OCEANIA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Supreme Court judge backs Hudson River Sloop Clearwater in battle over upstate nuke plant bailout

Early victory for Hudson River Sloop Clearwater in battle over upstate nuke plant bailout, Thomas C. Zambitotzambito@lohud.com  Jan. 26, 2018  Environmental groups scored an early-round victory in the legal battle over the state’s plan to bail out three upstate nuclear power plants with billions of dollars in subsidies backed by ratepayers….

January 29, 2018 Posted by | Legal, USA | Leave a comment

Legislation to protect Georgia consumers from Vogtle nuclear power costs

Georgia Senate bill aims to protect consumers’ pocketbooks from Vogtle, Savannah Now, January 27, 2018, By Mary Landersmary.landers@savannahnow.com  Legislation co-sponsored by state Sen. Lester Jackson, D-Savannah, seeks to limit the money paid by ratepayers — particularly schools — for Georgia Power’s expansion of Plant Vogtle.

If enacted as written, it would immediately reduce monthly residential power bills. And it could provide big rebates if the project isn’t completed.

The troubled expansion is five years behind schedule and its price tag has nearly doubled to $27 billion. Despite a staff recommendation that the project is uneconomic and a finding that the company will make $5 billion in profits from the delays, the Georgia Public Service Commission in December gave the green light to complete the expansion with few added consumer safeguards.

Senate Bill 355, sponsored by Rome Republican Chuck Hufstetler and introduced Wednesday, would amend the Georgia Nuclear Energy Financing Act to limit in several ways the ongoing collection of a nuclear fee while these reactors are being built and prevent the utility from automatically collecting the same nuclear fee on future projects. It would also provide for a refund if the reactors never become operational…….. http://savannahnow.com/news/2018-01-26/georgia-senate-bill-aims-protect-consumers-pocketbooks-vogtle

January 29, 2018 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment

“The Human Cost of Nuclear Weapons”

HANT 27th Jan 2018, Highland Against Nuclear Transport AGM 1st February. “The Human Cost of
Nuclear Weapons” A Talk by DR. JUDITH MACDONALD (Cromarty Peace Group /
International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons / MEDACT : Health
Professionals for a Safer World) Dr. Judith Macdonald’s talk will cover
her own involvement with ICAN leading to the historic signing of the
Nuclear Weapons Ban Treaty (signed by 122 countries in July 2017 ), MEDACT
(Medical Practitioners Against Nuclear Weapons) and will focus on “The
Human Cost of Nuclear Weapons” This will be followed by a discussion, a
short report on HANT’s activities in 2017 and plans for 2018 with
elections to the HANT Committee.
https://www.facebook.com/events/1261608800650823/

January 29, 2018 Posted by | ACTION | Leave a comment

UK govt pays £100m for advice on renewing nuclear arsenal

£100m cost of advice on renewing nuclear arsenal, Mark Hookham, Defence Correspondent, The Sunday Times More than £100m has been spent helping ministers decide whether to overhaul or replace Britain’s arsenal of nuclear warheads.

January 29, 2018 Posted by | USA | Leave a comment

South Carolina’s legislative mess over nuclear power

ANDY BRACK: What really needs to happen with General Assembly’s nuclear mess, South Carolina Now, ANDY BRACK Statehouse Report, 28 Jan 18

    Until state legislators go through the five stages of grief over the $9 billion failure of building two nuclear reactors, they might just screw up things worse.

It’s easy to see where they are, so far, six months after the announcement by Santee Cooper and SCANA that the project in Fairfield County wouldn’t get off the ground, despite ratepayers paying more for power over the last 10 years.

First is the denial stage – that it couldn’t happen here. Evidence of this is the prodigious finger-pointing as everybody and his brother look for scapegoats.

 Next comes anger. There’s still a lot of anger bubbling inside the capitol and among voters who are irritated by the waste of what’s happened. Anger comes in many forms, but often is seen in unrealistic calls to make everything better and send lots of people to jail. And politicians, scared for their hides, are shamelessly exploiting anger on a daily basis.

The third stage is bargaining, in which some lawmakers are rushing pell-mell to pass bills that try to fix problems in an attempt to negotiate away the pain caused by the failure. Slow down.

Fourth is depression. Often when one reaches this part of the grieving process, it reflects how a problem seems overwhelming and hard to cope with. But it also may start the process of trying to deal with a loss realistically, instead of development of quick responses fueled by anger.

Finally, there’s acceptance. It involves learning to live with what happened and being smart about dealing with it.

Folks, the state legislature isn’t there yet. Why? Because it hasn’t accepted responsibility that it is complicit in the chain of events that created a $9 billion eyesore that likely will become an enduring monument to failure and futility.

What the legislature needs to do now, more than rushing to pass legislation to fix what’s happened, is to apologize and take responsibility for the whole mess. Had legislators not passed the Base Load Review Act a decade ago, utilities wouldn’t have been able to charge ratepayers in advance to pay for the nuclear project.

This is not to let SCANA and Santee Cooper off the hook for cost overruns and apparent all-around mismanagement of the V.C. Summer construction project, but it’s to emphasize that the General Assembly needs to clean up its own house on the nuclear mess before resorting to solutions that could actually make things even worse…….. http://www.scnow.com/opinion/columns/article_4780ecd6-02f6-11e8-bc14-f3638c5f8137.html

January 29, 2018 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

$15M lawsuit filed over wildfire that threatened Hanford

 BY ANNETTE CARY acary@tricityherald.com, January 26, 2018, The late July day was hot, dry and windy.  But the training with live ammunition at the Yakima Training Center went ahead as usual.
A gunner fired at a target and the burst of ammunition ricocheted onto the ridge line, sparking a fire that spread across 275 square miles and threatened the Hanford nuclear reservation, according to a lawsuit filed this week in federal court…..http://www.tri-cityherald.com/news/local/crime/article196986384.html

January 29, 2018 Posted by | general | Leave a comment

Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant – another scare, with fire event

Fire at Rickety Diablo Canyon Nuclear Plant Gives California a Scare — Shutdown Slated for 2025, bureau EnviroNews Headline News , by Shad Engkilterra on January 27, 2018 , (EnviroNews USA 

January 29, 2018 Posted by | incidents, USA | Leave a comment

No plan for vote on financial rescue for Ohio nuclear plants

 http://www.the-review.com/news/20180128/no-plan-for-vote-on-financial-rescue-for-ohio-nuclear-plants  COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A state lawmaker says there are no plans to hold more hearings on a proposal to increase electrical bills to help keep Ohio’s two nuclear power plants operating.

Akron-based FirstEnergy Corp. has been pushing for the financial rescue that it says is needed to keep the Davis-Besse nuclear plant near Toledo and the Perry plant near Cleveland operating.

The legislation would give FirstEnergy’s plants an extra $180 million a year.

Republican Sen. Bill Beagle leads the Senate’s Public Utilities Committee. He says he doesn’t anticipate taking up a vote on the plan.

A FirstEnergy executive said earlier this week that the plants will likely close without a financial rescue.

The company has been saying the plants can’t compete with cheaper natural gas plants in the current market.

January 29, 2018 Posted by | politics, USA | Leave a comment