2018 January 30 « nuclear-news

The Japanese Government Is Lying to the International Community

Appeal from a Japanese Anti-nuclear Activist
Etsuji Watanabe
Nov.29 2017 Revised (Oct.12 2017)

The Japanese Government Is Lying to the International Community:
the Radiological Situation in and around Fukushima is NOT Safe
Appeal from Etsuji Watanabe: Member of the Japanese anti-radiation citizen-scientist group ACSIR
英語版　　http://blog.torikaesu.net/?eid=69

The Japanese government has created foreign language websites which provide the information about radiology in general and the radiological situation in Fukushima. Journalists around the world, our friends and acquaintances living abroad are continually asking us whether the information that these Japanese central and local government websites present to the international community is correct or not. The following is our answer.
[Question 1]
The stories uploaded on these websites give people the impression that worrying about radiation is unnecessary. As for this impression, has Fukushima now really become asafe place to live or visit?
[Answer]
First of all, Japanese anti-nuclear activists and evacuees from contaminated areas in Fukushima and Kanto, have been warning people all over the world NEVER to trust what the Japanese government is saying about both radiology in general and the specific radiological health effects caused by the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant disaster (hereafter Fukushima accident) following the Great East Japan Earthquake and Tsunami on March 11th, 2011.

Prime-minister Shinzo Abe and the Japanese government as a whole including Fukushima prefectural government have repeatedly declared that
“with regard to health-related problems (of the Fukushima accident), I (Abe) will state in the most emphatic and unequivocal terms that there have been no problems until now, nor are there any at present, nor will there be in the future.” (Abe’s statement at a news conference). This claim is completely fabricated and false.

By engaging in this behavior, the Japanese government has been systematically deceiving the public, both nationally and internationally.
Just think of the amount of radioactivity released during the Fukushima accident. One of the standards used to assess the extent of radioactive releases and longtime human health effects is the levels of cesium 137 (Cs137) released into the environment. Based on the Japanese government data (which is an underestimate), the Fukushima accident released 168 times the Cs137 discharged by the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. This amount is almost the equivalent to the total atmospheric nuclear explosions conducted by the United States on the Nevada test ground. The Nevada desert is not designated as a residential area, but the Japanese government has recommended evacuated residents return to live in areas with radiation levels of up to 20 mSv/year.

By removing economic support for evacuees, the Japanese government has
forced many people who had evacuated from these areas to return.
We estimate that in the Fukushima accident approximately 400-600 times the Cs137 were released into the atmosphere of the atomic bomb blast in Hiroshima. Roughly 80-120 Hiroshima-equivalents, were deposited on Japan. Of this, the decontamination efforts have only been able to retrieve five Hiroshima-equivalents. The waste from decontamination efforts is typically stored all over Fukushima mostly in mountainous heaps of large plastic bags. This means that 75-115 Hiroshima-equivalents of Cs137 still remain in Fukushima, surrounding prefectures, and all over Japan.

[Question 2]
These websites also point out that the international annual dose limit for the public is at 1mSv, but this level is easily exceeded by only one CT-scan, insinuating that this 1mSv standard is set too low and thus not a useful indicator.

[Question 3]
One of the websites states: “In Fukushima, the indoor radiation doses are now so reduced that no radioactive cesium can be found in the air. Therefore, no radioactive particles can invade the human body during breathing.” What do you think of this statement?
The interview is provided by
Hong Kong Society for the Study of
Nuclear Radiation(香港核能輻射研究會)
★渡辺悦司氏（市民と科学者の内部被曝問題研究会会員)
「台湾・香港のジャーナリストの質問に答えて―日本政府は国際社会に虚偽の情報を流している―福島と周辺地域の放射能汚染は決して安全・安心な状況にはない」

Indian militarisation in space affairs

By Hasan Ehtisham

Published: January 30, 2018

Three Indian actions at the start of 2018 would contribute as a great source of insecurity in the regional and global strategic environment. First, India successfully launched 31 satellites, including the country’s 100^th satellite of Cartosat series, on a single mission. Second, their army chief voiced readiness to cross the border to carry out any operation in Pakistan despite the nuclear deterrence. And third, India test-fired the Agni-V missile which covers China, Russia and even believed it could reach several European capitals. These developments are interlinked and have a causal relationship. The Indian military modernisation, especially in space and missile affairs, has encouraged the country’s leadership to enunciate hawkish and offensive comments against Pakistan.

India is militarising the outer space and this progress will disturb the fragile strategic equation of South Asia. The militarisation of space involves utilisation of peaceful space technology for exploiting weapons on the ground and on the earth’s atmosphere with more accuracy. There is a dual nature of the peaceful application of space technology and a satellite guidance system meant for peaceful use can be incorporated into a missile programme for military purposes. Initially, India has always depended on the dual-use capability of satellite technologies for military and strategic purposes.

Afghan women officers train at Indian military academy

India successfully launched the first military satellite GSAT-7 in August 2013 with the ability to carry out wide network-centric operations and maritime domain awareness. Whereas in 2016, the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) launched the seventh and final satellite to complete its own Regional Navigation Satellite System (IRNSS) which will be called Navigation with Indian Constellation (Navic). Several Indian sources confirmed that the main objective of the system is military use and the chief beneficiary of this system will be the Indian military.

The navigation system will offer an encrypted service for the Indian military and agencies. Along with Navic, India is already working on the fourth generation GSAT dedicated military communication satellites. It will connect all three domains that are sea-based assets (warships, nuclear submarines and aircraft carriers), land-based assets (troops formation, conventional war tech, ballistic and cruise missiles) and air force assets (combat aircraft). The Indian progression in space is reinforcing a belief within New Delhi’s policy pundits to exploit sub-conventional military options under the nuclear umbrella such as the Cold Start doctrine.

Can India destroy Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal?

India intensified the war from space by launching record-breaking 104 satellites from a single rocket (PSLV-C37). This technological feat was a demonstration of potential Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicle (MIRV) capability because PSLV rocket can be used as a missile to carry nuclear warheads to target locations. There are reports that India is planning to induct an ICBM missile (Agni-VI) into its armed forces with the capability of carrying MIRV, which can hit the targets up to 6,000 km.

Interestingly, the payload of Agni-VI is almost the same as satellite payload carried by the ISRO’s much larger and heavier Global Satellite Launch Vehicle (GSLV). This fact evidently demonstrates that the very foundation of Indian missile is the space launch vehicle technology delivered to it by countries like the US, Russia, France and Germany at different times under the rubric of peaceful scientific development.

In the last decade, India has ramped up the pace of space modernisation and the driving force is the Indo-US nuclear deal of 2005. In 2005, when the US and India were involved in constructing closer ties in space exploration and satellite navigation, there were reliable reports that Indian scientists were attempting to develop an ICBM. The deal started to create new avenues for India with regard to technology transfer. The emerging space-related cooperation between the US and India has started to help in improving the efficiency of latter’s missile capabilities. Moreover, India’s inclusion into the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) last year has enabled technological development with significant military implications.

The status acquired by India in MTCR has already generated noticeable benefits for India, especially in the context of producing BrahMos cruise missile. Under the shed of MTCR, now it is easy for India to import “high-end, dual-use technology” from other MTCR members, a benefit Pakistan and China do not have. The membership of MTCR has scaled down the level of scrutiny on the Indian space programme because the guidelines of MTCR are not designed to impede national space programmes or international cooperation.

The militarisation of space by India is already posing security challenges for its nuclear-armed neighbours while strengthening the Indian battlefield strategy, robust system for location identification and navigational support. The Indian defence ministry has already hinted that space warfare is a priority area till 2025 under the “technology perspective and capability roadmap”. The offensive military posture coupled with international cooperation in modernising India’s space programme will have a negative impact on the regional strategic stability.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 30^th, 2018.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/1621358/6-indian-militarisation-space-affairs/

January 30, 2018 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Australian Greens welcome Labor switch on nuclear waste dump

text-dont-nuclear-waste-australia

30/01/2018 | Press release

http://www.publicnow.com/view/075081C7CE48743E285B0556114F15579B61C94A

The South Australian Premier’s apparent change of heart on a national nuclear waste dump in South Australia is a late but welcome development, according to Greens SA Parliamentary Leader, Mark Parnell MLC.

‘The Greens have steadfastly opposed the Commonwealth Government’s process of nuclear waste dump site selection and we have supported communities at both Kimba and in the Flinders Ranges who are opposed to the dump. We invite Labor to join us in this campaign.’ said Mark Parnell.

‘The Greens believe that before any decisions are made about how to manage Australia’s nuclear waste, the Federal Government needs to make the case for a central repository, which to date, it hasn’t done. Waste from the Lucas Heights reactor can stay where it is and most medical waste has low levels of short-lived radioactivity and generally ends up safely in landfill.

‘Australia certainly needs to take responsibility for and manage our own domestic nuclear waste, but we must also be working to ensure that no new nuclear waste is generated.

The South Australian Government has a number of political and legal tools at its disposal to block the national nuclear waste dump. This includes the fact that one of the sites being investigated (Barndioota in the Flinders Ranges) is on Crown Land for which SA Environment Minister Ian Hunter is ultimately responsible. The land cannot be used for nuclear waste dump without the Minister’s approval, yet throughout 2017, the Minister responded to the Greens during Parliament’s Question Time that neither he nor his Department had had any discussions with the Federal Government over using this publicly-owned land for a national waste dump.

‘The question the Premier needs to answer is: who in his cabinet and which of his Departments is negotiating with the Federal Government? Will he now direct them to tell the Feds that SA is not interested in becoming the nation’s nuclear waste dump? Unless he gives those directions, the public will rightly be suspicious that the current anti-dump rhetoric might not last beyond March 17th’, concluded Mark Parnell.

January 30, 2018 Posted by arclight2011part2 | Uncategorized | 1 Comment