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

Japan #nuclear corporations desperate to carry on with the nuclear boondoggle post #Fukushima


11 June 2018

TOKYO — Japan will launch a public-private initiative to develop next-generation nuclear reactors that are safer and less expensive, hoping to spur a renewal of aging plants and keep atomic power as a viable energy source.

The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry is in talks to create a forum within fiscal 2018 that will include power companies and reactor builders to kick off the project.

The government’s new energy plan, issued on July 3, positions nuclear energy as a crucial part of the nation’s energy mix but does not spell out specifics as to how that can be achieved. By bringing together the expertise of various players, the government hopes to come up with a new technology that encourages construction and upgrades.

After the 2011 Fukushima meltdown, all of Japan’s reactors were suspended for safety inspections, and only nine, including those operated by Kansai Electric Power and Kyushu Electric Power, have restarted since. The government aims to have nuclear power make up 20% to 22% of the energy mix by 2030, a goal that would require having around 30 reactors running.

Japan’s large reactors — some with a capacity of around 1 gigawatt — require huge investment for construction and safety measures. Along with improving such large facilities, the public-private initiative will consider developing smaller reactors that generate around 100,000 to 300,000 kilowatts. Such reactors would cost several hundred billion yen (100 billion yen currently equals $898 million) to build — significantly less than the roughly 1 trillion yen price tag for larger models.

High temperature gas-cooled reactors are one option being considered. This type of reactor poses no danger of steam explosions during emergencies, unlike the water-cooled type that composes Japan’s stock. Many of Japan’s reactors have been running for decades, and new ones would feature new control technology and measures to contain the damage in a crisis.

The economy ministry will recruit the country’s big energy providers for the consultation body. Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings andKansai Electricwill consider taking part if invited by the government. Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Hitachi and other reactor makers will also be asked to join, as will the general contractors that would build the enclosing facilities.

As Japan’s nuclear reactors sit idle, decommissioning costs are growing as well. Even if new reactors are commercialized, companies will still bear the burden of dealing with their spent fuel — a problem some see as too tough for the country’s nine big power providers to handle separately.

The economy ministry will also seek to have the public and private sectors work on hydrogen power, high-performance storage batteries, distributed generation and other technologies, aiming to develop a range of options for a stable energy supply to satisfy a public deeply skeptical of nuclear energy safety.


July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

#Fukushima – An unresolved life #ONHCR #InternalDisplacement @NRC_Norway

Screenshot from 2018-07-10 22:01:21

Image source;

Ms. Sonoda was living in Fukushima, Japan, with her husband and their child in a beautiful natural environment and with a strong local community. The day of the nuclear disaster, 11 March 2011, they felt an enormous earthquake and unrelenting aftershocks. They later saw the explosion of reactor one, live on television.

“It was a massive shock. We began preparing in case we needed to move quickly and two days later reactor three exploded,” she recalls. “We decided to evacuate because we knew reactor three used mops fuel which contains plutonium. It was a nightmare. Suddenly the nuclear disaster destroyed our lives in Fukushima.”

With the Mayor and the local school, Ms. Sonoda tried to arrange the evacuation of children but she says the local Government stopped them. Because of the damage caused by the earthquake, roads were blocked; the provision of food and fuel started to dwindle. They could not save the children from the early stages of radiation exposure.

“The declaration of a nuclear emergency continues but last year the Government lifted most evacuation zones, even though many are still highly contaminated, and they stopped housing support. This pressures the citizens to return to Fukushima,” Ms. Sonoda points out.

According to Ms. Sonoda, the Government of Japan does not recognise those uprooted by the Fukushima accident as internally displaced persons, although 20 years ago the Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement acknowledged human-made disasters. Further, they have not been allowed to participate in the Government’s decisions that affect them.

“We don’t want to return with children and stay in radioactive and contaminated areas. We can’t see radiation, we can’t smell radiation,” Ms. Sonoda says. “We really need the Government to check the children’s health. They only scanned for thyroid cancer but no other health checks were made. We don’t know how [radiation] will affect children in the future.”

“Many people also struggle financially so we need basic housing support to stay evacuate,” she adds.

Over 40 million people around the world are currently internally displaced because of conflict and violence in the world, and an average of 25 million people is displaced each year due to natural disasters. Millions of other displacements are not systematically captured including those caused by land grabs, slow-onset disasters such as drought, and criminal violence.

It was that type of violence that uprooted Gildo Garza Herrera from his native state of Tamaulipas, northern Mexico.

Garza Herrera has been working as a journalist for the past 20 years. In 2017, he was forced to flee with his family to the capital Mexico City following several attempts against their lives by narcotraffickers. They left behind their livelihood.

“[Mexico is] the most dangerous country in the world to practice journalism,” he says. “They kill you; if you manage to survive, they condemn you to exile with your family, a desperate decision that by June 2018 at least 70 journalists have had to make to protect themselves.”

Garza Herrera says that of the 329,000 internally displaced persons in Mexico, 70 are journalists. He points out, however, that the Government does not recognize displacement and that there is no legal framework to create a comprehensive response to the problem.

“The forced displacement of journalists has several impacts: economic, labour, social and especially on freedom of expression. The communities these journalists have left are running out of information,” Garza Herrera stresses. “Tamaulipas, Veracruz, Guerrero, Sinaloa, Chiapas, Chihuahua and other states in Mexico are recognized by the Inter American Commission on Human Rights as “silenced zones” for freedom of expression.”

In April, the National Human Rights Commission of Mexico and other civil society organizations presented to Congress a draft law for the recognition of forced displacement. However, because of the recent electoral period, discussions around the law came to a halt.

Because of the current status quo, Garza Herrera and his fellow displaced journalists have decided to organize through the creation of an association. They are looking for support from international donors to build a shelter for newly displaced journalists and provide access to education to their children.

“It is important that discussions resume when we have a new Senate and other authorities in place, so the issue can be acknowledged and a response based on that law can be organized around it,” Garza Herrera says.

World projections indicate that climate change alone could uproot over 143 million people by 2050. The expected upward trend in displacement may accelerate global urbanization and thus put additional pressure on urban host communities, which may exacerbate criminal violence in cities.

No region or country is immune to internal displacement, and States must fulfil their responsibilities toward internally displaced people. This requires involving the displaced themselves in discussions to find durable solutions to mitigate the risks of long-term social, political and economic marginalisation, as endured by the survivors of dramatic man-made disasters such as the Fukushima accident.

July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

500 million Euros in Irish renewable energy projects available – Apply now #Equinor #Statoil @jamesjcollins

The Climate Action Fund is one of four such funds established under the National Development Plan  2018-2027 as part of Project Ireland 2040. The fund will support initiatives that contribute to the achievement of Ireland’s climate and energy targets.

The Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment has responsibility for implementing the fund, which will have an allocation of at least €500 million over the period to 2027.

The first call for applications by the Climate Action Fund, which will be open to applications from the public and private sector, has been published.  As the Climate Action Fund develops, further calls will be made.

This call for applications will provide grant funding to larger scale projects – seeking total support in excess of €1m – that are scheduled to commence development in 2019 or 2020.

The focus of the Climate Fund will be to support a broad range of projects that, in the absence of support from the Climate Action Fund, would not otherwise be developed.  This will include projects that demonstrate innovation and capacity building.

Some examples of the types of projects that may be supported include:

  • Renewable energy projects;
  • Energy efficiency projects;
  • District heating projects;
  • Local infrastructure projects (including electric vehicle charging networks); and
  • Projects that enhance the standards of environmental protection.

The deadline for applications is 5pm on 1 October 2018.

Climate Action Fund Call for Applications

Queries should be sent to

Article source;

Note to Statoil via clickback 😉 ; (click this link to let Statoil know about the proposal from the Irish Government for funding applications)

July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

#Tokyo2020 #Olympics #Radioactive Tokyo based competitions map

5h5 hours ago

★Share☆ will be held on the irradiated wastes affected by Accident.


July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Wade Allison tries to push #nuclear power on #Ireland #Fukushima #Chernobyl #ScienceMediaCentre

quote enemy of knowledge hawking We Are Humanity

That world leaders are recognising climate change and have responded with a move towards renewable energy sources should be viewed as positive.

A reduction in carbon emissions, to meet the Paris agreement’s goals, by relying on the nuclear industry, is an abysmal trade-off, considering its disastrous environmental record.

Radioactive waste is a byproduct of the nuclear industry. As you correctly indicate, (Wade Allison, Irish Examiner, June 25) nuclear processes are part of nature, but these natural processes resist being hurried.

Waste takes years to decay. Plutonium has a half-life of about 24,000 years. Where does this not-so-natural waste go?

Low-level waste from hospitals is incinerated before land burial. Waste from reactor decommissioning is deposited in geological repositories.

Waste from nuclear reactors is highly radioactive, often hot, and must be stored in a controlled environment.

At the Sellafield site in the UK, where the stockpiling of nuclear waste has been plagued with leaks, spent nuclear fuel is imported and reprocessed (recycled).

Waste arising from this is highly radioactive, must be encased in glass, and be regularly monitored.

Even with best practice management, monitoring this waste will continue for indefinite years and costs will rise as the stockpiles grow.

A common practice in the nuclear industry is the dumping of low-level nuclear waste into the sea. It is claimed by Greenpeace that the spent-fuel reprocessing plant at La Hague, in northern France, dumps “1m litres of liquid radioactive waste per day” into the ocean. The long-term impact of such dumping remains to be seen.

While population displacement to facilitate hydroelectric schemes is unfortunate, relocation because of radioactive fallout is a tragedy.

The Chernobyl nuclear accident in 1986 scattered 400 times more radioactive material into the Earth’s atmosphere than did the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. The Chernobyl exclusion zone, measuring 2,600sq km (1,004sq miles), is one of the most contaminated areas in the world.

It is larger than Co Wexford, where, in the late 1970s, the Irish government abandoned plans to develop a nuclear plant at Carnsore Point, following opposition and the Three Mile Island nuclear accident in the US, in 1979. The latter’s clean-up operation lasted 12 years and cost $1bn. By 2014, the price for decommissioning at Sellafield had reached £70bn.

However, a nuclear waste clean-up is a contradiction in terms. Contaminated material is simply moved to someone else’s backyard.

The Fukushima nuclear power plant accident in Japan, in 2011, is an ongoing disaster. In February, 2017, six years post-nuclear meltdown, it was reported that radiation levels at the plant were at “unimaginable levels”, following the discovery of new fuel leaks.

Professor Allison asserts that “Nuclear is for life”. Yes, it is. As he is so keen to embrace it, would he be happy take home a share of the industry’s waste?

Allison’s argument that we “must move beyond radiation phobia and accept more relaxed, evidence-based nuclear regulations” is a tall order, considering industry revelations, like the falsification of quality assurance data at Sellafield’s Mox Demonstration facility in 1999.

Undeniably, energy security comes at a cost. For nuclear energy, this is a very long-term mortgage, as both fuel and waste stockpiles create their own health-and-security risks.

There is no denying the contribution that radiation has made to medicine, but physicist Marie Curie, who did pioneering work on radioactivity, died from prolonged exposure to it.

Nuclear energy may look clean, but it is not. The spectre of artificial radioactivity from the nuclear industry looms large in our atmosphere.

Ireland has no room for stockpiles of nuclear waste, nor for the mishaps that have plagued the nuclear industry. Why jeopardise a lucrative tourism industry (€5bn a year) or our food-and-drinks industry (€12bn a year) by poisoning our landscape?

It’s not surprising that countries are refusing to invest in new nuclear plants, apart from those kowtowing to lobbyists with vested interests. Contrary to Wade Allison’s report, nuclear power seems unlikely to be popular tomorrow, given the legacy of waste it bestows on future generations.

Aidan J Collins MA

Brookville Park

Malahide Road


Dublin 5

Source of article;

(Note from Arclight2011 – More information from this blog on Prof Wade Allison )


The Economist: Oxford Professor Says OK to Raise Annual Dose Limit by 1000 Times for the Japanese, But the Reporter Reluctant to Inhale

Dr. Wade Allison is professor emeritus of physics (particle physics) at Oxford University. The event that the Economist’s reporter refers to in the article must be the talk given at American Chamber of Commerce in Japan (ACCJ) on October 3, where the professor, along with another researcher, presented the strong case that the radiation exposure below 100 millisieverts per year was not a problem, if one only gets rid of the unreasonable fear of radiation. He also says the current food regulation, evacuation regulation are “unreasonable” and should be relaxed significantly.

Here’s the screen capture of a page from his presentation slides he used in the ACCJ talk:

Arevamirpal wrote: “Why did the American Chamber of Commerce in Japan invite Professor Allison? What was the purpose? Does anyone know?”
That’s the good question!
I did look in this Allison’s biography.
He’s not a genetician, didn’t work on DNA, he is not a physician either, nor a statistician… His research field is neutrinos (what are these particules?, where are they coming from the sun?, how fast they are, etc.) It’s very theorical physic. Nothing to do with radiations and their effect on human health.
So, this so-called “expert” in nothing of an expert when it’s come to radiations and human health.
So why did he take an interest for this topic?
If you have a look on this page, where he presents his firsts results on neutrinos, you can see who are his sponsors (because you can’t work on neutrinos with only a computer, a microscope and a few tests tubes; it’s costs a lot of big money):
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, Ontario Power Generation, Agra-Monenco/Canatom Limited, CVD Manufacturing Inc.
All these companies are in nuclear power.

So, you take the money, and you have to be grateful. You come in Japan (interesting that it’s the chamber of commerce who organized the conference) and you say what your sponsors want you to say. (may be they did the slides).
As you are a scientist, in physics, and from Oxford on top of that, your titles will impress M. Everyman, and the lie has a chance to be swallowed.

But if Mr Allison is an expert in neutrinos, he is nothing but a fraud when discussing human health and radiations.

The question is: has this man something like a conscience, or neutrinos and money did eat all was left of it?

July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

New Brunswick should have second nuclear reactor: energy minister


The Canadian Press
July 9, 2018 07:19 AM

POINT LEPREAU, N.B. — New Brunswick’s energy minister says he’d like to see another nuclear reactor built in the Maritime province.

Canada and New Brunswick have an opportunity to become world leaders in the SMR technology and into bringing a clean, new and reliable source of ultra-low carbon power to the forefront of global climate change,” Doucet said Monday.

“The long-term vision is to build a commercial demonstration SMR plant at the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station,” Doucet said. “Construction of an SMR would be a major undertaking, which would see thousands of workers hired for construction.”

The company wants to build small, 100-megawatt reactors that it describes as inherently safe. A prototype operated for 30 years in the United States but the technology was never developed.

“We intend to demonstrate that the inherent safety features of our reactor enable a simple and cost effective design which will be competitive with all other forms of electricity generation,” said Don Wolf, chairman of Advanced Reactor Concepts.

Their ARC-100 reactor uses a technology that Wolf says doesn’t require the costly safety measures required by other nuclear reactors.

“The fuel is not an oxide of uranium, it’s a metal. The combination of the sodium as a coolant (rather than water) the metal fuel and the proprietary core design of the ARC reactor gives it inherent safety,” Wolf said.

Gaetan Thomas, president of Crown utility NB Power, said such reactors can be cost efficient.

“When you put all those factors together, it’s an ideal solution for the future,” Thomas said.

The New Brunswick government recently announced it will spend $10 million to create a nuclear research cluster.

New Brunswick’s 660-megawatt Candu-6 reactor at Point Lepreau is the only nuclear power plant in Atlantic Canada.

It underwent a $2.4 billion refurbishment between 2008 and 2012. The refurbishment was plagued by repeated delays and cost overruns.

Wolf said his company could start building ARC-100 reactors as early as 2030, and he said New Brunswick would be an ideal place to do it.

“I think you have an ideal situation here with respect to the trained workforce, the enthusiasm about nuclear power, and all the ingredients to have this be a world export hub,” he said. “There’s no reason why it shouldn’t be built here.”

Robert Blakely, a director with Canada’s Building Trades Unions, called Monday’s announcement significant.

He said while it doesn’t mean shovels in the ground in the near future, it provides hope for the years to come.

“This provides an opportunity to get young New Brunswickers into great trades, high-skilled, high-paying, rewarding careers,” Blakely said.


July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | 2 Comments

New UK nuclear safeguards regime to replace #EURATOM #BREXIT UK runs away from new European safety legislation!


New proposals on the detail of a new UK nuclear safeguards regime to replace the current regime provided by Euratom, have been set out in a consultation.

  • government sets out the details of new nuclear safeguards regime
  • nuclear safeguards legislation receives Royal Assent – UK on track to be able to meet international commitments once Euratom arrangements cease to apply in the UK
  • progress provides certainty to the civil nuclear industry and international partners as the UK prepares for Euratom exit

New proposals on the detail of a new UK nuclear safeguards regime to replace the current regime provided by Euratom, have been set out in a consultation launched today (Monday 9 July 2018).

The consultation sets out nuclear safeguards regulations that would be made using the powers granted by the Nuclear Safeguards Act, which last month became one of the first pieces of EU Exit legislation to complete its passage through Parliament and receive Royal Assent.

Business and Industry Minister, Richard Harrington said:

The Nuclear Safeguards Act is one of the first pieces of legislation to go through Parliament in preparation for EU Exit and is yet another major milestone in our work to prepare the civil nuclear industry for Euratom exit, ensuring continuity from day 1.

We are setting out proposals for the detail of our own UK framework for safeguards, demonstrating our readiness for EU Exit.

The Nuclear Safeguards Act addresses the United Kingdom’s departure from the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), an international organisation that governs the peaceful use of nuclear energy within the EU. The passing of the Act and today’s consultation on a new safeguards regime provide a clear signal to the public, industry and international partners that the UK is on track to meet its international commitments from day one of exit.

Nuclear safeguards are important processes through which the UK demonstrates to the international community that civil nuclear material is not diverted into military or weapons programs.

Today’s announcement comes just weeks after the UK’s commitment to international safeguards and nuclear non-proliferation was reaffirmed in Vienna, with the signing of 2 new safeguards agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

These key agreements with the IAEA – of which the UK is a founding member – are another major milestone in Euratom exit preparations and provide the basis for civil nuclear trading arrangements. This step will be welcomed by the industry in the UK and trading partners around the world.

Further progress towards Euratom Exit has been set out in a Quarterly update to Parliament published on 28 June, which outlines several key achievements, including the Office for Nuclear Regulation’s good progress on preparations for implementing the UK’s safeguards regime and the confirmation that all Euratom specific text in the Withdrawal Agreement has now been agreed.

The UK signed a new Nuclear Cooperation Agreement (NCA) with the United States of America in May, which will allow the UK and US to continue their mutually beneficial civil nuclear cooperation when the current Euratomarrangements cease to apply to the UK.

This US-UK NCA is expected to be the first in a series of new international agreements ensuring uninterrupted cooperation and trade following the UK’s exit from Euratom.

Details on how to respond to the consultation and to register interest for the workshops, can be found on the consultation web page.

Source for article

July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Trump CAN order a nuclear strike! Vipin Narang

The Kennedy questions in ‘62 about whether, and how, he could order a nuclear launch without consulting the Pentagon is particularly important. No official answers given but…POTUS can.

Screenshot from 2018-07-10 03:49:14

Document 03. Tazewell Shepard to the President, “JCS Emergency Actions File,” 16 January 1962, with attached “Alert Procedures and JCS Emergency Actions File,” Top Secret
With the Berlin situation on his mind as a possible source for a nuclear conflict, President Kennedy even considered the possibility of a preemptive strike against the Soviet Union in the event that country was preparing an attack. Although the “black bag” included information on how to the Joint Chiefs would get in touch with the president, Kennedy wanted more than that: he sought a reliable set of procedures in place for the control of nuclear use decisions. According to questions prepared for JCS Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer by White House naval aide Captain Tazewell Shepard, the president wanted to know whether in an emergency he could order a nuclear strike without consulting the Joint Chiefs or the secretary of defense, what he would say to the War Room when he called, how could it be proven that the caller was in fact the president, and whether it was necessary to authenticate to the secretary of defense presidential approvals for nuclear weapons use. For Shepard the key problem was whether the procedures described in the “JCS Emergency Actions File” were flexible enough to enable the president to take such actions. Plainly, Kennedy did not want to be in a position where he would only say “yes” or “no” to the Joint Chief’s request for strike authorization in a crisis.[10]

Contributed by: National Security Archive, National Security Archive

July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Management shift begins at US nuclear weapons lab – Los Alamos


LOS ALAMOS, N.M. (AP) — The U.S. government on Monday cleared the way for a new management team to begin taking over one of the nation’s top nuclear weapons laboratories as it looks to rebuild its reputation.

The National Nuclear Security Administration issued an official notice to proceed to Triad National Security LLC , marking the beginning of a transition at Los Alamos National Laboratory that will take about four months.

Made up of Ohio-based Battelle Memorial Institute, Texas A&M University and the University of California, the management team was announced as the winning bidder in June of a coveted $2.5 billion-a-year contract to manage the northern New Mexico lab.

The University of California has played a key management role at the lab since it was created as part of a top-secret effort during World War II to build the atomic bomb. The federal government opted to put the contract up for bid following missed goals and a string of safety lapses involving the handling of plutonium and radioactive waste.

The new contract also comes as the U.S. has tasked the lab with building at least 30 plutonium cores a year. The cores are used to trigger nuclear weapons, and the work is complex.

The University of California on Monday touted the scientific work done at the lab over the decades — from its role in the Human Genome Project to experiments in nuclear medicine and work on renewable energy and climate change.

July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | 1 Comment

China’s CGN denies eyeing stake in UK nuclear stations

"It's good and bad news with your investments, the good is that they've gone up, the bad news is they've gone up in smoke!"

China Daily, July 10, 2018

China’s major nuclear power operator, China General Nuclear Power Corp, denied it is in an early stage to buy a big minority stake in Britain’s fleet of nuclear power stations.

The company hasn’t conducted related work yet, Huang Xiaofei, spokesperson for the company, told China Daily on Monday.

The comment came after reports saying CGN is considering an approach for a share of up to 49 percent in the eight power stations, which generate a fifth of the nation’s electricity.

The stake, worth up to £4 billion ($5.3 billion), is being sold by Centrica, the parent company of British Gas, and the French giant EDF, according to the Times.

July 10, 2018 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment