Tajikistan’s Former Soviet Nuclear Sites Pose Threat To Nearby Villages –
Tajikistan’s Former Soviet Nuclear Sites Pose Threat To Nearby Villages
A mound of radioactive waste 300 meters high rises above the town of Taboshar.
Radio Free Europe April 09, 2009ByThe first Soviet atomic bomb, tested in 1949, was made from Tajik uranium.
Now Tajikistan is dealing with the dangerous legacy of its role in the Soviet nuclear program: 55 million tons of radioactive waste that, in some sites, is leaking into the soil and local water supplies.
Tajik and international specialists say the leaks pose a major risk to residents’ health and the environment. Most of the radioactive waste in Tajikistan comes from the country’s Vostokredmet plant, in the northern city of Chkalovsk. The plant was built in 1945 to mine and process uranium from deposits in Tajikistan and other Central Asian republics.
Utah nuclear power proposal has a powerful thirst
Water application » Billions of gallons would be diverted The Salt Lake Tribune, by Patty Henetz 6 April 09
A state representative pushing to bring nuclear energy to Utah has applied to the state to take billions of gallons of water from the Green River to supply reactors that could produce electricity for 3 million households.
Rep. Mike Noel, R-Kanab, executive director of the Kane County Water Conservancy District, has filed an application with the Utah Division of Water Rights to transfer 29,600 acre-feet of water to Emery County.
The water would be used for two proposed nuclear reactors for the Transition Power LLC Blue Castle Project on private land west of the city of Green River, said company CEO Aaron Tilton, a former lawmaker from Springville…………………….. Critics say even though the water right originally was for a coal-fired plant, it may not be easy to transfer it to a nuclear plant whose customers would include more Californians than Utah residents.
As CT Radiation Accumulates, Cancer Risk May Rise
As CT Radiation Accumulates, Cancer Risk May RiseThose who have the most scans over a lifetime face greatest risk, experts sayP osted March 31, 2009
By Steven Reinberg
HealthDay ReporterTUESDAY, March 31 (HealthDay News) — Cumulative exposure to radiation from CT scans can increase the risk for cancer by as much as 12 percent, Harvard University researchers report……………………………people who are having a lot of CTs need to think more carefully and talk with their doctor to determine whether additional scans add value to their care because the risks can add up over time, he said. “We found cancer risks up to 12 percent” higher for people who had 38 scans, he said.
The report is published in the April issue of Radiology.
As CT Radiation Accumulates, Cancer Risk May Rise – US News and World Report
Nuclear power – a cause of global warming
……….. the nuclear industry is a large contributor to the greenhouse gas aggregate and global warming.
The mining of uranium is especially intensive in emitting CO2, alongside a stringent reliance on diesel fuel to operate the machinery. Considering as well the mining of uranium, fuel enrichment, and plant construction combined to culminate an operating facility, the equivalent of 34-60 grams of CO2 are emitted per kilowatt of energy (from each operational facility). In 2007 the U.S.’s total generation of energy from nuclear fission was 806.5 billion kWh (kilowatt hours).
That equals anywhere from 27,421 billion to 48,390 billion grams of CO2 released into the atmosphere in that year alone. The global emissions are much starker, ranging anywhere from 90,429.8 billion to 159,582 billion grams of CO2 released into the atmosphere.
Once again, these numbers will only climb drastically with demand. In order to replace the entire world’s fossil fuels, more than 2,000 new nuclear facilities would have to be built–an endeavor that would assail the ecology of the planet and its people. ………
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1552/1/
Daniel Kessler: Remembering the Three Mile Island Meltdown
Remembering the Three Mile Island Meltdown THE HUFFINGTON POST Daniel Kessler 27 March 09 Thirty years ago, the word “meltdown” was seared into the American consciousness ……………. in the early morning hours of March 28, 1979…………
………. Contrary to the claims of the nuclear lobby, the Three Mile Island accident spewed radiation into the environment for days and crippled the U.S. nuclear industry. The question that has persisted since the accident isn’t whether radiation was released but how much radiation was released. Even the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) fact sheet on the Three Mile Island accident acknowledges that the meltdown resulted in a significant release of radiation. According to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 10 million curies of radiation escaped the damaged reactor core (a “curie” is a unit of radioactivity that denotes how many radioactive atoms in a particular collection of atoms are giving off radiation; 1 curie = 37 billion atoms giving off radiation). However, independent and unbiased nuclear engineers who reexamined the accident estimate that as much as 150 million curies of radiation may have escaped to the environment.
According to government reports on the accident, the radiation monitors went off scale before 8:00 a.m. on March 28, eliminating the only direct means of assessing the quantities and rate of release of radiation from the reactor. This information was vital to an accurate evaluation of the consequences of the meltdown……………..Even the nuclear cheerleaders at the NRC acknowledge that “exposure to any level of radiation is assumed to carry with it a certain amount of risk.” The scientific community generally assumes that any exposure to ionizing radiation may cause undesirable biological effects and that the likelihood of these effects increases as the dose increases. The NRC’s fact sheet on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation states that, “any amount of radiation may pose some risk for causing cancer and hereditary effect, and that the risk is higher for higher radiation exposures.” There is no such thing as a “safe” dose of radiation…………..
………As nuclear corporations attempt to resell reactors as clean and safe, we must remember that Three Mile Island revealed the truth about the nuclear industry. Not only is nuclear power expensive; it’s also dangerous and deadly.
Milk teeth and radiation | Out of the mouths of babes
Out of the mouths of babes
Mar 26th 2009 ST LOUIS The Economist What thousands of milk teeth reveal about radiationTHEY were locked away in an old ammunition bunker near St Louis, in dozens of cardboard boxes. Each was in its own manilla envelope, with an index card identifying the donor. These 85,000 baby teeth were collected in the late 1950s and early 1960s from children in the St Louis area to study the effects of radioactive fallout in the environment.The fallout came from hundreds of above-ground nuclear tests in America and other parts of the world. The radioactive isotope Strontium-90, one of the by-products of the bombs, spread into the atmosphere, fell onto the land, was ingested by dairy cows and passed into the milk supply. Strontium-90, like calcium, was concentrated in children’s teeth in detectable amounts…………..……….The undisputed link between the tests and a radioactive element in baby teeth provided much of the impetus for the 1963 Test Ban Treaty, which outlawed above-ground nuclear weapons-testing. The rediscovery of the 85,000 samples, about a quarter of the total collected, has spurred a new effort to study the link between early childhood exposure and health problems in later life.
There is already some evidence that 1950s children in St Louis grew into adults with a higher-than-average rate of cancer. Now researchers at the Radiation and Public Health Project, based in Brooklyn, are attempting to find more than 6,000 of the teeth donors to track their health problems or, in some cases, their premature deaths.
Milk teeth and radiation | Out of the mouths of babes | The Economist
People Died at Three Mile Island
People Died at Three Mile Island counter punch 25 March 09 By HARVEY WASSERMANPeople died–and are still dying–at Three Mile Island.As the thirtieth anniversary of America’s most infamous industrial accident approaches, we mourn the deaths that accompanied the biggest string of lies ever told in US industrial history.As news of the accident poured into the global media, the public was assured there were no radiation releases.That quickly proved to be false.The public was then told the releases were controlled and done purposely to alleviate pressure on the core. Both those assertions were false. The public was told the releases were “insignificant.”But stack monitors were saturated and unusable, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission later told Congress it did not know—and STILL does not know—how much radiation was released at Three Mile Island, or where it went…………………………………..The state of Pennsylvania hid the health impacts, including deletion of cancers from the public record, abolition of the state’s tumor registry, misrepresentation of the impacts it could not hide (including an apparent tripling of the infant death rate in nearby Harrisburg) and much more.
The federal government did nothing to track the health histories of the region’s residents.
In fact, the most reliable studies were conducted by local residents like Jane Lee and Mary Osborne, who went door-to-door in neighborhoods where the fallout was thought to be worst. Their surveys showed very substantial plagues of cancer, leukemia, birth defects, respiratory problems, hair loss, rashes, lesions and much more. ……………………….Data unearthed by radiologist Dr. Ernest Sternglass of the University of Pittsburgh, and statisticians Jay Gould (now deceased) and Joe Mangano of New York have led to strong assertions of major public health impacts. On-going work by Sternglass and Mangano clearly indicates that “normal” reactor radiation releases of far less magnitude that those at TMI continue to have catastrophic impacts on local populations. ………………….while the nuclear power industry continues to assert that “no one died at Three Mile Island,” it refuses to allow an open judicial hearing on the hundreds of cases still pending.
As the pushers of the “nuclear renaissance” demand massive tax- and rate-payer subsidies to build yet another generation of reactors, they cynically stonewall the obvious death toll that continues to mount at the site of an accident that happened thirty years ago. The “see no evil” mantra continues to define all official approaches to the victims of this horrific disaster.
Cancer screening: Doing more harm than good?
Cancer screening: Doing more harm than good?What you need to know before your next mammogram or colonoscopy
msnbc By Shannon BrownleeTODAYupdated 10:12 a.m. ET March 12, 2009 – “…………….It’s hard to believe, but some researchers wouldn’t call Bull lucky at all. They say that yearly mammograms are not nearly as effective at reducing the risk of dying of breast cancer as most women think, and that mammography leads many women to get unnecessary treatment — especially those diagnosed with DCIS. The problem is bigger than just mammography:……………………………..screening tests pick up many small cancers that would never have caused any symptoms. “Screening for cancer means that tens of thousands of patients who never would have become sick are diagnosed with this disease,” says H. Gilbert Welch, MD, codirector of the Outcomes Group at the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in White River Junction, Vermont, and a leading expert in cancer screening. “Once they’re diagnosed, almost everybody gets treated — and we know that treatment can cause harm.”……………………The flip side of this problem is that many screening tests do a great job at catching cancers that would never have caused problems and could simply have been left alone.
Cancer screening: Doing more harm than good? – TODAY Health- msnbc.com
New manager and new fights for Cancer Society
New manager and new fights for Cancer Society Meridian Booster By Allison Wall q12 March 09
The Lloydminster Canadian Cancer Society is taking an unprecedented stand against a possible nuclear power facility near Paradise Hill.
Although the Saskatchewan government recently issued a release encouraging Bruce Power to continue laying groundwork for a possible facility in northwest Saskatchewan, the Canadian Cancer Society Lloydminster unit has developed a policy to educate the public about the health risks associated with nuclear facilities.
“The start is to educate people about it before they can make a decision on it … and people can voice their opinions,” said Wendy Clague, new manager of the Society’s Lloydminster unit.
The policy is the first of its kind for the Cancer Society in Canada……………………ncreased cancer risk has been associated with nuclear power facilities in some studies – a fact that made some at the meeting uneasy.
“We know there are many benefits to nuclear power, but we also know that nuclear facilities create many situations that affect the human health, plant life and the earth itself,” said Don Retzlaff, a guest at the Canadian Cancer Society Lloydminster unit annual general meeting. “There has been a considerable amount of research in the United States and Europe that indicated that nuclear power plants can create serious health problems.”
Retzlaff said statistics in United States and Europe have indicated a sharp increase in breast cancer, lung cancer, liver cancer and pancreatic cancer, particularly in women and children.
“In Germany and Ireland, women and children living within 50 kilometres of a nuclear facility have a one in six chance of developing leukemia,” said Retzlaff.
New manager and new fights for Cancer Society – Lloydminster Meridian Booster – Alberta, CA
Americans are exposed to seven times more radiation
Americans are exposed to seven times more radiationTop News by Piyush Diwan on Wed, 03/04/2009 Recent research revealed that Americans are seven times more exposed to radiation than in 1980. The possible reason behind this increase is overuse of a diagnostic scans by doctors for profit.Research conducted by National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement said that doctors are ordering too many diagnostic tests, driving up the cost of healthcare in the United States and potentially harming patients. Researchers believe that too much radiation exposure can cause cancer, especially in younger people.Dr. James Thrall, chair of the American College of Radiology’s Board of Chancellors, said: “Unfortunately, one of the things we have seen in the imaging world is that many physicians look at imaging as the solution to their financial problems.”
Americans are exposed to seven times more radiation | Top News
News Headlines Increase Radiation Risks – More people go to the doctor if they are panicked – Softpedia
News Headlines Increase Radiation Risks SOFTPEDIA 7 March 09 More people go to the doctor if they are panicked – “……………………doctors say, patients are prone to getting more exposed to radiation after news programs and various daily papers tell that a disease is on the rise, or other such information……………………“Adding up all the doses and then spreading out the total over the entire population, no matter a person’s age, occupation, location, or health status is not appropriate for assessing risk to the general population,” Mayo Clinic professor of radiological physics Cynthia McCollough shares.
window.google_render_ad();While trying to keep healthy, people actually tend to get intoxicated with unnecessary doses of radiation, just to make sure that whatever disease is circulating the country at one point is not affecting them.
Overexposed: Imaging tests boost U.S. radiation dose
Overexposed: Imaging tests boost U.S. radiation dose
By Julie Steenhuysen
CHICAGO (Reuters) Mar 4, 2009 – Americans are exposed to seven times more radiation from diagnostic scans than in 1980, a report found on Tuesday as experts said doctors are overusing the tests for profit and raising health risks for patients.
The findings, issued by National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, add to already mounting evidence that doctors are ordering too many diagnostic tests, driving up the cost of healthcare in the United States and potentially harming patients.
While diagnostic scans give doctors valuable information and many times are necessary, doctors fear too much radiation exposure can cause cancer, especially in younger people………………………”Unfortunately, one of the things we have seen in the imaging world is that many physicians look at imaging as the solution to their financial problems,” Thrall, head of radiology at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said in a telephone interview.
Overexposed: Imaging tests boost U.S. radiation dose | Reuters
Nuclear Darkness and Climate Change
NUCLEAR DARKNESS AND GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE – The deadly consequences of nuclear war 3 March 09 5 million tons of smoke created by 100 Hiroshima-size nuclear weapons Following a war between India and Pakistan, in which 100 Hiroshima-size (15 kiloton) nuclear weapons are detonated in the large cities of these nations, 5 million tons of smoke is lofted high into the stratosphere and is quickly spread around the world. A smoke layer forms around both Hemispheres which will remain in place for many years to block sunlight from reaching the surface of the Earth. One year after the smoke injection there would be temperature drops of several degrees C within the grain-growing interiors of Eurasia and North America. There would be a corresponding shortening of growing seasons by up to 30 days and a 10% reduction in average global precipitation.
Hospitals Become Major Source of Nuclear Waste
Natural News.com February 24, 2009 by: David Gutierrez, staff writer Hospitals have become a major source of nuclear waste in the United States, producing and storing millions of radioactive materials each year with no long-term disposal plan. Experts increasingly fear that such waste could pose health hazards or be stolen by terrorists and used to build dirty bombs.“Instead of safely secured in one place, it’s stored in thousands of places in urban locations all over the United States,” said nuclear waste consultant Rick Jacobi.
Hospitals and other health facilities use radioactive material for a variety of functions, from examination to treatment. For example, radiation from cobalt and powdered cesium is used to sterilize blood and medical equipment, while cobalt is also used to kill diseased brain tissue. Capsules of cesium are implanted next to tumors to kill cancerous cells, and thin tubes of radioactive material are used to o
Iraq’s War Disfigured Babies
Iraq’s War Disfigured Babies iSLAMoNlINE.NET By Afif Sarhan, Feb. 23, 2009 BAGHDAD— In new Iraq, women like Leila Omar Wassin are heart-broken giving birth to babies born malformed because of the deadly substances years of war have sown in their bodies.
“My first baby died after he was born without legs and the second one died few days ago because his spinal cord was exposed and his head was too big,” the 36-old woman told IslamOnline.net.
Wassim is one of the victims of the massive bombing of Fallujah in 2004, when the US army admittedly used depleted uranium munitions, which contain low-level radioactive waste……………………………
After denying it at first, the Pentagon admitted in November 2005 that white phosphorous, a restricted incendiary weapon, was used in shelling Fallujah.
It also admitted to having used more than 1,200 tons of depleted uranium munitions in Iraq during the 2003 invasion.
The plight of babies’ birth defects has exacerbated over the years, becoming a common occurrence for doctors and nurses.
“Baghdad has shown a high level of contamination,” a doctor and a researcher at a Red Crescent Hospital in Baghdad told IOL, requesting anonymity.
“In 2005, we had about 600 cases reported at public hospitals and three years latter, this number has doubled.”
1 This Month
22 June – Virtual Event –Climate Change: New Data, New Debate
Monday, June 22, 2026 2:30 p.m. – 3:15 p.m. CT
YouTube. Register here
Protect Sazan Island from the Trump family! https://secure.avaaz.org/campaign/en/protect_sazan_island_from_the_trump_family_loc/?bqFCVab&v=174511&cl=22707147157&_checksum=5e9dde668860e8231c33699735e16a1fbf22ab2cb01da50c999fe8732b9775ef&utm_source=email&utm_medium=blast_email&utm_campaign=174511
25 June- THE PUKE ON NUKES
Thursday, June 25, 2026
7pm Central Time (8pm ET, 6pm MT, 5pm PT) UTC – 5
From NRC & DOE Deregulation to Techno-Fascist Billionaires Going Nuclear, Plus a Few Songs from Atomic Cabaret REGISTER
26 June – Radiation Trainwreck at the NRC / Join the Protect Better Campaign – https://us02web.zoom.us/meeting/register/4ZlZ5_qLSHGiLSCg8FF6Bg#/registration
Cuba Is Not a Failed State – It Is a Besieged State
PETITION: “Global Appeal to Endorse Palestinian Right of Return of Refugees”
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- June 2026 (193)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- 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)
-
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 