Goats irradiated in 1950s now pose possible environmental danger in Berkshire, UK
Contamination in Berkshire, Berkshire Live 21st Dec 2019, Goats injected with radioactive chemicals could be buried in Berkshire. The
animals, said to have been experimented on in the 1950s and 60s, could now
be buried on land in Shinfield.
Those living nearby have raised concerns
after learning scientists at the University of Reading injected the goats
with radioactive isotopes. The experiments were said to have been looking
into how radiation affected milk and metabolism.
It formed part of research
into milk production and the dairy industry, by The National Institute for
Research in Dairying (NIRD), based in Shinfield and closed in 1985. The
goats were apparently ‘famous in folklore’, according to one American
professor, Margaret Neville. Burying dead livestock is now banned to stop
the spread of disease. But before the 2003 ban, farmers would reportedly
often bury dead animals in pits on their own land.
U.S. Congress Demands Investigation Into the U.S.’s Nuclear Coffin, The Runit Dome
|
Congress Demands Investigation Into the U.S.’s Nuclear Coffin, The Runit Dome is leaking radioactive waste into the Pacific Ocean. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a30338371/congress-investigation-runit-dome-nuclear-waste/
Dec 27, 2019
|
|
Seafloor mapping reveals the degradation of ocean floor by Bikini nuclear bomb tests
Bikini Seafloor Hides Evidence of Nuclear Explosions, Seafloor mapping has revealed a crater and several shipwrecks persisting 73 years after the world’s first underwater nuclear test. Eos, Amanda Heidt 28 Dec 19
Seventy-three years after serving as the site of the world’s first underwater nuclear test, the seafloor around the Bikini Atoll remains scarred by finely detailed craters and littered with derelict ships.
Today, an interdisciplinary team of scientists is using sonar to assess the complex submarine environment. The results provide a sobering assessment of humanity’s capacity to alter nature…..
Unleashing the Power of the Atom
In the aftermath of World War II, the U.S. Navy chose the Bikini Atoll for a series of controlled nuclear explosions. Between 1946 and 1958, 23 confirmed tests were conducted throughout the area.
Trembanis and his team studied Able and Baker, a pair of tests conducted in July 1946 as part of Operation Crossroads. Both Able and Baker involved plutonium fission bombs with a yield of between 21 and 23 kilotons, but they were deployed differently……….
Clustering around a laptop, Trembanis and his team witnessed the real-time rendering of an underwater crater more than 800 meters across—big enough to fit three Roman Colosseums. ….
Littered throughout the atoll are the husks of strategically placed ships—decommissioned dreadnaughts, aircraft carriers, and submarines meant to bear the brunt of the Able and Baker explosions. …..
Even independent of their place in nuclear history, the Pilotfish and other Bikini shipwrecks attest to the long-lived effects of human activities on the environment.
As old ships decompose, they become ecological burdens, and researchers found that several wrecks on the Bikini seafloor are leaching plumes of oil. Trembanis and his team looked at sketches from surveys the National Park Service conducted in the late 1980s and saw the degradation of the past 40 years……. https://eos.org/articles/bikini-seafloor-hides-evidence-of-nuclear-explosions
Kyrgyzstan bans uranium, thorium mining
Above – radioactive tailings mountain in Central Asia
|
Kyrgyzstan bans uranium, thorium mining http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-12/16/c_138635832.htm 2019-12-16 BISHKEK, Dec. 16 (Xinhua) –– President of Kyrgyzstan Sooronbai Jeenbekov signed a decree banning the mining of uranium and thorium deposits in the Central Asian country, his press service reported on Monday.The law, aimed at ensuring radiation and environmental safety, prohibits geological exploration and development of uranium and thorium deposits in Kyrgyzstan, as well as dumping and transfer of the material, the report said.
Meanwhile, the import of raw materials and waste containing the two radioactive substances is not allowed by law, it said. Earlier this year, protests arose against the development of uranium deposits after reports that exploration work had begun in the Kyzyl-Ompol area in the Issyk-Kul region. |
|
Devastating array of craters on the ocean floor, from nuclear tests
Enormous Craters Blasted in Seafloor by Nuclear Bombs Mapped for the First Time, Live Science, By Mindy Weisberger – Senior Writer 11 Dec FRANCISCO — Today, all seems quiet in the remote Bikini Atoll, a chain of coral reef islands in the central Pacific. But more than 70 years ago, this region’s seafloor was rocked by powerful atomic bombs detonated by the U.S. Army.
For the first time, scientists have released remarkably detailed maps of this pockmarked seabed, revealing two truly massive craters. This new map shows that the seabed is still scarred by the 22 bombs detonated at Bikini Atoll between 1946 and 1958.
The map was presented yesterday (Dec. 9) at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union.
During the 1946 nuclear weapons test known as “Operation Crossroads,” the U.S. wanted to test the impact of nuclear bombs on warships. To that end, the Army assembled more than 240 ships — some of which were German and Japanese — that held different amounts of fuel and munitions, then deployed two nuclear weapons to destroy them, researcher Arthur Trembanis, an associate professor with the College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment at the University of Delaware, said in the presentation.
At the time of the tests, Trembanis said, comedian Bob Hope joked grimly:
“As soon as the war ended, we found the one spot on Earth that had been untouched by war and blew it to hell.”……….
But as powerful as the early atomic tests were, they were dwarfed by the later blasts caused by hydrogen and fusion bomb tests in the 1950s. The researchers investigated a crater that was 184 feet (56 m) deep and had an unusual oblong shape; they determined that it was a composite crater from multiple blasts: “Castle Bravo,” a 15-megaton bomb that was the largest ever detonated by the U.S., and “Castle Romeo,” the first deployed thermonuclear bomb.
These tests left behind a uniquely devastating array of shipwrecks and craters, and the first detailed map of their aftermath will help scientists to tell this untold story and connect to “a moment at the dawn of the nuclear age,” Trembanis said. “Our new findings provide insights into previously unknown conditions at Bikini and allow us to reflect on the lasting consequences from these and other tests.” https://www.livescience.com/mapping-reveals-bikini-atoll-nuclear-craters.html
U.S. Congress members call on Trudeau to stop nuclear waste dumping near Great Lakes
|
Upton, Dingell, Kildee and Mitchell Appeal to Trudeau: No Nuclear Waste In the Great Lakes Basin, https://whtc.com/news/articles/2019/dec/10/upton-dingell-kildee-and-mitchell-appel-to-trudeau-no-nuclear-waste-in-the-great-lakes-basin/965368/ When U.S. Representatives Fred Upton and Debbie Dingell joined with a handful of other House members last Friday, Dec. 6, 2019, to decry plans by Canadian officials to put a nuclear waste storage site in the Great Lakes basin, they were hoping to shame Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau into some kind of protective action.
Tuesday, December 10, 2019 But something else happened, Upton explained.
“We’ve got other members now, on a bipartisan basis, coming to us saying, ‘Hey, we want to sign that same letter,'” he said. “So we’re going to be doing another letter, a little bit later this week, that’ll have broader appeal. Because we were sort of under the gun when we learned the news late Friday afternoon.” Upton and Dingell joined two other Michigan representatives, Paul Mitchell and Dan Kildee in signing a letter appealing to Trudeau to oppose any nuclear waste storage plans near the Great Lakes. The complete text of last week’s letter: Dear Prime Minister Trudeau: We write to you out of deep concern regarding reports that Canada is moving closer to selecting a permanent national repository for harmful nuclear waste along the shores of the Great Lakes. Allowing a permanent nuclear waste storage facility anywhere near the Great Lakes basin, for any amount of time, is a risk we cannot afford to take. The recent reporting also has us greatly concerned that the highest levels of radioactive waste would ultimately be stored at the proposed site. We know that there are other Members of Congress representing districts in the Great Lakes basin who are most concerned by this development and will certainly be joining with us in the days ahead. This is a grave concern. These waters have long united us—they should not divide us. In November, the Energy and Commerce Committee favorably advanced H.R. 2699, the Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act of 2019, to the House for final consideration and it included an important bipartisan amendment that expresses the Sense of Congress that the governments of the United States and Canada should not allow permanent or long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel or other radioactive waste near the Great Lakes. This amendment was unanimously supported and adopted. We stand in strong opposition to any decision by the Canadian government to select or consider a permanent national repository for nuclear waste storage anywhere near the Great Lakes. This is a treasured natural resource each of our countries share and we urge you to stand with us to protect these waters for future generations. Thank you for your consideration of this important request and we look forward to a timely response. |
Water shortages to hit 1.9 billion people as glaciers melt
1.9 billion people at risk from mountain water shortages, study shows https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/09/billion-people-risk-water-supply-rising-demand-global-heating-mountain-ecosystem
Rising demand and climate crisis threaten entire mountain ecosystem, say scientists, Jonathan Watts Global environment editor, @jonathanwatts, Tue 10 Dec 2019 A quarter of the world’s population are at risk of water supply problems as mountain glaciers, snow-packs and alpine lakes are run down by global heating and rising demand, according to an international study.
The first inventory of high-altitude sources finds the Indus is the most important and vulnerable “water tower” due to run-off from the Karakoram, Hindu Kush, Ladakh, and Himalayan mountain ranges, which flow downstream to a densely populated and intensively irrigated basin in Pakistan, India, China and Afghanistan.
The authors warn this vast water tower – a term they use to describe the role of water storage and supply that mountain ranges play to sustain environmental and human water demands downstream – is unlikely to sustain growing pressure by the middle of the century when temperatures are projected to rise by 1.9C (35.4F), rainfall to increase by less than 2%, but the population to grow by 50% and generate eight times more GDP.
Strains are apparent elsewhere in the water tower index, which quantifies the volume of water in 78 mountain ranges based on precipitation, snow cover, glacier ice storage, lakes and rivers. This was then compared with the drawdown by communities, industries and farms in the lower reaches of the main river basins.
The study by 32 scientists, which was published in the Nature journal on Monday, confirms Asian river basins face the greatest demands but shows pressures are also rising on other continents.
“It’s not just happening far away in the Himalayas but in Europe and the United States, places not usually thought to be reliant on mountains for people or the economy,” said one of the authors, Bethan Davies, of Royal Holloway University.
“We always knew the Indus was important, but it was surprising how the Rhône and Rhine have risen in importance, along with the Fraser and Columbia.”
The study says 1.9 billion people and half of the world’s biodiversity hotspots could be negatively affected by the decline of natural water towers, which store water in winter and release it slowly over the summer.
This buffering capacity is weakening as glaciers lose mass and snow-melt dynamics are disrupted by temperatures that are rising faster at high altitude than the global average.
“Climate change threatens the entire mountain ecosystem,” the report concludes. “Immediate action is required to safeguard the future of the world’s most important and vulnerable water towers.”
As well as local conservation efforts, the authors say international action to reduce carbon emissions is the best way to safeguard water towers.
Citing recent research by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Davies said 75% of high-altitude snow and ice would be retained if global warming could be kept within 1.5C. However, 80% would be lost by 2100 if the world continued on a path of business as usual.
European report: don’t sacrifice the planet’s ecology in the drive for economic growth
Don’t pursue economic growth at expense of environment – report
Europe’s environmental watchdog gives warning as climate crisis continues, Guardian, Fiona Harvey 4 Dec 19, in Madrid Pursuing economic growth at the expense of the environment is no longer an option as Europe faces “unprecedented” challenges from climate chaos, pollution, biodiversity loss and the overconsumption of natural resources, according to a report from Europe’s environmental watchdog.
Europe was reaching the limits of what could be achieved by gradual means, by making efficiencies and small cuts to greenhouse gas emissions, with “transformational” change now necessary to stave off the impacts of global heating and environmental collapse, warned Hans Bruyninckx, executive director of the European Environment Agency…..
The EEA scored 35 key measures of environmental health, from greenhouse gases and air pollution, waste management and climate change to soil condition and birds and butterfly species, and found only six in which Europe was performing adequately.
“Incremental changes have resulted in progress in some areas but not nearly enough to meet our long-term goals,” said Bruyninckx. Further marginal changes would grow only more expensive, he predicted, making large-scale change necessary. “We already have the knowledge, technologies and tools we need to make key production and consumption systems such as food, mobility and energy sustainable.”
Wholesale changes could include banning internal combustion engines and scaling up public transport, abandoning fossil fuels in favour of 100% renewable energy, stipulating that products must be designed and manufactured to create no waste, and changes to our diets and agricultural production. Environmental goals could not be seen as separate to or lesser than economic goals, and accepting environmental damage as an inevitable cost would lead to ecological collapse, Bruyninckx warned.
The old system – of “continuing to promote economic growth and seeking to manage the environmental and social impacts” – would not deliver the EU’s long-term vision of “living well, within the limits of the planet”, the report warned.
The report, known as European Environment – State and Outlook (SOER), is a comprehensive study produced every five years and details the health or otherwise of all natural systems across EU member states and others including Norway, Switzerland and Turkey. The 2020 edition was brought forward to inform the incoming European commission as they discuss a promised “green new deal”, and for delegates at COP25, the UN conference on climate change currently taking place in Madrid.
There has been little improvement since the last report in 2015, despite promises, policies and targets, according to SOER 2020. Fewer than a quarter of protected species and only 16% of habitats are in a good state of conservation. Reduced pollution has improved water quality, but Europe will miss by a long way its goal of having a “good” rating for all water bodies by 2020. Though air quality has improved, about a fifth of the urban population live in areas where concentrations of pollutants exceed at least one EU air quality standard, and 62% of ecosystems are exposed to excessive nitrogen levels.
Global heating has added to the risks to health……https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/04/dont-pursue-economic-growth-at-expense-of-environment-report
Antarctic ice sheets could be at greater risk of melting than previously thought
|
|
|
As the Runit nuclear waste dome crumbles, Marshall Islanders want honesty and justice
‘People want justice’: Marshalls’ fury over nuclear information US withheld– https://www.rnz.co.nz/international/programmes/datelinepacific/audio/2018723289/people-want-justice-marshalls-fury-over-nuclear-information-us-withheld From Dateline Pacific, 21 November 2019
|
The caretaker president of the Marshall Islands says it’s unconscionable that the United States kept secret key information about its nuclear tests for decades. New details reveal the US withheld information about the nuclear waste it left behind when the Marshall Islands gained independence, and the extent of the tests it carried out. Now, a dome that contains hundreds of tonnes of nuclear waste is at risk of crumbling into the ocean. But with Washington increasingly jittery about China, the small Pacific country’s finding it might now have some leverage to get something done. TRANSCRIPTEnewetak was once a paradise – a long atoll in the clear blue waters of the north Pacific, white sand and thick green palms. Today, it’s rutted with scars, after the US detonated dozens of nuclear bombs on, in and above it in the 1940s and ’50s. Whole islands were vaporised, deep craters carved into the coral. Jack Ading is a senator from Enewetak. His family was forced to move for the tests, and then allowed to return in the 1980s. “It appears that when we moved back to Enewetak in the 1980s after we were assured by the US government that it was safe. We were actually subjecting ourselves to a risk that we were never warned about.” Government documents reveal that beyond the nuclear blasts, the US also tested biological weapons, including an aerosol bacteria. Jamie Tahana reports. TRANSCRIPTEnewetak was once a paradise – a long atoll in the clear blue waters of the north Pacific, white sand and thick green palms. Today, it’s rutted with scars, after the US detonated dozens of nuclear bombs on, in and above it in the 1940s and ’50s. Whole islands were vaporised, deep craters carved into the coral. Jack Ading is a senator from Enewetak. His family was forced to move for the tests, and then allowed to return in the 1980s. “It appears that when we moved back to Enewetak in the 1980s after we were assured by the US government that it was safe. We were actually subjecting ourselves to a risk that we were never warned about.” Government documents reveal that beyond the nuclear blasts, the US also tested biological weapons, including an aerosol bacteria. But this was kept secret when the people from Enewetak were allowed to return, and other documents show that people were subjected to tests and experiments about the lingering effects of radiation. Last week, the Los Angeles Times also uncovered that the US didn’t tell the Marshallese it had shipped 130 tonnes of soil from its atomic testing grounds in Nevada in 1958 and dumped it at Enewetak. The caretaker president of the Marshall Islands, Hilda Heine, says the new details are disturbing. “To say the least you would have thought that all that information would have been shared with the Enewetak people before they went back to Enewetak. It is unbelievable that such information was held back, and as a result people have gone back and lived there for many years.” The nuclear waste from the era is stored in a pile at the end of the island of Runit, covered in a concrete dome. But a recent study by the Marshall Islands Nuclear Commission found the dome is now at risk of collapsing, and as rising seas erode beneath it, much of that waste is seeping into the lagoon. The commission’s chair, Rhea Moss-Christian, says information about the dome and the testing era was withheld throughout the independence process, while a compact of free association was negotiated in the 1980s. “We signed the compact in 1986 on the understanding that we had all the information we needed to have. It’s pretty hard for us to see this information, to have the level of detail that we now have, and to think that any of those previous agreements could stand.” The Marshall Islands has sought US help to clean up contamination and to shore up the dome, but American officials have declined, saying it’s on Marshallese land and, therefore, is the Marshall Islands’ responsibility. Ms Moss-Christian says that’s ridiculous. “How can it be that this radioactive waste and structure that we didn’t ask for. How can it be that this is ours and ours to deal with?” A Nuclear Claims Tribunal formed by the two countries in 1988 concluded that the US should pay $US2.2 billion in claims and settlements. But documents from both the Nuclear Commission and a 2010 US House inquiry show only $4 million has been paid. Last month, the Marshall Islands parliament – the Nitijela – endorsed a Nuclear Commission strategy which calls for, among other things, full compensation, better healthcare, and environmental protections. The US maintains it is upholding its responsibilities. It says it’s paid nearly a billion dollars, which has gone towards resettlement, rehabilitation and healthcare costs for affected communities, and that it’s funding tests of the water and atmosphere around the Runit dome. But Giff Johnson, the editor of the Marshall Islands journal and an author of books about the nuclear legacy, says that’s not enough. “People want justice for Marshall Islanders. The US government has to step up and address issues that it has addressed for American victims but is ignoring out here.” For the Marshall Islands, a smattering of atolls in the North Pacific – population 53,000 – it might be an opportune time to twist a superpower’s arm. Washington is increasingly nervous about a growing Chinese presence, and the compact of free association – which guarantees relations and funding from the US – expires in three years. Having initially maintained there won’t be a replacement compact, Washington is now keen to open talks for a new one, and has sent a string of high-ranking officials for visits. The caretaker president, Hilda Heine – who a few months ago was invited to the White House to meet President Donald Trump – says that could bode well. “The geopolitical situation in the Pacific is really helpful to the cause of the Marshall Islands. The US is now paying more attention to the Marshall Islands, so our issues around climate change, around our nuclear legacy, I think those will come to the forefront of our discussions going forward with the United States.” Whatever comes from those discussions, the people of Enewetak want more than they’re getting now. |
|
Toxic flushing of nuclear poisons into Lake Winnepeg
winnipeg-564698971.html By: Dave Taylor 11/9/2019 How on Earth did humans ever think nature would absorb the nasty poisons we generate?
By now, we should realize that to bury or flush these toxins will not make them simply disappear. Many are insidious and will be back to bite us in the future. Putting a stop to these practices is paramount considering efforts to ameliorate past mistakes is such an onerous proposition, one that is even more demanding when the original polluter and their profits have disappeared.
We persist in flushing sewage into Lake Winnipeg and resist efforts to reduce phosphorus loads all in the name of financial savings. Ironically, there are no savings to be had, just a deferred payment plan. People will pay, it’s just a matter of when. The nuclear facility near Pinawa was built in the 1960s upon this very strategy of flushing wastes into the Winnipeg River and ultimately Lake Winnipeg, and continues to this day. The justification at that time was that they could dilute the radioactivity to levels that met their vague “as low as reasonably achievable” policy. Efforts continue to clean up the mess left behind in trenches, standpipes and bunkers, many of which are in disrepair and lead to the river. The subcontracting consortium that is attempting to deal with defunct sites across the country is Canadian Nuclear Labs (CNL). It is funded by the federal government and is led by SNC-Lavalin, whose lobbying efforts of the federal government are renowned and include bribery and fraud charges, as well as illegal election financing. The off-loading of the site and its problems have significantly altered the original decommissioning plans of 2001 and expedient shortcuts are being slipped by Canada’s nuclear regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, which we are obliged to trust to provide scrutiny of the cleanup and the ever-changing plans. CNL has applied for a 10-year licence and is being paid a king’s ransom ($1 billion annually) to restore the lands messed up by Atomic Energy of Canada at sites across the country. Placing our trust in CNL or the regulatory watchdog, commission, has never been more difficult. Not only are they administered by the same natural resources minister who advocates the expansion of nuclear power in Canada, but they have received a chastising by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for what can only be described as a substandard approach to radioactive-waste disposal. The IAEA conducted a review mission in September and concluded the commission should enhance its policies and “should consider better aligning its radiation-protection requirements with IAEA safety standards.” In other words, shape up. At the very least, the federal watchdog should be placed under the environment portfolio so there is no perception of conflict of interest. The challenges for Pinawa are substantial as radioactive waste has been disposed of in decaying installations, some of which have required significant patching for cracks and, in a recent report made available to the public, they have discovered evidence of plutonium in the sewage lagoon not intended to receive radioactive materials. There are also the remains of Whiteshell Reactor No. 1 this consortium plans to seal up with concrete in hopes that the inevitable leaks will be absorbed by the river. Indigenous elders, including Dave Courchene, have taken a collaborative approach to dealing with this toxic predicament, which is upstream from them and entirely related to the concept of “flushing” wastes into a sacred river. Representatives of the Sagkeeng, Hollow Water and Peguis communities held a ceremony at Pinawa in September in hopes of changing the paradigm and promoting a much better solution. Since there is no solution to the problem of nuclear waste, they advocate isolating, containing, repackaging and consistent monitoring of these poisons over hundreds of years, a proposal that CNL is not likely to embrace as it will cut into their profits. Sagkeeng Chief Derrick Henderson stated: “We must be very careful with what we do to our land; we will be here forever and we all have that responsibility and duty.” Until the federal government assumes this duty of stewardship toward the Winnipeg River, “flushing” of radioactive waste will continue. The elders are sending SNC-Lavalin and friends a clear message. If they aren’t willing to adhere to traditional wisdom, keep them on a short leash with a year-to-year licence. Dave Taylor teaches at the University of Winnipeg.
|
|
Problematic question of Fukushima food at the Olympic Games
Japan grapples with serving Fukushima food at Olympics, Channel News Asia, 20 Nov 19, FUKUSHIMA: For years, Japan’s government has sought to convince consumers that food from Fukushima is safe despite the nuclear disaster. But will it serve the region’s produce at the Tokyo Olympics?
It’s a thorny subject for the authorities. They pitched the Games in part as a chance to showcase the recovery of areas affected by the 2011 tsunami and nuclear disaster.
Government officials tout strict checks on food from the region as evidence that the produce is completely safe, but it remains unclear whether athletes and sports teams from around the world will be convinced.
In the Fukushima region, producers are keen to see their products served at the Olympic village and have submitted a bid to the organisers.
“The Fukushima region has put forward food from 187 producers and is second only to Hokkaido when it comes to meeting the specified criteria in terms of range of products,” said Shigeyuki Honma, assistant director general of the local government’s agriculture and forestry planning division.
“Fukushima wants to serve athletes its rice, its fruits, beef and vegetables. But the committee still has to decide.”……
the figures have only gone some way to reassuring foreign officials: numerous countries including China, South Korea, and the United States maintain restrictions on the import of some or all produce from Fukushima.
South Korea, which is currently locked in a dispute with Japan over wartime issues, has been vocal about its concerns ahead of the Olympics, even raising the possibility of bringing in its own kitchen and food.
“We have requested the Olympic organisers to provide objective data verified by an independent third body,” the South Korean Sports and Olympic Committee said in a statement earlier this year.
“Since Japan repeatedly said its food from Fukushima is safe, we have demanded they provide statistics and data to back up their claims,” an official with the committee told AFP.
The position underlines a long-running problem for Japan: while it points to its extensive, government-mandated checks as proof of safety, many abroad feel the government is not an objective arbiter……..
The International Olympic Committee said it was still weighing how to handle the matter.
“Food menus and catering companies for the Olympic Village are under discussion and have yet to be defined,” a spokesman told AFP.
The Tokyo 2020 organisers said promoting areas affected by the 2011 disaster remains a key goal…….
South Korea’s safety concerns about Fukushima water release
South Korea Nuclear Regulator Wants Information on Radioactive Fukushima Water Release, By Reuters, 20 Nov. SEOUL — Japan’s reluctance to disclose information about the release of radioactive water from its damaged Fukushima nuclear plant is hampering neighboring countries’ efforts to minimize the impact, the head of South Korea’s nuclear safety agency said on Wednesday.
Since the 2011 earthquake and tsunami caused a meltdown at some of the reactors the Fukushima plant, owner Tokyo Electric Power Co (Tepco) has been storing radioactive water in tanks at the site from the cooling pipes used to keep the fuel cores from melting. The utility will run out of space for the water in 2022.
Japan has not yet decided how to deal with the contaminated water, but its environment minister said in September that radioactive water would have to be released from the site into the Pacific Ocean.
“We have been raising Japan’s radioactive water issue to the international community to minimize the impact … but as Japan hasn’t disclosed any specific plan and process we would need more details to run simulations and study,” Uhm Jae-sik, chairman of the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission, told Reuters.
In addition to the Fukushima crisis, safety concerns about nuclear energy have increased in South Korea following a 2012 scandal over the supply of faulty reactors parts with forged documents, prompting a series of shutdowns of nuclear reactors.
South Korea, the world’s fifth-largest user of nuclear power, targets a long-term phase out of atomic power to allay public concerns.
“Regardless of the government’s energy policy change, our primary goal is ensuring the safety of nuclear power,” Uhm said.
South Korea operates 25 nuclear reactors, which generate about a third of the country’s total electricity. Of the 25 reactors, 10 are offline for maintenance, according to the website of Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power.
(Reporting By Jane Chung; Editing by Christian Schmollinger) https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2019/11/20/world/asia/20reuters-southkorea-nuclear.html
Japan’s METI says it’s safe to dump radioactive water from Fukushima nuclear disaster into ocean
The industry ministry said Monday it would be safe to release water contaminated by the Fukushima nuclear disaster into the ocean, stressing that on an annual basis the amount of radiation measured near the release point would be very small compared to levels to which humans are naturally exposed.
Discharging the water into the Pacific Ocean over the course of a year would amount to between just one-1,600th and one-40,000th of the radiation to which humans are naturally exposed, the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry, or METI, told a government subcommittee on the issue.
Water used to cool the melted-down cores and groundwater from close to the damaged plant contain some radioactive materials, and are currently being collected and stored in tanks on the plant grounds.
But space is running out fast, and the government is exploring ways to deal with the waste water — which already totals more than 1 million tons with the volume increasing by more than 100 tons every day.
According to an estimate performed by the ministry, annual radiation levels near the release point after a release would be between 0.052 and 0.62 microsievert at sea, and 1.3 microsieverts in the atmosphere, compared with the 2,100 microsieverts that humans come into contact with each year in daily life.
One member of the subcommittee called on the ministry to provide detailed data showing the impact of different conditions such as ocean currents and weather.
Another member requested more information on the amount of radiation that people will be exposed to internally, depending on how much fish and seaweed they consume.
The waste water is currently being treated using an advanced liquid processing system referred to as ALPS, though the system does not remove tritium and has been found to leave small amounts of other radioactive materials.
The tanks storing the water are expected to become full by the summer of 2022, according to Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc., the operator of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
The plant was damaged by a magnitude 9.0 earthquake and ensuing tsunami on March 11, 2011.
While government officials stress the safety of releasing the waste water, local fishermen are opposed to discharging it into the ocean due to worries that it would cause reputational damage and impact their livelihoods.
South Korea has also expressed concern over the environmental impact.
In September, Japanese and South Korean officials traded barbs over the issue at a meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.
A nuclear expert from the IAEA said in 2018 that a controlled discharge of such contaminated water “is something which is applied in many nuclear facilities, so it is not something that is new.”
The “Plutocene” danger – nuclear war, radioactive pollution, global heating
Why are these two facts related? Because they illustrate the two factors that could transport us beyond the Anthropocene—the geological epoch marked by humankind’s fingerprint on the planet—and into yet another new, even more hostile era of our own making.
My new book, titled The Plutocene: Blueprints for a post-Anthropocene Greenhouse Earth, describes the future world we are on course to inhabit, now that it has become clear that we are still busy building nuclear weapons rather than working together to defend our planet.
have coined the term Plutocene to describe a post-Anthropocene period marked by a plutonium-rich sedimentary layer in the oceans. The Anthropocene is very short, having begun (depending on your definition) either with the Industrial Revolution in about 1750, or with the onset of nuclear weapons and sharply rising greenhouse emissions in the mid-20th century. The future length of the Plutocene would depend on two factors: the half-life of radioactive plutonium-239 of 24,100 years, and how long our CO2 will stay in the atmosphere—potentially up to 20,000 years.
During the Plutocene, temperatures would be much higher than today. Perhaps they would be similar to those during the Pliocene (2.6 million to 5.3 million years ago), when average temperatures were about 2℃ above those of pre-industrial times, or the Miocene (roughly 5.3 million to 23 million years ago), when average temperatures were another 2℃ warmer than that, and sea levels were 20 to 40 meters (65-131ft) higher than today.
Under these conditions, population and farming centres in low coastal zones and river valleys would be inundated, and humans would be forced to seek higher latitudes and altitudes to survive—as well as potentially having to contend with the fallout of nuclear conflict. The most extreme scenario is that evolution takes a new turn—one that favors animals best equipped to withstand heat and radiation.
Climates past
While we have a range of tools for studying prehistoric climates, including ice cores and tree rings, these methods do not of course tell us what the future holds.
However, the basic laws of physics, the principles of climate science, and the lessons from past and current climate trends, help us work out the factors that will dictate our future climate.
Broadly speaking, the climate is shaped by three broad factors: trends in solar cycles; the concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases; and intermittent events such as volcanic eruptions or asteroid impacts.
Solar cycles are readily predicted, and indeed can be seen in the geological record, whereas intermittent events are harder to account for. The factor over which we have the most control is our own greenhouse emissions.
CO2 levels have previously climbed as high as 2,000 parts per million (ppm), most recently during the early Eocene, roughly 55-45 million years ago. The subsequent decline of CO2 levels to just a few hundred parts per million then cooled the planet, creating the conditions that allowed Earth’s current inhabitants (much later including humans) to flourish.
But what of the future? Based on these observations, as reported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), several projections of future climates indicate an extension of the current interglacial period by about 30,000 years, consistent with the longevity of atmospheric CO2.
If global warming were to reach 4℃, as suggested by Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, chief climate advisor to the German government, the resulting amplification effects on the climate would pose an existential threat both to nature and human civilization.
Barring effective sequestration of carbon gases, and given amplifying feedback effects from the melting of ice sheets, warming of oceans, and drying out of land surfaces, Earth is bound to reach an average of 4℃ above pre-industrial levels within a time frame to which numerous species, including humans, may hardly be able to adapt. The increase in evaporation from the oceans and thereby water vapor contents of the atmosphere leads to mega-cyclones, mega-floods and super-tropical terrestrial environments. Arid and semi-arid regions would become overheated, severely affecting flora and fauna habitats.
The transition to such conditions is unlikely to be smooth and gradual, but may instead feature sharp transient cool intervals called “stadials.” Increasingly, signs of a possible stadial are being seen south of Greenland.
A close analogy can be drawn between future events and the Eocene-Paleocene Thermal Maximum about 55 million years ago, when release of methane from Earth’s crust resulted in extreme rise in temperature. But as shown below, [ diagram on original] the current rate of temperature rise is far more rapid—and more akin to the planet-heating effects of an asteroid strike.
Mounting our defense
Defending ourselves from global warming and nuclear disaster requires us to do two things: stop fighting destructive wars, and start fighting to save our planet. There is a range of tactics we can use to help achieve the second goal, including large-scale seagrass cultivation, extensive biochar development, and restoring huge swathes of the world’s forests.
Space exploration is wonderful, but we still only know of one planet that supports life (bacteria possibly excepted). This is our home, and there is currently little prospect of realising science fiction’s visions of an escape from a scorched Earth to some other world.
Yet still we waver. Many media outlets operate in apparent denial of the connection between global warming and extreme weather. Meanwhile, despite diplomatic progress on nuclear weapons, the Sword of Damocles continues to hang over our heads, as 14,900 nuclear warheads sit aimed at one another, waiting for accidental or deliberate release.
If the clock does strike nuclear midnight, and if we don’t take urgent action to defend our planet, life as we know it will not be able to continue. Humans will survive in relatively cold high latitudes and altitudes. A new cycle would begin.
Andrew Glikson is an Earth and paleo-climate scientist at the Australian National University.
-
Archives
- June 2026 (55)
- 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











