nuclear-news

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

USA quietly reveals extent of massive nuclear bombing of Marshall Islands

The Fallout from Nuclear Secrecy , Consortium News,  July 23, 2013   During the Cold War’s early years, the U.S. government detonated dozens of nuclear explosions on Pacific atolls, spreading nuclear fallout around the globe and making some areas uninhabitable, a grim legacy captured in secret documents finally being shared with the Marshall Islands’ government, reports Beverly Deepe Keever.

Bikini-atom-bomb

 More than a half century after U.S. nuclear tests shattered the tranquility of Pacific Ocean atolls — rendering parts of them uninhabitable – the U.S. government has quietly released secret fallout results from 49 Pacific hydrogen-bomb blasts with an explosive force equal to 3,200 Hiroshima-size bombs. Continue reading

July 24, 2013 Posted by | history, OCEANIA, Reference, USA, weapons and war | 1 Comment

Operation Redwing saga: the radioactive pollution of the Marshall Islands

The Fallout from Nuclear Secrecy , Consortium News,  July 23, 2013 “……….As the Redwing tests continued, radiation badges were handed out, which Harris described as “small rectangular plastic discs three inches by an inch and a half.” Even with these, Harris wondered about the future impact of the radiation: “Had our genetic code been compromised? Would we get leukemia or some other form of cancer?”

His answer came decades later. Those present at Operations Redwing or Hardtack or for six months afterward who succumb to one of 19 primary cancers are eligible for $75,000 compensation made available by Congress.

At the time of Operation Redwing in 1956, the U.S. government under President Dwight Eisenhower released very little information. This secrecy was politically significant because it kept voters in the dark during the presidential election campaign in which Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson advocated stopping the H-bomb tests being conducted by the Eisenhower administration.

During the election year, U.S. officials announced only two of the 17 blasts in the Redwing series. This virtual blackout hid from U.S. voters over 77 summertime days during the presidential election campaign Redwing’s 20,820 kilotons of explosive force — or the equivalent of 1,388 Hiroshima-size bombs. That tonnage is the equivalent of 18 Hiroshima-size bombs per day over 77 days.

Seven Redwing tests received no public notice and the remaining eight blasts were disclosed by Japanese scientists in news articles datelined Tokyo. Thus the fastest and most accurate information about U.S. Redwing testing was disclosed from Tokyo by Japanese, an immense irony given that only a decade earlier, U.S. atomic bombs had contributed to Japan’s surrender by destroying two of its cities. Eisenhower handily won re-election.

The more powerful 32 detonations in Operation Hardtack were launched in 1958 as the U.S. and the Soviets raced toward declaring a moratorium on such experiments and the U.S. accelerated testing missile warheads. Washington disclosed only nine of the 32 blasts that produced a total yield of 28,026 kilotons, or the equivalent of 1,868 Hiroshima-size bombs – an average of 35 per week in 1958 or five per day. That was the lowest disclosure rate of any U.S. Pacific testing operation.

Even more ironic than the Japanese disclosures in 1956 were the Soviet ones about the 1958 Hardtack detonations. The Soviets charged that the U.S. had concealed most of the tests being conducted, which even U.S. officials deemed accurate.

In doing so, the Soviets made huge propaganda gains as they announced their initiative of stopping their nuclear testing that year. Surprisingly, New York Times columnist James Reston wrote that “the United States, which pamphleteered its way to independence and elevated advertising and other arts of persuasion into a national cult, should be unable to hold its own in the battle for the headlines of the world.”

Samples made during several Hardtack tests showed that fractions of the radioactive elements of strontium and cesium were dispersed over distances of more than 4,000 miles, according to a report titled “Operation Hardtack: Fallout Measurements by Aircraft and Rocket Sampling” dated 1961 and declassified in 1985. The U.S. gave a newly declassified version of this report to RMI officials.

That 4,000-miles range means the radioactive elements could have descended on San Francisco and other West Coast areas.  Both radioactive elements pose serious health problems.

The decades-long delay in receiving a full accounting of these fallout results helps to substantiate the contention of the RMI that its negotiators were denied vital information when they agreed in 1986 with President Ronald Reagan to form an independent nation, thus ending the American administration of the U.N.-sanctioned trust territory established in 1947.

Kept in the dark about the fallout results, the Marshallese agreed to terms so insufficient that a U.S.-financed $150 million nuclear-claims trust fund is now penniless, unable to compensate fully Marshallese for health and property damages presumed to have resulted from the tests. RMI’s appeals to Congress, the U.S. courts and the Bush administration have been turned back and the Obama administration has yet to help them.

Last September, Special Rapporteur Calin Georgescu of the United Nations reported to its Human Rights Council that the U.S. government should:

–Remedy and compensate Marshall Islanders for its nuclear weapons testing that has caused “immediate and lasting effects” on their human rights,

–Open up still-secret information and records regarding the environmental and human health effects of past and current U.S. military use of the islands,

–Grant Marshallese full access to their  medical and other records, and

–Consider issuing a presidential acknowledgment and apology to victims adversely affected by the 66 weapons tests it conducted when it administered the Marshall Islands as a U.N. strategic trust territory.

Over the decades, the Marshallese have not been alone in wanting more information about the nuclear tests. In 1954, the Association of State Health Officials voted to ask the federal government to give health officials with security clearances access to classified atomic energy information so as to prevent health hazards.

From 1945 to 1992, the United States carried out 1,054 nuclear tests worldwide. Beverly Deepe Keever is the author of News Zero: The New York Times and The Bomb and the newly released Death Zones and Darling Spies: Seven Years of Vietnam War Reportinghttp://consortiumnews.com/2013/07/23/the-fallout-from-nuclear-secrecy/

July 24, 2013 Posted by | history, OCEANIA, politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Hinkley nuclear site’s history of weapons deals with USA

Puflag-UKHinkley’s hidden history Morning Star UK 21 July 2013 by David Lowry With the coalition government’s decision to back a third nuclear reactor at Hinkley Point on Somerset’s coast and the ongoing debate over Trident replacement, it’s interesting to take a look back at the origins of Britain’s nuclear programme.

Flag-USAWhen the British nuclear power and weapons programmes were born, a different foreign power, the United States, was intimately involved in the planning.

The first public hint came with an MoD announcement in June 1958 on “the production of plutonium suitable for weapons in the new [nuclear] power stations programme as an insurance against future defence needs” at Britain’s first-generation Magnox reactor (named after the fuel type, magnesium oxide).

A week later in Parliament, Labour’s Roy Mason asked why the government had “decided to modify atomic power stations, primarily planned for peaceful purposes, to produce high-grade plutonium for war weapons.”

He was informed by paymaster general Reginald Maudling: “At the request of the government, the Central Electricity Generating Board has agreed to a small modification in the design of Hinkley Point and of the next two stations in its programme so as to enable plutonium suitable for military purposes to be extracted should the need arise.

“The modifications will not in any way impair the efficiency of the stations. As the initial capital cost and any additional operating costs that may be incurred will be borne by the government, the price of electricity will not be affected……….

the following month, the US and British governments signed a mutual defense – spelt with an “s” even in the official British version, so you can guess where it was authored – co-operation agreement on atomic energy matters.

The agreement was intended to circumvent the draconian restrictions of the 1954 Atomic Energy Act, which sought to retain all nuclear secrets within the US, even though many foreign nationals had worked collaboratively with US counterparts for six or more years on nuclear R&D.

The deal was reached after several months of congressional hearings in Washington DC, but no oversight whatsoever in the British Parliament.

As this formed the basis, within a mere five years, for Britain obtaining the Polaris nuclear WMD system from the US, and some 20-odd years later for Britain to buy US Trident nuclear WMD, the failure of Parliament to at least appraise the security merits of this key bilateral atomic arrangement was unconscionable…….

And so it may be seen that the Britain’s first civil nuclear programme was used as a source of nuclear explosive plutonium for the US military, with Hinkley Point A the prime provider.

The reason there was a swap between Britain and the US of weapons-suitable highly enriched uranium and plutonium was the US had huge surpluses of uranium, but wanted more plutonium than its nuclear production complex at Hanford could deliver, while the British first-generation “commercial” Magnoxes, which were scaled-up plutonium production factories, were perfect for producing military-suitable plutonium as they had online refuelling systems to optimise plutonium over electricity production.

They produced perfect plutonium in surplus, but Britain lacked sufficient highly enriched uranium, so an exchange deal was mutually beneficial.

Two decades later in 1984 Wales national daily the Western Mail reported that the largest Magnox reactor in Britain, at Wylfa on Anglesey, had also been used to provide plutonium for the military.

Plutonium from both reactors went into the British military stockpile of nuclear explosives, and could well still be part of the British Trident warhead stockpile today.

Subsequent research by the Scientists Against Nuclear Arms, published in the prestigious science weekly journal Nature and presented to the Sizewell B and Hinkley C public inquiries in the ’80s, has demonstrated that around 6,700kg of plutonium was shipped to the US under the military exchange agreement, which stipulates explicitly that the material must be used for military purposes by the recipient country.

To put this quantity into context, a nuclear warhead contains around 5kg of plutonium.

Is it any wonder the Atoms for Peace movement began to demand “safeguards” to deter diversion of civilian nuclear plants to military misuse?

After all, the US and Britain knew that such deadly diversion was possible – they had demonstrated it themselves.

The trouble is that safeguards are misleading. They are neither safe, nor do they guard. And what would Iran or North Korea make of this deliberate intermixing of civil and military nuclear programmes by one of the nuclear weapons superpowers – one which leads the criticisms of them for allegedly doing this very thing today.  http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/news/content/view/full/135635

July 24, 2013 Posted by | - plutonium, history, Reference, secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK, USA | Leave a comment

Nuclear weapons insanity: America’s AIR-2 Genie rocket

it was basically a suicide device. 

Flag-USAThe craziest part about this? In the only live test during Operation Plumbob, the US Air Force put five guys directly under the blast to prove how “safe” it was to use over populated areas. P

And the US government made 3,000 Genies.

The Five Most Insane Nuclear Delivery Systems Jaolpnik MICHAEL BALLABAN, 14 July 13 

“…….Earlier this week we looked at the giantSoviet nuclear gun. That thing is definitely batty, what with its giant cannon at one end and what was essentially a tank at the other end turning it into a self-propelled howitzer. The Americans had a crazy nuke gun, too, and for awhile it looked like maybe we’d just stand and shoot atomic cannons at each other.

The thing is though, with both of those artillery pieces the actual physics package was intended to reach at least 15 miles away before the thing actually exploded. And even then, that was waytoo close.

What would happen, then, if you wanted it to explode even closer?

The AIR-2 Genie was a doomsday rocket of absolute desperation.

genie_missile_test

With the Cold War in its deepest freeze but without the benefit of long-range ICBMs, American military planners thought the only way New York, Los Angeles, or Chicago would be bombed would be in massive waves of Soviet bombers. Unfortunately, if 100 of them come at you at once, you may not shoot them all down. And really, only one getting through your defenses is necessary for absolute devastation.

In 1958, when the AIR-2 was introduced, the problem was compounded by the fact that missile guidance systems still weren’t quite up to snuff. Directly hitting all of the bombers coming at you was going to be a near-impossible task. The solution was to launch one, single, solitary missile. That missile, completely unguided, with a nuclear bomb on board, would cause a big enough explosion to hopefully wipe out all the attackers. With a big enough boom, you wouldn’t need a guidance system.

Oh, and the range was only six miles. In case you’re forgetting, most nukes make a bigger boom than that, so it was basically a suicide device.

The craziest part about this? In the only live test during Operation Plumbob, the US Air Force put five guys directly under the blast to prove how “safe” it was to use over populated areas. P

And the US government made 3,000 Genies……..  http://jalopnik.com/the-five-most-insane-nuclear-delivery-systems-768180979

July 15, 2013 Posted by | history, Reference, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Insane nuclear weapons: nuclear torpedo, and nuking the moon!

exclamation-Project A119, conceived before the Apollo landings, was ostensibly created for “science.” There’s no real science purpose to nuking the moon, though, so it’s kind of obvious what it was really about. Also, they intended to blow up the nuke on the Moon’s horizon, for maximum visibility from Earth.

 For science.

The Five Most Insane Nuclear Delivery Systems Jaolpnik MICHAEL BALLABAN, 14 July 13  “……The Nuclear Torpedo   Quick! Doomsday is upon us! The only way to save our cities is to get rid of all the enemy subs! Both the East and the West made nuclear torpedoes that survived in service into at least the 1970s. That’s not such a bad idea if you really want to sink something, but nukes aren’t something you just want to be using all willy-nilly. As torpedoes had the nasty habit of sometimes escaping from their tubes, this necessitated a two-step process for their use.

The Nuclear Torpedo Declassified U.S. Nuclear Test Film #46

First, the torpedo would be fired, and then a second button would be pushed to detonate it. This meant you would need a wire to connect the original sub and the newly-fired torpedo.

Nothing wrong with that, right? Just get a really long wire. And then you realize how a “really long wire” is still too short for you to get away.

The American Mark 45 torpedo had a really long wire, but even at its longest it was only eight miles in length. Even if you sunk somebody, with an 11 kiloton warhead on board, you were bound to go down to the bottom with them. http://jalopnik.com/the-five-most-insane-nuclear-delivery-systems-768180979

Project A119  Continue reading

July 15, 2013 Posted by | history, Reference, technology, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Crazy military nuclear plans – the chicken nuke, the backpack nuke

The Five Most Insane Nuclear Delivery Systems Jaolpnik MICHAEL BALLABAN, 14 July 13  “……The Chicken Nuke  When Cold War planners were planning out the seemingly inevitable Hot War, they had dreams dancing in their heads of massive waves of Russian soldiers and tanks sweeping across Germany. The British, being plucky, were confident they would lose.

The Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment developed a nuclear land mine that could be detonated either by wire or by an eight-day timer that would completely obliterate the advancing enemy columns. Not such a bad idea if you’re a fan of indiscriminate wastelands.

The only problem was that land mines tend to be buried in the ground, where it can get cold. Cold temperatures would freeze the electronics in the nuke mines, preventing them from doing their intended deadly deed. Clearly, a solution was needed to heat those bad boys up.

Blankets? No, too safe. One of those gel packs you put in your mittens when you ski? How pedestrian. No, this was 1954, and everything needed to go whoosh and phflew, so something high-tech was needed. Oh yes, that’s right.

Chickens.

The idea was to seal the chickens inside the nuclear casing as the Western armies retreated from the German plain. With a supply of food and water inside, the chickens would last for roughly a week, and their body heat would be enough to make sure everything went kaboom as normal.P

Once again, chickens.

Somehow the British actually ordered ten of these things in 1957, but supposedly none were made before the project was cancelled a year later, Let’s just hope there are no chickens buried under Germany.

The Backpack Nuke 

Local news likes to whip everyone into a tizzy with tales of terrorists and backpack nukes, but the reason we know it’s a real possibility is because backpack nukes are a real thing. And we would know, because we made them.

The H-912 container for the Mark 54 Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM) could be feasibly carried on your back, although it does look a bit bulky. The idea would be for two guys (Navy SEALs or otherwise) to parachute into Soviet territory, set it, and forget it. The second guy would be there essentially just to back the first guy up, though in a pinch it looks like it could be used on a one-man mission.

Though it doesn’t look that big, it could actually destroy the equivalent of a few city blocks.

How fast can you run?…  http://jalopnik.com/the-five-most-insane-nuclear-delivery-systems-768180979

July 15, 2013 Posted by | history, Reference, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Savannah River nuclear plant connected to unsuccessful diplomacy

Officials in Washington thought they had clinched a deal with Moscow to ensure that the Russian plutonium stockpile would shrink, only to discover after years of delay that Russia had other plans

How a Massive Nuclear Nonproliferation Effort Led to More Proliferation, The Atlantic,  More than a decade of negotiations with Russia produced a clear winner, and it was not the United States. DOUGLAS BIRCH AND R. JEFFREY SMITHJUN 24 2013 SAVANNAH RIVER SITE, South Carolina “……The huge new nuclear fuel plant at Savannah River reached this shaky stage via a convoluted path. The idea behind it grew out of a crisis. Arms control agreements in the 1980s had left both the U.S. and the Soviet Union with huge stockpiles of fissile materials from dismantled warheads. The collapse of the Soviet economy left workers at vast weapons production complexes without heat, power or paychecks, a circumstance that threatened security and raised the risk of nuclear smuggling.

At least four times between 1994 and 2000, small amounts of smuggled plutonium were recovered by law-enforcement officials in Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency –all at the height of the Russian economic meltdown.

The United States and its allies worried these cases were the tip of an iceberg. Princeton physicist Frank von Hippel, a key player in the early push for a disposal agreement, recalls his surprise on visiting the huge Mayak nuclear complex in western Siberia in 1994. There, he found 30 metric tons of plutonium oxide from civilian reactors capable of being fashioned into bombs, stored in 12,000 tea-kettle-sized containers. A fence surrounded the reservation, but inside the gates all that stood between a thief and the plutonium was a padlock on the warehouse door and a nervous conscript guard.

A distinguished panel concluded in a special 2001 report for the Energy Secretary that the threat of diverted weapons materials from the former Soviet Union “is a clear and present danger, to the international community as well as to American lives and liberties.”
Nor has the risk of nuclear terror diminished since then, U.S. officials say. “Two decades after the end of the Cold War, we face a cruel irony of history –the risk of a nuclear confrontation between nations has gone down, but the risk of nuclear attack has gone up,” President Obama warned on the eve of an April 2010 global summit on nuclear security in Washington. Former vice president Dick Cheney told the American Enterprise Institute the following year that a terrorist with nuclear materials and know-how was “the most dangerous threat” the U.S. faced.

But even though the United States and Russia worked together to stem nuclear security problems in the 1990s, the two countries disagreed from the start about controlling plutonium. The U.S. view, initially, was that the best way to prevent the explosive from being used in new bombs was to lock it away in ceramic and glass.

Russia, though, was eager to tap the vast riches locked in its Cold War detritus. The country pressed to use its plutonium as fuel for a type of nuclear reactor that can actually produce more plutonium than it burns, in a form that is more easily used in nuclear explosives – a reactor known as a “breeder” that many Western experts say can promote a dangerous international trade in the nuclear explosive.

In a long struggle to resolve this disagreement, the Russians got the better of Washington, according to some experts who followed it closely. As a result, the South Carolina plant’s troubles partly reflect the fact that soaring U.S. national security ambitions were brought to earth by unsuccessful diplomacy. Officials in Washington thought they had clinched a deal with Moscow to ensure that the Russian plutonium stockpile would shrink, only to discover after years of delay that Russia had other plans…….” http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/06/how-a-massive-nuclear-nonproliferation-effort-led-to-more-proliferation/277140/

June 25, 2013 Posted by | history, USA | Leave a comment

How USA built a forest in order to atomic bomb it

How Do We Know Nuclear Bombs Blow Down Forests? Because we built a forest in Nevada and blew it down. Slate, By   May 31, 2013, “……. Once the United States had built the first atomic bomb in 1945, it then improved it by building the first hydrogen bomb in 1952. It then began working on building more portable bombs, and since the Soviet Union had done the same, the United States also wondered about the bombs’ effects. So in the early 1950s, the government set up models of all the things that bombs could blow up—houses, bridges, cars, pigs, sheep—and exploded bombs near them. The government did this for at least a decade and didn’t stop until it and the rest of the world banned above-ground testing. The tests, many of them at the Nevada Test Site, were called “shots,” and they had names.

The shot called Encore was on May 8, 1953, and among the many effects it tested was what a nuclear bomb would do to a forest. The Nevada Test Site wasn’t replete with forests, so the U.S. Forest Service brought 145 ponderosa pines from a nearby canyon and cemented them into holes lined up in tidy rows in an area called Frenchman Flat, 6,500 feet from ground zero. Then the Department of Defense air-dropped a 27-kiloton bomb that exploded 2,423 feet above the model forest. The heat set fire to the forest, then the blast wave blew down the trees and put out some fires and started others.Here’s the video.

I’m not sure what I make of this. Certainly in the 1950s nobody was controlling nuclear weapons; they were alive, reproducing, and roaming the world. So knowing precisely what damage they cause might help mitigate that damage. And certainly I’m not going to think about the more distant and longer-term effects of those shots, more than 200 of them above ground, except to say that as a 10-year old girl in Illinois, even I wasn’t safe.

I do know I’m impressed by the amount of directed effort, the thoroughness of thought that went into cutting down 145 ponderosa pines, trucking them out of the canyon, digging holes, filling them with concrete, sticking the trees into them, dropping the bomb, and beginning the measurements. And though the United Nations belatedly began negotiating a ban on above-ground tests in 1955, the Limited Test Ban Treaty didn’t get signed until 1963. That was the limited treaty; the comprehensive one banning all tests everywhere took another 40-plus years, and even now the United States hasn’t ratified it.* I’m most impressed by the contrast between the pointed determination of the test shots and the infinite dithering about the (yes, infinitely more complicated) test bans. I might suspect that human nature and its governments have a dark side.

Add this little public service booklet, illustrated with the drawing above and written by the Atomic Energy Commission to the people of Nevada:

“You are in a very real sense active participants in the Nation’s atomic test program. … Some of you have been inconvenienced by our test operations. At times some of you have been exposed to potential risk from flash, blast, or fall-out. You have accepted the inconvenience or the risk without fuss, without alarm, and without panic. Your cooperation has helped achieve an unusual record of safety.”

June 4, 2013 Posted by | history, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Nevada population was exposed to nuclear bomb tests’ radioactive fallout

atomic test warningAdd this little public service booklet, illustrated with the drawing at left and written by the Atomic Energy Commission to the people of Nevada:

“You are in a very real sense active participants in the Nation’s atomic test program. … Some of you have been inconvenienced by our test operations. At times some of you have been exposed to potential risk from flash, blast, or fall-out. You have accepted the inconvenience or the risk without fuss, without alarm, and without panic. Your cooperation has helped achieve an unusual record of safety.”

As though they were asked.

How Do We Know Nuclear Bombs Blow Down Forests? Because we built a forest in Nevada and blew it down. Slate, By   May 31, 2013, “……. Once the United States had built the first atomic bomb in 1945, it then improved it by building the first hydrogen bomb in 1952. It then began working on building more portable bombs, and since the Soviet Union had done the same, the United States also wondered about the bombs’ effects. So in the early 1950s, the government set up models of all the things that bombs could blow up—houses, bridges, cars, pigs, sheep—and exploded bombs near them. The government did this for at least a decade and didn’t stop until it and the rest of the world banned above-ground testing. The tests, many of them at the Nevada Test Site, were called “shots,” and they had names.

The shot called Encore was on May 8, 1953, and among the many effects it tested was what a nuclear bomb would do to a forest. The Nevada Test Site wasn’t replete with forests, so the U.S. Forest Service brought 145 ponderosa pines from a nearby canyon and cemented them into holes lined up in tidy rows in an area called Frenchman Flat, 6,500 feet from ground zero. Then the Department of Defense air-dropped a 27-kiloton bomb that exploded 2,423 feet above the model forest. The heat set fire to the forest, then the blast wave blew down the trees and put out some fires and started others. Here’s the video. Continue reading

June 1, 2013 Posted by | civil liberties, history, Reference, USA, weapons and war | 2 Comments

In 1983, nuclear war was only just avoided

atomic-bomb-l

While historians have previously noted the high risk of an accidental nuclear war during this period, the new documents make even clearer how the world’s rival superpowers found themselves blindly edging toward the brink of nuclear war through suspicion, belligerent posturing and blind miscalculation.

 

The USSR and US Came Closer to Nuclear War Than We Thought A series of war games held in 1983 triggered “the moment of maximum danger of the late Cold War.” The Atlantic, DOUGLAS BIRCHMAY 28 2013 An ailing, 69-year-old Yuri Andropov was running the Soviet Union from his Moscow hospital bed in 1983 as the United States and its NATO allies conducted a massive series of war games that seemed to confirm some of his darkest fears.

Two years earlier Andropov had ordered KGB officers around the globe to gather evidence for what he was nearly certain was coming: A surprise nuclear strike by the U.S. that would decapitate the Soviet leadership. …

The Western maneuvers that autumn,called Autumn Forge, , were depicted by the Pentagon as simply a large military exercise. But its scope was hardly routine, as Americans learned in detail this week, for the first time, from declassified documents published by the National Security Archive, a Washington-based nonprofit research organization. Continue reading

May 29, 2013 Posted by | history, Reference, Russia, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

USA did nuclear tests to find out effects on animals

Veteran recalls 1940s radiation contamination study http://www.texarkanagazette.com/news/2013/05/27/veteran-recalls-1940s-radiation-contamin-470111.php By: Greg Bischof – Texarkana Gazette  John Cary served in the Navy during World War II and participated in Operation Crossroads at Bikini Atoll. The operation consisted of two nuclear weapon tests to determine radiation’s effects on animals.  

  To 19-year-old John Cary, the scene aboard his Navy ship, the USS Burleson, must have resembled Noah’s ark as he observed a multitude of animals being placed there in 1946.

However, unlike the biblical Noah’s ark, the animals’ placement wasn’t to p…subscribers only 

May 29, 2013 Posted by | history, Religion and ethics, USA | Leave a comment

1957 Mayak nuclear disaster – the forgotten event near Ozyorsk

Ozyorsk was and remains a closed town because of its proximity to the Mayak plant, 

To consider how insanely radioactive Lake Karachay is, think about this: Chernobyl disaster: 5-12 exabecquerels blown over thousands of square miles Lake Karachay: 4 exabecquerels in this tiny lake, less than a quarter of a mile in diameter. Even approaching the lake will get you a lethal dose within an hour. And they ARE starting to cover it up with concrete and gravel as the water evaporates. As the water recedes, they lay down dirt, gravel and concrete over the area so it can’t fill back in and the sediment doesn’t get disturbed by the wind.

Mayak-Lake-Karachev,-Ozyors

The 10 Worst Civilian Nuclear Accidents in History http://www.neatorama.com/2013/05/21/The-10-Worst-Civilian-Nuclear-Accidents-in-History/  , May 21, 2013   Quick -how many nuclear accidents can you name? Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima …any more? There have been quite a few nuclear accidents of varying danger that you probably never heard of, including some fatal incidents. For example, in 1957, nuclear waste exploded at a reactor near the Soviet town of Ozyorsk.

One of the storage tanks contained around 70 to 80 tons of radioactive liquid waste, and its cooling mechanism stopped working and wasn’t fixed. The tank’s contents, made up mostly of ammonium nitrate and acetates, began to dry out as the liquid heated up and evaporated. Moreover, the temperature increase caused an explosion whose force was equivalent to 70 to 100 tons of TNT, and this sent huge amounts of radioactivity – roughly 20 MCi (800 PBq) – into the environment. The fallout cloud from the explosion contaminated an area of up to 7,722 square miles (20,000 square kilometers).

Over a period of nearly two years, about 10,000 people were evacuated from the surrounding area. In terms of fatalities, the exact cost of the incident is not known, but immediately around the site of the explosion there were 66 diagnosed cases of chronic radiation syndrome.

Read more about the Ozyorsk incident and nine others in a list at Tech Graffiti. Link -via the Presurfer

May 23, 2013 Posted by | environment, history, Reference, wastes | Leave a comment

1983 – how close it came to nuclear war

New Documents Reveal How a 1980s Nuclear War Scare Became a Full-Blown Crisis WIRED.COM, BY ROBERT BECKHUSE 05.16.13 

During 10 days in November 1983, the United States and the Soviet Union nearly started a nuclear war. Newly declassified documents from the CIA, NSA, KGB, and senior officials in both countries reveal just how close we came to mutually assured destruction — over a military exercise.

That exercise, Able Archer 83, simulated the transition by NATO from a conventional war to a nuclear war, culminating in the simulated release of warheads against the Soviet Union. NATO changed its readiness condition during Able Archer to DEFCON 1, the highest level. The Soviets interpreted the simulation as a ruse to conceal a first strike and readied their nukes. At this period in history, and especially during the exercise, a single false alarm or miscalculation could have brought Armageddon……. http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2013/05/able-archer-scare/

May 18, 2013 Posted by | history, incidents | Leave a comment

The horror of the Hiroshima atomic bombing – nuclear effects, theme for June 19

Who Will Drop the Next Nuclear Bomb? We ignore the ever-growing global arsenal of nuclear weapons at our peril. The Nation,  Nick Turse  May 13, 2013 “……..Nuclear Horror: Then and Now The first nuclear attack on a civilian population center, the U.S. strike on Hiroshima, left that city “uniformly and extensively devastated,” according to astudy carried out in the wake of the attacks by the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey.  “Practically the entire densely or moderately built-up portion of the city was leveled by blast and swept by fire… The surprise, the collapse of many buildings, and the conflagration contributed to an unprecedented casualty rate.”  At the time, local health authorities reported that 60% of immediate deaths were due to flash or flame burns and medical investigators estimated that 15%-20% of the deaths were caused by radiation.

Witnesses “stated that people who were in the open directly under the explosion of the bomb were so severely burned that the skin was charred dark brown or black and that they died within a few minutes or hours,” according to the 1946 report.  “Among the survivors, the burned areas of the skin showed evidence of burns almost immediately after the explosion.  At first there was marked redness, and other evidence of thermal burns appeared within the next few minutes or hours.”

Many victims kept their arms outstretched because it was too painful to allow them to hang at their sides and rub against their bodies.  One survivor recalled seeing victims “with both arms so severely burned that all the skin was hanging from their arms down to their nails, and others having faces swollen like bread, losing their eyesight. It was like ghosts walking in procession…  Some jumped into a river because of their serious burns. The river was filled with the wounded and blood.”…… http://www.thenation.com/article/174295/who-will-drop-next-nuclear-bomb#

 

May 14, 2013 Posted by | health, history, Reference | 5 Comments

Soldier reveals experience as “guinea pig” for US nuclear radiation tests

text ionisingU.S. Army vet reveals 1950s nuclear secret, Rapid City Journal 12 May 13, “…… As impossible as it seems, Shuck said Operation Tumblesnapper involved exploding atomic bombs over the desert in an effort to study and better understand the effects of nuclear radiation.

“Our clothes and shoes were found to be contaminated with radiation, and we were ‘decontaminated’ with an air blower after Shot Charlie,” said Shuck, who drives the Disabled American Veterans bus throughout the Black Hills area.

“We were issued no special or protective clothing. We did wear film badges, which were to measure our exposure to skin radiation. Some personnel were required to shower until skin contamination was lowered to zero, and then put on clean clothing. I was never decontaminated beyond an air blower blowing the sand off my clothing.”

Some of the live animals used in the tests didn’t fare as well, said Shuck. Like the sheep and rabbits that were burned to a crisp on one side, and virtually untouched on the other…….

A stripped B-52 nearby broke right in the middle.

Shuck says he took part in four blasts altogether: Shot Charlie, the 31-kiloton bomb dropped from a C-50 aircraft flying over Yucca Flat; and Shots Easy, Fox, and George, three tower drops. During Shot Charlie, Shuck and his group were stationed about three miles away from “Ground Zero,” and watched the dust storm and fire ball approach and pass over the trenches.

After the blast passed, Shuck’s group marched in formation toward “Ground Zero” within half an hour after the detonation.“On the tower shot, I noticed the sand looked like burnt glass, as if the sand had been melted,” says Shuck.

After the tests, they had to bury the equipment, and not much more was said, Shuck said. “They just wanted to test the bombs and find out more about the effects of radiation. We were guinea pigs.”

Since then, as the dangers of radiation have become more publicized, Shuck pointed to a book called “American Ground Zero: The Secret Nuclear war” which details alleged health, crop, livestock, and private property damage as a result of these and other atomic tests. He and his Army group weren’t the only ones affected, he says.

Shuck, who is currently retired, said that out of that group, only half are left alive.“Many of them have died of cancer or leukemia,” he said, “which are probably effects of the blasts.”….. apidcityjournal.com/news/local/communities/belle_fourche/u-s-army-vet-reveals-s-nuclear-secret/article_1e32b6ef-93b5-5769-9ff4-b48d8db27c7e.html

May 13, 2013 Posted by | civil liberties, history, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment