USA’s Nuclear Regulatory Commission ignores Recommendation on Plans to Address a Core-Melt Accident
NRC Rejects Recommendation to Require Nuclear Plant Owners to Establish Plans to Address a Core-Melt Accident, UCS, Washington (August 28, 2015)—
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has rejected the recommendation of the high-level task force it convened after the March 2011 Fukushima disaster to require nuclear plant owners to develop and maintain plans for coping with a core-melt accident. This decision will allow nuclear plants to continue to maintain those plans voluntarily and deny the agency the authority to review those plans or issue citations if they are deficient.
“Once again, the NRC is ignoring a key lesson of the Fukushima accident: Emergency plans are not worth the paper they are printed on unless they are rigorously developed, maintained and periodically exercised,” said Edwin Lyman, a senior scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). “When it comes to these critical safety measures, the NRC is allowing the industry to regulate itself.”
In a decision posted on the NRC’s ADAMS website on August 27, NRC commissioners instructed agency staff to remove a provision of a proposed draft rule aimed at protecting plants from Fukushima-type accidents that would require nuclear plants to establish Severe Accident Management Guidelines, or SAMGs. The staff’s proposal was in response to Recommendation 8 of the NRC’s post-Fukushima staff recommendations, which questioned the effectiveness of NRC’s current practice of allowing plant owners to develop and maintain the SAMGs on a voluntary basis. ……
Yesterday’s decision also removes a provision from the proposed draft rule that would require new reactors to have additional design features to protect against Fukushima-type accidents. By eliminating this requirement, Lyman said, the NRC is relinquishing the opportunity to ensure that new reactors built in the United States will have stronger protection measures than the current reactor fleet. http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release/NRC-Rejects-Requiring-Core-Melt-Plans-0522#.VeOCWSWqpHw
Leaked review tells of ‘Significant Design Vulnerabilities’ at Hanford radioactive trash site
‘Significant Design Vulnerabilities’ Plague Massive Nuclear Waste Site, Leaked Internal Review Reveals, Common Dreams,
‘The fact that the Department of Energy has not released this report, prepared last year, is alarming and indicative of a safety-last culture.’
A leaked internal review of the nation’s largest nuclear clean-up site found hundreds of “significant design vulnerabilities” and begs questions about the Energy Department’s transparency, a watchdog group says.
The Hanford Nuclear Reservation near Richland, Washington houses radioactive waste from the production of plutonium for nuclear weapons, and the decades-long clean-up effort has been costly and plagued by leaking underground nuclear waste storage tanks.
Seattle-based Hanford Challenge, which advocates for safe clean-up of the site, says it received the Department of Energy document from a whistleblower who has worked at the site for many years as an engineer.
“The fact that the Department of Energy has not released this report, prepared last year, is alarming and indicative of a safety-last culture,” said Tom Carpenter, Executive Director of the group.
The document is a 2014 draft review called “Low-Activity Waste Facility Design and Operability Review and Recommendations.” That LAW facility, Hanford Challenge explains in a statement, “is designed to treat waste from Hanford’s high-level nuclear waste tanks that will be pre-treated to remove the highly-radioactive materials before being mixed with glass formers in a facility designed to vitrify the low level waste.”
From the executive summary of the leaked report: ……
The leaked review comes the same month as whistleblower Walter Tamosaitis, who raised safety concerns regarding operations at the site, reached a $4.1 settlement with Hanford subcontractor AECOM.
And last year, documents obtained by the Associated Press showed there were “significant construction flaws” in some of the double-shell storage tanks at the facility. U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) urged the Energy Department to provide an action plan of how it would deal with the risks the flaws pose, writing in a letter (pdf) to Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz: “It is time for the Department to stop hiding the ball and pretending that the situation at Hanford is being effectively managed.”
The Washington site has proven itself an “intractable problem” that “costs taxpayers a billion dollars a year,” author and history professor Kate Brown wrote earlier this year. “Corporate contractors hired to clean up Hanford have made hundreds of millions of dollars in fees and surcharges, and, since little has been accomplished, the tab promises to mount for decades.”http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/08/26/significant-design-vulnerabilities-plague-massive-nuclear-waste-site-leaked-internal
Sendai’s cooling tubes already leaking! But the pro #nuclear hubris goes on!
Japan Sendai Nuclear Restart — The Hubris Alone Is Killing Me, Let Alone the Volcano and Salt Water Leaks, Nuke Pro 21 Aug 15
I would drop a comment at the link, but I have been banned from Japan Times, so many TIMES that I can’t count. They have no interest in the truth.
————————————————————————————————————–
Kyushu Electric checked the water quality and confirmed an increase in salt content.
Each condenser has some 26,000 tubes inside that are used to pipe seawater around for cooling. Kyushu Electric suspects that holes have opened on such tubes, causing seawater to enter into the condenser. [diagram below by the author of this article]
And this is very dangerous way to think. Perhaps they have 2 sets of heat exchangers, so they can run at 50% whilst one set is completely shut down and worked on. Regardless, this is a stop gap measure, just like at San Onofre if some tubes are already going, there are many more right behind it. So these stories will slip out at the weeks go on.
Heat exchangers that can handle salt water are going to be stainless steel at least and ideally titanium. Industry has gotten a lot better at working with titanium in the last few decades. So those 40 year old heat exchangers at Sendai are probably stainless steel, not at good as titanium.
But in Typical japan Times Fashion, they try to downplay the incident by stating
In Japan, similar problems have occurred about 50 times in the past, but the latest case was the first at the Sendai power plant. In the past, Kyushu Electric experienced two cases at the No. 1 reactor at its Genkai plant in Saga Prefecture in 1997 and 1999.
Classic “don’t worry” it happens all the time. So the pimps of nuke will do anything to keep this plant running. Including putting your life and livelihood at risk………. http://nukeprofessional.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/japan-sendai-nuclear-restart-hubris.html?showComment=1440185210724#c7323011781148838576
China’s race to clear dangerous chemicals from Tianjin explosion site
China warehouse explosion: Tianjin workers race to clear site of deadly chemicals before it rains Fears potential showers could create clouds of toxic gas. Chinese officials face a race against time to clear toxic chemicals from the site of the Tianjin warehouse explosion, amid fears the blast may have released hundreds of tons of toxic gas into the air.
Soldiers have joined rescue workers in gas masks and hazard suits in the port city where the death toll from Wednesday’s massive explosion has risen to 112. Another 95, the majority of whom were firefighters, remained missing.
Officials confirmed the warehouse where the blast occurred was used to house more than 100 tons of sodium cyanide, a potentially deadly substance.
The presence of the chemicals was confirmed by Shi Luze, the chief of staff of the People’s Liberation Army’s Beijing Military Region.
He said workers were trying to clear the area before possible rain showers, which could create toxic gas……..http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-warehouse-explosion-tianjin-workers-race-to-clear-site-of-deadly-chemicals-before-rains-10457786.html
France worried that China’s hasty nuclear power programme is unsafe
“the state of conservation” of large components like pumps and steam generators at Taishan “was not at an adequate level” and was “far” from the standards of the two other EPR plants, one in Finland and the other in Flamanville, France
in a rare public comment about safety concerns, China’s own State Council Research Office three years ago warned that the development of the country’s power plants may be accelerating too quickly.
Critics of China’s nuclear safety regime, including Albert Lai, chairman of The Professional Commons, a Hong Kong think tank, says that lack of information risks eroding confidence in safety controls in what’s set to be a 14-fold increase of atomic capacity by 2030.
“The workings of China’s atomic safety authority are a ‘‘total black box,’’ said Lai. ‘‘China has no transparency whatsoever.’’
China Regulators ‘Overwhelmed’ as Reactors Built at Pace, Bloomberg Tara Patel, Benjamin Haas , June 20, 2014 (Bloomberg) — China is moving quickly to become the first country to operate the world’s most powerful atomic reactor even as France’s nuclear regulator says communication and cooperation on safety measures with its Chinese counterparts are lacking.
In the coastal city of Taishan, 100 miles (160 kilometers) from the financial hub of Hong Kong, Chinese builders are entering the final construction stages for two state-of-the-art European Pressurized Reactors. Each will produce about twice as much electricity as the average reactor worldwide.
France has a lot riding on a smooth roll out of China’s EPRs. The country is home to Areva SA, which developed the next-generation reactor, and utility Electricite de France SA, which oversees the project. The two companies, controlled by the French state, need a safe, trouble-free debut in China to ensure a future for their biggest new product in a generation. And French authorities have not hidden their concerns. Continue reading
South Africa’s incorrect environmental assessments for proposed nuclear power stations
Nuclear deal environmental assessments don’t match proposed plants: DA http://www.timeslive.co.za/politics/2015/08/16/Nuclear-deal-environmental-assessments-dont-match-proposed-plants-DA RDM News Wire | 16 August, 2015
The Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) conducted to assess and predict the environmental consequences of chosen nuclear build sites – and which are necessary by law – are outdated and obsolete‚ and cannot be used in support of the proposed trillion rand nuclear build programme, the Democratic Alliance says.
The DA said on Sunday that this is yet another reason why Minister of Energy Tina Joematt-Pettersson must “move to scrap this secretive and unaffordable nuclear deal once and for all”.
In a statement‚ DA spokesman on energy Gordon MacKay said this information had come to light in a reply to a DA parliamentary question in which the Minister of Energy revealed that the EIAs – which are needed before construction can begin – were carried out for only three of the proposed sites by Eskom between 2007 and 2008.
“The DA has reviewed the existing EIAs and we have noted deficiencies in at least two respects.
“Firstly‚ the EIA’s have only assessed the suitability and environmental impact of High Pressurized Water Reactors‚ a technology currently being used at South Africa’s sole nuclear site at Koeberg.
“The EIA’s have not considered technology being offered by other bid vendors such as Rossatom’s AES 2006 reactor. This reactor‚ the VVER‚ is a water to water pressurised rector and differs materially from the design evaluated by the EIA. Adoption of technology from vendor nations with designs deviating from Koeberg’s would therefore be ill advised and invalid.
“Secondly‚ the EIA was conducted when the power utility was planning on expanding its nuclear generating fleet through the nuclear-1 project – a much smaller‚ single site project which does not compare to the current proposed build programme‚” Mr MacKay asserted.
“Indeed‚ the Environmental Consultants who did carry out the EIA indicated that the evaluation was only for a single nuclear power station of a maximum of 4‚000 MW‚” he added.
He quoted the consultants as making clear in their report that “In spite of the above-mentioned broad recommendations regarding the number of power stations that could potentially be constructed at each site‚ it must be emphasized that the current application is for a single nuclear power station of a maximum of 4‚000 MW. The cumulative impacts of any additional nuclear power stations on a particular site (if authorised) would have to be confirmed in a new EIA process prior to any further development”.
“This‚” stated MacKay‚ “is significantly less than the current nuclear build programme‚ which is estimated at 9600MW‚ more than double the maximum of 4000 MW stipulated in the EIA. The report also makes it quite clear – anything above 4000MW would have to be confirmed in a new EIA process prior to any further development.
“The fact that the Minister is trying to distort South Africa’s legislative processes‚ in this way‚ is deeply concerning.
“It is now increasingly clear that the proposed trillion rand nuclear deal is ill-thought out‚ and rushed‚ and should not be pursued. The Minister must now put her pride aside‚ and do what is right: scrap the deal‚ once and for all.”
Seabrook Nuclear Station’s 10-mile evacuation plan inadequate
Seabrook Station’s 10-mile evacuation zone draws scrutiny , SeaCoast Online, By Max Sullivan
msullivan@seacoastonline.com Aug. 16, 2015 The Massachusetts House of Representatives is considering a bill to extend the emergency planning zone surrounding Seabrook Station nuclear power plant. Some New Hampshire lawmakers support the idea and are considering similar legislation for the Granite State.
The bill, H.2031, would extend the zone to 50 miles out from Seabrook Station in Massachusetts only. There is currently a 10-mile radius around the nuclear plant. Within that radius, first responders receive special training, siren equipment and a supply of potassium iodide pills to be dispersed to counteract some of the health problems caused by exposure to radiation.
Potasium iodide can help block radioactive iodine from being absorbed by the thyroid gland, thus protecting this gland from radiation injury, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
Bill supporters note during the meltdown of the nuclear plant in Fukushima, Japan, American citizens were urged to evacuate at least 50 miles from the site.
The bill is currently in the Massachusetts Joint Committee on Public Health.
Massachusetts state Sen. Kathleen O’Connor Ives, a Democrat representing the First Essex District, wrote a letter in support of the bill and said she has concerns about the fact only three of her towns, Amesbury, Newburyport and Salisbury, fall within the 10-mile radius. The other towns she represents, Haverhill, Merrimac, Methuen and North Andover, do not have the same emergency resources, she said…….http://www.seacoastonline.com/article/20150816/NEWS/150819432
Earthquake M5.0 offshore of Fukushima prefecture
M5.0 hit Fukushima offshore / No announcement on plant status from Tepco http://fukushima-diary.com/2015/08/m5-0-hit-fukushima-offshore-no-announcement-on-plant-status-from-tepco/ by Mochizuki , August 14, 2015 According to JMA (Japan Meteorological Agency), M5.0 occurred offshore of Fukushima prefecture at 5:13 of 8/14/2015 (JST).
The depth of epicenter was 40km. They observed 4 of seismic intensity in Iwaki city.
The earthquake affected the large area from Shizuoka to Aomori prefecture.
The latest status of Fukushima plant has not been announced by Tepco http://www.jma.go.jp/en/quake/20150814051743395-140513.htm
Questions on the causes and effects of the Tianjin explosion
Tianjin explosions ignite barrage of questions, The Age, Philip Wen China correspondent for Fairfax Media, August 14, 2015 Tianjin: As fatalities continue to mount, so too have questions around the cause, response and potential health effects of the terrifying explosions at a toxic chemicals warehouse that tore through the port city of Tianjin, China, on Wednesday night.
Chinese authorities have dispatched more than 200 military nuclear and biochemical materials specialists to the site of the blast, as well as a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Beijing environmental emergency response centre.
But some 36 hours after the explosions, municipal and environmental officials said they were still unable to determine the specific substances held in the warehouse which likely triggered the blast which killed dozens, injured hundreds, and ignited a fireball so large it was captured by orbiting satellites.
The owner of the warehouse, Ruihai International Logistics, is a firm which specialises in handling hazardous cargo, state news agency Xinhua said. It is licensed to handle dangerous and toxic chemicals including sodium cyanide, compressed natural gas, phosphoric acid, potassium nitrate and butanone – an explosive industrial solvent.
“So far, we are not able to provide the detail of type and amount of these dangerous items,” Gao Huaiyou, the deputy director of Tianjin’s work safety administration bureau, said on Thursday. “There is quite a big inconsistency with information provided by the company’s management and their customs declaration.”
Though a pungent smell and visible smog hung in the vicinity of the blast, officials said 17 emergency air monitoring stations indicated air quality in the city remained within a normal range, aided by easterly winds which blew toxic plumes from the fires out to sea.
Readings of cyanide and chemical oxygen demand – a measure of water quality – some three to eight times normal levels were detected near two underground discharge pipes, though officials said the pipes had been sealed off and posed no danger to health or the environment of the surrounding area.
Xinhua said 1000 firefighters and more than 140 fire trucks were struggling to contain the blaze in a warehouse which stored “dangerous goods”.
“The volatility of the goods means the fire is especially unpredictable and dangerous to approach,” it said….http://www.theage.com.au/world/tianjin-explosions-ignite-barrage-of-questions-20150814-gizjw9.html#ixzz3ir0wfaMy
Belgium lax on nuclear safety – yet another incident
Greenpeace nuclear expert: ‘There’s always something’, DW, 13 Aug 15, After yet another incident at one of Belgium’s two nuclear power plants, DW spoke to Greenpeace expert Rianne Teule to assess the risk. She worries that safety is not being taken seriously enough. Early Thursday morning, the Tihange 3 nuclear reactor was shut down because of an “unplanned unavailability,” according to utility company GDF Suez.
The shutdown is the latest in a string of minor technical incidents at the plant since last July, including two minor fires, some of which have been attributed to human error. The incidents, the age of the plant – the oldest reactor dates to 1975 – and cracks that were discovered in the walls of Belgian reactors earlier this year have raised concerns over the safety of the country’s nuclear power supply.
DW spoke to Rianne Teule, campaign director with Greenpeace Belgium, about the state of Belgium’s nuclear industry and the future of the renewables sector.
DW: What can you tell me about this week’s technical incident at Tihange?
Rianne Teule: It’s relatively normal in any reactor that there’s a scram [emergency shutdown] caused by some kind of technical issue; that should not be a problem. But, last week, four workers were suspended [for security lapses by the Federal Agency for Nuclear Control]. In combination with the scram this week, that of course makes you think something more is going on, if the two things are related. Of course, Electrobel, the Tihange operator, has said that they aren’t related, that everything is normal. But [the incident] did cause FANC to pay more attention.
There have been quite a few minor incidents at Tihange in recent months.
There’s always something. And the safety culture being somewhat questionable, there’s the risk that these small incidents turn into something bigger.
How significant is that risk?
The Doel reactor, which is 10 kilometers (6 miles) from Antwerp, is in the harbor. An accident there would basically stop all activity in the harbor – an important part of the Belgian economy………..
Belgium decided to phase out nuclear energy a long time ago, in 2003. They set a maximum lifetime of 40 years per reactor, which meant that the first reactors would shut down in 2015. But the government didn’t actually do anything to prepare for the phaseout of nuclear. They didn’t invest enough in renewables to compensate for the nuclear shutdown, and that was used as an argument in 2014 to extend the lifetime of Tihange 1 by 10 years, and it’s being used as an argument now to extend the lifetimes of Doel 1 and 2. Tihange 1 was supposed to close in October this year……….
Belgium is also a very complicated country politically. While the nuclear energy sector is controlled by the federal government, renewable energy is controlled by the regional governments. There should be some kind of overarching energy vision managed by the federal government, but that doesn’t exist at the moment.
And, while these nuclear reactors stay operational, investment in other electricity supplies is more difficult because it’s not sure there will be space on the market and on the grid. What we would need is a gradual shutdown of nuclear, and simultaneously a gradual increase of renewables. Right now, it’s too risky for investors in renewables. There are no feed-in tariffs or priority access of renewables to the grid. There’s nothings like that. In Germany, that was the main incentive to invest in renewables………..http://www.dw.com/en/greenpeace-nuclear-expert-theres-always-something/a-18650290
Nuclear experts sent to test China’s Tianjin explosion site
Chemical, nuclear experts testing Tianjin blast site, Aljazeera America, Military has begun work on the ground in China’s northern port city where two explosions killed at least 55 dead August 14, 2015 China has sent chemical experts into Tianjin to test for toxic gases after a series of deadly explosions.
The team of nuclear and chemical experts is on the ground on Friday in the northern port city of Tianjin, the scene of two massive explosions that have left at least 55 people dead. Seventeen of the dead were from among the more than 1,000 firefighters sent to the mostly industrial zone to fight the ensuing blaze, China’s official Xinhua News Agency reported.
The chemical experts were testing the area for toxic gases, the official news agency Xinhua said, adding that the death toll had climbed to 55, with 701 admitted to hospital.
The team of 217 nuclear and biochemical materials specialists from the Chinese military began work at the site on Thursday.
The explosions at a warehouse for hazardous chemicals in the Chinese port of Tianjin on Wednesday raised questions about the whether the materials had been properly stored. Windows were shattered for miles around by the shockwaves, and the explosions were so big they were seen by satellites in space and registered on earthquake sensors.
Officials in Tianjin said they did not yet know what materials were at the hazardous goods storage facility where the explosions happened, or the cause of the blast.
But the Beijing News reported earlier that according to manufacturers, at least 700 ton of sodium cyanide were at the site, along with other substances, and the poisonous chemical had been detected in sewage samples in the area.
The report was no longer available on the newspaper’s website on Friday………..
ianjin is the 10th largest port in the world by container volume, according to the World Shipping Council, and the seventh-biggest in China. It handles vast amounts of metal ore, coal, steel, cars and crude oil.
Ships carrying oil and “hazardous products” were barred from the port Thursday, the Tianjin Maritime Safety Administration said on its official microblog. It also said vessels were not allowed to enter the central port zone, which is near the blast site.
State media said senior management of the company had been detained, and that President Xi Jinping demanded severe punishment for anyone found responsible for the explosions……..
As is customary during disasters, Chinese authorities tried to keep a tight control over information. Police kept journalists and bystanders away with a cordon about a mile from the site. On China’s popular microblogging platform of Weibo, some users complained that their posts about the blasts were deleted, and the number of searchable posts on the disaster fluctuated, in a sign that authorities were manipulating or placing limits on the number of posts.
The Tianjin government said that because of the blasts it had suspended online access to public corporate records. These records might be used to trace the ownership of Ruihai. It was not clear whether the blackout was due to technical damage related to the explosion. No one answered the phone at the Tianjin Market and Quality Supervision Administration or the Tianjin Administration for Industry and Commerce on Thursday.
Ruihai Logistics said on its website — before it was shut down — that it was established in 2011 and is an approved company for handling hazardous materials. It said it handles 1 million tons of cargo annually……..http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2015/8/13/at-least-50-dead-and-hundreds-injured-in-chinese-warehouse-explosion.html
Iran could not hide evidence of nuclear weapons work
Why it’s impossible to hide nuclear work in 24 days – or 24 years, REUTERS, By Yousaf Butt August 13, 2015 One of the most misleading distortions being floated by political opponents of the Iran nuclear deal is the “24-day” loophole meme: Iran would be able to hide all evidence of any nefarious nuclear weapons work during the 24 days it may take inspectors to gain access to a suspicious site.
For starters, International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors would have continuous daily access to all Iran’s declared nuclear facilities. If Iran does not allow anytime inspections of any declared site, it could result in the reimposition — or “snapback” — of sanctions.
The 24-day rule applies only to undeclared suspect sites anywhere in the country. Because inspections anywhere at any time can be complicated to work out, a procedure was devised to address the problem.
Why 24 days? Iran and the atomic energy agency first would have a maximum of 14 days to come to an understanding about how to carry out the new inspections. In the absence of an agreement, the members of the Joint Commission – the United States, Britain, France, Germany, China, Russia and Iran — must resolve the issue, by consensus or a vote, within seven days. Tehran would have three days to implement the decision. So, the 24 days is not a gift to Tehran that would allow it to hide potential nuclear malfeasance — it is just the maximum periodallowed to hammer out a way to inspect any undeclared suspicious facility in Iran.
More important, critics insist, Iran could use those 24 days to hide evidence of nuclear materials. This is not going to happen. It would be virtually impossible even in 240 days, let alone 24. Even a nanogram, or one-billionth of a gram, of leftover dust from nuclear-weapons related work — such as covert enrichment at a suspect site — could be detectable.
The main way the agency could find incriminating dust is with a “swipe sample” using a super-clean cotton cloth. The wipe would be applied to surfaces, especially where dust naturally collects, including corners of a room, cracks, bolt holes, equipment interiors and where walls meet the floor.
As the agency itself states: “Any nuclear process … will also produce particulate materials with particle dimensions in the 0.1 [to] 10 micrometer range. Such small particles are believed to be quite mobile and will travel several meters from their point of origin due to air currents or human activity. This mobility also makes it extremely difficult to clean up an area to such an extent that no particles remain available for swipe sampling.” [emphasis added]
The swipe samples from a suspect site would be taken to a laboratory, where the atomic energy agency can use a variety of highly sensitive methods to pick up any infinitesimal incriminating nuclear particles. Isotopic ratios, chemical forms or particle shapes can all provide clues about where the nuclear material came from and how it was produced.
One particularly powerful method is known as “fission track-secondary ion mass spectrometry.”Particles from a swipe sample are irradiated with neutrons on a Lexan (plastic) plate. If there are fissile materials in the sample, they would become unstable and split apart; heavy fission-product particles would be produced. In sufficient quantities, these particles would leave tracks in the plate that can be viewed by acid etching……….
The bottom line is that it is almost impossible to get away with messing around with nuclear materials. Nuclear fingerprints are not removable.
“You cannot get rid of them by cleaning,” Stephan Vogt, head of the atomic agency’sEnvironmental Sample Laboratory told Reuters in 2013. “You cannot dilute them to the extent that we will not be able to pick them up. It is just a matter of time,” he stated, before the atomic energy agency detects any incriminating residue………..
Twenty-nine top U.S. scientists — including Nobel Prize winners, senior experts in arms control and former White House science advisers – wrote to President Barack Obama this past weekend to praise the Iran deal. They called it “technically sound, stringent and innovative.” Instead of listening to the complaints about the 24-day meme, Congress should pay heed to these experts. http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/08/13/why-its-impossible-to-hide-nuclear-work-in-24-days-or-24-years/
$4.1-million settlement to Hanford nuclear weapons site whistle-blower
Tamosaitis, who is well-known within the small community of experts in chemical mixing technology, had the largest national impact. The concerns he raised led the Energy Department to order a full-scale test of the mixing system, which has yet to be completed.
“The safety culture in the entire Energy Department complex is bad,” he said. “The Energy Department needs to clamp down on the contractors. It is systemwide.”
Hanford nuclear weapons site whistle-blower wins $4.1-million settlement LA Times, By RALPH VARTABEDIAN contact the reporter Twitter: @rvartabedian When Walter Tamosaitis warned in 2011 that the Energy Department’s plans for a waste treatment plant at the former Hanford nuclear weapons complex were unsafe, he was demoted and put in a basement room with cardboard boxes and plywood for office furniture.
Tamosaitis had been leading a team of 100 scientists and engineers in designing a way to immobilize millions of gallons of highly toxic nuclear sludge as thick as peanut butter. The sludge, which could deliver a lethal dose of radiation to a nearby person within minutes, is stored in leaking underground tanks near the Columbia River in Washington state.
Two years later, Tamosaitis was fired after 44 years with San Francisco-based engineering firm URS, which was later acquired by Los Angeles-based AECOM. He filed a wrongful termination suit but encountered some initial legal setbacks, and it looked as if he had been blackballed from the industry.
But on Wednesday, Tamosaitis won a $4.1-million settlement from AECOM, among the largest known legal damages paid out to a whistle-blower in the Energy Department’s vast nuclear waste cleanup program. Continue reading
Explosion in Tianjin, China – in warehouse supplying nuclear fuel?
Top Asian News at 11:00 pm GMT
TIANJIN, China (AP) — Huge explosions at a warehouse for … ore which could supply its nuclear weapons program or fuel nuclear reactors, …–
The blasts ripped through a warehouse storing “dangerous goods” in Tianjin’s Binhai New Area around 11:30 p.m. local time, China’s official Xinhua News Agency said. http://www.wsj.com/articles/huge-blast-rocks-chinese-city-1439403843
Cyber terrorism threat if Britain’s nuclear security moves to online technology
Nuclear power plants ‘could become more open to cyber attacks’ as police consider cloud storage
The armed police force that guards Britain’s nuclear material is considering storing information in “cloud” despite series of high-profile leaks. Britain’s nuclear power stations could be more exposed to cyber attacks within months, experts have warned after the police force that protects them revealed they are considering using the “cloud” to store information.
The Civil Nuclear Constabulary (CNC), the armed police force tasked with guarding all of Britain’s nuclear plants, has previously refused to use the new storage technology given much of its information is classified as “sensitive”.
However the force has revealed it could start using cloud technology as early as April next year despite a series of high profile information breaches which raised questions about the software’s reliability.
Technology experts warned the move could be “unnecessary” and leave the force more exposed to foreign hackers.
It will raise fears that information about Britain’s nuclear material could be more likely to be obtained by enemies of the state at a time of heightened alert over terrorism…….http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/11792281/Nuclear-power-plants-could-become-more-open-to-cyber-attacks-as-police-consider-cloud-storage.html
-
Archives
- May 2026 (62)
- 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)
- June 2025 (348)
-
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 