Radioactive trash burning underground near major USA city
“Nuclear fire” erupts at radioactive facility near major US city — Footage shows underground explosions, massive smoke plumes — AP: “Unknown amount of radioactive waste burned” — EPA sends emergency radiological team — Residents: “We were flat out lied to… Why didn’t they evacuate the town?” (VIDEO) http://enenews.com/nuclear-fire-erupts-radioactive-dump-100-miles-major-city-footage-shows-underground-explosions-massive-smoke-plumes-ap-unknown-amount-radioactive-waste-burned-epa-sends-radiological-emergency?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ENENews+%28Energy+News%29
CBS Las Vegas, Oct 22, 2015 (emphasis added): Government officials are still looking into what may have caused a low-level radiological storage facility [~100 miles outside Las Vegas] to go up in flames… “We didn’t even hear about it when it happened, according to Cindy Craig, a resident. “We weren’t even get told about it until the next day.”
Las Vegas Review-Journal, Oct 21, 2015: Carol Johnston, owner of KC’s Outpost [in Beatty, Nevada]… said she was serving customers on a patio Sunday when she “heard a big boom” then looked up and saw a big puff of smoke. “Why didn’t they evacuate the town then?” she asked in a telephone interview Wednesday.
CBS Las Vegas, Oct 22, 2015: In the 40-second cellphone video… you can see the explosion in the shooting from the ground causing massive plumes of smoke. The explosion caused the facility to go up in flames. State officials said the fire started inone of 22 covered trenches used to store low-level radioactive material…
AP, Oct 19, 2015: EPA said the unknown amount of low-level radioactive waste that burned had been deposited… before 1992… [USGS previously] found high concentrations of radionuclides underground, the Nuclear Resource and Information Service said.
Las Vegas Review-Journal, Oct 22, 2015: Fire Marshal Chief Peter Mulvihill said [it] “burned very hot“… Items buried in the low-level nuclear waste dump include… nuclear reactor crud…
AP, Oct 21, 2015: Mulvihill said the fire burned unabated after starting Sunday during intense thunderstorms and flash flooding… Now, first-responders have backed off while investigators locate archived paperwork to determine what was buried in the burned trench… [I]ncident managers initially feared about 2,000 people in the sprawling rural area would need to be evacuated if radiation had been detected. Mulvihill told reporters that all but two employees left the… facility adjacent to the radioactive waste dump…
Las Vegas Review-Journal, Oct 20, 2015: “We don’t know exactly what caught fire. We’re not exactly sure what was burning in that pit,” Fire Marshal Chief Peter Mulvihill said… “there was some energetic burning” that blew a hole in the cover soil that caps trench No. 14, where low-level radioactive materials were buried.
AP, Oct 19, 2015: [EPA] is sending a radiological emergency team to look for contamination… EPA spokesman Rusty Harris-Bishop says no dangerousgamma radiation has been detected… The fire eruptedSunday during heavy rain…
KSNV, Oct 20, 2015: [R]esidents are still concerned because of what was burning, and because they say they were “flat out lied to“… As the fire burned, the US 95 was closed for a 140 mile stretch for nearly 24 hours. People waiting in their cars say they were told a much different reason for the traffic jam. “They told us it was debris in the road,” one resident told News 3. “We found out it was a nuclear waste fire.”
KSNV, Oct 20, 2015: This small town voiced big concerns at Tuesday night’s town hall after a fire at a low-level radioactive waste dump… “We don’t find out about it in the city of Beatty until we watch the news the next morning. What if that was extremely hazardous?” [a resident] said. “I’m very, very upset about it.”… many questions remain including what exactly was burning?… “We have absolutely no idea… what it is” [Sheriff Sharon Wehrly] said…
Las Vegas Sun, Oct 23, 2015: Sunday’s nuclear fire… reportedly did not emit above-average doses of radiation.
Las Vegas Sun, Oct 22, 2015: Media buzzed with reports of a low-level nuclear fire… [T]he plume of smoke — determined by the… government to not be hazardous to public health — billowed… residents, though, were unaware of the details of the emergency situation.
Las Vegas Review-Journal, Oct 19, 2015: Mulvihill said investigators would be taking a close and methodical look at the site “once it is safe to go down there.”… [The fire] was allowed to burn itself out over the course of about 12 hours… US Ecology officials said they created “an exclusion zone around the facility” at the request of state regulators… As part of their investigation, state officials said they will be looking at the [dump’s] overall stability…
KTNV, Oct 22, 2015: You can see a column of white smoke… Then multiple underground explosions in trench 14 send more smoke spewing out. The ground erupts… We don’t know what these explosions kicked up into the air but we do know state leaders were well aware of the risks buried at the U.S. Ecology site… Minutes from legislative hearings detail concerns about “unknown contamination levels.” The state expressed concern because it was not sure of the contamination levels or when a fissure might occur.
KTNV transcript, Oct 22, 2015 (at 2:20 in): “We’ve just learned… there are 2 new areas of land that are sinking from recent flooding at the site, and a crater where the fire broke out.”
Watch broadcasts: KTNV | NBC Las Vegas
Los Alamos National Laboratory has radioactive materials stolen
Radioactive material keeps getting stolen from nuclear lab, feds say http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/23/radioactive-material-keeps-getting-stolen-from-nuclear-lab-feds-say/ Federal officials say workers have stolen radioactive materials from Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico multiple times this year.The Albuquerque Journal reported Friday that the items were taken from an area that stores contaminated materials before they’re shipped elsewhere. A federal court filing says there have been 76 thefts by Los Alamos personnel in 2015.
An affidavit says lab officials contacted federal investigators on Sept. 30 to say a subcontractor’s employee had stolen items.
The day before, police responded to a call about a man throwing materials into bushes near the lab. Officers found several radioactive items, including a band saw that tested 500 times above the allowable limit for contamination.
A Los Alamos spokesman referred questions to the FBI, which didn’t respond to a request for comment.
50 years later, USA will clean up site of nuclear bomb’s crash in Spain
Palomares nuclear crash: US agrees Spanish coast clean-up http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34569614 19 October 2015 Almost 50 years after four nuclear bombs fell on the Spanish coast after two US military planes collided, American officials have signed a deal to clean up contaminated land.
None of the bombs detonated in January 1966, but three fell around Palomares and a fourth was found on the sea bed.
Highly toxic plutonium was spread over a 200-hectare (490-acre) area.
On a visit to Madrid, Secretary of State John Kerry agreed to finalise a deal on disposing of contaminated soil.
Under the agreement in principle, signed by Mr Kerry and Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo, the US will remove the soil at Palomares to a site in the US.
Spanish media said the soil would be transported to a site in Nevada. The deal comes a few months before the 50th anniversary of the crash, one of the most serious nuclear incidents of the Cold War.
An earlier consignment of contaminated soil was shipped to a site in South Carolina shortly after the accident and buried in deep trenches.
But further analysis of soil in the area has been carried out in recent years, and the health of residents in the Palomares area is still being monitored.
- On 17 January 1966, a US B-52 bomber carrying four 1.5 megaton bombs collided with a refuelling tanker some 31,000 feet above Palomares on Spain’s Mediterranean coast
- The tanker crew and three people on board the bomber were killed
- One bomb equipped with a parachute landed intact
- Two bombs hit the ground at high speed, scattering plutonium
- A fourth bomb landed five miles off shore and was later recovered by USS Petrel
“I looked up and saw this huge ball of fire, falling through the sky” – Spain waits for US to finish nuclear clean-up
Despite safety problems, South Korea obsessed with plan for massive nuclear station
South Korea’s Nuclear Obsession The fixation on nuclear power ignores Fukushima and the global trend towards renewables. The Diplomat By Daul Jang October 22, 2015 Five Greenpeace activists last week entered the security zone of the Kori Nuclear Power Plant. Arriving via a black inflatable boat, they climbed out and scampered up a rocky slope, unfurling a bright yellow banner in front of the plant’s fence. For 40 minutes they stood their ground as guards looked on, sirens blazed, and warnings from the Coast Guard were broadcast over the loud speaker.
In South Korea, the world’s fourth largest producer of nuclear power, the government is planning to expand the Kori site. With six reactors online, two waiting for operating license approval, and an additional two planned, it will bring the total number to ten reactors by 2022. Yet with 3.4 million people living within the 30 km zone, major companies such as Hyundai Motors located nearby, and popular Haeundae beach also in the vicinity, it reveals a government in denial of the threat to its people and nation.
But for the government and the industry, the argument is that Korea needs nuclear power. But the reality is that industrial economies, both established and rapidly developing nations, are investing in renewables because they are reliable, affordable, quick to install, safe, and are the best generating technology to reduce carbon emissions. In 2014, Germany, Japan, China, India, Spain, Mexico, Brazil and the Netherlands collectively generated more electricity from renewables (excluding large-scale hydro) than from nuclear power.
Even before the tragic Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident in 2011, the global nuclear industry was in decline. ……..
The meltdown of three nuclear reactors at Fukushima dramatically exposed the reality that multiple reactors at a nuclear power plant site equal catastrophic failure. …….
The majority of South Korean people, like the people of Japan, have understood the lessons of Fukushima – that nuclear power is a technology with unacceptable risks. In contrast, both the Abe government in Japan and the administration of Park Geun-hye in South Korea are deliberately ignoring the lessons of Fukushima. It took the Fukushima Daiichi accident to change the mind of one national leader. South Korea should not have to wait for an accident at Kori to have a similar effect.
Daul Jang is the Project Leader for the Climate and Energy Campaign at Greenpeace East Asia in Seoul. http://thediplomat.com/2015/10/south-koreas-nuclear-obsession/
Chinese firm seeking to build nuclear in UK has history of errors in construction
Errors revealed at Chinese nuclear firm seeking to invest in UK plants, Guardian, Emma Graham-Harrison, 19 Oct 15 Huge quantity of protective steel was left out of initial construction of China General Nuclear Corp’s first reactor, built close to Hong Kong in 1987. One of the Chinese nuclear power firms pushing for a stake in the UK’s energy industry left out hundreds of critical steel rods when building its first reactor nearHong Kong in 1987 because workers misread the blueprint.
The missing parts were added in a higher layer of the foundation, with extra steel to reinforce them, after the extraordinary mistake was discovered. The plant has now been operating safely for more than two decades.
But the nature and scale of the error raises serious questions about the rigour of Chinese nuclear firms and the country’s oversight regime, experts say.
“[This a prospective] partner who, when they built the first nuclear power station in China, forgot to put in a large percentage of the protective steel,” said Professor Steve Tsang, senior fellow of the China Policy Institute at Nottingham University. “Potentially we are putting ourselves in a very difficult situation.”
China General Nuclear Corp built and runs Daya Bay nuclear plant in Shenzhen. It is one of two Chinese power firms expected to invest in the UK’s Hinkley Point power station and potentially build and operate a future nuclear plant, along with China National Nuclear Corporation and French firm EDF.
Chancellor George Osborne, on a trade mission to China last month, said the government would provide £2bn in initial financing for the much-delayed project, which EDF has struggled to fund. ndustry observers believe the Chinese cash for Hinkley is conditional on allowing Chinese firms to build their own plant at Bradwell in Essex. That project would function as a showcase for Chinese technology.
“I understand what the Chinese want, which is to have a demonstration plant, to show they can build inexpensively, quickly and reliably,” said Theresa Fallon, senior associate at the European Institute of Asian Studies.
“But it’s at a time when energy is relatively inexpensive, and this plant is a bit untried technology. I understand there are rules, but there were rules in Hong Kong too when you had the problems in Daya Bay. You are not building a gazebo, it’s really dangerous, serious stuff.”
News of the problems at one of China’s first commercial nuclear power plants only reached neighbouring Hong Kong weeks after the mistake was discovered on 14 September 1987……
A leading Chinese scientist told the Guardian this year that China’s nuclear power expansion plans are “insane” because the country’s safety controls are notrigorous enough.
“China currently does not have enough experience to make sound judgments on whether there could be accidents,” said 88-year-old He Zuoxiu, who worked on China’s nuclear weapons programme. “The number of reactors and the amount of time they have been operating safely both matter.”……http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/oct/19/steel-rods-missing-at-chinese-nuclear-firm-seeking-to-invest-in-uk-plants
Nuclear power facilities not up to date with today’s cyber threats
Unheeded cybersecurity threat leaves nuclear power stations open to attack , The Conversation, Nasser Abouzakhar October 17, 2015 There has been a rising number of security breaches at nuclear power plants over the past few years, according to a new Chatham House reportwhich highlights how important systems at plants were not properly secured or isolated from the internet.
As critical infrastructure and facilities such as power plants become increasingly complex they are, directly or indirectly, linked to the internet. This opens up a channel through which malicious hackers can launch attacks – potentially with extremely serious consequences. For example, a poorly secured steel mill in Germany was seriously damaged after being hacked, causing substantial harm to blast furnaces after the computer controls failed to shut them down. The notorious malware, theStuxnet worm, was specifically developed to target nuclear facilities.
The report also found that power plants rarely employ an “air gap” (where critical systems are entirely disconnected from networks) as the commercial and practical benefits of using the internet too often trump security…….
The problem is that the industrial communication protocols and mechanisms still commonly used in nuclear power plants were designed in an era before the internet and cyber-threats were a consideration. These are often insecure and not designed to deal with such challenges. Most of the legacy communication protocols such as Profibus, DNP3 andOPC are still vulnerable to various attacks as they lack any proper authentication techniques.
This means that all a malicious hacker might need to get inside a nuclear power station’s network is Google. Using search terms relevant to the software in use in the plant, Google can turn up direct links to websites leading into its network – with little or no security in the way…… https://theconversation.com/unheeded-cybersecurity-threat-leaves-nuclear-power-stations-open-to-attack-49258
Concerns over Japan’s huge stockpile of weapons grade nuclear material
China calls on Japan to address world concerns on excessive nuclear stocks http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2015-10/15/c_134717556.htm BEIJING, Oct. 15 (Xinhua) — China on Thursday called for action from Japan to defuse concerns over its excess of nuclear materials as both Chinese and U.S. think tanks expressed worry in recent reports.
“The international community has always been concerned about Japan’s stockpile of enriched uranium and the risks relating to nuclear proliferation and safety,” Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said.
“The reports suggest there are ways to resolve the surplus nuclear material issue,” she said at a regular news briefing, calling on Japan to be responsible and act to address the international community’s concerns.
The stockpile puts Japan, its neighbors and the world at risk, a joint study by China Arms Control and Disarmament Association and the China Institute of Nuclear Information and Economics said on Friday.
“If, in future, a different country started to stockpile — could be enriched uranium, it could be plutonium — that country could cite Japan as a precedent,” said James Acton, author of a new report on Japan’s reprocessing policy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace think tank.
The Chinese study suggests Japan should make a rational plan for its nuclear consumption and address the imbalance, while ensuring the safety and security of these materials.
Citing the latest data from the Japanese government submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the Chinese study found Japan has 47.8 tonnes of highly sensitive separated plutonium, 10.8 tonnes of which are stored in Japan, enough to make 1,350 nuclear warheads.
Hinkley deal raises fears about China’s power over Britain’s nuclear project
Security fears over China nuclear power deal, BBC News, 17 Oct 15 Downing Street is playing down security fears about plans to give China a stake in Britain’s nuclear power industry.
A final decision on the new nuclear plant at Hinkley Point, Somerset, could be announced next week during Chinese president Xi Jinping’s state visit.
Security sources have told The Times the scheme poses a threat to national security – and a senior Tory MP has called for an inquiry.
But No 10 said it would not sign the deal if it thought security was a risk.
Chancellor George Osborne has already announced a £2bn government guarantee to secure Chinese funding for the Hinkley Point C nuclear power station, to be jointly built with French energy giant EDF at an estimated cost of £24.5bn.
The final go-ahead for the deal could be announced next week – paving the way for a second new reactor to built by the Chinese and French consortium at Sizewell, in Suffolk.
If an agreement is reached, work could then start on the first Chinese-designed and built nuclear reactor in Europe, at Bradwell, in Essex, where a previous British-built reactor is in the process of being decommissioned.
How concerned should we be?………….
Construction of the first Hualong One reactor began in May in China’s Fujian province, according to World Nuclear News.
Gaining regulatory approval from the UK authorities for the design would be a major boost to the Chinese National Nuclear Corporation’s hopes of exporting the technology around the world.
‘Trapdoors or backdoors’
But senior UK defence and security sources reportedly are concerned that the state-controlled company, which helped develop China’s nuclear weapons, poses a national security risk.
They fear “trapdoors or backdoors” could be inserted into IT systems, allowing Beijing to bypass British security measures……..
‘Fait accompli’
Bernard Jenkin, Conservative MP for Harwich and North Essex, where the Bradwell plant would be built, has called for the government to produce a “comprehensive assessment of the national security implications” of the Chinese scheme……..http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-34549478
No evacuation plan, yet PM Abe restarts another Sendai nuclear reactor
Last year, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said he would not allow a reactor startup unless its safety is completely confirmed. But the process of approving reactor restarts at the Sendai nuclear power plant has not been in line with his pledge at all
Safety put on the back burner as another nuclear reactor is restarted, Asahi Shimbun, 14 Oct 15 Kyushu Electric Power Co. is set to restart the No. 2 reactor at its Sendai nuclear power plant in Satsuma-Sendai, Kagoshima Prefecture, on Oct. 15. In August, the plant’s No. 1 reactor became the first to resume operations under new safety regulations that went into force in July 2013.
Some areas near the plant may not even have a dependable evacuation route in the event of a disaster. Furthermore, no evacuation drills for residents have been undertaken.
The electric utility’s plan to restart the idled reactor was given the green light by the Nuclear Regulation Authority. The nuclear watchdog body has no authority, however, to examine evacuation plans.
A reactor should not be restarted under such circumstances. Continue reading
Threat of out of control fire to radioactive trash site
I wonder if, in bushfire prone Australia, the South Australia Nuclear Fuel Chain Commission’s fudgy old pro nukers have considered increasing fire risks and the vulnerability of nuclear facilities?
‘Catastrophic’: Underground fire creeps towards nuclear waste site, news.com.au, OCTOBER 12, 
2015 BENEATH the surface of a US landfill lurk two things that should never meet: a slow-burning fire and a cache of Cold War-era nuclear waste, separated by no more than 365 metres.
Government officials in Missouri have quietly adopted an emergency plan in case the smouldering embers ever reach the waste, a potentially “catastrophic event” that could send up a plume of radioactive smoke over a densely populated area near the city’s main airport.
Although the fire at Bridgeton Landfill, near St. Louis has been burning since at least 2010, the plan for a worst-case scenario was developed only a year ago and never publicised until last week, when St. Louis radio station KMOX first obtained a copy……..
Directly next to Bridgeton Landfill is West Lake Landfill, also owned by Republic Services. The West Lake facility was contaminated with radioactive waste from uranium processing by a St. Louis company known as Mallinckrodt Chemical. The waste was illegally dumped in 1973 and includes material that dates back to the Manhattan Project, which created the first atomic bomb in the 1940s.
The Environmental Protection Agency is still deciding how to clean up the waste. The landfill was designated a Superfund site in 1990.
The proximity of the two environmental hazards is what worries residents and environmentalists. At the closest point, they are 1,000 to 1,200 feet apart.
If the underground fire reaches the waste, “there is a potential for radioactive fallout to be released in the smoke plume and spread throughout the region,” according to the disaster plan.
The plan calls for evacuations and development of emergency shelters, both in St. Louis County and neighbouring St. Charles County. Private and volunteer groups, and perhaps the federal government, would be called upon to help, depending on the severity of the emergency…………
Last month, Koster said he was troubled by new reports about the site. One found radiological contamination in trees outside the landfill’s perimeter. Another showed evidence that the fire has moved past two rows of interceptor wells and closer to the nuclear waste.
Koster said the reports were evidence that Republic Services “does not have this site under control.”……..http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/catastrophic-underground-fire-creeps-towards-nuclear-waste-site/story-e6frflp0-1227565910467
At least four Russian cruise missiles have crash-landed in Iran
Russian missiles crash in Iran: what we know, Vox World, by Max Fisher on October 8, 2015
- At least four Russian cruise missiles, headed for Syria, have reportedly crash-landed in Iran, Pentagon sources tell CNN and other outlets.
- So far neither Russian nor Iranian sources have confirmed the incident, though Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency is carrying the story (but crediting CNN).
- It is not known whether the missiles detonated or whether there are any casualties. Iran has enough empty space that it’s possible the missiles crashed harmlessly…….http://www.vox.com/2015/10/8/9482023/russia-missiles-iran-crash
Nuclear power building – UK’s worry of China’s poor health and safety record
nuclearnews No 2 nuclear power Oct 15 ..…….. it is China’s poor health and safety record which is most worrying. With the power of the Chinese Government and the UK Government’s enthusiasm for Chinese money the concern is that the UK’s nuclear regulators will be sidestepped.
China’s health and safety standards have been thrust into the spotlight this year by a series of chemical explosions. An explosion at a chemical plant in the eastern Chinese province of Shandong shortly before midnight on 31st August 2015 was the second to occur at a chemical plant in Shandong province in a matter of days.
Although no casualties were reported, the blast happened about a fortnight after explosions in the port city of Tianjin, northern China, which killed over 145 people. In the wake of the Tianjin blast, the Communist Party has sacked the head of China’s safety regulator, who was previously the vice mayor of the city. Shortly after, 12 government officials and company executives were detained. (6)
According to Ben Chu, author of ‘Chinese Whispers: Why Everything You’ve Heard About China is Wrong, the disaster in Tianjin was the latest consequence of a system that places personal profit before public safety. He says in China today behind every industrial accident lies a reeking morass of corruption.
Chinese state media reported that the son of a former local police chief was secretly a joint owner of the Tianjin warehouse that went up in a devastating fireball last week, killing 145 people, injuring 674 and damaging some 17,000 homes. He used his official connections to obtain licences for the warehouse, even though it flagrantly breached regulations prohibiting the storage of hazardous chemicals (sodium cyanide in this case) near residential areas. (7)
Dangers of UK-China plan for nuclear power at Bradwell Estuary
Will Bradwell get a Chinese Reactor? nuCLEAR news No 2 nulcear power October 2015 It is now pretty clear that David Cameron will sign an agreement with the Chinese Government, at the time of the State Visit of President Xi Jinping on 20th October, that will enable two Chinese state-owned nuclear companies to develop the site at Bradwell which is currently owned by EdF, says the Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group. (BANNG)
The development could happen rather quicker than anyone might have imagined, says the group because of the financial problems and delays with Hinkley Point. “Cameron’s folly means the sacrifice of the Blackwater estuary,” said Professor Andy Blowers, Chair of the Blackwater Against New Nuclear Group (BANNG). “Basically, the estuary will be trashed if this goes ahead.”
“This love-in between the British and Chinese Governments takes absolutely no account of the impact and implications that will be unleashed on the Blackwater estuary. The obstacles, including the problems of cooling water from such a shallow estuary, are massive”. Barry Turner, Vice Chair of BANNG, commented: “For BANNG, the simple fact is that the Bradwell site is totally unsuitable for a new power station no matter who the developer might be.
The delicate Blackwater estuary cannot cope with the demands of a new nuclear power station without its effective destruction. The long-term risks from rising sea-levels and coastal change will be phenomenal leaving not only a power station with all its inherent dangers but an everlasting residue of dangerous radioactive wastes on a site that is likely to disappear over the next two centuries. There is no thought for the future in this and it is immoral to be undertaking such an enterprise on such a location.
Bringing such a monster to the Blackwater is nothing short of monstrous”. In return for helping out with the increasingly expensive Hinkley Point plant in Somerset, the Chinese have been told they can use the site of an old nuclear power station at Bradwell-on-Sea, on the Blackwater estuary, to build a reactor of their own design. “I am not worried about the Chinese. I am worried about us”, says Charles Clover writing in the Sunday Times.
For it is an open question whether British standards of regulation are up to the expectations of people who live in places such as West Mersea, just across the water from Bradwell. “We have some excellent regulations in Britain, but the problem is that all too often we choose to ignore them. I believe the public can live with the risks of the nuclear industry as long as there is transparency, and that there is not an instant return to the culture of secrecy and political influence over regulators that some of us remember from Sellafield in the bad old days. For if we wish to have both electricity and oysters, the problem is ourselves, not the Chinese.” (2) A peaceful protest including a flotilla of boats was held on Mersea Island by campaigners on 4th October. (3)…. http://www.no2nuclearpower.org.uk/nuclearnews/NuClearNewsNo78.pdf
Reality check on what Isil could actually do with nuclear materials
What could Isil actually do if they got their hands on nuclear material?Dirty bomb? Nuclear missile? After reports of Russian criminals trying to sell to Islamic State, we ask what the jihadists could actually do with nuclear material. By Richard Brown, King’s College London, Telegraph UK, 08 Oct 2015 The confirmation that black market gangs have been offering nuclear materials for sale – and have expressly targeted Islamic State buyers – can hardly be received with equanimity.
There is no reason to believe that an organisation with so hellishly violent a track record as Isil would baulk at using such materials offensively if ever they had ready access to them.
It would, however, be premature to leap from news of (failed) transactions to visions of a nuclear-armed Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isil), without first asking what they could actually do with any nuclear material they bought.
Why ‘bomb-grade’ doesn’t always mean that
The term ‘nuclear material’ can, in fact, cover a range of different substances, including those required for nuclear explosions – namely, uranium and plutonium. Neither is at all easy to produce………
Alternative uses for nuclear material
A nuclear explosion is not the only use to which Isil could put ‘nuclear materials’.
There are other radioactive substances than uranium and plutonium, and a more practical and perhaps more tempting prospect would for Isil to use these to produce a radiological dispersal device – a so-called ‘dirty bomb’. Such a device would scatter potentially lethal doses of radioactive material over a large area.
The explosive component could be fairly crude, and the appropriate radiological materials would be easier to obtain used (a small quantity of Caesium-137 or Cobalt-60 would be ideal).
No nuclear explosion would result, but there would be a significant risk of radiation sickness and contamination of a wide area. The psychological and environmental impact could be severe.
That said, the lethality of the device itself might not be especially high; much would depend on the context in which the device was used, and the swiftness with which authorities could begin decontamination.
At any rate, most of the value to the terrorists would come from the scale of disruption the bomb caused, rather than from the radiological death toll……..http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11918489/What-could-Isil-actually-do-if-they-got-their-hands-on-nuclear-material.html
Many nuclear facilities insecure, vulnerable to cyber-attack
Report finds many nuclear power plant systems “insecure by design” http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/10/report-finds-many-nuclear-power-plant-systems-insecure-by-design/ Use of VPNs in some reactors, lack of security measures pose risks. by Sean Gallagher – Oct 8, 2015 A study of the information security measures at civilian nuclear energy facilities around the world found a wide range of problems at many facilities that could leave them vulnerable to attacks on industrial control systems—potentially causing interruptions in electrical power or even damage to the reactors themselves. The study, undertaken by Caroline Baylon, David Livingstone, and Roger Brunt of the UK international affairs think tank Chatham House, found that many nuclear power plants’ systems were “insecure by design” and vulnerable to attacks that could have wide-ranging impacts in the physical world—including the disruption of the electrical power grid and the release of “significant quantities of ionizing radiation.” It would not require an attack with the sophistication of Stuxnet to do significant damage, the researchers suggested, based on the poor security present at many plants and the track record of incidents already caused by software.
The researchers found that many nuclear power plant systems were not “air gapped” from the Internet and that they had virtual private network access that operators were “sometimes unaware of.” And in facilities that did have physical partitioning from the Internet, those measures could be circumvented with a flash drive or other portable media introduced into their onsite network—something that would be entirely too simple given the security posture of many civilian nuclear operators. The use of personal devices on plant networks and other gaps in security could easily introduce malware into nuclear plants’ networks, the researchers warned.
The security strategies of many operators examined in the report were “reactive rather than proactive,” the Chatham House researchers noted, meaning that there was little in the way of monitoring of systems for anomalies that might warn of a cyber-attack on a facility. An attack could be well underway before it was detected. And because of poor training around information security, the people responsible for operating the plants would likely not know what to do.
That problem is heightened by what the researchers characterized as a “communication breakdown” between IT security professionals and the plant operations staff, and a simple lack of awareness among plant operations people about the potential dangers of cyber-attacks. Cultural differences between IT and nuclear engineering culture cause friction at some facilities, in fact—making it difficult for IT and security staff to get across the problem with the poor security practices in the plants.
Unfortunately, there’s no way to tell how bad the problem really is, because the nuclear industry doesn’t talk about breaches. “The infrequency of cyber security incident disclosure at nuclear facilities makes it difficult to assess the true extent of the problem and may lead nuclear industry personnel to believe that there are few incidents,” the researchers wrote in their summary. “Moreover, limited collaboration with other industries or information-sharing means that the nuclear industry tends not to learn from other industries that are more advanced in this field.”
These issues, combined with a lack of regulation, may lead to an underestimation of risk by nuclear operators and result in a lack of budgeting or planning for reducing the risk of attack.
1 This Month
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (74)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
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
