More doublespeak from UK Energy Minister about nuclear subsidies
Hayes today reiterated that “there should be nothing available for nuclear that’s not available for other technologies”
(A subsidy is a subsidy is a subsidy – even if other forms of energy get one, too)
U.K. Will Reject EDF Nuclear Deal That Puts Burden on Consumers, Bloomberg By Sally Bakewell – Nov 6, 2012 The U.K. government is prepared to walk away from a deal with Electricite de France SA over plans to build the first nuclear plant in the country since the 1980s if the power price demanded by the utility is too high.
The government would “absolutely” refuse a deal that placed too great a burden on consumers, Energy Minister John Hayes said today in London . He held talks yesterday with Vincent de Rivaz, chief executive officer of EDF’s local unit.
Britain and EDF are negotiating the terms of a contract that would guarantee the price of power generated at Hinkley Point in Somerset. Continue reading
A HOAX about new Fukushima crisis should not make us think it is now SAFE
Nuclear Perceptions Fight Reality OpEd News, By William Boardman, 22 Oct 12, FUKUSHIMA FREAKOUT OBSCURES REAL ACCIDENT THAT GOES ON AND ON An early morning flurry of internet reports carried scary – but false – headlines aboutFukushima nuclear power plant’s fuel pools exploding and burning, and releasing massive amounts of radiation on October 22. Many readers expressed skepticism, as the reports seemed to come from a single, unconfirmed source and by later the same afternoon more responsible websites were labeling the story a hoax .
The Fukushima accident in Japan continues nonetheless, at a slower pace for now, even though one of the more dangerous damaged units has cracks in its walls and is sinking into the ground, as affirmed by nuclear engineer Arnie Gunderson in his October 21 podcast .
Unit 4 at Fukushima is perhaps the most threatening part of the damaged plant because the unit’s fuel rods are outside the containment where further mishap could lead to the release massive amounts of radiation directly into the environment.
At the time of the earthquake in March 2011, about 100 miles of Japan’s coastline, including the area around Fukushima, dropped about three feet, increasing the impact of the tsunami that destroyed the nuclear power plant, which continues to deteriorate.
In recent weeks it’s become increasingly clear that Fukushima Unit 4, with its unprotected fuel rods is continuing to sink into the ground, and is sinking asymmetrically, creating the possibility that the building will begin to tilt. The unit sank about 36 inches in March 2011 and has sunk another 30 inches since then, as confirmed by Gunderson.
How Safe Is a Buckled, Sinking Building?…….. http://www.opednews.com/articles/Nuclear-Perceptions-Fight-by-William-Boardman-121022-931.html
Fallacy of the Thorium nuclear reactor “miracle”
There is a rash of misinformation on the net about the supposed merits of the ‘new’ nuclear energy source on the block, thorium. I am sure that in a perfect world where nobody lies, thorium would be the perfect answer to the world’s energy needs as is claimed. This is unfortunately not the case.
Apparently, every time there is a new nuclear catastrophe, the thorium ‘miracle’ is promoted again as the ‘savior’ for the world. The Fukushima nuclear radiation catastrophe was not unique and the thorium misinformation artists have come out in droves. It’s the nuclear industry’s defense mechanism – create a new ‘safety myth’ that regular people can latch onto.
In reality, the thorium nuclear fuel cycle has been under development since the very early days of the nuclear industry. India, for example, has spent decades trying to commercialize it, and has failed. The US, Russia, Germany, and many others tried and failed as well. At best, thorium based nuclear power generation may be commercialized in a few decades.
I doubt it.
Fortunately, there are a number of independent trustworthy and expert sources of information on the internet regarding thorium nuclear. Here they are: Continue reading
Australia’s rather dodgy “medical” nuclear reactor
ANSTO chief ducks and weaves on 
questioning about incidents at Lucas Heights nuclear reactor
Noel Wauchope 18 Oct 12, I guess that we can rely on the mainstream media to give a sympathetic coverage to Dr Adi Paterson, chief of Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) – who was very distressed after being put on the spot in the Senate yesterday. At one point in the polite, but persistent, questioning by Senator Scott Ludlam, the discussion was interrupted by an interjection from David Reid. Reid was the whistleblower who alerted us all to a radiation incident at Lucas Heights, and was sacked for this
Anyway, the most recent KPMG report on the 2007 incident criticised the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) for its poor response to the incident.
This report was one of several reports on the matter. In February 2011, Australia’s workplace health and safety regulator, Comcare, found the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, or ANSTO, has under-reported accidents and breached safety standards. Investigating radiation incidents, Comcare found that ANSTO breached health and safety laws. It also reported that Mr Reid’s suspension was somewhat extreme and Mr Reid was substantially denied procedural fairness.
In the Senate yesterday Senator Scott Ludlam got devious answers from Dr Paterson, who seemed bent on asserting that the radioactive spill incidents never happened, anyway. No wonder that David Reid angrily interjected!
SENATOR LUDLAM: ” The KPMG report finds that ANSTO technical and supervisory staff and the executive management covered up the fact that three staff were contaminated by the beta emitter yttrium on the relevant day and that Mr Reid witnessed an incident between two men at the contamination barrier on the day in question n. He reported that one man had yttrium contamination, which is a beta radiation emitter, all down his clothes and in his mouth and that the other man’s supervisor was trying to clean him up and was telling him not to report the contamination….Mr Paterson, are you still contesting that these events even occurred at all? “
DR PATERSON: We were not involved in this investigation in a way that would have allowed us to put all of the issues on the table this was a report that was, indeed, intended for ARPANSA. It was not intended to make any findings in relation to ANSTO, and I do not believe it has done.
SENATOR LUDLAM: It is your facility; it is your plant. It is a report about an accident involving your staff at your facility. I am not quite sure why we are creating this distance. It was created for the regulator because they were extremely unhappy—I will contest these contentions later on this morning with ANSTO—with ANSTO’S response to these incidents, which did indeed occur. These are not alleged incidents. These are a matter of public record.
DR PATERSON I believe that we have been very clear on this matter. If indeed this incident did take place— —(interjection here from David Reid)…
SENATOR LUDLAM: So you contest the existence?
DR PATERSON: : I can contest whether there was an incident of this nature at the time that has been outlined in the report.
Thorium reactors – the latest dishonest spin from the nuclear propagandists
US Department of Energy (DOE) and its conflict of interest about radiation
It’s quite a leap to claim that evacuation zones around nuclear power plants might not be needed based on the chromosomes of 112 irradiated mice.
in 1970, the world’s largest human study of pregnancy x-rays reported that NRC’s harmless dose more than doubles the risk of childhood cancer
A Radioactive Conflict of Interest HUFFINGTON POST, Robert Alvarez on the Conflict of Interest inherent within US DOE radiation research 06/25/2012 Having the Energy Department control radiation health research makes as much sense as giving tobacco companies the authority to see if smoking is bad for you.
Last month, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) heralded an Energy Department funded study indicating that evacuation zones around nuclear power stations might not be needed after a major nuclear accident. Continue reading
Chorus of pro nuclear statements from vested interests
Japan’s Nuclear Exit; Nuclear Farce Or Who Is Behind The Resistance To Change Simply Info, September 17th, 2012 | “……..The US decision to intervene uninvited into Japan’s energy debate comes at a time when the nuclear industry worldwide has been attacking Japan and Germany for their phase outs and going after other energy sectors with disinformation campaigns.
Some of the more notable comments made by US officials regarding Japan’s nuclear phase out:
US Deputy Secretary of Energy Daniel Poneman –
“At a meeting with the DPJ’s policy chief Tuesday, Poneman said that if Japan takes such steps it might have unexpected effects on the United States and other concerned parties, Maehara said.” Continue reading
India’s nuclear heavies will “enlighten the masses”
I was so fascinated by this little article: I have coloured my favourite phrases in red.
Summit to allay fears on Kundakulam, Jaitapur nuclear plants Times of 
India B Sridhar, TNN Sep 13, 2012, JAMSHEDPUR: The innocent misguided people opposing the likes of Kundakulam nuclear power plant in Tamil Nadu and Jaitapur nuclear power plant in Maharashtra will be in focus in the global Nuclear Energy Summit scheduled to be held in Mumbai on September 25.
The summit to be organized by the department of atomic energy (DAE) will witness domestic and foreign nuclear producing company’s representatives discuss the various misconceptions and misinformation about the nuclear energy plants in a comprehensive manner.
“The summit will immensely help in allaying the fears related to the operation of the nuclear energy plants in India,” said
Jamshedpur-based Uranium Corporation of India Ltd (UCIL) spokesperson Atul Bajpai.
The UCIL will have 15 panels at the summit venue that will largely be informative in nature aimed at enlightening the common masses about the effective and sustainable uranium exploration measures the premier public enterprise is practicing over the years…..
Atomic Energy Commission chairman R K Sinha, Atomic Energy Nuclear Board vice-chairman S Duraisamy, nuclear specialist, Lisega Inc (US) Bob Fandetti and chief executive, French Nuclear Industry Association, Henri Chapotot are among those who will take part in the summit to be held at the Mumbai Exhibition Center.
The nuclear energy cargo cult and its cheerleaders
The top ten common myths of the nuclear cheerleaders As I mentioned in a previous posting the worst enemy of the nuclear industry is not Greenpeace or the environmentalists, but many of their own nutty cheerleaders. The more reasoned voices within the industry, which say that yes it can supply some small amount of the world’s energy, at least while we still have uranium around and we’re prepared to foot the bill for building and decommissioning reactors (which they admit is probably higher than the alternatives but you have to look at the issue of energy security). Unfortunately these people tend to get drowned out by their colleagues who are more motivated by job security than any genuine concern for the world’s energy security.
The second category of the nuclear cheerleaders includes the numerous PR gurus who lobby and schmooze on the industries behalf. Few of this last category have any relevant qualifications (not that this stops them claiming to be “experts”) and often work for largePR agencies, who count the Tobacco industry and the fossil fuel lobby among they’re other clients. This last point is relevant for as I shall demonstrate these PR types often use the same tactics the tobacco and global warming denial lobby utilise to promote nuclear energy while distorting the facts.
Finally you have by far and away the majority of the nuclear cheerleaders – the sheep. These are people who generally don’t really know very much about nuclear energy, other than what they’ve lapped up from industry produced propaganda. They tend to be either unaware of many of the negative aspects of nuclear energy or assume that all such stories are the product of a bias media….yet they happily lap up stories from the very same media whenever they say something positive about nuclear energy (usually the result of lobbying by the PR types mentioned above). This last category of nuclear cheerleader are probably the most dangerous, as they are quite happy to pass himself off as “experts” to anyone who’ll listen and fill other people’s heads with pure industry generated drivel and half truths.
These “sheep” are essentially worshippers of a “scientific cargo cult” , something that has the illusion of science but is actually more a creation of science fiction. There are several other examples of such “scientific cargo cults” such as those trying to develop SSTO space vehicles that violate the basic principles of the rocket equation, or nano-technology “assemblers” (that ignore the very basics of thermodynamics and atomic theory) or Intelligent design (that ignores science altogether!). All of these examples as well as some aspects of the nuclear dream all share one think in common – they are founded on myth’s that are at odds with reality.
Don’t get me wrong, we can do a great deal more than we are currently doing in space (for a lot less money too!), and nano-technology has many potentially exciting applications (notably in the field of renewable energy), and there is some potential scope to use nuclear power in the future (but only so long as we’re prepared to pay the price both in financial and environmental terms), but the idealistic visions promoted by some in these fields are just non-starters, usually for fairly simple technical reasons. Wasting time and money pursuing such impossible goals will only make achieved more reasoned and plausible objectives less likely.
To prevent anyone reading this from getting sucked into this nuclear energy cargo cult, as recently happened to the (former) environmentalists George Monbiot, I will explain a couple of the common myths that these cheerleaders spout out and demonstrate how they are wrong, illogical and totally divorced from reality……. http://daryanenergyblog.wordpress.com/2011/04/02/the-top-ten-common-myths-of-the-nuclear-cheerleaders/
Dispelling the myths of the pro nuclear astroturfers
The top ten common myths of the nuclear cheerleaders, daryanenergyblog, “……Myth I – The Fukushima accident is a “Triumph” of nuclear technology, it proves it works safely – Reality: It raises some important questions about aspects of nuclear safety
Myth II – Only 56 people were killed by the Chernobyl accident – Reality: The death toll from Chernobyl was many times higher, in the thousands or possibly tens of thousands
Myth III – Radiation isn’t that dangerous at all, it’s over exaggerated by the media, why the impact of Chernobyl was no worse than a few dozen chest x-rays each, and TMI was no worse than you’d get eating a banana – Reality: The effects of radiation from artifical sources is potentially quite serious
Myth IV – Nuclear power is cheaper than any of the alternatives – Reality: Its actually more expensive than most of the alternatives!
Myth V – But we can’t rely on renewables, because of their intermittent nature – Reality: Nuclear power has its own issues with intermittency
Myth VI – there’s plenty of fissile material in the world – Reality: While no immediate supply problems are anticipated, ultimately the world’s stockpiles of fissile material are limited in scale
Myth VII – We can’t build Renewables fast enough only nuclear power plants can be built quickly enough to prevent climate change – Reality: The current build rate of nuclear power stations is a small fraction of the annual build rate of renewables, even the maximum ever build rate of NPP’s in the 70′s is still exceeded by the currrent build rate of renewable systems
Myth VIII – Yes, you’ve highlighted several problems but you see once we get these new fast reactors working all these problems will be solved – Reality:Fast-reactors are a failed series of white elephants that are unlikely to ever work
Myth IX – All these problems will be solved when we develop Fusion, which will happen in the near future – Reality: While we’re making progress, its far to early to say when Nuclear Fusion will become commercially viable….if ever!
Myth X – Disposal of nuclear waste is easily solved, indeed we’ve already sorted it out – Reality: While there are options available, the nuclear industry is not pursing them, this is leading to a gradually worsening problem which needs to be tackled soon
Stop press, Bonus feature! Myth XI – We need to use MOX and reprocessing to stop Terrorists getting their hands on Plutonium in the future – Reality: This statement merely shows how out of touch the nuclear industry is….with reality! http://daryanenergyblog.wordpress.com/2011/04/02/the-top-ten-common-myths-of-the-nuclear-cheerleaders/
Is Fukushima Worse Than Chernobyl?
Radiation from Fukushima, Food Consumer, 5 Sept 12,
Radiation from Fukushima ukushima nuclear disaster is not the only thing Americans need to be worried about. As many as 14 states have been polluted by the nuclear tests conducted in the U.S. in 50’s, according to some reports. The clean states are only those in the West like Oregon, California, and maybe Washington as well. By Dr. Mercola
“……When the Chernobyl reactor melted down in 1986, approximately 134 plant workers and firefighters were exposed to high doses of radiation – 800 to 16,000 mSv – and developed acute radiation sickness. Of those 134 workers, 28 died within 3 months of exposure.
In total, more than 160,000 children and 146,000 cleanup workers became victims of radiation poisoning as a result of living and working in that radiotoxic environment, raising the incidence of birth defects, leukemia, anemia, cancers, thyroid disease, liver and bonemarrow degeneration, and overall severely compromised immune systems.
These, however, are only estimates, and according to some data, Chernobyl deaths may actually top 1 million.6 Fukushima is the largest nuclear disaster since, but there are many similarities popping up. For one, as the Institute of Science in Society (ISIS) points out:7
“From the beginning, the official nuclear safety experts were at pains to minimize the projected health impacts, as they are doing now for the Fukushima accident.”
According to ISIS, with Chernobyl, they underestimated related deaths by:
- Underestimating the level of radiation by averaging exposure over a large region, such as an entire country, so high exposure doses and health statistics of the most contaminated areas are lumped together with the less and least exposed
- Ignoring internal sources of radiation due to inhalation and ingestion of radioactive material from fallout
- Using an obsolete and erroneous model of linear energy transfer due to external sources of ionizing radiation
- Not counting diseases and conditions other than cancers
- Overestimating the natural background radiation; today’s “background” has been greatly increased by discharges from nuclear activities including tests of nuclear weapons, use of depleted uranium, and uranium mining
- Suppressing and withholding information from the public……. http://www.foodconsumer.org/newsite/Non-food/Environment/radiation_from_fukushima_0904120707.html
Touching faith of Steve Kidd that our grandchildren will solve the nuclear waste problem
“SOMEHOW the waste issue will UNDOUBTEDLY be taken care of”
In Today’s issue of Nuclear Engineering I found a fascinating article by Steve Kidd, deputy director-general of the World Nuclear Association. I was fascinated because of the insight this article gives into the thinking of the nuclear lobby.
It’s all about South Korea, and Mr Kidd is full of praise for the culture there. You see, they’re not only hard-working, – but Mr Kidd seems to be rejoicing that the South Koreans have none of that pesky individualism, that slows things up in other countries. In South Korea, he says, there’s ” a feeling of national unity, initially fostered by strong state control and somewhat repressive policies, which it carries through to today. Critics would argue that there is a lack of individualism, and it is certainly true that South Koreans all seem to think and speak with one voice…. every Korean is part of ‘Korea Inc’ and the economy drives forward with only the odd bump on the way”
This is awfully handy for the nuclear industry, – South Korea sounds like one place where the populace will believe their government. Mr Kidd seems agrees with all the economists, that nuclear energy needs government backing to survive “A strong national consensus that a nuclear programme is both necessary and do-able is also important, as is the guarantee that support won’t suddenly be withdrawn by political change.”
But my favourite part is that wonderfully religious bit, in which the nuclear advocate shows complacent faith that somehow, in the future, somebody’s grandchild will fix the problems that the nuclear industry has created – no doubt long after Mr Kidd and the rest of them have made their money, retired, and died.
“The major difficulty may turn out to be obtaining sites for the additional reactors in the 2020s, as the current four sites will run out of space for extra units by then. But somehow this will undoubtedly be taken care of, as will the waste issue, which is rising in significance as the volume of stored used fuel grows rapidly.”
Touching faith, isn’t it? – Christina Macpherson
Don’t believe the nuclear lobby’s lies about bananas and radiation
Nukers promoting contaminated food – the falsehoods of
the Potassium excuse http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/nukers-promoting-contaminated-food-the-falsehoods-of-the-potassium-excuse/http://nuclearhistory.wordpress.com/2012/08/30/nukers-promoting-contaminated-food-the-falsehoods-of-the-potassium-excuse/ I have blogged about this before. Attempts at selling contaminated food in the market of people’s lives by nuclear advocates has to stop in Japan and everywhere.
It will take me the weekend to finish this post as I gather the historic and current sources which show the Potassium equivalent dose (which the industry calls the banana equivalent dose) is a false, incorrect, wrong and deceptive fallacy.
In the interim, this wiki article explains the fallacy in brief:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banana_equivalent_dose
In brief: radio potassium (K40) is much a very small proportion of all potassium. It is far less radioactive per unit weight (amount, physical dose) than any biologically active fission product.
Potassium in any form is dangerous to the heart in excess, but potassium is a needed nutrient.
The body maintains a potassium balance therefore. This danger to the heart is a bio-chemical effect. The radiological nature of radio cesium (a potassium analogue) poses an additional threat to the heart and other soft tissue. Continue reading
Murdoch news paints nuclear disasters as “not too bad, really”
Murdoch’s Journal pushes tragic Fukushima flim-flam http://www.freepress.org/columns/display/7/2012/1941#.UD6F7tkjq2c.twitter August 29, 2012 With every atomic reactor disaster comes the inevitable whitewash.
And Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal has just painted a tragic new coat over the radioactive wasteland of atomic flim-flam. Its “Panic at Fukushima” speaks volumes to a nuclear power industry now crumbling at the core. It fits an historic pattern:
When yet another radioactive leak emits from the local nuke—no matter how serious—the official response is hard-wired to include the phrase “no danger to the public.”
When serious structural cracks surface at reactors like Ohio’s Davis-Besse or Crystal River, Florida, safety concerns are invariably dismissed with well-funded contempt.
As with fatally flawed steam generators at California’s San Onofre, if it can make an extra buck, the industry will run these reactors into the ground, safety-be-damned. Protected by federal taxpayer insurance and the bankruptcy laws, they know even a catastrophic disaster need not trouble their bottom line. Continue reading
What is wrong with thorium nuclear reactors? Well, a lot, really
Thorium: Why We Don’t Want It http://nowarnow.wordpress.com/2012/08/03/thorium-why-we-dont-want-it/ By No War Now / 3 August, 2012
“….. Thorium is just another nuclear industry way of persevering their jobs in an energy production method that does not make sense for our planet. Thorium requires mining rare earth elements. Thorium requires the changing of laws to process monazite, currently categorized as “‘prescribed substance’ and the sole domain of the government” per the Atomic Energy Act (Canada and China work in thorium, http://nextbigfuture.com/2012/08/canada-and-china-work-on-thorium-candu.html).
Thorium continues the predatory practice of extracting public money to support its development and operations. Of course, you won’t learn this from the schills and trolls who want to convince you that thorium is the answer to our energy needs and ought be part of our “clean energy” package. Mining is not, and has never been, a clean energy production practice. Especially when it involves uranium. Continue reading
1 This Month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/2352741955560
of the week–London Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament
Tell the Ukrainian Government to Drop Prosecution of Peace Activist Yurii Sheliazhenko
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
-
Archives
- April 2026 (189)
- 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)
- May 2025 (261)
-
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 