Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant: further delays for removal of melted fuel debris
About 880 tons of highly radioactive melted nuclear fuel remain inside the three damaged reactors. Critics say the 30- to 40-year cleanup target set by the government and TEPCO for Fukushima Daiichi is overly optimistic. The damage in each reactor is different and plans need to be formed to accommodate their conditions.
NewsDay, By The Associated Press, January 25, 2024
TOKYO — The operator of the tsunami-hit nuclear plant in Fukushima announced Thursday a delay of several more months before launching a test to remove melted fuel debris from inside one of the reactors, citing problems clearing the way for a robotic arm.
The debris cleanup initially was supposed to be started by 2021, but it has been plagued with delays, underscoring the difficulty of recovering from the plant’s meltdown after a magnitude 9.0 quake and tsunami in March 2011.
The disasters destroyed the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant’s power supply and cooling systems, causing three reactors to melt down, and massive amounts of fatally radioactive melted nuclear fuel remain inside to this day.
The government and the Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings, or TEPCO, initially committed to start removing the melted fuel from inside one of the three damaged reactors within 10 years of the disaster.
In 2019, the government and TEPCO decided to start removing melted fuel debris by the end of 2021 from the No. 2 reactor after a remote-controlled robot successfully clipped and lifted a granule of melted fuel during an internal probe.
But the coronavirus pandemic delayed development of the robotic arm, and the plan was pushed to 2022. Then, glitches with the arm repeatedly have delayed the project since then.
On Thursday, TEPCO officials pushed back the planned start from March to October of this year.
TEPCO officials said that the inside of a planned entryway for the robotic arm is filled with deposits believed to be melted equipment, cables and other debris from the meltdown, and their harder-than-expected removal has delayed the plan.
TEPCO now is considering using a slimmer, telescope-shaped kind of robot to start the debris removal.
About 880 tons of highly radioactive melted nuclear fuel remain inside the three damaged reactors. Critics say the 30- to 40-year cleanup target set by the government and TEPCO for Fukushima Daiichi is overly optimistic. The damage in each reactor is different and plans need to be formed to accommodate their conditions.
TEPCO has previously tried sending robots inside each of the three reactors but got hindered by debris, high radiation and inability to navigate them through the rubble, though they were able to gather some data in recent years.
Getting more details about the melted fuel debris from inside the reactors is crucial for their decommissioning. TEPCO plans to deploy four mini drones and a snake-shaped remote-controlled robot into the No. 1 reactor’s primary containment vessel in February to capture images from the areas where robots have not reached previously……… more https://www.newsday.com/news/nation/Japan-Fukushima-nuclear-plant-melted-fuel-decommissioning-v83291
Japan’s Fukushima nuclear plant further delays removal of melted fuel debris
Daily Mail, 26 Jan 24, TOKYO (AP) – The operator of the tsunami-hit nuclear plant in Fukushima announced Thursday a delay of several more months before launching a test to remove melted fuel debris from inside one of the reactors, citing problems clearing the way for a robotic arm.
The debris cleanup initially was supposed to be started by 2021, but it has been plagued with delays, underscoring the difficulty of recovering from the plant’s meltdown after a magnitude 9.0 quake and tsunami in March 2011……………………………………………
About 880 tons of highly radioactive melted nuclear fuel remain inside the three damaged reactors. Critics say the 30- to 40-year cleanup target set by the government and TEPCO for Fukushima Daiichi is overly optimistic. The damage in each reactor is different and plans need to be formed to accommodate their conditions.
TEPCO has previously tried sending robots inside each of the three reactors but got hindered by debris, high radiation and inability to navigate them through the rubble, though they were able to gather some data in recent years.
Getting more details about the melted fuel debris from inside the reactors is crucial for their decommissioning. TEPCO plans to deploy four mini drones and a snake-shaped remote-controlled robot into the No. 1 reactor’s primary containment vessel in February to capture images from the areas where robots have not reached previously………………. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/ap/article-13006423/Japans-Fukushima-nuclear-plant-delays-removal-melted-fuel-debris.html
NNSA Issues Final Surplus Plutonium Environmental Impact Statement
The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) published a Notice of Availability (NOA) in the Federal Register on Jan. 19, 2024, announcing the availability of the final Surplus Plutonium Disposition Program (SPDP) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The SPDP would employ the dilute and dispose strategy to safely and securely dispose of up to 34 metric tons of plutonium surplus to the Nation’s defense needs, using new, modified, or existing facilities at sites across the Nation.
The EIS satisfies NNSA’s obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as the agency seeks to fulfill two important goals:
- Reduce the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation worldwide by dispositioning surplus plutonium in the United States in a safe and secure manner.
- Meet NNSA’s domestic and international legal obligations.
The 34 metric tons of surplus plutonium covered in the EIS was previously intended for use in fabricating mixed oxide (MOX) fuel. After irradiation in commercial power reactors, the fuel would have been stored pending disposal in a deep geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel. DOE cancelled the MOX project in 2018.
NNSA’s preferred alternative, the dilute and dispose strategy, also known as “plutonium downblending,” includes converting pit and non-pit plutonium to oxide, blending the oxidized plutonium with an adulterant, compressing it, encasing it in two containers, then overpacking and disposing of the resulting contact-handled transuranic (CH-TRU) waste underground in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) facility in New Mexico. The approach would require new, modified, or existing capabilities at the Savannah River Site (SRS) in South Carolina, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico, the Pantex Plant in Texas, and WIPP.
Under the No Action Alternative, up to 7.1 metric tons of non-pit plutonium would be processed at either LANL or SRS. If the processing occurs at LANL, then the resulting plutonium oxide would be transported to SRS. If it occurs at SRS, then the resulting material would remain there. In both cases the processed material would be diluted, characterized, packaged, and transported as CH-TRU defense waste to the WIPP facility for disposal.
The final SPDP EIS is posted on the NNSA NEPA reading room web page. NNSA will publish a Record of Decision (ROD) for the program after Feb. 20, 2024. The ROD will be published in the Federal Register and posted on the DOE NEPA and NNSA NEPA Reading Room websites.
NNSA announced its intent on Dec. 16, 2020, to prepare an EIS to evaluate the environmental impacts of the dilute and dispose strategy. It released the draft EIS for public comment on Dec. 16, 2022. It conducted three in-person public hearings and one virtual public hearing in January 2023. NNSA has incorporated public comments and developed the final SPDP EIS and is committed to complying with all appropriate and applicable environmental and regulatory requirements.
The Politics of Nuclear Waste Disposal: Lessons from Australia
22 Jan 2024 | Jim Green and Dimity Hawkins, https://www.apln.network/projects/voices-from-pacific-island-countries/the-politics-of-nuclear-waste-disposal-lessons-from-australia
Click here to download the full report.
In this report, Jim Green and Dimity Hawkins explore Australia’s long and complex engagement with nuclear waste issues. With the failure to remediate atomic bomb test sites, and repeated failures to establish a national nuclear waste repository, the approaches of successive Australian governments to radioactive waste management deserve close scrutiny.
A recurring theme is the violation of the rights of Aboriginal First Nations Peoples and their successful efforts to resist the imposition of nuclear waste facilities on their traditional lands through effective community campaigning and legal challenges. Green and Hawkins argue for the incorporation of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into Australian law, and amendments to the National Radioactive Waste Management Act to remove clauses which weaken or override Indigenous cultural heritage protections and land rights.
In addition, they highlight the need for studies, clean-up and monitoring of all British nuclear weapons test sites in Australia in line with the positive obligations in the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). In light of the failure to manage existing radioactive waste management challenges, it must be questioned whether the Australian government can successfully manage the challenges of high-level nuclear waste management posed by the AUKUS defence pact and the plan to purchase and build nuclear-powered submarines.
This report was produced as part of a project on Nuclear Disarmament and the Anthropocene: Voices from Pacific Island Countries, sponsored by Ploughshares Fund.
Finland’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) wants to delay completion of its review on waste dump
Finland’s Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) has requested the
deadline for its opinion on Posiva Oy’s operating licence application for
the world’s first used fuel repository to be extended until the end of
2024. In September last year, it said it would not complete its review by
the end of 2023 as originally planned.
Radioactive waste management company
Posiva submitted its application, together with related information, to the
Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment (TEM) on 30 December 2021 for
an operating licence for the used fuel encapsulation plant and final
disposal facility currently under construction at Olkiluoto.
The repository
is expected to begin operations in the mid-2020s. Posiva is applying for an
operating licence for a period from March 2024 to the end of 2070. The
government will make the final decision on Posiva’s application, but a
positive opinion by STUK is required beforehand. The regulator began its
review in May 2022 after concluding Posiva had provided sufficient
material. The ministry had requested STUK’s opinion on the application by
the end of 2023.
However, STUK announced in September that its safety
assessment and opinion on the application was taking longer than expected
and would not be completed by that deadline.
World Nuclear News 19th Jan 2024
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/STUK-requests-extension-to-repository-review-deadl
Chalk River, or low-level nuclear governance.
Monique Pauzé, The author is a Bloc Québécois MP (Repentigny) and Environment critic., January 18, 2024
A few days ago, after several “rounds of work and consultation” that began in 2016, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) ruled in favor of the Chalk River Near Surface Waste Management Facility (NSWMF) project. Opposition to this open-air radioactive dump is undeniable: a multitude of aboriginal communities, citizen groups, scientists and over a hundred cities and municipalities spread around the Ottawa River, including Ottawa, Montreal and Gatineau.
To contextualize the issues surrounding this project, and to grasp the extent to which the authorization given is highly reprehensible, if not absurd, I believe it is pertinent to address it in the light of a study by the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Environment, specifically on Canada’s governance of radioactive waste. Held in 2022 and concluding with a report submitted to federal elected officials, the study is absolutely relevant today.
To begin with, we remind you that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) made suggestions and recommendations to the CNSC in 2019, during the peer review conducted by the Integrated Regulatory Review Service mission. As a result, we had confirmation, despite the government’s expressed pride, that Canada was not beyond reproach in this area, and this justified the attention of federal elected officials.
Many decried it: the essential principle of keeping radioactive waste away from sources of drinking water is not respected, and in many respects the project is at odds with the recommendations and guidelines of the IAEA, as well as with the five principles agreed and adopted by the leaders of 133 First Nations in Ontario.
There is an absence of consideration for the possible hazards associated with the project’s location and underground, hazards that attract less attention than the risks of contamination of watercourses, tributaries of the river, from which potentially millions of people draw their drinking water.
Legitimate opposition
In addition, Chalk River is located at the junction of geological fractures and in the western Quebec earthquake zone, a seismic belt that spans the Ottawa Valley, the Laurentians and parts of eastern Ontario. The volume of various radioactive wastes that will be buried in the open pit is substantial. Witnesses and experts have raised the issue of the lack of clarity in identifying the substances that will be introduced into the mound.
Opposition to the project is absolutely legitimate.
Several witnesses to this study accurately addressed the physical characteristics of Canadian radioactive waste, highlighting the redefinition of what constitutes intermediate-level radioactive waste, hidden in a CNSC “proof regulation” adopted in June 2020. William Turner, retired from Atomic Energy of Canada Limited and a resident of Deep River, provided the committee with a detailed fact sheet on this issue.
Gilles Provost, a science journalist and witness to the study, wrote in Le Devoir on June 13 of the same year: “[…] we come up against a scientific absurdity: in physics, the activity of a radioactive product is its decay rate. The faster it decays, the higher its activity. This means that a radioactive product with [higher] activity according to physics would now be low-level waste according to the new definition decreed by the CNSC!”
This new definition has concrete effects, since the Chalk River SRWMF is designed to receive only low-level waste. The result? Waste considered to be medium-level by physical science will end up in the mound, since it is now considered to be low-level.
For the Aboriginal communities of Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi, the process chosen by the CNSC constitutes a failure in its duty to consult properly.
In addition to the disturbing comments made or sent by their representatives during the parliamentary committee study in 2022 about the “coercive” nature of the consultative approach, the aboriginal communities are rightly relying on Article 29.2 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which states that no decision on nuclear waste storage, small modular reactors, transport or decommissioning can be taken without free, prior and informed consent.
“[…] We could explain it to you, but you wouldn’t understand it anyway. We’ll give you all the information and you won’t understand it.” This excerpt from the testimony of Reg Niganobe, Chief of the Grand Council of the Anishinabe Nation and a witness to the 2022 study, is shocking: when a representative of the sector expresses himself in this way, I think the climate they want to create is incredibly unhealthy and contemptuous. Non-native groups have also been subjected to this type of “approach” in similar processes. Their submissions to the committee study attest to this.
If there is indeed a political will to consider the communities most directly affected by these issues, then they must be given the consideration they deserve.
Reconciliation? Participatory consultations? Transparent processes and compliance with IAEA standards? The CNSC reports to Minister Jonathan Wilkinson, and the mobilization against Chalk River will continue. The federal government had better change its mind… It has the authority to do so.
Kebaowek Nation calls for cancellationof nuclear waste disposal site at Chalk River
Nuclear waste disposal would run counter to Aboriginal rights and environmental protection.
by Alexia Leclerc, Pivot, January 16, 2024
The Kebaowek First Nation denounces the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission’s decision to grant a license to the private company Canadian Nuclear Laboratories to build a radioactive waste disposal facility at Chalk River, on Algonquin Anishinabeg traditional territory. She believes that the Commission did not respect its duty to consult Aboriginal communities, and is concerned about the consequences for health and the environment.
Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) has obtained a federal licence to operate a 37-hectare area for, among other things, the permanent near-surface storage of up to 1,000,000 cubic metres of solid low-level radioactive waste.
This area is located on the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation communities, who reject the project. The area is close to sacred sites such as Oiseau Rock and Pointe au Baptême, as well as the Kichi Sibi (Ottawa River) and its watershed, and several animal and plant species important to the ecosystem.
The community of Kebaowek strongly denounces this situation and calls on the federal government to stop the project. “The Commission’s decision is unacceptable,” said Lance Haymond, Chief of the First Nation, in a press release issued on January 9. “The Government of Canada must act quickly and affirm the suspension of the project without delay.”
CNL applied to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), a federal administrative tribunal, for an amendment to its current operating licence. The Commission, which issues licences to nuclear companies, is mandated to assess the environmental and human impacts of such a project, while ensuring that obligations to consult Aboriginal peoples are met.
Duty to consult not respected
“We believe that consultation has been inadequate, to say the least, and that our Aboriginal rights are threatened by this proposal,” says Lance Haymond.
The communities of Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi, members of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation, intervened with the Commission in June 2022 to inform it that they had not been adequately consulted. The Commission gave them one year to provide a brief that would allow adequate consultation.
Only these two communities were given additional time for consultation activities, although other communities also requested this time.
The brief filed by Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi states that all the communities of the Algonquin Anishinabeg Nation have potential title, interest and inherent rights over the entire Kichi Sibi watershed, beyond the limits imposed by the reserve and provincial system.
“How do they understand the duty to consult, when ten out of eleven communities refuse the project?” denounces Justin Roy, Councillor for the Kebaowek First Nation. “It’s not enough to simply inform and listen. What the communities want is to be able to sit at the discussion table, to take part in the decision-making and solution-making process.
He acknowledges that nuclear waste management needs to be addressed, but maintains that the current solution is inadequate.
The Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi brief already asserted that approval of this project would violate the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This states that states must take effective measures to prevent the storage or disposal of hazardous materials on the territories of indigenous peoples without their free, prior and informed consent.
When we asked about the criticisms of the consultations, the Commission simply referred us to its report, without comment. The report describes the consultation process and mentions the additional time granted to the two communities.
Threats to health
Kebaowek Chief Lance Haymond states “it is undeniable that the safety and health of people and the environment will be profoundly impacted for generations to come by this project”.
Gordon Edwards, president of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, warns of the dangers of storing nuclear substances in the area, despite the Commission’s ruling. “Judging that there will be no significant environmental impacts doesn’t mean that there won’t be any.”
Gordon Edwards points out that even after the active life of this nuclear waste management site is over, radioactive materials from it will still be present in the environment for several thousand years.
The release of radioactive materials into the water of the Ottawa river that flows into the St. Lawrence will be monitored to ensure that the quantity respects Canadian standards, insists the Commission. However, Gordon Edwards warns that no public health or medical data will be collected on the health effects of exposure to people from these substances in the water.
“When we put radioactivity in the water we drink, we expose millions of people. Even if the level of exposure is very low, it exposes a lot of people to these radioactive cancer-causing agents.” He explains that the more people are exposed to radiation, the greater the number of cancers are expected.
“The main reason to keep radioactive materials out of the environment is to keep the number of people exposed to them as minimal as possible,” he sums up.
Impact on endangered species
Despite the Commission’s assessment, the Kebaowek First Nation also remains concerned about the project’s environmental impacts. “The Commission’s final decision is completely unfounded in concluding that the project […] will not have significant environmental effects,” insists Lance Haymond.
Justin Roy points out that several protected species inhabit this environment. For example, he points out that the Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi brief assesses, among other things, that vegetation clearing would have an impact on the black ash, considered an endangered species by the Ontario government. However, there is no mention of the black ash in the Commission’s report.
Construction of the site would also require the destruction of hibernation sites, threatening the black bear population, says Justin Roy.
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission affirms that the environmental effects are for the most part insignificant, and that mitigation measures will be put in place to protect endangered species. In response to Pivot’s questions, it states that it will continue to observe the surrounding environment as part of the Independent Environmental Monitoring Program.
Commission decision a ‘gut-punch’, so years-long battle over radioactive waste mound will continue
“You cannot sit there and tell me that over the next 550 years nothing is going to leach out of this mound and get in and make its way into the surrounding environment and waterways.” —Kebaowek First Nation Councillor Justin Roy
By Shari Narine
Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
Windspeaker.com 12 Jan 24
Kebaowek First Nation is considering legal action now that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has given the go ahead to Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL) to construct a Near Surface Disposal Facility (NSDF) for solid low-level radioactive waste at its Chalk River Laboratories site on traditional unceded Algonquin territory.
“The big thing being discussed right now is pushing for a judicial review of the project. Just based on all of our environmental findings and the impacts that could be shown, we strongly believe we’d have a good case for this,” said Kebaowek First Nation Councillor Justin Roy.
Next steps will be decided once the legal team has fully reviewed the 169-page decision from the commission, which was released Jan. 9, he says.
The commission ruled it was confident that the NSDF project, an engineered containment mound for up to a million tonnes of radioactive and hazardous waste, was “not likely to cause significant adverse effects with respect to Aboriginal peoples.”
The containment mound is to be located 1.1 km from the Ottawa River on a bedrock ridge. The Kichi Sibi (Ottawa River) is sacred to the Algonquin people. The Chalk River site is also close to the sacred Algonquin sites of Oiseau Rock and Baptism Point.
The commission concluded “the design of the NSDF project is robust, supported by a strong safety case, able to meet its required design life, and sufficient to withstand severe weather events, seismic activity, and the effects of climate change.”
Roy calls the decision a “gut punch” but admits he is not surprised.
What does surprise him, however, is that the decision states that CNL adequately undertook a duty to consult with First Nations.
“I find that hard to believe when you have 10 of 11 Algonquin communities in direct opposition to the project. After everything that we’ve done over the last number of years and everything that we presented at last year’s hearing and then even in the hearing this last August, we’re just falling on deaf ears once again,” said Roy.
On June 9, the Algonquins of Pikwakanagan signed a long-term relationship agreement with CNL and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, another nuclear organization. The agreement establishes a working group with representatives from all three parties.
The commission held that the disposal facility was also “not likely to cause significant adverse effects” when it came to fish and fish habitat, aquatic species at risk, migratory birds, or federal lands.
“We have inherent rights to our unceded Algonquin territory and that means we need to protect everything that encompasses that territory, from the environment, the trees, the land, the air, the water and all the living species that make up our Algonquin territory,” said Roy.
Algonquin people are on the ground, he said, hunting, fishing and picking berries and “were able to show that there are going to be plenty of environmental impacts and, especially, species at risk that are going to be affected by this.”……………………………………………………………… https://windspeaker.com/news/windspeaker-news/commission-decision-gut-punch-so-years-long-battle-over-radioactive-waste
Kebaowek First Nation strongly opposes nuclear waste storage facility in Chalk River
Radioactive waste site in Chalk River a go
National Observer, By Natasha Bulowski / Local Journalism Initiative / Canada’s National Observer, 9 Jan 24
The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission has greenlit a proposed nuclear waste storage facility in Chalk River, Ont., after a years-long battle waged by concerned citizens, environmentalists and First Nations.
On Jan. 9, the commission announced Canadian Nuclear Laboratories’ operating licence will be changed to allow construction of a “near-surface disposal facility” to hold up to a million tonnes of radioactive and hazardous waste. Stored in a large mound, the waste would sit about a kilometre from the Ottawa River, a culturally important river for Algonquins, and this proximity to drinking water for millions is one of many factors that raised alarm bells for opponents.
The proposed facility, referred to as the NSDF, “is not likely to cause significant adverse environmental effects” as long as Canadian Nuclear Laboratories sticks to its proposed mitigation and monitoring measures, the commission said in its decision.
Within hours of the announcement, Kebaowek First Nation put out a press release calling on the federal government to intervene and stop the project. Organizations representing 10 of the 11 Algonquin First Nations have opposed the project, alongside leaders and elders from those nations. Pikwakanagan First Nation, the only Ontario-based Algonquin Nation and closest to Chalk River, signed a long-term relationship agreement with Canadian Nuclear Laboratories on June 9, 2023………………………………………………
Kebaowek First Nation Chief Lance Haymond called the commission’s decision “unacceptable” because it goes against the rights of Indigenous Peoples and environmental protection in a press release issued a few hours after the decision.
“I want to be very clear: the Algonquin Peoples did not consent to the construction of this radioactive waste dump on our unceded territory,” Haymond said. “We believe the consultation was inadequate, to say the least, and that our Indigenous rights are threatened by this proposal.”
Algonquin leaders from Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg First Nations and Algonquins of Barriere Lake have long opposed the NSDF and have urged the commission to heed their concerns about environmental and human health. At the final licensing hearing in August, Kebaowek and Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg argued the consultation was inadequate because it began far too late in the decision-making process and did not appear to take their concerns or traditional knowledge seriously………………………………………….
James Walker, a nuclear waste expert and former director of safety engineering and licensing at AECL, disputed the proclamation that all waste will be low-level in a submission to the commission. His calculations, based on the inventory of waste provided by Canadian Nuclear Laboratories, show that much of it is intermediate-level radioactive waste and should not be placed in a near-surface facility. There is also no inventory management system to properly verify the waste complies with the acceptance criteria, he wrote. Walker said the project is “non-compliant with International Safety Standards” for these reasons……………………..
Last month, concerned citizen Ole Hendrickson initiated a House of Commons petition (authorized by Pontiac, Que. MP Sophie Chatel) calling for an international review of three radioactive waste projects including the NSDF at Chalk River. At the time of writing, it has almost 2,950 signatures. Petitions require a minimum of 500 signatures to be presented in the House of Commons and receive an official response from the government. https://www.nationalobserver.com/2024/01/09/news/radioactive-waste-site-chalk-river-go#
Mr President, saying that nuclear power will save the climate is a lie.
While Emmanuel Macron continues to affirm his attachment to the atom,
Yannick Jadot, Marine Tondelier, Eric Piolle and Sandra Regol are calling
on France not to get stuck again in costly and dangerous dependence on this
energy.
At the end of 2023, first in a forum, then in his wishes to the
French, President Macron reaffirmed his attachment to the relaunch of
nuclear power. He who questioned in 2017 the relevance of depending
three-quarters on a single source of electricity production has today
transformed into a nuclear industry salesman.
In Dubai, busy tripling
global production by 2050, he actively campaigned for the mention of
nuclear power in the final COP 28 agreement.
Liberation 9th Jan 2024
Behind the (somewhat dirty) scenes of nuclear waste processing
Behind the (somewhat dirty) scenes of nuclear waste processing. Nuclear
energy, even if many call it “clean”, produces a lot of waste (and costs
“crazy money”). A researcher was able to carry out a survey lasting
approximately one year on two French waste landfill sites. How are these
things managed? Exclusive interview. “There is no such thing as
decontamination. This is an abuse of language. You don’t kill the
radioactivity, you move it.”
Mediapart 9th Jan 2024
The mystery of a Truchas woman who died with extraordinary amounts of plutonium in her body
KUNM | By Alice Fordham, https://www.kunm.org/local-news/2024-01-08/the-mystery-of-a-truchas-woman-who-died-with-extraordinary-amounts-of-plutonium-in-her-body
With the release of the movie Oppenheimer last year, there has been a resurgence of interest in the history of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. But for writer Alicia Inez Guzmán at the investigative nonprofit Searchlight New Mexico, that interest has been there for years as she has covered the past and present of the lab and its impact on the people of northern New Mexico. Her reporting includes the town of Truchas, where she grew up. In her latest report, Guzmán looks at the story of one woman who lived in Truchas, and died in 1972, inexplicably with extraordinarily high levels of plutonium in her body. Guzmán spoke with KUNM about her reporting.
ALICIA INEZ GUZMAN: When I first heard about this mystery woman, it was on an airplane coming back to Santa Fe. And I was sitting next to Jay Coghlan, who’s the executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico. And he said something to the effect of, the woman with the most plutonium in her body after the Trinity Site detonation, was from Truchas. And I just thought it was so fascinating and cryptic that I actually got the source of the information, which is the LAHDRA report or the Los Alamos Historical Document and Retrieval Assessment. And that’s where I was able to read for myself that there was a woman from Truchas, who had 60 times the amount of plutonium than the average New Mexico resident, and it was attributed to the Trinity Site, which led me on a wild goose chase basically
KUNM: Why was this so intriguing to you?
GUZMAN: Sure, so Truchas is 225 miles away from the Trinity Site. It’s in northern New Mexico in the Sangre de Cristo Mountains. And we know of course, the fallout did reach places like Truchas and far beyond, but in order for somebody to have plutonium in their body, they have to ingest it or inhale it. And so that was part of the question that I had was: well, she’s 225 miles away, could she have ingested or inhaled plutonium at that distance?
KUNM: So you had these questions, how did you go about finding out more about this person?
GUZMAN: When she was listed in the larger report, simply she was from Truchas, alive when Trinity detonated. So I had two pieces of information to go on. But what I realized was that the reason why they had that information about her at all was because the lab had conducted a series of autopsies on not only workers from Los Alamos National Laboratory, but the surrounding community. And once I found that information out, I was able to determine that there had actually been a class action lawsuit made on behalf of families of people who had been autopsied, because their families had never given informed consent. So I had to go to the courthouse here in Santa Fe, and from there, I found an issue of Health Physics magazine from 1979. And her name was not given, but it gave her age, at death, where she was from, what she did — a housewife — and the year that she died. And so, when I did a search in obituaries for that set of criteria, only one woman came up. And it turns out, as I suspected, that I knew the family.
KUNM: And what did they learn from you, and what did you learn from them?
GUZMAN: I should start out with what they learned, because I had to basically call them and reveal that possibly their grandmother had been involved in this clandestine study. And that if it was her, she had by far the most amount of plutonium in her body than anybody else who had been autopsied as a resident in that study. So, I think it was a huge shock to them.
Of course, what I learned from them was that this woman, whose name is Epifania Trujillo, she ended up moving in with her daughter and son in law, and her son in law, as it happened, worked at the laboratory as a janitor in a hot site, a hot site being somewhere where there was radiation, and that all of his children, he had seven children, all of his children except for one ended up getting cancer, and his wife. And so, I started talking to epidemiologists and toxicologists and physicists to really think through: is it possible that instead of having been exposed or contaminated from the Trinity Site, could it be Epifania and her family had been exposed and contaminated by what I later came to know or find out was take-home toxins? And largely what I hypothesize in the story was it is far more likely that her exposure came from Los Alamos National Laboratory, then it would be from Trinity Site.
Carlsbad depositary- 79% of waste came from nuclear wastes from Idaho National Laboratory
Hundreds of shipments of nuclear waste were buried at a facility near
Carlsbad in 2024, and the federal government was poised to send even more
waste to the site in 2024. For that work, the Department of Energy’s
contractor Salado Isolation Mining Contractors (SIMCO) earned about $11.5
million or about 89% of its available $13 million fee between Feb. 4, 2023
when SIMCO took over the contract and the end of the last federal fiscal
year on Sept. 30, 2023.
DOE records show 479 shipments of transuranic (TRU)
nuclear waste were received at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant between Jan.
1 and Dec. 31, 2023, from federal labs and other nuclear facilities around
the U.S. TRU waste is made of clothing materials, equipment and other
debris irradiated during nuclear activities, and it is buried in a salt
deposit at WIPP about 2,000 feet underground. The DOE said in 2023 it
worked to increase shipments to 17 per week, and hold that level in the
coming years. Most of the waste, about 79%, came from Idaho National
Laboratory in the form of 377 waste shipments.
Carlsbad Current-Argus 7th Jan 2024
Challenging questions concerning UK’s Geological Disposal Facility (GDF)Test of Public Support.
Nuclear Waste Services (NWS), the division of the taxpayer-funded Nuclear
Decommissioning Authority, charged with identifying a location for a
Geological Disposal Facility (GDF) into which Britain’s legacy and future
high-level radioactive waste will be deposited, has stated that the two
criteria that will determine the location are – the availability of
sufficient ‘suitable’ geology and the consent of a ‘willing
community’.
Three ‘Search Areas’ are known to be under consideration
for the GDF – Theddlethorpe on the East Lincolnshire coast and Mid and
South Copeland on the West coast of Cumbria.
According to the government
and industry guidance that governs the conduct of this investigation,
whether such consent exists will ultimately be determined by a Test of
Public Support amongst the members of the Potential Host Community (PHC).
The timing of the test is down to the Relevant Principal Local Authorities
(RPLAs) – Cumberland Council in Cumbria and Lincolnshire County Council
and East Lindsey District Council in Lincolnshire, but its nature and the
participants in it are determined by the Community Partnerships that have
been established supposedly to provide stakeholder oversight to the
process.
Whether the test is then carried out by the RPLAs, NWS staff or
both is not specified, but if the result is negative, NWS are required to
withdraw the area from further consideration.
NFLA 2nd Jan 2024
UK’s Nuclear Waste Service (NWS) to grant £millions to the 3 Community Partnerships, to seek a site for nuclear waste dump.
In Phase 1, Community Investment Funding of up to £1 million per annum is
made available by Nuclear Waste Services (NWS) to each of the three
Community Partnerships currently engaged in the siting process for a
Geological Disposal Facility (GDF).
Where a Community Partnership / Search
Area is taken forward into Phase 2, involving the commencement of borehole
investigations, this sum will increase to £2.5 million per annum.
A decision on which two Search Areas will be taken forward is anticipated in
2026. The grants can be used to fund projects, schemes or initiatives
benefiting the community of each Search Area that: provide economic
opportunities, enhance the natural and built environment, or improve
community wellbeing. Each Community Partnership can also agree its own
criteria for awards based on local circumstances.
A Freedom of Information
request was submitted to NWS with a short question set which was identical
for each of the Community Partnerships. The responses received from NWS
follow.
NFLA 5th Jan 2024
-
Archives
- October 2026 (120)
- 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)
- November 2025 (359)
-
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
