48 of 89 children found thyroid abnormality in Ushiku city Ibaraki
February 3, 2015
By 1/30/2015, Ushiku city government of Ibaraki announced 48 of 89 children were given A2 or B diagnosis in their thyroid inspection.
A2 is given when they find thyroid nodule (≦5.0mm) or cysts (≦20.0mm), B is given when they find thyroid nodule (≧ 5.1mm) or cysts (≧20.1mm).
Since last August, 50 more children had the inspection. 40 children were given A2, 8 children were given B in total.
Only less than half of the testees turned out to be free of any abnormality.
Ushiku city government states 40 children of A2 don’t need any follow-up inspection.
http://www.city.ushiku.lg.jp/scms/admin76381/data/doc/1421893197_doc_54_0.pdf
http://www.city.ushiku.lg.jp/scms/admin76381/data/doc/1383177176_doc_54_0.pdf
Source: Fukushima Diary
48 of 89 children found thyroid abnormality in Ushiku city Ibaraki
Clean-up work resumes at Fukushima nuclear plant
Feb. 03, 2015
Tokyo Electric Power Co, operator of the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, on Tuesday recommenced clean-up work after a two-week break due to two fatal accidents at the Daiichi and Daini plants.
All work was halted following the accidents, in order for safety regulation checks to be conducted.
However, TEPCO said it expects delays to continue for up to a month on a project to build an ice wall intended to contain the leaking of contaminated water from reactors at the Daiichi plant, TV Asahi reported.
TEPCO has been fighting a daily battle against contaminated water since Fukushima was wrecked by an earthquake and tsunami in March 2011 and three reactors underwent meltdowns.
Water flushed over the wrecked reactors to keep them cool enough to prevent further radioactive releases is leaking into basements after contact with the melted uranium fuel.
The water mixes with groundwater that seeps into the basements, requiring more pumping, treatment and storage.
Missteps and leaks have dogged the efforts to contain the water, slowing down the overall decommissioning process, which is expected to take decades.
Source: Japan Today
Tepco unlikely to complete ice wall by March
Feb 3, 2015
Tokyo Electric Power Co. will probably not meet its target of completing by the end of March the first section of frozen soil shields to curb the buildup of radioactive water at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant.
Construction is being delayed by two weeks to one month after two deadly accidents at Fukushima No. 1 and No. 2 nuclear plants last month forced the company to suspend work for safety checks, Tepco officials said Monday.
The shields are intended to block groundwater from the nearby mountains from flowing into the reactor building basements and mixing with water that has become highly radioactive after being used to cool the overheating reactors.
Tepco began the construction work last June.
The volume of contaminated water has been increasing by several hundred tons a day due partly to the inflow of groundwater.
Even after the construction is completed, Tepco will need approval from the Nuclear Regulation Authority to start circulating refrigerant to freeze the surrounding soil. The NRA is concerned that the shields may change the flow of groundwater and cause the ground to sink, which could allow contaminated water to flow out of the reactor buildings.
Source: Japan Times
Manga artist claims again Fukushima radiation is causing nosebleeds
Feb 2, 2015
Tetsu Kariya, author of the gourmet manga “Oishinbo,” says in the series’ latest edition that radiation is so high in Fukushima Prefecture it is causing nosebleeds among local residents.
The theme echoes one in a previous story that critics panned when Kariya had the main character suffer a nosebleed after visiting the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
The controversial episodes ran in Shogakukan Inc.’s Big Comic Spirits magazine last May. But when the manga was compiled into book form, critical passages, including one linking nosebleeds and radiation exposure, were watered down.
In his latest book, published by Yugensha, Kariya questions the Environment Ministry’s assertion that radiation is unlikely to be causing nosebleeds locally. He cites surveys that found that “many people” have been suffering nosebleeds in the prefecture.
Kariya has written extensively about the plight of Fukushima farmers and fishermen, whose troubles he has studied at first hand. He has visited places around the nuclear power station.
He said he altered some controversial episodes in the new book to prevent misunderstanding and to protect real people who were identifiable in previous episodes and who others criticized.
In the final chapter, Kariya emphasizes that the reconstruction of the lives of the people is far more important than the recovery of the land of Fukushima.
“It is only you who can protect yourselves,” he said, addressing them in general. “Please have the courage to flee from Fukushima.”
Source: Japan Times
Fukushima radiation is causing nosebleeds -Manga artist
Manga artist claims again Fukushima radiation is causing nosebleeds, Japan Times, Tetsu Kariya, author of the gourmet manga “Oishinbo,” says in the series’ latest edition that radiation is so high in Fukushima Prefecture it is causing nosebleeds among local residents.
The theme echoes one in a previous story that critics panned when Kariya had the main character suffer a nosebleed after visiting the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant.
The controversial episodes ran in Shogakukan Inc.’s Big Comic Spirits magazine last May. But when the manga was compiled into book form, critical passages, including one linking nosebleeds and radiation exposure, were watered down.
In his latest book, published by Yugensha, Kariya questions the Environment Ministry’s assertion that radiation is unlikely to be causing nosebleeds locally. He cites surveys that found that “many people” have been suffering nosebleeds in the prefecture…..http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/02/02/national/manga-artist-claims-again-fukushima-radiation-is-causing-nosebleeds/#.VNF_0tKUcnk
Indian government rolls over to accomodate US nuclear corporations, US military strategy
Obama’s visit and the much-hyped nuclear deal, DNA Tuesday, 3 February 2015 Exploiting fully the servile attitude of this Modi government, being offered on a platter, US President Barack Obama, on his recent State visit to India as the guest of our 66thRepublic Day Parade, got what he wanted from India to rejuvenate the beleaguered US economy.
The Left parties opposition to the Indo-US nuclear deal and the subsequent developments which led to the withdrawal of the support from the UPA-I government were based on very serious apprehensions concerning the consequences of this deal. These relate to pressures to transform the Indian independent foreign policy positions towards those of a subordinate US ally; forcing India to further open up its economy to the profit maximisation of US corporations and India being drawn into USA’s strategic and military network as a steadfast accomplice.
The Modi government has reportedly gone ahead to permit the circumvention of US manufactured nuclear reactors’ liability in the case of a nuclear accident. Reports indicate that Section 17(b) of the Act will be interpreted in the Rules to enable the Indian State-owned insurance corporations to offer a cover of Rs750 crores to cover supplier’s liability, while a government back-up will extend this to Rs1,500 crores. India will pay the premium for such an insurance policy to the foreign suppliers. ……http://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-obama-s-visit-and-the-much-hyped-nuclear-deal-2057646
If USA nuclear reactors have accidents in India – Indian tax-payers pay: US corporations scot-free!
Good News! US Corporations Won’t Have to Pay for Nuclear Disasters in India, FAIR,
But what is the news? Here’s how the paper’s Mandakini Gahlot summarizes the agreement:
Picking up from a stalled 2008 civil nuclear agreement between the two countries, the deal would allow US firms to invest in energy in India. It also resolves a dispute over US insistence on tracking fissile material it supplies to the country and over Indian liability provisions that have discouraged US firms from capitalizing on the agreement.”……
These corporations–who have the political backing of the US government–have succeeded in getting international conventions to agree that “no one other than operators can be held responsible” in the event of a nuclear catastrophe. The suppliers want assurances that these international conventions, and not Indian law, will be applied in the wake of such an event.
The “breakthrough” between Obama and Modi seems to be an agreement that the law will be “tweaked” to let US corporations off the hook in case of a devastating accident. For example, suppliers of nuclear equipment could be redefined as “contractors” and therefore not be liable under Indian law.
Of course, if USA Today explained that Obama had gotten the Indian prime minister to find a loophole that would allow US corporations to avoid having to compensate victims of nuclear disasters that they contributed to, that would be harder to present as a “good news!” story. http://fair.org/blog/2015/01/27/good-news-us-corporations-wont-have-to-pay-for-nuclear-disasters-in-india/
India tests nuclear-capable missile that could reach China , even Europe
India tests nuclear-capable missile from mobile launcher,DW, 30 Jan 15 India has carried out the first launch of its Agni-V long-range missile from a mobile mount. The weapon, which can carry nuclear warheads, is capable of reaching China and even Europe.
Saturday’s test-launch of the Agni-V ballistic missile was the first time that the weapon has been fired from a truck mount – called a “canister” – rather than a concrete launchpad, a spokesman for India’s Defense Research and Development Organization said.
The mobile launchpad will facilitate flexible deployment of the missile, which has a range of 5,000 kilometers (3,100 miles) – making it capable of reaching the Chinese mainland, or nearly all of western Europe.
“Successful test-firing of Agni-V from a canister makes the missile a prized asset for our forces,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi said on Twitter.
The 17-meter (18.6-yard) weapon, which weighs 50 tons, was launched from the test range on Wheeler Island off the eastern state of Orissa.
It is the third time that the Agni-V missile, named after the Sanskrit word for “fire,” has been tested, having received its initial launch in April 2012 (pictured above).
Deterring ‘evil eyes’
The test comes as India, the largest importer of arms in the world, is involved in a defense upgrade to the tune of $100 billion (88.6 billion euros).
Modi has said he wants to increase India’s military power to the extent that no other country “dare cast an evil eye” on it. His right-wing government has pushed on with long-delayed projects worth over $60 billion since taking power in elections in May. http://www.dw.de/india-tests-nuclear-capable-missile-from-mobile-launcher/a-18227324
Renewable energy a more practical option than nuclear, for Pakistan
Generating energy from alternative resources more feasible than nuclear plants: speakers, Pakistan Today, 1 Feb 2015 Physicists, architects, engineers, economists and civil society activists on Sunday emphasized the need to adopt alternative energy sources like solar and wind instead of nuclear power plants for generation of electricity in Pakistan as it is not cheaper as claimed by the Atomic Energy Commission of Pakistan.
Instead of providing nuclear reactors, China should be asked to provide money for power generation through solar and wind, said the experts while speaking at a workshop on ‘proposed karachi nuclear power plants: preparing for the environmental impact assessment and public hearing’ jointly organised by the Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (PILER) and the Pakistan Fisherfolk Forum (PFF) at a local hotel.
“The citizens of Karachi should take part in a large number in the expected public hearing for the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) by the government after the orders by Sindh High Court,” said Dr AH Nayyar, Professor of Physics at Quaid-e-AzamUniversityIslamabad. It is for the first time that an EIA and public hearing is being held for a nuclear power plant.
They stressed the need to sensitise the local communities especially fishermen about dangers of radiations which may be great threat to their lives.
Dr Nayyar said the present government was setting up two nuclear power plants, K2 and K3, along Karachi coast without acquiring the mandatory EIA report. The SHC order has asked the government to arrange a public hearing for the EIA. But for that the EIA document should be made available for the general public much before the actual hearing so they can study and understand.
He pointed out that some concerned citizens had gone to the court against the nuclear power plants and during the hearing, the PAEC had confessed that earlier it had done the EIA process in a “wrong way,” without following the legal process. It had acquired the EIA from Sindh Environmental Protection Agency without holding public hearing……………….http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2015/02/01/city/karachi/generating-energy-from-alternative-resources-more-feasible-than-nuclear-plants-speakers/
Consumer groups in Malaysia condemn government that is “hell-bent’ on nuclear power
Putrajaya ‘hell-bent’ on nuclear plant despite public concerns, says consumer group Malaysian Insider, 1 February 2015 Plans to build a nuclear plant in Malaysia are afoot, warned a consumer group, and said Putrajaya was misleading the public into thinking that it will consult the people on the use of nuclear energy when it had already decided to proceed with a bill to be table in Parliament this year.
Consumers Association of Penang (CAP) president SM Mohamed Idris said the government was “hell-bent” on introducing nuclear power in the country’s energy mix and highlighted statements made by energy officials over the past year and recently which indicated that Malaysia was intent on adopting nuclear energy.
As proof, he cited the setting up of the Malaysian Nuclear Power Corporation (MNPC) in January 2011, and the listing of nuclear energy as an entry point project in the Economic Transformation Programme in 2010.
“The government is hell-bent on introducing nuclear energy in the country’s energy mix.
“It is disingenuous of the government to continue misleading the public with its standard response line that a decision has yet to be made and the government is still exploring the option to go nuclear,” he said in a statement today.
Mohamed also said Putrajaya had announced its intention to table the Atomic Energy Regulatory Bill in August last year, and that the announcement was welcomed by MNPC chief executive officer, Dr Mohd Zamzam Jaafar, who said MNPC was hopeful that the bill would be approved by Parliament this year.
Malaysia, a nett oil exporter, has, in the past, floated the idea of adding nuclear power to its energy mix to meet long-term fuel needs, but such announcements were always greeted with public disapproval.
In 2010, the minister of energy, green technology and water then, Tan Sri Peter Chin, announced plans to build a nuclear plant that would start operations in 2021.
In July last year, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Mah Siew Keong, who oversees the MNPC, had also said that feasibility studies would be conducted on building nuclear plants as a sustainable energy option for Malaysia.
There is no indication yet of where the proposed nuclear plant would be built, but remote locations close to water sources are required in line with international rules. This would leave a limited number of states, such as Pahang, Johor and Terengganu, as possible locations……….
CAP also called upon the public to denounce the soon-to-be completed Malaysian Nuclear Power Infrastructure Development Plan as an “undemocratic and authoritarian” plan. – February 1, 2015. – See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/putrajaya-hell-bent-on-nuclear-plant-says-consumer-group#sthash.2irEgUtq.dpuf
Civil Society in Pakistan challenges government, questioning nuclear power plans
Alternative energy: Civil activists prepare for public hearing on nuclear power plants, Express Tribune, By Our Correspondent February 1, 2015 KARACHI: Despite the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission’s (PAEC) claims that nuclear power is the ‘most cost efficient’ energy source for the developing country, civil society activists want it to be replaced with alternative sources of energy because they say the Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima and Bhopal disasters are not forgotten.
In view of the PAEC’s public hearing scheduled for March, on the proposed nuclear sites near Karachi, the civil society is bracing itself to meet it fully prepared and question the power project’s significance, benefits, hazards and possible alternatives.
“It is suspected that the K-2 and K-3 Chinese-manufactured nuclear power plants are being installed here on an experimental basis,” said physicist Abdul Hameed Nayyar, speaking to a workshop on Sunday, organised by the Pakistan Institute of Labour Education and Research (Piler). “No such power plant is operating anywhere in the world.”
He asserted that according to international standards, a 30-kilometer-radius around nuclear plants was vulnerable. The proposed nuclear sites were too close to Karachi and put the lives of millions of people at risk, he said.
Nayyar claimed that many regulations were being neglected in conducting the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA). “PAEC wrongfully obtained certificates for the nuclear plants from the Sindh Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) without seeking public consent,” he said. “The SEPA was bound by law to incorporate and consider public comments into the procedure before issuing such a certificate to any industry.”
Another activist, Roland deSouza, added that in Pakistan, the institutions supposed to assess the environmental impact of growing industrialisation were very poor. “The SEPA is understaffed, incompetent and influenced by political and bureaucratic circles,” he said, adding that the prosperity of a country depended on the conservation of its environment.
He narrated stories of the DHA Cogen project and constructions near the Abdullah Shah Ghazi’s shrine, claiming that even in those cases, the proper course of action for assessment were not followed until the civil society took the matter to court.
On the PAEC’s claim that radiations caused by the nuclear plants would not be harmful, he said, that no independent verification could be made as yet. Concluding his presentation, he questioned why we didn’t import solar energy projects from China, since it was the largest producer of this less hazardous and modern source of energy.
The nine-hour-long programme at the Regent Plaza was divided into sessions to give attendees an understanding of nuclear power projects and the significance of the forthcoming formal public hearing.
The speakers focused on the issues of how the PAEC would transport radioactive material, what measures they would take in case of a mishap and how a reactor would be decommissioned after the completion of its life cycle……….http://tribune.com.pk/story/831269/alternative-energy-civil-activists-prepare-for-public-hearing-on-nuclear-power-plants/
Indian Citizens’ Statement against Capitulation to the US on Nuclear Liability
http://kashmirwatch.com/news.php/2015/01/30/indian-citizens-statement-against-capitulation-to-the-us-on-nuclear-liability.html Kumar Sundaram
We are deeply disturbed by media reports that the Indian government has capitulated to aggressive U.S. demands and agreed to a deal that indemnifies American nuclear vendors from the consequences of accidents caused by design defects in their reactors.
Preliminary reports suggest that the government has agreed to create an insurance pool, backed by public sector companies, so that any potential American liability can be redirected back to Indian taxpayers. This creates a “moral hazard”, where the Indian people could end up being responsible for mistakes made by a multinational corporation.
The 2010 Indian liability Act is already a weak law heavily biased towards the nuclear industry. It caps the total liability for an accident at a paltry Rs 1,500 crores and takes away the rights of victims to sue the supplier. The much-discussed supplier liability is very limited: the government alone, as the operator, has a right of recourse against the vendor.
So, we fail to understand the Modi government’s motivation for weakening this law even further. The U.S. has nothing attractive to offer in terms of nuclear commerce. The Indian government has agreed to purchase the AP1000 reactors from Westinghouse, and the Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) from General Electric. Both these designs are untested. The ESBWR technology is so immature that the design received certification from the U.S. nuclear regulatory commission—the first step before a reactor can be constructed—only last September. Recent reports suggest that construction of AP1000 units has run into trouble in China.
Independent estimates suggest that the cost of electricity from these reactors may exceed Rs. 15 per unit. This is much higher than the tariff from competing sources of electricity.
Therefore, the reality behind the grandiose proclamations made by the Indian government is rather sobering. India has agreed to pay billions of dollars for immature American technology, and then ensured that American companies will not be held to account for any design defects.
We hope that progressive forces and concerned citizens throughout the country will unite to oppose this disturbing development.
Signatures: Continue reading
Danger for India in weakening Liability law, and no benefit to India in USA nuclear deal
The most baffling feature of the current agreement is that it holds no tangible benefits for India. The United States has offered to sell two reactor designs — both of which are expensive and untested.
Last week, the residents of Mithi Virdi wrote an open letter to Mr. Obama and Mr. Modi reminding them that the “gram panchayats of four most-affected villages … [have] passed a resolution declaring the entire … region as [a] nuclear free zone.” The leaders of the “world’s largest democracies” face a clear choice. They can channel billions of dollars into nuclear corporations by sacrificing safety and economic prudence. Or they can heed the democratic voices from Mithi Virdi and cancel these unnecessary deals.
Nuclear deal no cause for celebration THE HINDU, SUVRAT RAJUM. V. RAMANA 31 Jan 15 Any understanding between Narendra Modi and Barack Obama on circumventing the Indian nuclear liability law to protect American reactor suppliers should be a matter of concern
At their recent meeting, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Barack Obama discussed methods of circumventing the Indian nuclear liability law to protect American reactor suppliers from the consequences of accidents caused by design defects. Although public details are scarce, if they have indeed reached an understanding on the issue, then this is not a cause for celebration; it should be a matter of deep concern.
The importance of supplier liability is illustrated by the Fukushima nuclear disaster in 2011. When the reactors were hit by the tsunami that year, the weakness of the General Electric (GE) Mark I design was cruelly exposed. The reactors’ inadequate containment was unable to prevent the spread of radioactivity when the cooling systems failed and pressure built up inside the reactors. Although this design defect was first noted about 40 years ago, just as the Fukushima reactors were commissioned, the industry resisted regulatory changes that could have ameliorated the disaster.
Framework of impunity
The Japan Center for Economic Research estimated that the cost of cleanup at Fukushima may reach $200 billion. A 2013 expert study “Accounting for long-term doses in worldwide health effects of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident” published in the journal Energy and Environmental Science estimated that the disaster may lead to about a thousand excess deaths due to cancer. However, it is unlikely that GE will ever be held accountable for its poor design choice. Under Japanese law, the supplier is indemnified from liability for an accident. This is the framework of impunity under which nuclear suppliers like to operate.
Legal indemnity for suppliers creates a “moral hazard”— encouraging suppliers to take excessive risks since they don’t have to pay for the consequences. The case of GE not strengthening the Mark I containment is not an exception. Continue reading
Sums add up for solar power in India, but NOT for nuclear power
I’m afraid the sums simply don’t add up for nuclear power, purely from an economic point of view. The fully loaded cost (including decommissioning and waste management) of a unit of power would be probably 100 times that of a unit of conventional power today.
On the other hand, it appears as though the time has come for solar power. Plummeting costs of photovoltaic panels, improvements in storage and transmission, and other technological factors now mean that solar lifecycle cost is approaching conventional costs in the West. Given India’s inherent availability of sunlight, I am of the opinion that we would be better off spending the billions needed for nuclear power on a crash program of research into solar power, and maybe even on subsidizing it heavily to kick-start it.
Indo-US nuclear deal: Why is Modi pursuing what looks like a total loss in N-energy? First Post by Rajeev Srinivasan Jan 26, 2015 On 25 January, the airwaves were filled with self-congratulatory and self-satisfied messages about how “we” had “won” the “nuke deal”. Nobody was clear about what exactly we had won, and how, and why the Americans (superb negotiators) had apparently caved in to Indian demands. As I write this on Republic Day, there is still no concrete data. ……. Continue reading
Poor likelihood that nuclear power can ever be effective against climate change
Nuclear power additions ‘need to quadruple’ to hit climate goals, IEA says, The Carbon Brief 31 Jan 2015, 14:50 Simon Evans “………Governments can choose whether to support new nuclear or not, the IEA says. They could finance guarantees, as well as reviewing electricity market arrangements. The UK has done both, through its electricity market reforms and fixed-price contracts for nuclear power.
The nuclear industry needs to show it can deliver projects on time and within budget so that these financing costs can be reduced, the IEA says. It says new nuclear plants should cost around £3.8 billion per gigawatt in Europe. The UK’s Hinkley C plant is expected to cost almost that, partly because of the costs of borrowing money to finance the scheme.
Existing nuclear plants will also need to stay open for longer as part of the 2050 roadmap, which depends on further research and investment. The IEA sees plants operating for up to 60 years or more. Nuclear operator EDF recently announced a ten-year life extension at one of its Dungeness B plants, and it hopes to agree similar extensions at its other UK plants.
Small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) could play a “niche” role in future, the IEA says. It points out that just three prototype modular reactors are under construction, that none are yet operating and that the economics of SMRs “have yet to be proven”. Former environment secretary Owen Paterson gave SMRs a starring role in his vision for the UK’s energy future in a speech last year…….”
-
Archives
- October 2026 (129)
- 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
