Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty has enduring value
THE ENDURING VALUE OF THE CTBT, Arms Control Wonk, by Michael Krepon | September 6, 2016
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee is turning its attention to the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty for the first time since 1999, when it held the briefest of hearings on the Treaty before fast-forwarding it to the Senate, which rebuked President Bill Clinton by denying its consent to ratification. The vote was mostly along party lines – only four Republican Senators voted yea back then – a preview of bitter partisan divides to follow.
One of these years, the SFRC will hold lengthy hearings on the CTBT, focusing on what has changed since the 1999 vote, what benefits the Treaty can provide, and what insurance policies could address lingering concerns. The two biggest and most important developments since the 1999 vote, as former Secretary of State George Shultz and others have noted, are the U.S. stockpile stewardship program and advancing capabilities to detect very low-yield, covert nuclear tests.
At the time of the 1999 vote, effective stockpile stewardship without explosive testing was a concept. Now it is a reality. The U.S. nuclear labs have figured out how to extend the longevity of existing warhead designs without explosive testing. Exceptional progress has also been made in detecting extremely low-yield tests – both by U.S. national technical means and by a parallel International Monitoring System built by the CTBT Preparatory Commission, based in Vienna. As a consequence, the two biggest concerns of CTBT skeptics have been satisfactorily addressed.
For these reasons alone, the CTBT deserves open-minded consideration in hearings informed by technical expertise. The Senate’s consent to ratification could do more than any other single step to reduce nuclear dangers in East Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East, where continued or renewed testing would rattle allies and accelerate negative regional dynamics……….
Given the CTBT’s enduring value, it deserves a boost by means of a rare UN Security Council resolution and a companion P-5 statement – especially on the 20th anniversary of the Treaty’s signing ceremony at the United Nations.
Note: The Stimson Center will convene a meeting on September 13, 2016 on the United States and the Future of the CTBT. http://www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/1201904/the-enduring-value-of-the-ctbt/
Study: Future drought will offset benefits of higher CO2 on soybean yields
EurekAlert, 6 Sept 16 UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN, CHAMPAIGN, ILL. — An eight-year study of soybeans grown outdoors in a carbon dioxide-rich atmosphere like that expected by 2050 has yielded a new and worrisome finding: Higher atmospheric CO2 concentrations will boost plant growth under ideal growing conditions, but drought – expected to worsen as the climate warms and rainfall patterns change – will outweigh those benefits and cause yield losses much sooner than anticipated.
The new discovery, reported in the journal Nature Plants, contradicts a widely accepted hypothesis about how climate change will affect food production, said University of Illinois plant biology professor Andrew Leakey, who led the new research…….http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-09/uoia-sfd090116.php
USA and China formally ratify Paris climate agreement
US joins China in ratifying Paris climate agreement in ‘turning point’ for planet , ABC News 4 Sept 16 America and China have formally joined the Paris climate change agreement, with US President Barack Obama hailing the accord as the “moment we finally decided to save our planet”.
The move by the world’s two biggest polluters is a major step forward for the 180-nation deal, which sets ambitious goals for capping global warming and funnelling trillions of dollars to poor countries facing climate catastrophe.
Mr Obama and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping handed ratification document to United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon, who said he was now optimistic the agreement will be in force by the end of the year.
Mr Ban described the two leaders as far-sighted, bold and ambitious.
“China and the United States represent nearly 40 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions,” he said.
“Now by formally joining the Paris agreement your have added powerful momentum to the drive for the agreement to enter into force this year.”
Mr Obama said history would show that the Paris deal would “ultimately prove to be a turning point, the moment we finally decided to save our planet”……..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-04/us-joins-china-in-ratifying-paris-climate-agreement/7812366
Coal lobby is urged to copy tactics of the tobacco lobby!
Here we go again: Fossil fuel industry takes a play from Big Tobacco’s playbook. http://www.dailyclimate.org/t/1692193038704125011 August 31, 2016 by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.)
Last year, coal mining executives attending the annual meeting of the Rocky Mountain Coal Mining Institute were treated to a presentation on the future of American mining titled:“Survival Is Victory: Lessons From the Tobacco Wars.” As the title implies, the presentation laid out a path for the fossil fuel industry to weather a barrage of lawsuits and new safety and health regulations, modeled on the efforts of the tobacco industry in the 90s and early 2000s. (See John Schwartz’s story in The New York Times.)
Richard Reavey, the Cloud Peak Energy vice president who delivered the presentation, described the similarities between what Big Tobacco went through and the challenges facing coal today as “remarkable and eerie.” (We should take his word for it. Before working for Cloud Peak, a mining company, Reavey was an executive at tobacco giant Philip Morris for 17 years, according to his LinkedIn profile.) His advice to the coal execs: do what tobacco did and “cut a deal while we are still relevant.” After all, “a much more heavily regulated tobacco industry is still viable and profitable.”
Ironically, Reavey’s presentation on these similarities between tobacco and fossil fuel strategies has a much deeper parallel.
For decades, cigarette makers hid from the public and from policymakers the scientific evidence they had of their product’s dangers. The Justice Department brought, and ultimately won, a civil racketeering lawsuit against the major tobacco companies for carrying out that fraud. Today, researchers often compare this tobacco fraud on the public to the fossil fuel industry’s suppression of its research on the dangers of carbon pollution.
Dr. Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University has written about the pattern followed by both industries: hiring their own scientists to churn out favorable research; creating (and bankrolling) front groups to sow doubt in the public debate about scientific consensus, while obscuring the hand of the industry; and even attacking and harassing individual scientists whose work may discredit the industry propaganda. Professor Mann himself has been the target of vexatious “investigations” and efforts to intimidate and harass him, including death threats—just for producing peer-reviewed academic research shedding light on the effects of increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
Dr. Robert Brulle of Drexel University has documented an intricate propaganda web of climate denial, with over one hundred organizations, from industry trade associations to conservative think tanks to plain old phony front groups. The purpose of this sophisticated denial apparatus, he says, is “a deliberate and organized effort to misdirect the public discussion and distort the public’s understanding of climate.” These are tactics that were developed, tested, and proven effective by the tobacco industry—and in some cases the very same front groups were involved.
Public lawyers demanded that the “tobacco files”” behind this fraud be made a public record. A recentanalysis by the Center for International Environmental Law of millions of documents from these tobacco industry archives reveals close collaboration over the better part of a century between cigarette manufacturers and oil producers on research, lobbying, and public relations. The new bookPoison Tea, by Climate Nexus Executive Director Jeff Nesbit, chronicles this same relationship.
In the book and film Merchants of Doubt, Drs. Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway identify spin doctors, spokespeople and even scientists-for-hire who were involved in the tobacco and now fossil fuel campaigns. Not only has the energy industry recycled tobacco’s strategies and front groups, it’s redeploying some of the same personnel, like Mr. Reavey, the coal convention presenter.
Sharon Eubanks, lead counsel on behalf of the United States in United States v. Phillip Morris, the federal tobacco litigation, has said she believes the government could make a case against fossil fuel producers very similar to the one she led against tobacco under federal civil racketeering laws. That’s not just because coal companies are openly taking cues from tobacco’s legal and regulatory fight. It’s because mounting evidence indicates that, like tobacco, the fossil fuel industry may have engaged in a deliberate, protracted fraud to mislead the public, to protect their profits, to the peril of us all.
Harvey Wassermann on nuclear’s last stand in New York
Nuclear’s Last Stand? New York’s Cuomo Rushes in to Save Dying Plants Progressive.org, September 2, 2016 Harvey Wasserman Andrew Cuomo is trying to ram through a complex backdoor bailout package worth up to $11 billion to keep at least four dangerously decrepit nuclear reactors operating.
To many proponents of safe energy, the move comes as a shock. Its outcome will have monumental consequences for nuclear power and the future of our energy supply.
For years, Governor Cuomo has made a public show of working to shut down two Entergy-owned reactors at Indian Point, thirty-five miles north of Manhattan. He and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman have fought Entergy in court, trying to stop operations. They warn that the reactors are too dangerous to run so close to New York City, which cannot be evacuated in case of a major accident. More than ten million people live within a fifty-mile radius of Indian Point, whose two operating reactors opened in the 1970s.
Entergy is now trying to get the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to extend the expired operating licenses for the two plants, Indian Point Two and Three. (Indian Point Unit One was shut in October 1974 due to its lack of an Emergency Core Cooling System).
Cuomo claims he still wants to close Indian Point Two and Three. Like most aging reactors, they have been continually plagued with leaks, mechanical failures, structural collapse, and unplanned shutdowns. Recent revelations of major problems with critical bolts within Indian Point’s core structure, and tritium leaks into the broader environment, have deepened public opposition.
The national and local groups fighting to shut Indian Point, some for decades, include Riverkeepers, Clearwater, the Indian Point Safe Energy Coalition, the Nuclear Information & Resource Service, Beyond Nuclear, Friends of the Earth, and many more.
But now Cuomo wants to earmark more than $7 billion in public money, for starters, to keep four upstate nuclear reactors on line. One is the Ginna reactor, near Rochester; the other three—FitzPatrick, Nine Mile Point One, and Nine Mile Point Two—occupy a single site on Lake Ontario. Fitzpatrick is owned by Entergy. The rest are owned by Exelon, the nation’s largest nuclear power owner/operator.
All four reactors are in various stages of advanced deterioration and were slated for permanent closure. Without massive public subsidies, none can compete with natural gas or with wind and solar, which are rapidly dropping in price.
Entergy announced last fall that economic factors would force it to shut Fitzpatrick in January 2017. Exelon told the New York Public Service Commission that it would probably shut Nine Mile 1 and Ginna next year as well.
Environmentalists hailed the announcements. The aging U.S. fleet now involves about 100 reactors, down from a maximum of about 130, and 900 fewer than the 1,000 Richard Nixon predicted in 1974. Many of them, like Ginna, are well over forty years old. Many are known to be leaking various radioactive substances, most commonly tritium, as at Indian Point. Major leaks have also recently been revealed at FitzPatrick. Structural problems like Indian Point’s missing bolts and a crumbling shield building at Ohio’s Davis-Besse are rampant.
Nonetheless, in a complex twelve-year package ostensibly meant to promote clean energy, Cuomo’s PSC has passed a huge subsidy plan meant keep the four upstate reactors going.
The deal’s arcane terms involve a transfer of Fitzpatrick from Entergy to Exelon. The handouts from the public to the nuclear industry would be spread over more than a decade. Ironically, they could, under certain circumstances, also be used to keep open the two reactors at Indian Point.
Cuomo has made much of “saving” some 2,000 reactor jobs jobs in a depressed region where unemployment is rampant. But Stanford economist Mark Jacobson has shown that the billions spent to keep the reactors open could create tens of thousands of jobs throughout the state if spent on pursuing wind and solar energy and increased efficiency. Those sources could provide New York with far more energy at a much cheaper rate, without the long-term safety, ecological, and public health problems caused by the aging reactors………
Nuke operators throughout the United States are watching to see if New York’s proposed subsidies will keep set a precedent for states to jump in and keep money-losing reactors operating as they crumble. Exelon has lost a fight for billions in Illinois. Environmental, consumer, and even competing utilities are fighting huge bailout demands from FirstEnergy for its Davis-Besse reactor near Toledo.
At the turn of the twenty-first century, the industry fought for deregulation, arguing that its reactors would do well in a “free market economy.” But in the process it demanded (and got) about $100 billion in public handouts for “stranded costs” that it argued were unfairly imposed on its massively inefficient technology.
Now that the reactors are failing even after that huge cash infusion, the industry wants another round of huge subsidies…….
The reaction among New York anti-nuke groups to Cuomo’s handout has been fierce. The battle heads back to the PSC in the form of public comment, and then into the courts. Opponents are buoyed by the growing success of the state’s solar industry. As the interests tied to Solartopian technologies expand, their opposition to bailouts like this escalates.
It’s unclear how the battle over nuclear power in New York will be resolved. “The fight,” promises Tim Judson of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, “is far from over.”
Harvey Wasserman, a co-founder of the global “No Nukes” movement, has been writing forThe Progressive since 1967. He is author of Solartopia! Our Green-Powered Earth, and editswww.nukefree.org. http://www.progressive.org/news/2016/09/188931/nuclear%E2%80%99s-last-stand-new-york%E2%80%99s-cuomo-rushes-save-dying-plants
Polarisation on climate change – now worse than ever in America
global warming has joined God, guns, gays, and abortion as core elements of Republican identity, and this will be hard to change.
Americans Now More Politically Polarized On Climate ChangeThan Ever Before, Analysis 
Finds http://www.skepticalscience.com/americans-more-polarized-on-climate-change.html
American voters and politicians are now more polarized than ever before across all aspects of climate change — from the cause, to the science and the impacts — a major new analysis has found.
Campaigns funded by vested fossil fuel interests and pushed by a network of ideological think tanks, many linked to the oil billionaire Koch brothers, have helped to widen the gap, pushing Republican politicians, elites and voters away from action ongreenhouse gas emissions.
Tracking Gallup opinion poll surveys going back to 2001 and congress voting patterns from 1970 onwards, the analysis authors warn that as the November election approaches, Americans are faced with a stark political choice.
The analysis is published in the respected journal Environment and comes from sociologists Associate Professor Aaron McCright of Michigan State University, Professor Riley Dunlap of Oklahoma State University, and PhD researcher Jerrod Yarosh also at Oklahoma.
The researchers found the widest gaps between Democrats and Republicans come when they are asked about the causes of climate change and if the media exaggerates the seriousness of the issue.
While virtually all climate scientists and the world’s leading scientific academies have long agreed that the burning of fossil fuels is causing climate change, only about half Republicans accept the science.
A Republican controlled Congress, the article says, would be a “huge step backward in our nation’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions” and could also undermine international cooperation, especially if Republican nominee Donald Trump won the Presidency.
“Whether, and how, individual Americans vote this November may well be the most consequential climate-related decision most of them will have ever taken,” the authors conclude.
Stark Choices
Dunlap told DeSmog the choice facing US voters was glaring.
“Looking back, Gore versus Bush was stark, although Bush hid his denial for a bit. But now the partisan differences on climate change are out in the open, and the choices from the top down are stark.”
The Koch brothers had led a network of “conservative mega-donors” that had created a “shadow GOP” that had managed to reduce the influence of the Republican National Committee, the analysis argues.
These efforts, the article explains, have blocked legislation, limited international negotiations and made rejection of climate science “normative” among Republican elites and activists.
Widening Gaps
Dunlap, McCright and Yarosh looked at how elected Democrats and Republicans had voted on environment and climate bills in both houses of Congress since 1970, using data from the League of Conservation Voters. The researchers found:
What was once a modest tendency for Congressional Republicans to be less pro-environmental than their Democratic counterparts has become a chasm—with Republicans taking near-unanimous anti-environmental stances on relevant legislation in recent years, especially 2015.
Since 2001 polling company Gallup has been asking US voters for their views on aspects of climate change, such as if they think it’s happening, if it’s caused by humans and if they are concerned about it.
In 2001, 53 percent of Republican voters agreed that global warming was caused by humans, compared with 70 percent of Democrats — a gap of 17 percentage points. But by 2016, this gap had blown out to 41 percentage points, with only 43 percent of Republican voters accepting climate change is human-caused.
These “partisan gaps” had widened across all areas since 2008, except when voters were asked if they thought global warming had already started, where the gap remained at 34 percentage points.
Bridging the Gap?
Alongside the analysis, the authors look at various attempts to bring Republicans closer to accepting the realities of climate change, such as changing communication strategies. The writers claim:
Does any persuasive framing strategy hold special promise for penetrating Republicans’ partisan/ideological identities? The evidence so far gives little basis for optimism.
The sociologists say one major reason why attempts to better communicate the realities of climate change to conservatives have failed is down to “motivated cognition” — described as the tendency for people to only accept information that reinforces their existing political beliefs and their views on the world.
Even when Republicans experience extreme weather events, there was little evidence that this was enough for those voters to change their views. Dunlap told DeSmog:
“I fear polarization will be difficult to overcome because Republican reluctance to accept the reality and seriousness of human-caused climate change is in a self-reinforcing loop.
There are top-down cues from Republican political elites and their supporters from conservative think tanks to conservative media — especially the Murdoch media— that influence voters, as well as bottom-up pressure from party activists such as Tea Party supporters who act as ‘enforcers’ of party principles, especially in primary elections to select Republican candidates.
The result is that global warming has joined God, guns, gays, and abortion as core elements of Republican identity, and this will be hard to change.”
Since 2001 polling company Gallup has been asking US voters for their views on aspects of climate change, such as if they think it’s happening, if it’s caused by humans and if they are concerned about it.
In 2001, 53 percent of Republican voters agreed that global warming was caused by humans, compared with 70 percent of Democrats — a gap of 17 percentage points. But by 2016, this gap had blown out to 41 percentage points, with only 43 percent of Republican voters accepting climate change is human-caused.
These “partisan gaps” had widened across all areas since 2008, except when voters were asked if they thought global warming had already started, where the gap remained at 34 percentage points.
Bridging the Gap?
Alongside the analysis, the authors look at various attempts to bring Republicans closer to accepting the realities of climate change, such as changing communication strategies. The writers claim:
Does any persuasive framing strategy hold special promise for penetrating Republicans’ partisan/ideological identities? The evidence so far gives little basis for optimism.
The sociologists say one major reason why attempts to better communicate the realities of climate change to conservatives have failed is down to “motivated cognition” — described as the tendency for people to only accept information that reinforces their existing political beliefs and their views on the world.
Even when Republicans experience extreme weather events, there was little evidence that this was enough for those voters to change their views. Dunlap told DeSmog:
“I fear polarization will be difficult to overcome because Republican reluctance to accept the reality and seriousness of human-caused climate change is in a self-reinforcing loop.
There are top-down cues from Republican political elites and their supporters from conservative think tanks to conservative media — especially the Murdoch media— that influence voters, as well as bottom-up pressure from party activists such as Tea Party supporters who act as ‘enforcers’ of party principles, especially in primary elections to select Republican candidates.
The result is that global warming has joined God, guns, gays, and abortion as core elements of Republican identity, and this will be hard to change.”
Talen Energy abandons proposed Bell Bend nuclear power plant
Enformable, 1 Sept 16 , Talen Energy, the company that owns the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station in Pennsylvania, has informed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) that it sees no “viable path” forward and is abandoning its application to construct a new nuclear power plant next to the Susquehanna facility…….. http://enformable.com/2016/09/talen-energy-abandons-proposed-bell-bend-nuclear-power-plant/
Dangerous transport of radioactive wastes – legal action against this
The nuclear waste is a byproduct of the process used at the Chalk River laboratories to create medical radioisotopes from highly enriched uranium originally produced in the U.S. It’s being shipped back to the U.S. as part of a 2010 agreement to repatriate the radioactive material, costing the Canadian government about US$60 million.
According to the U.S. lawsuit filed Aug. 12 in Washington, D.C., the thick yellowy-green liquid being shipped contains highly enriched uranyl nitrate, highly enriched uranium, radioactive varieties of cesium, niobium, zirconium, rhodium, rubidium, iodine, xenon, tellurium, barium, lanthanum, cerium, strontium, praseodymium, neodymium, europium, neptunium and plutonium.
Niagara on nuclear waste route, Welland Tribune, By ALLAN BENNER, August 31, 2016 Trucks loaded with liquid nuclear waste could be rolling down highways within days — likely travelling through Niagara on their way into the U.S.
But seven American environmental groups have teamed up to launch a lawsuit against the United States government and its Department of Energy (DoE) in the hope of stopping the shipments before they begin.
A November 2015 DoE report, which concluded that an environmental impact statement on the plan would not be necessary, says up to 150 shipments of liquid nuclear waste will be hauled by transport truck from Canadian Nuclear Laboratories in Chalk River, Ont., a community near Algonquin Park, to a disposal site in Savannah River, S.C., 1,700 kilometres south.
Each shipment will include four 58.1-litre stainless steel containers, for a total of 232 litres of nuclear waste per trip. Those containers will be placed inside cylindrical steel nuclear transport casks, which will then be loaded into typical shipping containers and loaded onto trucks. The project is expected to continue for several years.
The nuclear waste is a byproduct of the process used at the Chalk River laboratories to create medical radioisotopes from highly enriched uranium originally produced in the U.S. It’s being shipped back to the U.S. as part of a 2010 agreement to repatriate the radioactive material, costing the Canadian government about US$60 million.
Niagara-on-the-Lake resident Gracia Janes, environment convener for the National Council of Women of Canada who has lobbied against the plan, described the material being transported as “absolutely deadly stuff.”
According to the U.S. lawsuit filed Aug. 12 in Washington, D.C., the thick yellowy-green liquid being shipped contains highly enriched uranyl nitrate, highly enriched uranium, radioactive varieties of cesium, niobium, zirconium, rhodium, rubidium, iodine, xenon, tellurium, barium, lanthanum, cerium, strontium, praseodymium, neodymium, europium, neptunium and plutonium.
Although environmental groups believe shipments could begin in September, that information could not be confirmed.
It’s classified……….
Higgins is concerned about the use of the Peace Bridge in the proposed route, one of the busiest border crossings between the two countries. “It’s only three lanes,” he said. “Consequently, trucks are stuck on the bridge idling for inordinate periods of time.”
Niagara’s regional council has taken a stand on the issue, too. On June 11, 2015, councillors ratified a motion opposing any shipment of radioactive liquid waste, and urging the governments of Canada and the U.S. to halt the shipment of high-level radioactive liquid waste pending the outcome of public consultations on the advisability and the potential adverse impacts of the proposed shipments, as well as alternative procedures.
Lincoln regional Coun. Bill Hodgson said he was concerned at the time the motion was passed, but he’s “more alarmed now that it seems that it’s imminent, and really no one with authority has stepped forward and said, ‘Let’s rethink the movement of this stuff.’” “This is a really toxic soup. This is not kid’s play,” he said.
Niagara Falls Mayor Jim Diodati shares the concerns about the plans……..
if one of those containers were to break, Janes said it would be a disaster. “If it did break open, if it did get down to what’s in there, it’s radioactive material that would take an awfully long time — thousands of years — to actually disappear, if it ever does disappear,” said Janes, who first brought the issue to regional council’s attention during a delegation in February 2015.
“It would go into the groundwater and it could be in a community. We’re not sure where it’s going,” she said. “Or there could be a fire, and it could be sending off plumes of we don’t know what.”
She said it’s “not quite Chernobyl, but I don’t know.”
The November 2015 DoE report also looked at worst-case scenarios, including the potential for radioactive liquid to spill on the ground after highway collisions……
Gervais, however, said he doesn’t believe facilities exist at Chalk River to convert the liquid material to solid.
Kamps said the shipments are unprecedented. “Never before has highly radioactive liquid waste been transported in North America,” he said. http://www.wellandtribune.ca/2016/08/31/not-quite-chernobyl
Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (VCCC) – strong petition against $19.2 billion nuclear power plant
the $19 billion Unit 3 is being built above an earthquake fault.
The Dangerous Nuclear Plant Rising on DC’s Doorstep http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/09/01/the-dangerous-nuclear-plant-on-dcs-doorstep/ by JOHN LAFORGE, Dominion Virginia Power, a section of the giant utility Dominion, is proceeding unlawfully with construction of its $19-billion-plus power reactor 80 miles from Washington, DC — called North Anna 3 — and must get formal approval from the Virginia State Corporation Commission (SCC) before it can continue, according to a petition filed August 30th by the Virginia Citizens Consumer Council (VCCC;), a nonprofit group based in Elliston, Va.
The group’s “Petition for a Declaratory Judgment” says in part: “At an estimated total cost of at least $19.2 billion, North Anna 3 would be the most expensive power [reactor] ever built in the United States and could raise customers’ rates by 26 % or more according to the Virginia Attorney General. While Dominion claims that North Anna 3 is needed for compliance with the federal Clean Power Plan, it would be far costlier than the low-carbon alternative of combined renewables, demand-side management, and efficiency … Dominion has not complied with Virginia law by failing to seek SCC approval before making expenditures on project development and beginning preliminary construction of North Anna 3.” Continue reading
Iran still hindered by USA sanctions, following nuclear deal
Ryabkov Says U.S. Sanctions Continue To Hinder Iran After Nuclear Deal, Radio Free Europe September 01, 2016 The United States has carried out its part of the Iranian nuclear deal, but unilateral U.S. sanctions on Iran have remained in place and are a “big hindrance” for Tehran, a top Russian diplomat told TASS.
Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov, who is visiting Tehran, told TASS on August 31 that the U.S. administration has implemented “from start to finish” everything envisaged by last year’s agreement, “but it hasn’t moved any further.”
“All the so-called unilateral sanctions that existed before an agreement was reached with Iran have stayed in place,” he said.
“These unilateral sanctions are a big hindrance,” he said. “Any deal serviced in dollars goes through corresponding controlling agencies of the United States and can be suspended.”
Despite the removal of most international sanctions against Iran, Ryabkov said European and Asian businesses continue to be cautious about dealing with Iran and as a result, “deals are fewer than one would want to see.”
Radioactive waste from oil and gas fracking found in landfill
Radioactive Waste Found at Oil Field Landfill in North Dakota, Oil Price By Irina Slav – Sep 01, 2016, North Dakota has had a problem with the inappropriate disposal of this radioactive waste for years. This time, the State Health Department of North Dakota is probing an oilfield waste landfill operated by IHD Solids Management after the detection of a significant amount of illegal radioactive matter.
The radioactive material was detected twice in two separate inspections that took place in May and June. Now the HD has ordered a third-party inspection of the landfill and instructed the operator to remove 950 tons of waste and take it out of the state, after radioactivity checks of all 12 oilfield waste landfills in the state revealed levels of between 5 and 80 picocuries, the latter standing 30 picocuries above the new maximum allowed for oilfield waste…….
The company will not be fined for the transgression because it dealt with the problem by removing the suspicious waste, as did two other landfill operators in North Dakota, Secure Energy and Gibson Energy. They too had to remove over-radioactive material from their landfills and ship it to special nuclear waste facilities.
Prudently, if not a tad belatedly, North Dakota will soon start requiring oilfield waste landfill operators to verify the radioactivity level of every load that arrives, rather than taking the word of the company generating the waste for it.
The waste from oil and gas wells include uranium, thorium, radium, a radioactive isotope of potassium, as well as isotopes of lead and polonium. These are naturally occurring elements that are brought to the surface through fracking. http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Radioactive-Waste-Found-at-Oil-Field-Landfill-in-North-Dakota.html
Watts Bar nuclear reactors shut down indefinitely, following transformer fire
Transformer fire forces TVA to shut down Unit 2 reactor indefinitely TVA probes cause of switchyard fire at Watts Bar Tuesday night. Times Free Press August 31st, 2016 by Dave Flessner
The blaze in one of the main bank transformers connected to the new Unit 2 reactor triggered notice of “an unusual event” — the lowest of four emergency classifications for problems at a nuclear power plant. Although the fire did not affect any nuclear or generation equipment in either the reactor or turbine buildings at Watts Bar, it did damage a transformer and required TVA to shut down its Unit 2 reactor indefinitely, TVA spokesman Jim Hopson said today. ….
When the fire erupted, the reactor had to be shut down and the unit will remain idle until a new transformer is installed and the cause of the fire is determined. http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/local/story/2016/aug/31/transformer-fire-nuclear-plant-triggers-emergency-notice/384326/
Legal challenges to New York nuclear power subsidies,
Flurry of challenges attacks NY nuclear and renewable power subsidies, http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2016/09/flurry_of_challenges_attack_ny_plan_for_nuclear_and_renewable_power_subsidies.html Syracuse.c om, By Tim Knauss | tknauss@syracuse.com , 1 Sept 16, SYRACUSE, N.Y. – At least 15 interest groups have challenged New York’s new “clean energy standard,” which mandates subsidiesfor nuclear plants and renewable energy, by petitioning the state Public Service Commission to reconsider the policy.
The formal petitions for rehearing come from a wide range of critics, from power plant owners to low-income consumer advocates, reflecting the sweeping impact of the new regulations.
Challenges had been widely expected, given the high stakes for energy producers and customers. Petitions for rehearing are typically the first step in seeking to change a commission decision. Lawsuits could follow.
There is no deadline for the commission to respond to the petitions, said Jon Sorensen, speaking for the PSC.
“Parties will likely be given 45 business days to comment on the arguments presented in the petitions before the commission decides whether to reject those petitions or modify the order,” he wrote in an email.
The PSC is under pressure to move ahead with its new policy swiftly, especially the part that affects Upstate nuclear plants. The FitzPatrick plant in Oswego County is slated to close in January if the planned sale of the plant to Exelon Corp. is blocked. The sale of FitzPatrick depends on approval of subsidy contracts authorized by the clean energy standard.
Under a side agreement between New York officials and current plant owner Entergy Corp., the sale of FitzPatrick must be approved and subsidy contracts for the facility signed, all by Nov. 18, or the sale can be called off and state power authority would owe a $35 million termination fee to Entergy.
Several of the petitioners seeking to revisit the clean energy standard claim the PSC acted with illegal haste by adopting the nuclear subsidy scheme, details of which were proposed just two weeks before the commission vote. Those critics say the proposal to adopt a 12-year subsidy program for Upstate nuclear plants, which is expected to cost nearly $1 billion during just the first two years, should have been subjected to a 45-day comment period under the State Administrative Procedures Act. The PSC said in its original order that the comment period was adequate.
Other petitions say the PSC erred by excluding certain types of renewable energy, such as existing wind farms or new hydroelectric dams, from getting subsidies under the clean energy standard.
The Independent Power Producers of New York, among others, argued that some New York power generators excluded from the clean energy standard might sell their output in Massachusetts, which just enacted financial incentives for renewable power.
Contact Tim Knauss anytime | email | Twitter | 315-470-3023
American Fukushima rescue ships still contaminated with radiation
16 US ships that aided in Operation Tomodachi still contaminated with radiation, By MATTHEW M. BURKE | STARS AND STRIPES March 13, 2016 CAMP FOSTER, Okinawa — Sixteen U.S. ships that participated in relief efforts after Japan’s nuclear disaster five years ago remain contaminated with low levels of radiation from the crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, top Navy officials told Stars and Stripes.
In all, 25 ships took part in Operation Tomadachi, the name given for the U.S. humanitarian aid operations after the magnitude-9.0 earthquake and subsequent tsunami on March 11, 2011. The tsunami, whose waves reached runup heights of 130 feet, crippled the Fukushima plant, causing a nuclear meltdown.
In the years since the crisis, the ships have undergone cleanup efforts, the Navy said, and 13 Navy and three Military Sealift Command vessels still have some signs of contamination, mostly to ventilation systems, main engines and generators……
The Navy has acknowledged that the Reagan passed through a plume of radiation. Navy images showed sailors with their faces covered, scrubbing the deck of the Reagan with soap and water as a precautionary measure afterward. The Reagan and sailors stayed off the coast of Japan for several weeks to aid their Japanese allies.
The multibillion-dollar ship, projected to last at least 50 years after its launch in 2001, then was taken offline for more than a year for “deep maintenance and modernization” at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and Intermediate Maintenance Facility in Bremerton, Wash., according to Navy officials…….
Sailors who performed the work said it entailed entering spaces deep within the ship, testing for high levels of radiation, and if it was found, sanding, priming and painting the areas. They say there were given little to no protective gear, a claim that the Navy denies……
Eight Reagan sailors, claiming a host of medical conditions they say are related to radiation exposure, filed suit in 2012 against the nuclear plant’s operator, the Tokyo Electric Power Co. The suit asserts that TEPCO lied, coaxing the Navy closer to the plant even though it knew the situation was dire. General Electric, EBASCO, Toshiba Corp. and Hitachi were later added as defendants for allegations of faulty parts for the reactors.
A spokesman for TEPCO declined to comment for this story because of the sailors’ lawsuit, which was slated to go forward pending appeals in the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.
The illnesses listed in the lawsuit include genetic immune system diseases, headaches, difficulty concentrating, thyroid problems, bloody noses, rectal and gynecological bleeding, weakness in sides of the body accompanied by the shrinking of muscle mass, memory loss, leukemia, testicular cancer, problems with vision, high-pitch ringing in the ears and anxiety.
The list of sailors who have joined the lawsuit, which is making its way through the courts, has grown to 370…….
Shinzo Kimura — a professor at Dokkyo Medical University in Japan who has studied radiation exposure from Hiroshima and Nagasaki to Chernobyl and, now, Fukushima — said it wasn’t too early for sailors to show symptoms of exposure-related conditions. Doctors have seen conditions in children living near the plant that surfaced earlier than would normally be expected.
Kimura, hired by the Nihonmatsu city government for his expertise in the field, was the first scientist on the ground taking readings in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. He said each person and the way their body is affected by radiation is different.
While unable to definitively say if the sailors were sickened by the radiation, Kimura reasoned that the levels aboard the Reagan were high enough to cause illnesses. Otherwise, he said, why go through the bother of repeated cleanings to lower radiation levels?
“It is impossible to speculate or calculate how much the doses were before the two decontamination works,” he said. “The U.S. military is very good at risk-management. Considering that, it is assumed that decontaminations were conducted twice because the levels were not favorable.”
sumida.chiyomi@stripes.com http://www.stripes.com/news/16-us-ships-that-aided-in-operation-tomodachi-still-contaminated-with-radiation-1.399094
Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant to shut down permanently on October 24
| OPPD announces shutdown date for Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant http://enformable.com/2016/08/oppd-announces-shutdown-date-fort-calhoun-nuclear-power-plant/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Enformable+%28Enformable%29 31 Aug 2016 The PWR reactor at the Fort Calhoun nuclear power plant in Nebraska will shut down for good on October 24th, 2016. The reactor first went online in September, 1973 and was the smallest nuclear reactor in the United States in terms of power generation (476 MW). The Nuclear Regulatory Commission received a letter from Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) that notified them of the utilities decision to decommission the lone reactor at the power plant.In June, the OPPD announced that it had reached a decision to shut down the plant, but an exact date had not been announced. The utility estimated that it would save $1 billion over the next 20 years if it decommissioned the power plant.
The plant was the focus of international concern after the Missouri River flooded and surrounded the facility with rising water. The reactor was forced to remain offline for nearly three years while OPPD responded to a wide range of deficiencies identified in inspections by the NRC after the flooding event.
|
-
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
