Non-nuclear production of medical isotopes
National nuclear medicine shortage could have a Wisconsin solution
WTN News Tom StillAugust 17, 2009
“…………Scientists working with the Madison-based company believe they can generate the neutrons necessary to create Mo-99, an essential nuclear medicine tool, without using a nuclear reactor to do so.It’s a safer and more sustainable method than the status quo, which relies on production of Mo-99 from five retirement-age nuclear medicine reactors – two of which are now shut down, one perhaps permanently…………………………”
National nuclear medicine shortage could have a Wisconsin solution (WTN News)
Ionising radiation causing rise in thyroid cancer
Your Health: Rise in thyroid cancer may be tied to radiation
By Kim Painter, USA TODAY 16 August 09A medical mystery: As overall cancer rates fall, why are thyroid cancer rates rising? Diagnoses of cancer in this gland in the neck are increasing about 6% a year, faster than cancers found anywhere else, according to one National Cancer Institute analysis.Researchers know one big reason: The many medical scans Americans have, for everything from neck pain to artery plaque, are turning up thousands of tiny thyroid tumors that otherwise might go undetected and often would do no harm.
“We call them ‘incidentalomas,’ ” says Amy Chen, a head and neck surgeon at Emory University in Atlanta and American Cancer Society researcher.
But that’s not the whole story. Two recent studies, including one co-written by Chen, show larger thyroid tumors are being found at an increasing rate, too. And those can’t be explained by more aggressive diagnosis alone, researchers say.
“There is something else going on” to contribute to the 37,000 cases of thyroid cancer expected this year, Chen says. That’s up from 18,000 in 2000.
Your Health: Rise in thyroid cancer may be tied to radiation – USATODAY.com
Nuclear costs spell the dying of this industry?
Nuclear power’s new debate: cost
Issues of safety and waste make way for a focus on funding.
By Mark Clayton | Staff Writer for The Christian Science Monitor/ August 13, 2009
“…………a new wave of concern is rising – not over traditional anxieties such as radioactive waste or weapons proliferation – but about the mammoth financial cost of nuclear power and who will bear it.
The big hurdle for Calvert Cliffs III and at least 21 other nuclear power reactors now in the US development pipeline is all about money – finding the billions in loans to build them. And the key to getting those loans is winning federal guarantees to back them.
Today, the US has 104 nuclear reactors, providing about 20 percent of the nation’s power. No new nuclear plants have been ordered in the US since 1978. This is not because of protestors, but because of a lack of investor funding and Wall Street remembering the ghosts of nuclear power’s past – massive construction cost overruns, utility defaults, and bankruptcies. Yet these no longer seem to haunt the nuclear industry or its supporters.
……………….“Despite industry efforts to frame nuclear energy as the cheapest option, the reality is that nuclear power’s very survival has required large and continuous government support,” writes Doug Koplow, president of the Boston energy consulting company Earth Track, in a recent analysis of public subsidies for nuclear power. Mr. Koplow tracks $178 billion in public subsidies for nuclear energy for the period from 1947 to 1999. Others have reached similar figures.
ALTOGETHER, NUCLEAR-INDUSTRY BAILOUTS in the 1970s and ’80s cost taxpayers and ratepayers in excess of $300 billion in 2006 dollars, according to three independent studies cited in a new nuclear-cost study by the Union of Concerned Scientists.
New guarantees in coming years could also leave US taxpayers picking up the tab if nuclear utilities defaulted on their loans. In 2008, the Government Accountability Office said the average risk of default on Department of Energy guarantees was about 50 percent. The Congressional Budget Office projected that default rates would be very high – well above 50 percent.”
On that basis, the potential risk exposure to US taxpayers from federally guaranteed nuclear loans would be $360 billion to $1.6 trillion, depending on the number of power reactors built, the Union of Concerned Scientists’ study found.
http://features.csmonitor.com/innovation/2009/08/13/nuclear-power%E2%80%99s-new-debate-cost/
Nuclear Regulatory Commission: failure and cover-up
The NRC’s ghastly failure
It and the Veterans Affairs Department papered over cancer treatment errors.
Philadelphia Inquier, 12 August 09 By Peter Crane
When news broke of the bungled radiation treatments given to prostate cancer patients at the Philadelphia VA hospital, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was quick to deflect responsibility. The agency said it learned of the problems only in May 2008 and then moved “aggressively and decisively” to correct them.
The Department of Veterans Affairs took a similar line. Testifying before a Senate committee in June, acting VA Undersecretary for Health Gerald Cross expressed regret that “this problem went undetected for nearly six years.”
But the NRC’s own records tell a different story. Documents readily accessible on its Web site show it knew of Dr. Gary Kao’s pattern of errors in 2003, saw it recur in 2005, and did nothing about it until 2008. Far from “undetected,” this problem was papered over by the two agencies……………………
the doctors and hospitals licensed by the NRC are a powerful lobby, relentless and all too successful in demanding less regulation. In recent years, the agency has dismantled much of the system of regulations that used to protect patients and the public.
For example, the NRC used to have a rule requiring safety checks that might have prevented the Philadelphia disaster. But, yielding to the industry, the NRC abolished that rule in 2002………..
…..decisions affecting the medical care of Philadelphia’s veterans or anyone else should not be entrusted to an agency of nuclear engineers – certainly not one with the NRC’s record of failure. This would require a change in the law, which Congress should make after thoroughly investigating the NRC’s medical program.In the meantime, President Obama has two vacancies to fill on the five-member Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Recent reports say he is preparing to name two more reactor experts, to the jubilation of the nuclear-power industry. This would only make a bad situation worse.
Obama should instead nominate someone – perhaps a current or former state regulator – with the expertise and will to end the NRC’s long neglect of its medical responsibilities.
Decisions affecting the medical care of Philadelphia’s veterans or anyone else should not be entrusted to an agency of nuclear engineers – certainly not one with the NRC’s record of failure. This would require a change in the law, which Congress should make after thoroughly investigating the NRC’s medical program.
In the meantime, President Obama has two vacancies to fill on the five-member Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Recent reports say he is preparing to name two more reactor experts, to the jubilation of the nuclear-power industry. This would only make a bad situation worse.
Obama should instead nominate someone – perhaps a current or former state regulator – with the expertise and will to end the NRC’s long neglect of its medical responsibilities.
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20090812_The_NRC_s_ghastly_failure.html
TVA reduces plans for Alabama nuclear plant to 1 reactor, instead of the 4 originally planned
TVA reduces plans for Alabama nuclear plant to one reactor instead of the 4 originally planned
by Duncan Mansfield NOXVILLE, Tenn. 7 August 09 — The Tennessee Valley Authority, faced with falling electric sales and rising costs from cleaning up a massive coal ash spill in Tennessee, on Friday trimmed plans for a potential four-unit nuclear plant in northeast Alabama to one reactor.The nation’s largest public utility, which two years ago had positioned itself as a leader in this country’s so-called “nuclear renaissance,” said it would prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement to consider a single reactor for its unfinished Bellefonte site near Scottsboro, Ala.
That single unit might be one of the two advanced Westinghouse AP1000 reactors for which TVA has already applied to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a combined construction and operating license. Or it might be one of the two incomplete reactors that have been mothballed at the site since 1988……………
….TVA had plans in the 1960s and 1970s for as many as 17 reactors, but scrapped most of them because of cost and lack of power demand.
TVA reduces plans for Alabama nuclear plant to 1 reactor, instead of the 4 originally planned
Overcoming Nuclear Power’s Biggest Hurdle
Nuclear Power’s biggest hurdle
Strategy and Business 4 August 09 Nuclear power supporters had long hoped that the solution to the nuclear waste problem could be found in a storage facility hollowed out of Yucca Mountain, deep in the Nevada desert roughly 80 miles north of Las Vegas.But questions about Yucca’s long-term ability to keep radioactivity from leeching into groundwater energized nuclear opponents, as well as nearby residents and Nevada political leaders.
Soon after taking office, President Obama defunded the project.Pending another solution, the roughly 60,000 tons of nuclear fuel waste currently in the U.S. is stored on-site at nuclear plants, either in subsurface canisters or in secure “ponds” filled with boric acid.
If this approach continues much longer, it could cost Washington a lot of money: Utilities have successfully sued the federal government for failing to provide a permanent storage solution after they ponied up roughly US$30 billion in fees paid over several years to fund the Yucca project.
Indeed, untangling the nuclear waste problem may be more a matter of economics than of location.
Increased cancer deaths near nuclear power plants
Uranium and the secret society
Arch1 5 August 09
“……………………Ernest J. Sternglass of the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, (”The Health Effects of Nuclear Fallout and Releases from Nuclear Power Plants.”) has concerns that nuclear power plants have similar effect.
He pointed out that studies in the north central Texas area indicate large increases in cancer rates since the start-up of the Comanche Peak nuclear power plant in Somervell County southwest of Fort Worth. (14)
Dr. Sternglass states data indicates that cancer mortality in the counties surrounding the power plant – Somervell, Hood, Johnson and Erath – increased dramatically, 27 percent, during the second five-year period while the rate for the state increased 15 percent for the same period.(15)
In Hood County, breast cancer increased 190 percent over the previous five-year period, and total breast cancer deaths for all four counties increased by 51 percent while the statewide increase was 12 percent for the same period.
More recently, using mortality statistics from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Mangano and Sherman found that in 1985-2004, the change in local child leukemia mortality (vs. the U.S.) compared to the earliest years of reactor operations were:
An increase of 13.9% near nuclear plants started 1957-1970 (oldest plants)
* An increase of 9.4% near nuclear plants started 1971-1981 (newer plants)
* A decrease of 5.5% near nuclear plants started 1957-1981 and later shut down
The 13.9% rise near the older plants suggests a potential effect of greater radioactive contamination near aging reactors, while the 5.5% decline near closed reactors suggests a link between less contamination and lower leukemia rates. Because of the large number of child leukemia deaths in the study (1292) it makes many of the results statistically significant.
The Mangano/Sherman report follows a 2007 meta-analysis also published in the European Journal of Cancer Care by researchers from the Medical University of South Carolina. That report reviewed 17 medical journal articles on child leukemia rates near reactors, and found that all 17 detected elevated rates.(17)
A January 2008 European Journal of Cancer article that found high rates of child leukemia near German reactors from 1980-2003 is believed to be the largest study on the topic (1592 leukemia cases)
http://arch1design.com/blog/?p=1859
USA – double standards on India, Iran – in spread of nuclear technology
When narrow national interests obstruct a noble cause
The Economist 7 August 09
“………….The Obama administration, unlike its predecessor, talks of ratifying the test-ban treaty. America and Russia are busy cutting warheads. Nuclear officials from America, Russia, Britain, France and China will meet in London next month to explore ways to build confidence for future disarmament.
Yet all will be in vain unless better ways can be found to deal with a practical problem as old as the nuclear age: how to stop nuclear technologies that can be used legitimately for making electricity from being abused for bomb-making. Efforts to tackle it are in a muddle.
………………..the Obama team may have done itself no favours either by agreeing to open early talks with India, under a controversial 123 deal negotiated by the Bush administration. This will eventually allow India to extract plutonium from spent reactor fuel of American origin. India, which has never signed the NPT, does not yet have any American-built reactors, let alone the spent fuel from them to reprocess. America is creating a muddle by giving India such rights now, when it is telling Iran than it should suspend its work and others that they had better not start.
……………..A quiet change: In the confusion, few will have noticed that the Obama administration has dropped its predecessor’s plans to restart commercial plutonium reprocessing—because it makes no economic sense, even for rich America, and is a proliferation risk.
Protecting Fort Collins and Northern Colorado from uranium mining
The Alliance 5 August 09
Mining’s benefits will not last forever: Now to sum up the problems of uranium mining in the world, from water to health, from economic problems to uranium accidents, nothing but pure greed if the State of Virginia allows uranium mining in the whole state! Only the state of Virginia and the Canadian uranium mining company will benefit from open pit uranium mining and milling!
A Canadian company, Powertech, is planning to mine uranium just six miles northeast of Fort Collins on 6,880 acres of private land…………………Both types of mining – in-situ leach (ISL) and open pit (OP) – pose serious health risks for local residents, and create drastic environmental and economic risks for Fort Collins and northern Colorado. The Larimer County Medical Society, the Colorado Medical Society, and even the City of Fort Collins passed resolutions against the mine. Elected officials from both political parties, farmers and ranchers, medical professionals, real estate agents, and environmentalists have taken a stand against the mine………………..
Colorado needs to enact stringent regulations to protect citizens and property owners from the dangers of uranium mining. In a few months the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board will be changing the rules on uranium mining to make them comply with laws passed by the legislature in 2008.
http://thealliance123.blogspot.com/2009/08/protecting-fort-collins-and-northern.html
Strong anti-nuclear group having effect in Texas
New Anti-Nuclear Group, Energía Mía, Putting Heat on CPS
TEXAS VOX August 6, 2009 by citizensarah
“……………..Citizens are uniting in efforts to halt CPS’ spending for more nuclear reactors. Speakers from many diverse organizations and businesses relayed their concerns about nuclear power as part of the newly formed Energia Mia network and are working to increase visibility and awareness of the problems of nuclear power.
“Energía Mía urges all citizens in San Antonio to get involved now and contact the mayor and city council. The rate hikes that would come from more nuclear power are unacceptable. They would create a severe economic hardship on many people and local businesses” said Cindy Weehler. “We have set up a new web site, www.EnergiaMia.org to provide information to the public and let people know how to get involved.”
According to the San Antonio Express-News, their membership includes representatives from
…the Southwest Workers Union, Project Verde, Alamo Group of the Sierra Club, Highland Hills Neighborhood Association, Jefferson Heights Neighborhood Association, Texas Drought Project, Green Party and the San Antonio Area Progressive Action Coalition.
Alongside fundamental concerns about water, security, radioactive waste, and health and safety risks, the group is concerned about the financial effect the project could have on the city and the rate hikes that CPS has said will accompany STP’s expansion. CPS has already said that 5-8% rate hikes will be needed every two years for the next ten years to pay for this project, and that electric rates could increase nearly 50% as a result.
The good news is that all the noise these activists are making is starting to have an impact.
http://texasvox.org/2009/08/06/new-anti-nuclear-group-energia-mia-putting-heat-on-cps/
Nuclear power is dangerous and too expensive to build
delaware online Frieda Berryhill, 6 August 09 “……….First, companies will not build nuclear power plants without the protection of the Price-Anderson Act which provides taxpayer compensation in case of an accident since no company in the world will insure them.
Price-Anderson, however, only provides $500 million when the latest government report, states that depending on the severity of the accident, damages could run in the billions. Second, after 50 years of operation there is still the waste problem. Energy Secretary Steven Chu appeared before the House lawmakers on June 3 and declared the planned Yucca Mountain repository “dead.”……………..
since 2005, cost estimates for building a new nuclear reactor have more then tripled. Nuclear energy, once declared to be “too cheap to meter,” is now too expensive to pursue.
Nuclear power is dangerous and too expensive to build | Delawareonline.com | The News Journal
Braidwood nuclear reactor shut down
Braidwood nuclear reactor shut down
Chicago Breaking News 31 july 09
One of the two nuclear reactors at the Braidwood Generating Station was shut down last night and remains offline this morning because of a transformer problem that is preventing the unit from receiving power, an Exelon spokeswoman said………..
The transformer problem triggered an automatic shutdown at the facility 60 miles southwest of Chicago
The Health Costs of U.S. Nuclear Weapons
The Costs of U.S. Nuclear Weapons
mil.news.sohu.com 29 July 09……………….Environmental and Health Costs
“…………..one great irony of the Cold War is that although the United States produced nuclear weapons en masse to destroy the Soviet Union, and vice-versa, the principal victims of each country’s nuclear weapons were its own citizens.From the very beginning, nuclear officials dealt with the problem of nuclear waste by devising interim rather than long-term solutions…………………..
………millions of gallons of wastes leaked into the ground. Hanford officials insisted for years that it would take centuries for the waste to reach the groundwater underneath the site. In fact, it was only a matter of decades before their optimistic assumptions were proven wrong.
“…………………..A major reason why the United States today faces a “cleanup” bill of at least $300 billion is that problems such as the Hanford waste tanks were ignored in favor of maintaining or increasing production of nuclear weapons. Production was the first priority of the government. Making sure it was done in a manner that did not unnecessarily hurt people or destroy the environment was a distant second. Had the government thought through more carefully the consequences of unrestrained production of plutonium and highly-enriched uranium, many of the problems—and bills—we face today could have been avoided or substantially mitigated. It now appears that in a number of cases, no effective “cleanup” will be possible and highly-contaminated sites will simply have to be fenced off and monitored for generations………….…A number of the 600,000 people who worked in a nuclear weapons facility were exposed to unnecessarily high levels of radiation. Exposure to toxic chemicals was also high. At several facilities, no consistent records were kept of employee radiation exposures. At at least one, plant officials entered false readings into dosimetry logs. When workers fell ill and applied for worker’s compensation, the DOE spent millions of dollars on lawyer’s fees to avoid paying out even a single claim, out of fear that paying one claim would open the floodgates to lawsuits and increase calls for stricter health and safety measures, which would necessarily drive up costs and impede production of more weapons………………
……..Uranium miners, many of whom were Navajo, developed lung cancer after working in unvented mines without respirators or any sort of protective gear. Government officials were well aware of the dangers to the workers, but chose to ignore them to keep production high and the price of uranium low.
Extreme secrecy on U.S. Nuclear Weapons impedes democracy
The Costs of U.S. Nuclear Weapons
mil.news.sohu.com 29 July 09
“……………………The extreme secrecy surrounding almost everything concerning nuclear weapons impeded effective democratic debate for decades. During the earliest years of the program, the AEC simply presented a budget to Congress with little or no detailed justification for how the money would be spent and why. The fundamental issue of how U.S. nuclear weapons would be used and how the requirements for deterrence were developed was never adequately explored during the early years when the basic framework for the program was being established. One result of this is that U.S. officials systematically failed to anticipate how the Soviet Union would perceive the U.S. buildup and how it would drive the Soviets to respond with its own provocative programs. Finally, pork barrel politics (the use of government programs by elected representatives to enrich their constituents) was an important underlying factor as well…………………………..Funding something connected to the defense of the nation required less justification and was more immune to careful scrutiny than a non-military program. Nuclear weapons programs became an important means of support for the otherwise poor and mostly rural communities where production facilities were located. In time, these communities became dependent, to varying degrees, on their local nuclear facilities, to the extent that local officials (and many workers) often downplayed the health and environmental risks they posed……………..
………..As a result of the Cold War and the imperatives of the nuclear standoff, this aspect of the American economy resembled the economy of the Soviet Union, in which decisions were made on a planned basis by a remote government, without reference to market forces, behind closed doors, for reasons that would not be made public
US Lawmakers Concerned about ‘Reset’ of US-Russia Relations
US Lawmakers Concerned about ‘Reset’ of US-Russia Relations
Voice of America
By Dan RobinsonCapitol Hill31 July 2009
“………………Questions about where the U.S.-Russia relationship is going are many, ranging from arms control, missile defense and nonproliferation and Iran’s nuclear program, to cooperation in counter-terrorism and U.S. concerns about human rights and media freedom in Russia.Among questions: How can the U.S. work with Russia to persuade Iran to end its uranium enrichment program?……………………………
Assistant Secretary Gordon told lawmakers that the Obama administration has told Russia that sales of sophisticated arms, including an anti-aircraft system, to Iran would be a real problem in bilateral ties.On Iran’s nuclear program, Gordon noted that Russia has agreed to a joint threat assessment on ballistic and nuclear issues to include an examination of Iranian efforts.
He said one of the objectives of a U.S government inter-agency team visiting Moscow is to share the U.S. analysis, and persuade Russia that pressure must be increased if Iran fails to respond positively and soon on the issue.
VOA News – US Lawmakers Concerned about ‘Reset’ of US-Russia Relations
1 This Month
19 November – Webinar – The Reality of Reprocessing
Time: 11:00 AM Pacific Time (US & Canada) / 2:00 PM Eastern / 7:00 PM UK / 8:00 PM CET
Register for the Zoom Event Here
Shut down the radiation-damaged Heysham nuclear reactors now
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity – go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
Say No to NASA’s Reckless Nuclear Reactor on the Moon
-
Archives
- November 2026 (64)
- October 2026 (302)
- September 2026 (339)
- August 2026 (330)
- July 2026 (355)
- June 2026 (287)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (267)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
