Fukushima Radiation Concentrated in Particles, Hot Spots, Laboratory equipment Wed, 08/15/2018 – bySeth Augenstein– Senior Science Writer –@SethAugenstein “….
A new report indicates that the estimates of how much radioactivity was released remain accurate, but where it is located and concentrated are a continual source of discovery.
In fact, more than three-quarters of radioactive cesium was released as glassy microparticles formed by the meltdown, and those particles are now gathered in the nuclear exclusion zone as radioactive hot spots, according to a recent paper and presentation.
The findings were published in Environmental Science and Technology, and also scheduled for presentation at the Goldschmidt Conference of the Geochemical Society, held this week in Boston.
The cesium-134 and cesium-137 particles thrown over a wide area have now been washed down from roofs and trees and plants, where it has clustered together in the ground, according to the scientists, led by Satoshi Utsunomiya of Kyushu University.
The microparticles were distinguished from the soluble cesium by its elevated radioactivity, using a novel procedure, the investigators said.
Twenty soil samples from around the disaster area were assessed using autoradiography, similar in concept to a medical X-ray in that it would expose a photographic film or detector to image the radiation. The scientists looked at the sieved soil samples and quantitatively determined the amount of microparticles using a comparison between the photo-stimulated glow, and the radioactivity levels, they report.
Although the total amount of radiation appears accurate, its concentrations have appeared to be inaccurate, they conclude.
The initial findings were originally covered earlier this year in Laboratory Equipment. However, the findings on the concentrations and possible health impacts are new.
An independent commenter, Ken Buesseler of the Wood Hole Oceanographic Association, said in a statement released by the conference that the work has advanced the understanding of the Japanese nuclear tragedy.
“The idea of microparticles has not been ‘missed in the assessment of total cesium levels in soil after Fukushima; it has been included, although this work highlights the fraction found in cesium microparticles,” Buesseler said. “These researchers have done a fine job of developing new tools to quantify these microparticles, and that is an important story to tell.”…….https://www.laboratoryequipment.com/news/2018/08/fukushima-radiation-concentrated-particles-hot-spots
Fierce debate sparked by ‘nuclear mud’ digging on Bristol Channel coast, Mud is being dug up and moved from Hinkley Point nuclear power station, Bristol Live By David Williamson, Daniel Chipperfield , 16 Aug 18
Plans to dig up mud from Hinkley Point nuclear sites on the Somerset coast and dump it in South Wales have been met with controversy.
Work will start next month dredging roughly 300,000 tonnes which will be moved to land near Cardiff, but protesters say there’s a chance the mud could be contaminated with radiation, making it unsafe…. Wale’s Online’s poltiical editor David Williamson has been investigating the issue as protesters call on Natural resources Wales to suspend the licence for the dredging.
Hinkley Point A Stopped Producing Electricity In 2000 After 35 Years Of Operations; Hinkley Point B Has Been Generating Electricity Since 1976.
EDF Now Wants To Take Mud And Sediment So It Can Drill Six Vertical Shafts For The Cooling Water System For The New Hinkley Point C Power Station.
The Energy Giant Claims The Material Is “No Different To The Sediment Already At The Cardiff Grounds” And Is “Not Classed As Radioactive Under UK Law”.
But Campaigners Do Not Believe Detailed The Tests That Have Been Carried Out Are Sufficiently Thorough…….Dr Richard Bramhall Of The Low Level Radiation Campaign – A Former Member Of The UK Government’s Committee Examining Radiation Risks Of Internal Emitters (CERRIE) – Has Voiced Worries About The Tests.
In A Letter To NRW He Raised Concerns The Tests Did Not Assess Whether Uranium, Plutonium And Other Alpha-Emitting Elements Were Present In Minute “Particulate” Form.
As Larger Fragments Break Up, Any Given Amount Of Particulate Matter Will Become More Mobile, Be More Easily Inhaled Into The Deep Lung And The Lymphatic System, And Will Emit More Radiation,” He Said.
Tim Deere-Jones, A Self-Employed Marine Pollution Consultant, Argues Years Of Discharges From The Existing Nuclear Stations Mean More Detailed Study Is Needed.
He Said: “Those Sediments Had Been In Receipt Of Discharges From The Hinkley A Nuclear Station And The Hinkley B Nuclear Station… If You’ve Got 300,000 Tonnes Of That Stuff Being Dredged And Dumped So Close [To South Wales] You Need To Know Exactly What You’ve Got In It In Terms Of Radioactivity.”
Tim Deere-Jones, A Self-Employed Marine Pollution Consultant, Argues Years Of Discharges From The Existing Nuclear Stations Mean More Detailed Study Is Needed.
He Said: “Those Sediments Had Been In Receipt Of Discharges From The Hinkley A Nuclear Station And The Hinkley B Nuclear Station… If You’ve Got 300,000 Tonnes Of That Stuff Being Dredged And Dumped So Close [To South Wales] You Need To Know Exactly What You’ve Got In It In Terms Of Radioactivity.”
Ken Rankin, 17 Aug 18,Why is it, that sticky jagged fibers, like fiberglass, don’t cause mesothelioma, when embedded in lung tissue yet, similar asbestos fibers do cause cancer and mesothelioma?
For toxicologists, studying asbestos and mesothelioma, there has always been one question. “How can these little-tiny, mineral fibers, embedded in soft tissue, almost always cause cancer? ”
Little or no physiological explanation, for it, made much sense.. The consensus was, that the fibers, set off a lethal-unending inflammation cascade, where the mineral fiber is lodged. An assault, on ones own body, by itself, from cytokines.
So, I ask, “Why is it that sticky jagged fibers, like fiberglass, dont cause mesothelioma when embedded in lung tissue, while asbestos does cause cancer and mesothelioma?”
The answer must be because, the asbestos fibers, are radioactive. They are mineral fibers, extracted from the earth. Asbestos fibers, contain radium. When lodged in soft tissue, the asbestos fibers, constantly emmit alpha rays that are mutagenic, chemotoxic, and carcinogenic to the surrounding tissue microenvironment.
People forget, that for 80 years, that the government and nuclear physicists, have been lying-their-asses-off about the true nature of radionuclides. They have been lying about radionuclide, lethality in the human body, even in microscopic doses. Even the more diluted emmitors, like the radium in asbestos just sits there in the tissue constantly emitting alpha and beta rays. The smallest fibers of asbestos, trapped in soft tissue, always causes cancer.
This is what a fiber of asbestos trapped in your lungs, stomach, colon or any other soft tissue is doing: Alpha emittor in a cloud chamber:
Cloud chamber. Alpha particles
This is the age of ultimate Trump -republican corrumption and criminality . Russia has the largest and, one of the only asbestos mines left, in the world. Any semblance of logic that they are not uncaring psychopaths. is all an illusion. Thee republicans, are making trillions on insider trading on the helterskelter tariffs that only make sense, to wall street crooks .
They will make trillions from kickbacks from russia for buying Russian asbestos, so that millions of americans can die horrible mesothelioma deaths
“Along with mineralogical observation, we have analyzed forty-four major and trace elements in extracted asbestos bodies (fibers and proteins attached to them) with coexisting fiber-free ferruginous protein bodies from extirpative lungs of individuals with malignant mesothelioma. Observarions and patients’ characteristics suggest that inhaled iron-rich asbestos fibers and dust particles, induce ferruginous protein body formation resulting in ferritin aggregates in lung tissue that contain radium from the asbestos. Chemical analysis of ferruginous protein bodies extracted from lung tissues reveals anomalously high concentrations of radioactive radium, reaching millions of times higher concentration than that of seawater. Continuous and prolonged internal exposure to hotspot ionizing radiation from radium and its daughter nuclides could cause strong and frequent DNA damage in lung tissue, initiate different types of tumour cells, including malignant mesothelioma”
226Ra has been measured in five asbestos group minerals. The activity levels are variable, are consistent with other forms of rock and range from 0.01–0.4 pCi 226Ra/g. Alpha particles from asbestos fibers immobilized in the lower lung near pleural surfaces and in the upper lung on bronchial surfaces may be implicated in initiating mesothelioma and bronchial carcinoma.
WHAT MORE DIRECT PROOF DO YOU NEED? TO KNOW HOW LETHAL RADIONUCLIDES ARE. THEY ARE THE MOST CARCINOGENIC, MUTAGENIC, TERATOGENIC, TOXIC agents in the universe. Radionuclide pollution, is destroying the life-giving chemistry of biomolecules on earth, that animate us!
The Government have issued a clear commitment to developing the UK’s capacity to produce nuclear energy in 2018.
But some MPs are reticent and believe the UK is being taken down the wrong path in its pursuit of a robust sustainable energy mix, writes Dods Monitoring’s Josh White. SNP MPs such as Drew Hendry and Alan Brown have encapsulated this sentiment in the Commons, often taking the Government to task on its decision to prioritise new nuclear over alternatives such as oil and gas and offshore wind.
In July, Hendry accused the Government of locking consumers into paying £20 to £40 more per megawatt-hour and called on it to end to its “obsession with outdated, expensive and risky nuclear”.
Does Hendry have a point? – At face value, there’s no denying that a higher strike price represents a poorer public investment, however, new nuclear stakeholders have argued that the reliability of nuclear energy sets it apart from other cheaper forms of low carbon energy production.
Whilst it is evident that the Government seeks to establish new nuclear as the core of the future UK energy mix, the success of the project will be contingent on finding a solution to the pressing issue of what to do with nuclear waste – a problem unique to nuclear energy.
Currently, the solution on thetable is to store radioactive waste in geological disposal facilities (GDFs) that would be built with community consent, bringing jobs and skills to affected localities whilst also providing a long-term solution to the legacy of higher-activity waste.
The scheme failed to gain traction in 2008 when it was launched as part of the Managing Radioactive Disposal white paper, however, with the need to transition towards a sustainable energy mix greater than ever, the Government is hoping the initiative will attract
more support and uptake this time around.
FirstEnergy takes “unwelcome” step towards plant closures, WNN, 16 August 2018
FirstEnergy Solutions Inc (FES) has taken its next step towards the closure of three nuclear power plants, filing plans related to the decommissioning with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The Beaver Valley, Davis-Besse and Perry plants are scheduled to close during the next three years unless legislative policy solutions can be found to keep them operating.
The company on 15 August said it had filed with the NRC details of the training programme for the professionals who will supervise the removal and on-site storage of fuel from the plants after their shut-down.
“Today’s NRC submission is a necessary milestone for us but not a welcome one,” Don Moul, FES president and chief nuclear officer, said………. A solution must be reached by mid-2019, when FES must either purchase the fuel required for Davis-Besse’s next refuelling or proceed with the shutdown. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/FirstEnergy-takes-unwelcome-step-towards-plant-clo
The possibility of a shipment of spent nuclear fuel on Michigan highways to Port Huron and into Canada has members of a nuclear watchdog group concerned and asking questions.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission received a request for approval of a highway shipment route for spent nuclear fuel from LaSalle County Nuclear Generating Station to Port Huron and Michigan’s port of exit.
A July 13 letter from the NRC indicates the agency received the application, dated May 13, 2018, and the NRC has a goal to complete the review within 45 days, by late August.
LaSalle County Generating Station, near Chicago, has two nuclear reactors that produce 2,320 megawatts of energy, or enough to power 2.3 million homes, according to Exelon Generation, the company that operates the plant.
The company said the proposed shipment is for nine fuel rods, weighing around five pounds each, that will be shipped to a testing facility in Canada after reaching Port Huron.
Beyond Nuclear, an advocacy group working to push for a future free of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons, found the letter posted online on July 23, among hundreds of documents on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s online library.
The group, along with other advocates, criticized the possible shipping route.
“We have serious concerns about shipping high-level radioactive waste from Exelon’s LaSalle reactors to a port city,” said David Kraft, director of the Chicago-based Nuclear Energy Information Service. “Except in cases of extreme emergency, we believe that irradiated fuel should only be moved once for permanent isolation.”
Kay Cumbow of Great Lakes Environmental Alliance in Port Huron said a spill, release or fire in the area or near waterways that flow into the St. Clair River could potentially ruin one of the largest fresh water deltas in the world, the St. Clair Flats. ………
Beyond Nuclear believes the application’s wording suggests a possible water route to the destination, according to a news release from the advocacy organization.
Michael Keegan, spokesperson for Don’t Waste Michigan and Coalition for a Nuclear Free Great Lakes, in Monroe, Michigan, said, “Why risk sending deadly radioactive wastes through our communities and Great Lakes watersheds?”
A community vote on the proposed nuclear waste dump on South Australia’s Eyre Peninsula has been delayed after an Aboriginal group won a court injunction.
Key points:
The Federal Government has shortlisted Kimba for Australia’s future nuclear waste dump
The Barngarla Aboriginal people have won an injunction to halt a community vote
The Supreme Court will hear the case next Thursday
The Barngarla people, the traditional owners of much of the Eyre Peninsula, applied for an injunction to halt the vote in South Australia’s Supreme Court, arguing it contravened the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.
Lawyers for the Aboriginal group argued the District Council of Kimba did not have the power to conduct the postal ballot, which was due to begin on Monday.
The Federal Government has shortlisted two sites near Kimba as possible locations for a low-level radioactive waste storage facility, along with four other sites around Australia
The lawyer representing the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation, Daniel O’Gorman SC, told the court his clients had no issue with the vote going ahead, they just wanted to be included in it.
“That’s all they want, they just want to be included, they don’t want to be treated any differently because their rights are Aboriginal rights,” he said.
The court heard the majority of the 211 native title holders lived outside the boundary of the Kimba District Council and that excluding them from the vote had the effect “of nullifying or impairing their rights”.
But Michael Burnett, representing the District Council of Kimba, told the court its power to conduct the postal vote came from the Local Government Act.
He said the council wanted to conduct the vote in a fair manner and decided the fairest manner was to comply with “the statutory procedure that applies in the case of elections”.
“It’s not a vote that has direct consequences … it’s part of a range of consultations that will be taken into account,” he said.
Mr Burnett said there were direct consultations taking place with native title holders about the proposed sites, a claim which Mr O’Gorman rejected.
“They’re getting two bites of the cherry and therein lies the exclusion, [the native title holders are] only getting one,” Mr O’Gorman said.
Mr Burnett questioned why the Barngarla Determination Aboriginal Corporation had waited until August to seek an injunction when they had known about the vote since May.
But Mr O’Gorman said the corporation had written to the District Council of Kimba on six occasions seeking to be included in the postal vote and council had only made its final decision on July 27.
The vote of around 800 residents who live in Kimba will be delayed until after a full court hearing next Thursday.
State lawmakers maintained they will have a say in a proposed facility to store high-level nuclear waste near Carlsbad and Hobbs, despite an opinion issued by New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas suggesting New Mexico will have a limited role in licensing the project.
New Mexico Sen. Jeff Steinborn (D-36), who chairs the New Mexico Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Committee said Balderas’ opinion was informative but did not preclude lawmakers from preventing the facility from operating.
The committee convened in May to study the project proposed by New Jersey-based Holtec International, and held its third meeting on Wednesday at University of New Mexico-Los Alamos.
Opposed to the project, Steinborn said state lawmakers owe their constituents a full review of the proposal.
More: Who is Holtec? International company touts experience in nuclear storage
“I think it’s kind of a troubling deficiency in the government if the state doesn’t have to give consent to have something like this foisted upon it,” he said. “The State of New Mexico owes it to the people to look at every aspect of it.”
In Balderas’ response to multiple questions asked by Steinborn, he cited numerous past cases that Balderas said created a precedent that state governments have almost no role in federal licensing for nuclear facilities.
More: Attorney general: New Mexico has little say in Holtec proposal
He said the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the sole authority to license the facility, and the state’s authority would likely begin once it went into operation, providing some recourse if something goes wrong.
“While it is abundantly clear that the state cannot license or otherwise directly regulate interim storage facilities, the Supreme Court has repeatedly held that state tort law can provide a remedy for injuries suffered as a result of nuclear plant operation,” Balderas wrote.
But Steinborn said he and the committee intended to make their voices heard well before the plant could go into operation.
He said even if the federal NRC does issue Holtec the needed license, the state could fight back by blocking utilities and infrastructure such as water and transportation access – cutting off the facility’s ability to operate. Continue reading →
Citing ‘potential mismanagement,’ state senator asks for study of JEA’s nuclear power costs Jacksonville.com By Nate Monroe , 16 Aug 18
Central Florida state Sen. Debbie Mayfield has asked the Legislature’s auditing and accountability office to study JEA’s involvement in a faltering and increasingly expensive nuclear power project, citing it as an “alarming example” of “potential mismanagement” at the city-owned electric, water and sewer utility.
JEA’s involvement in the Plant Vogtle nuclear expansion project has largely simmered in the background this year as City Hall was embroiled in a contentious debate over whether it should sell the utility to a private operator. But the costs associated with JEA’s share of Vogtle — which could total $4 billion over 20 years — have concerned city and utility officials and credit-rating analysts.
JEA has told the Plant Vogtle co-owners it wants the project canceled, and utility officials are actively searching for ways to get out of the contract it has with the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, one of the co-owners
Mayfield, who represents a state Senate district that includes Brevard and Indian River counties about 150 miles south of Jacksonville, wants the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability Office to complete an in-depth study of JEA’s contract with MEAG, and to submit a report to the House and Senate leadership by Feb. 1.
“Citizens from the community have expressed concern over recent events and published reports that suggest serious issues surrounding the spending and operation decisions of the JEA,” Mayfield wrote in a Wednesday letter to the legislative auditors.
…….. JEA signed the Plant Vogtle nuclear power agreement in 2008, when industry analysts considered nuclear power to be on the upswing
…….In recent years, however, the fortunes of nuclear power have nose dived, stemming in large part from the availability and low cost of natural gas.The Plant Vogtle expansion is the only remaining active project of its kind in the nation and has experienced explosive cost overruns and delays in the completion dates. Zahn said JEA’s decision to invest made sense in 2008 but that the structure of the contract has left JEA in a bad spot, especially as the cost has skyrocketed. ……..
Citizens Advisory Panel Skeptical Over Sale of Pilgrim Nuclear Powerplant, WCAI , BySARAH TAN , 16 Aug 18
The Nuclear Decommissioning Citizens Advisory Panel expressed deep skepticism regarding Entergy’s decision to sell the Pilgrim powerplant in Plymouth on Wednesday night. Entergy is looking to sell the plant to a joint company after it officially closes in June 2019. Entergy claims the two companies, Holtech International and SNC Lavalin, have more experience with nuclear decommissioning. Holtech and SNC Lavalin have proposed to decommission the plant in much less time – eight years versus Entergy’s up to 60 years, and for much less money than Entergy had estimated. …….
Panel members peppered Entergy and Holtech officials with questions regarding their finances, their plans for decommissioning and their plans for where they’ll store spent nuclear fuel. Former state senator Dan Wolf said the fact that Pilgrim could be sold to not one, but two companies, concerned him.
“And it concerns me that as one of the things I see as part of the presentation is the financial strength of the business, which would imply that if the business gets weak financially there’s not going to be safety? The two should be disconnected, and I don’t see evidence of that,” Wolf said.
Glick ‘at a loss’ over FERC role in Trump coal and nuclear bailout, The Democrat commissioner said he has no knowledge of FERC’s efforts to assist the Trump administration in supporting money-losing coal and nuclear plants. Utility Dive, Gavin Bade@GavinBade 16 Aug 18
Federal Energy Regulatory Commissioner Richard Glick said Wednesday he has no knowledge of efforts at his agency to assist the Trump administration in bailing out money-losing coal and nuclear plants.
“I would like to know what they’re doing,” Glick said, referring to the FERC staff. “I think Commissioner [Neil] Chatterjee would like to know what they’re doing and so would Commissioner [Cheryl] LaFleur, so I just thought I’m kind of at a loss right now trying to figure out what they are doing.”
FERC later said that it was only providing technical assistance to ensure critical electricity infrastructure is protected, but Glick said even that role had not been communicated to him and other commissioners.
“The commission does provide technical assistance and has been doing that for a long time,” he said on the sidelines of the Midcontinent ISO Market Symposium in Indianapolis. “Maybe that’s what [Pugliese is] doing. I honestly just don’t know.”
Populists May Rip Up Sweden’s Nuclear Code of Conduct, Bloomberg, By Jesper Starn,
Five party bi-partisan agreement from 2016 under threat
Energy system will be tested this winter after atomic closures
Sweden’s biggest ever cross-party energy deal was designed to provide stability for utilities for almost three decades, but the 2016 accord is now at risk of being ripped up after next month’s general election.
The Sweden Democrats, which some polls show could emerge as the biggest party, would revoke nuclear-plant closures central to the agreement if they came to power. The Christian Democrats, one of the accord’s co-signers, on Tuesday echoed that view and pressed for key parts of the deal to be renegotiated.
The agreement ended more than 30 years of bickering over nuclear power, extended support for renewable energy and stated that there should be zero emissions impacting the climate by 2045. It effectively boosted the lives of the nation’s six newest reactors until at least 2040, but didn’t address how the capacity of four older Vattenfall AB and EON SE units will be replaced. …….https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-16/nuclear-revival-talk-could-upend-historic-swedish-energy-accord
· COLUMBIA — Attorneys suing South Carolina Electric & Gas say the power company should have to refund everything it collected for its failed nuclear project over the past year — some $452 million in all.
· In a motion filed Wednesday, lawyers representing SCE&G ratepayers say the utility should have dropped its nuclear financing charges from electric rates as soon as it told construction workers at the V.C. Summer power plant to leave the site.
· They say state law only allows SCE&G to charge people for the nuclear project while it is under construction or if it’s fully built — something the company gave up after it abandoned the $9 billion investment on July 31, 2017.
· The nuclear project was dropped after nine years of work on the power plants. SCE&G’s customers paid more than $1.8 billion to finance the endeavor. The troubled utility company is now facing a wave of legal challenges due to the unfinished reactors —now considered the biggest economic failure in state history.
· The new motion threatens to pile another massive liability onto SCE&G’s books.
· State lawmakers already forced the power company earlier this month to temporarily slash its nuclear charges, a move that reduced its customers’ bills by 15 percent and will cost the company roughly $270 million by the end of this year.
· Those customers will also receive a rebate for the power they purchased between April and July.
Nuclear plant owners take next steps in decommissioning process, The Times Jared Stonesifer Aug 15, 2018
The company that owns the Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station on Wednesday took the next steps in the decommissioning process for the plant after filing paperwork with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
FirstEnergy Solutions, which is going through bankruptcy, issued a news release Wednesday morning saying it has taken “its latest steps in the regulatory process” by notifying the NRC of its “certified fuel handler training and retraining program,” as required under the NRC’s decommissioning process.
The filing provides details into the training program for professionals who will supervise the removal and on-site storage of fuel from nuclear plants. Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the NRC, explained Wednesday that the filing is necessary so that his agency can determine if FirstEnergy Solutions has enough “certified fuel handlers” to oversee the decommissioning process, which involves a lengthy process of permanently and safely storing spent nuclear fuel.
……… Neil Sheehan, a spokesman for the NRC, explained Wednesday that the filing is necessary so that his agency can determine if FirstEnergy Solutions has enough “certified fuel handlers” to oversee the decommissioning process, which involves a lengthy process of permanently and safely storing spent nuclear fuel………..
The timeline of potential decommission of FirstEnergy Solutions’ three nuclear power plants hasn’t changed. The company reaffirmed Wednesday that the first nuclear unit at Beaver Valley in Shippingport will go offline in May 2021, while the second unit will follow in October.
In addition, the company plans to deactivate the Davis-Besse nuclear facility in Oak Harbor, Ohio, in May 2020, and the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio in May 2021……..
Ontario Clear Air Alliance 9th Aug 2018 Unsurprisingly, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has approved
a ten-year extension to the aging Pickering Nuclear Station’s operating
licence, meaning the plant can now operate until 2028.
It took the CNSC less than five weeks to review – and dismiss – dozens of submissions
pointing out the Pickering Station’s terrible location surrounded by
millions of people, the lack of thorough emergency planning despite 50
years of operations, and the absence of plans for better dealing with the
tonnes of radioactive waste stockpiled at the plant with nowhere to go.
Instead, the CNSC came down in favour of submissions such as one made by
Ontario Power Generation that claimed that no one had been harmed by the
massive radiation releases from the Fukushima accident and that “some
radiation” is actually good for you! http://www.cleanairalliance.org/licence/
October 6 – 13 – INTERNATIONAL WEEK OF PROTEST TO STOP THE MILITARIZATION OF SPACE.”
The climate change threat to nuclear power
By Natalie Kopytko“…………The final problem is droughts, which climate models predict will become longer and larger. Legal battles have already been fought in the US over scarce water resources in regions with nuclear power plants, including the Catawba river basin in the Carolinas and the Apalachicola/Chattahoochee/Flint river basin in Georgia, Florida and Alabama. These battles show us that adapting our systems – including nuclear power – to a reduced supply of water will not be easy.
The International Atomic Energy Agency advises the nuclear industry to build power plants to last for 100 years. Given that climate models don’t agree on what to expect within this time period, it is not at all clear how this can be achieved.
New reactors could use dry or hybrid systems with lower water requirements, but the costs of running these systems are likely to be prohibitive. Considering nuclear power plants already have problems with construction cost overruns, any additional costs are likely to meet resistance.
What is to be done? Most forms of energy generation are vulnerable in some way to the effects of climate change, and the fact that nuclear power is among them is yet another argument against a wholesale shift towards this source of energy.
