nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Japan downplayed Chernobyl concerns at G-7 for energy policy’s sake: declassified documents

Japan is the world ‘s champion in downplaying and denying…. WWII sexual slaves, Nanking massacre, Fukushima….
19453106_10207444199423070_5669012037410882752_o.jpg
Eager to maintain its energy policy in the wake of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, Japan made sure concerns about nuclear technology were downplayed at the 12th Group of Seven summit it chaired in Tokyo days after the disaster, according to Japanese diplomatic records declassified Wednesday.
References to “radiation” and “concerns” about the nuclear accident that took place in what is now present-day Ukraine were deleted from a draft of the G-7 statement. The final statement instead dubbed nuclear power as “an energy source that will be ever more widely used in the future.”
The declassified records show that Japan worked to build an international consensus on retaining nuclear power even while little was known about the cause of the Chernobyl accident or the scale of the damage.
Missing a chance to thoroughly debate strengthening safety regulations, Japan went ahead with its nuclear power strategy until the March 2011 Fukushima accident, triggered by a huge earthquake and tsunami, exposed what government-appointed investigators and others have dubbed a “safety myth.”
According to a Foreign Ministry official who was involved in the G-7 summit at the time, “There was no awareness in the government or the nuclear industry that Japan’s nuclear plants might be dangerous too, or that we could learn a lesson from (Chernobyl).”
After the nuclear crisis on April 26, 1986, the Soviet Union first publicly acknowledged it on April 29 JST, but released very few details as part of its tight control of information in the midst of the Cold War.
Among the declassified records is a Japanese government “plan to respond to the Soviet nuclear accident,” dated May 1 and marked secret.
The plan centered on “reaffirming the necessity” of nuclear power, while also aiming to set up an international information-sharing system for nuclear accidents.
This plan guided the Japanese delegation at the G-7 summit in Tokyo, which began on May 4, and served as a springboard for the statement adopted there the following day.
According to a document dated May 3, then-Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone had told senior Foreign Ministry officials that “there is great interest in Japan in the ‘ashes of death (radioactive fallout).’ ”
The issue was a particularly sensitive one for the public due to the exposure of fishing boat Fukuryu Maru No. 5, also known as the Lucky Dragon, to radioactive fallout from a U.S. hydrogen bomb test in the Marshall Islands in 1954, as well as the 1945 U.S. atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II.
The ministry later described Nakasone as having “shown initiative” at the summit.
Once the G-7 adopted its statement, Japan’s Agency for Natural Resources and Energy then wrote a memorandum to power companies and local authorities involved with nuclear plants on May 6, explaining that the government would “continue to promote (nuclear power) with a safety-first mindset.”
A note in the margin warned the recipients not to release the contents of the memo to the press.
Earlier, the Foreign Ministry had ordered Japanese embassies across Europe to gather information on the Chernobyl accident, according to a ministry cable dated April 29 in which it was described as something that “could have a grave impact on Japan’s nuclear energy policy.”
The cable also indicates Tokyo was mindful of the accident’s potential to stir up opposition to nuclear power within Japan, including in communities near power plants. It noted that “no marked protest activities have been observed.”
The G-7 then comprised of the United Kingdom, Canada, France, West Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United States.
Advertisements

December 21, 2017 Posted by | Japan | , , | Leave a comment

NIRS Telebriefing: Arnie discusses Nuclear Disasters

Spring: The Season of Nuclear Disaster – Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima Daiichi was the title of the April 4, 2017 tele-briefing hosted by the Nuclear Information and Resource Service (NIRS) and guest speaker Fairewinds’ Chief Engineer Arnie Gundersen. Hosted by Tim Judson, NIRS executive director, Arnie discusses the myths of atomic energy, the ins and outs of each disaster, and his own personal experiences with assessing the industry failures and magnitude of each disaster. At the end of his presentation, Arnie and Tim also answered questions from listeners in this enlightening segment.

http://www.fairewinds.org/nuclear-energy-education//nirs-telebriefing-arnie-discusses-nuclear-disasters?rq=NIRS

April 20, 2017 Posted by | World Nuclear | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Anomalies in wildlife and the ecosystem around Chernobyl and Fukushima

 

Dr. Timothy Mousseau, Professor of Biological Sciences, University of South Carolina. Mousseau discussed his many studies on the health impacts on wildlife and biota around Chernobyl and Fukushima which soundly debunk the notion that animals there are “thriving.”

April 9, 2017 Posted by | radiation | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ionizing radiation from Chernobyl affects development of wild carrot plants. Abstract

Latest Chernobyl paper shows radiation effects of wild carrots!

srep39282-f1.jpg

 

Abstract
“Radioactivity released from disasters like Chernobyl and Fukushima is a global hazard and a threat to exposed biota. To minimize the deleterious effects of stressors organisms adopt various strategies. Plants, for example, may delay germination or stay dormant during stressful periods. However, an intense stress may halt germination or heavily affect various developmental stages and select for life history changes. Here, we test for the consequence of exposure to ionizing radiation on plant development. We conducted a common garden experiment in an uncontaminated greenhouse using 660 seeds originating from 33 wild carrots (Daucus carota) collected near the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. These maternal plants had been exposed to radiation levels that varied by three orders of magnitude. We found strong negative effects of elevated radiation on the timing and rates of seed germination. In addition, later stages of development and the timing of emergence of consecutive leaves were delayed by exposure to radiation. We hypothesize that low quality of resources stored in seeds, damaged DNA, or both, delayed development and halted germination of seeds from plants exposed to elevated levels of ionizing radiation. We propose that high levels of spatial heterogeneity in background radiation may hamper adaptive life history responses.”

Zbyszek Boratyński, Javi Miranda Arias, Cristina Garcia, Tapio Mappes, Timothy A. Mousseau, Anders P. Møller, Antonio Jesús Muñoz Pajares, Marcin Piwczyński & Eugene Tukalenko

http://www.nature.com/articles/srep39282

December 19, 2016 Posted by | radiation | , , | Leave a comment

Svetlana Alexievich, a Belarusian writer who won a Nobel Prize for her book on the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, visited evacuees in Fukushima Prefecture recently to hear about their experiences.

Alexievich was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2015 for her writing about human suffering through the testimonies of witnesses of the Chernobyl disaster. She has been highly praised for her oral history of that event.

Alexievich was invited to speak at a university in Tokyo.

“It may be impossible to stop nuclear power plants right away, but it’s important to consider what you can and should do,” she said at the event.

Alexievich’s books are written collages of testimonies by ordinary people. Her book, “Chernobyl Prayer: A Chronicle of the Future,” published in 1997, is representative of her work. It’s a collection of statements from the victims of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster 30 years ago in the former Soviet Union.

About a quarter of the land in Alexievich’s home country of Belarus was contaminated and seriously damaged by radioactive material. Even now, many former residents are not allowed to return to their hometowns.

Alexievich spent more than 10 years interviewing over 300 people, sometimes on camera.

“In the last few days, whenever I lifted my husband’s body, his skin would peel off and stick to my hand,” the wife of one firefighter told her.

She then wrote about their deep shock and continual sadness.

The Nobel Committee described her work as “polyphonic writings, a monument to suffering and courage in our time.”

“I try to listen to people no one sees or hears,” Alexievich says. “There’s much more power in their emotions than in economic or medical data…. So I think it’s important to remember their lives.”

Alexievich came to Japan to hear what people in Fukushima prefecture have to say, and visited temporary housing to listen to residents’ stories.

She met with a former resident of Iitate village, a town that’s still under an evacuation order.

“I was a dairy farmer in Iitate, but now I’m unemployed,” Kenichi Hasegawa told her.

Before the earthquake, he had about 50 cows, and was living with 7 members of his family that spanned 4 generations. Hasegawa drove Alexievich to his former home, which still stands empty.

After the accident, all of his cows had to be put down or let go. Unable to continue dairy farming due to radiation, Hasegawa decided to demolish the cow shed. His family is now scattered.

“Wasn’t it difficult to leave home?” Alexievich asked him.

Yes, it was… We can’t live the way we did before the accident, because of the radiation,” Hasegawa said.

Government officials say the evacuation order on Iitate will be lifted next March, but Hasegawa is anxious about the future.

“They say we’ll be able to return home, but haven’t mentioned their plans for the village after that,” he says. “My children won’t be returning.”

“In Fukushima, I saw the exact same situation I’d seen in Chernobyl. The destroyed homes, the empty villages and cities, the victims’ despair — they’re all the same,” Alexievich said. “In both countries, governments rushed to develop new technology, but they weren’t able to fulfill their responsibilities. They were irresponsible toward ‘the ordinary people.’”

Alexievich was also told the story of a dairy farmer who committed suicide. A close friend of the farmer took her to the place where he died.

“He left a note saying, ‘I wish there’d been no nuclear power plants here,'” Hasegawa said.

Alexievich has spent years focusing on the suffering of ordinary people and making their voices heard. Visiting the 2 disaster-stricken regions has renewed her sense of determination.

“No one completely understands the horror of nuclear power. Literature should communicate it, and so should philosophers. It’s not a job for politicians alone,” Alexievich said. “In other words, we need to look at what happened in Chernobyl and Fukushima and put them together, to form new knowledge…. I saw the future, not the past, and we need to work on that future.”

It has been 30 years since the nuclear disaster in Chernobyl, and 5 years since the one in Fukushima. The future depends on never letting the voices of “the ordinary people” go unheard — that’s the message from Nobel laureate Svetlana Alexievich.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/newsroomtokyo/aired/20161208.html

8 dec 2016.jpg

December 11, 2016 Posted by | Nuclear | , , | Leave a comment

Ionizing Radiation from Chernobyl and the Fraction of Viable Pollen

Tim Mousseau – latest Chernobyl paper in International Journal of Plant Sciences:

Oct 05, 2016

Pollen viability is an important component of reproductive success, with inviable pollen causing failure of reproduction. Pollen grains have evolved mechanisms to avoid negative impacts of adverse environmental conditions on viability, including the ability to sustain ionizing radiation and repair DNA. We assessed the viability of 109,000 pollen grains representing 675 pollen samples from 111 species of plants in Chernobyl across radiation gradients that spanned three orders of magnitude. We found a statistically significant but small and negative main effect of radiation on pollen viability rates across species (Pearson’s r = 0.20). Ploidy level and the number of nucleate cells (two vs. three) were the only variables that influenced the strength of the effect of radiation on pollen viability, as reflected by significant interactions between these two variables and background radiation, while there were no significant effects of genome size, pollen aperture type, life cycle duration, or pollination agent on the strength of the effect of radiation on pollen viability.

Introduction

Most organisms are susceptible to environmental perturbations—such as climate change, extreme weather events, pollution, changes in nutrient availability, and changes in ionizing radiation levels—but the effects of such perturbations on individuals, populations, and ecosystems are variable (Candolin and Wong 2012; IPCC 2013; Møller and Mousseau 2013). In order to better understand these effects and to predict how a given species would respond to environmental disturbances, a study of the specific effects at different stages of organisms’ life cycles is required. Since reproduction is a key phase in the life cycle of any organism, reproductive effects are of particular interest. In the case of the effects of ionizing radiation, the negative consequences for reproduction in response to acute irradiation have been studied for decades and are well established (review in Møller and Mousseau 2013). However, the effects of long-term chronic exposure to low dose radiation are poorly understood.

Pollen grains are susceptible to the effects of environmental perturbations, which can have significant negative consequences for plant reproduction through pollen limitation (Delph et al. 1997; Ashman et al. 2004). Potential negative environmental effects include those resulting from elevated levels of ionizing radiation (Koller 1943). Therefore, plants have mechanisms to protect themselves from such effects, such as DNA repair, bi- or trinucleate cells, or redundancies in the genome resulting from duplications.

The area around Chernobyl in Ukraine has proven particularly useful for studying the effects of radioactive contamination on ecological and evolutionary processes at a large spatial scale. The Chernobyl nuclear accident in April 1986 led to the release of between 9.35 × 103 and 1.25 × 104 petabecquerel of radionuclides into the atmosphere (Møller and Mousseau 2006; Yablokov et al. 2009; Evangeliou et al. 2015). These radioactive contaminants were subsequently deposited in the surrounding areas of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine but also elsewhere across Europe and even in Asia and North America. The pattern of contamination is highly heterogeneous, with some regions having received much higher levels of radionuclides than others, owing to atmospheric conditions at the time of the accident (fig. 1). To this day, the Chernobyl area provides a patchwork of sites that can differ in radioactive contamination level by up to five orders of magnitude across a comparatively small area. Even decades after the accident, the amount of radioactive material remaining around Chernobyl is enormous (Møller and Mousseau 2006; Yablokov et al. 2009).

fg1.gif

Fig. 1. Map of the distribution of radioactive contamination in the Chernobyl region, with pollen sampling locations marked. Adapted from DeCort et al. (1998).

Because of the unprecedented scale and global impact of the Chernobyl event, it is not surprising that it generated significant interest in both the scientific community and the general public. As a result, studies have been conducted to assess the consequences of Chernobyl for human health and agriculture as well as its biological effects, ranging from the level of DNA to entire ecosystems. Since ionizing radiation has long been well established as a mutagen (Nadson and Philippov 1925; Muller 1950), a large proportion of the research effort has focused on examining changes in mutation rates in areas that have been radioactively contaminated to different degrees as a result of the accident. Although there is considerable heterogeneity in the results of these studies, most have detected significant increases in mutation rates or genetic damage following the Chernobyl disaster, with the rates remaining elevated over the following 2 decades (reviewed in Møller and Mousseau 2006). For example, the mean frequency of mutations in Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) is positively correlated with the level of background radiation, and it is 10 times higher in contaminated areas compared with control sites (Shevchenko et al. 1996). A study of Scots pine seeds detected elevated mutation rates within the exclusion zone over a period of 8 yr following the accident (Kal’chenko et al. 1995). In wheat (Triticum aestivum), the mutation rate was six times higher in radioactively contaminated areas compared with controls (Kovalchuk et al. 2000). Likewise, the frequency of chromosomal aberrations in two varieties of wheat grown within the Chernobyl exclusion zone 13 yr after the disaster was elevated compared with the spontaneous frequency of chromosomal aberrations in these cultivars (Yakimchuk et al. 2001). The levels of chromosome aberrations in onions (Allium cepa) were also positively correlated with the intensity of radioactive contamination in plants grown 20 yr after the accident (Grodzinsky 2006). Therefore, there is considerable evidence showing increased mutation rates in plants in the most contaminated sites (Møller and Mousseau 2015).

On the basis of the results of these studies, one might expect that a similar relationship between radiation level and the frequency of abnormalities would be seen in pollen. Indeed, Kordium and Sidorenko (1997) reported that the frequency of meiotic anomalies in microspore formation and the frequency of pollen grain viability was reduced in 8%–10% of the 94 plant species studied as a function of the intensity of gamma radiation 6–8 yr after the accident. In violets (Viola matutina), the proportion of viable pollen was negatively correlated with background radioactive contamination (Popova et al. 1991). While it is evident that plants differ in their susceptibility to ionizing radiation, the reasons for this variation are not entirely clear. It is likely that some species develop tolerance and/or resistance to mutagenic effects of radiation to a greater extent than others (Baer et al. 2007). For example, pollen of silver birch (Betula verrucosa), which grows in areas contaminated by the Chernobyl accident, showed elevated DNA repair ability compared with pollen from control areas, consistent with adaptation or epigenetic responses to increased radiation (Boubriak et al. 2008). There are also indications that genome size might affect the response of different species to radiation. Among the plants studied by Kordium and Sidorenko (1997), the rate of pollen viability decreased with increasing radiation to a higher degree in plants with smaller genomes (Barnier 2005), although the actual mechanism remains unknown. One potential explanation is that a larger genome might contain multiple copies of some genes as a result of duplication, rendering mutations in one of these copies less deleterious than if there were only a single copy present, although this explanation may not universally apply (Otto 2003).

In order to assess the effects of radioactive contamination on plant reproduction and to further assess species-specific differences in the effects of ionizing radiation on pollen viability, we analyzed pollen samples from plants growing in the Chernobyl region. We expected that the effects of radiation would differ among species, with some plants showing higher pollen inviability rates than others as a result of elevated radiation levels. A second objective was to test whether observed differences in pollen viability rates could be attributed to differences in phenotype among species, with possible explanatory factors including pollen size, the number of pollen apertures, ploidy, genome size, bi- or trinucleate cells, life span (annual vs. perennial), and pollination agent. We hypothesized that each of these factors could be related to the plants’ ability to resist or to tolerate radiation-induced mutations. Pollen size, genome size, and ploidy are all related to the amount of DNA and the number of copies of genes contained in the pollen grain. Because the pollen aperture—as the site of pollen germination—could be particularly susceptible to radiation-induced damage, we included the number of apertures as a potential explanatory variable. Furthermore, whether a plant is annual or perennial is related to individual longevity and, consequently, to the number of mutations that can accumulate over its lifetime as well as to the number of generations from the time of the Chernobyl accident until the time of sample collection. This may be particularly relevant for plants, given that germ tissue is derived from somatic tissues during each reproductive event as opposed to most animals, in which germ cells terminally differentiate very early during embryonic development (Buss 2006). Pollen viability depends on the ability of pollen to assess the integrity of its DNA and to repair the DNA of the generative nuclei before division (Jackson and Linskens 1980). This process is particularly important for binucleate pollen cells in which this happens during pollen germination, which is in contrast to trinucleate pollen cells, in which the need for DNA repair during pollen germination is less evident. DNA repair efficiency and adaptation of plants to chronic irradiation may also depend on the composition of radiation at the contaminated sites (Boubriak et al. 1992, 2008).

Across all plant species, we found a statistically significant relationship between radiation and the frequency of viable pollen of an intermediate magnitude (Cohen 1988). We also documented significant interactions between species and radiation, radiation and cell number, and radiation and ploidy. However, the significant effect of ploidy disappeared when both ploidy and whether cells were bi- or trinucleate were entered simultaneously in a single model. Most effects were small to intermediate in magnitude, as is commonly the case in studies of living organisms (Møller and Jennions 2002). We emphasize that our study included by far the largest sample size so far reported to detect effects of chronic radiation on pollen viability. However, we also emphasize the limits of our study. Many plant species could not be included simply because we could not locate multiple flowering specimens during our fieldwork. These and other sampling limitations reduced the number of pollen grains and the number of species that could be included.

Species differ in their susceptibility to radiation, as demonstrated for birds at both Chernobyl and Fukushima (Møller and Mousseau 2007; Møller et al. 2013; Galván et al. 2014), and in terms of adaptation to radiation (Galván et al. 2014; Møller and Mousseau 2016; Ruiz-González et al. 2016). The observed interspecific differences in radiation effects reported here for the proportion of viable pollen could be due to adaptation to radiation through tolerance of radiation-induced mutations or through induction of increased DNA repair in organisms living in contaminated areas. Another possibility is that some species are more resistant to radiation because of historical exposure in radiation hotspot areas with high natural levels of radiation (Møller and Mousseau 2013).

We observed a significant relationship between the proportion of viable pollen and the interaction between ploidy and radiation. Such a finding might suggest that resistance to deleterious effects of radiation is based on redundancy in the genome, where species with higher ploidy levels have an advantage if they have multiple copies of a given gene. We failed to detect an effect of selected physical attributes of pollen grains—such as genome size, pollen size, and aperture type—on the susceptibility of pollen to radiation. Furthermore, whether a plant was annual or perennial or whether it was insect or wind pollinated did not affect the proportion of viable pollen. Finally, whether plants produced bi- or trinucleate pollen had a significant effect on pollen viability, and the interaction between radiation and cell number was also significant.

While we confirmed the general finding of Kordium and Sidorenko (1997) that in approximately 10% of species the proportion of viable pollen is negatively correlated with radiation level, we were unable to reproduce their findings with respect to the overall magnitude of this effect. Our observed effect size was much smaller, and the slopes for individual species differed significantly from those reported by Kordium and Sidorenko (1997). Because more than 10 yr have passed between the two studies, we suggest that a change in radiation effects has taken place over time, for example, as a result of adaptation or accumulation of mutations. Another possible explanation for the discrepancy has to do with sample size, since our study included a much larger number of pollen samples and sampling locations than the study by Kordium and Sidorenko (1997). These explanations are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Whereas other studies have demonstrated significant negative effects of radioactive contamination around Chernobyl on mutation rates and fitness in general, our study of pollen viability shows a very small effect, and some species even show positive relationships between pollen viability and radiation that is suggestive of adaptation to increased levels of radiation. However, on the basis of the current study, it is not possible to determine whether the observed heterogeneity reflects evolved adaptive responses or is the consequence of unmeasured selective effects on characters correlated with pollen viability, which could in part explain an overall positive effect of radiation (for a discussion of evolutionary responses in Chernobyl, see Møller and Mousseau 2016). Experimental approaches would be needed to decipher the mechanisms underlying the heterogeneity in plant responses observed here (Mousseau 2000).

The observed variability in susceptibility to radiation is a common finding in studies of the effects of radiation from Chernobyl (Møller and Mousseau 2007; Galván et al. 2011, 2014; Møller et al. 2013). While our results are consistent with earlier findings that DNA repair mechanisms may play an important role in adaptation to life in radioactively contaminated environments—especially for plants, which are sessile and hence cannot move to less contaminated areas—further research is required to test this explicitly. Finally, because of the observed differences in resistance to radiation among species, it is likely that even small overall effects of radiation—such as the one on the proportion of viable pollen described here—can have significant consequences for species composition and abundance at a given location and, therefore, for ecosystem characteristics and functioning.

In conclusion, we have found a statistically significant overall negative relationship between radiation intensity and the frequency of viable pollen in plants growing in contaminated areas around Chernobyl. The magnitude of this effect across species included in our study was intermediate. We only found a significant relationship between the proportion of viable pollen and ploidy × radiation interaction, bi- or trinucleate cells, and bi- or trinucleate cells × radiation interaction. This suggests that DNA repair mechanisms could play an important role for the ability of plants to resist increased radiation, at least when it comes to pollen formation.

Acknowledgments

We thank Puri López-García for use of a microscope for pollen counts. This work has benefited from the facilities and expertise of the cytometry platform of Imagif (Centre de Recherche de Gif; http://www.imagif.cnrs.fr). We thank Spencer Brown and Mickaël Bourge for their help with the flow cytometry measurements and Srdan Randić for help with pollen counts. Field collections for this study were supported in part by the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (France), the North Atlantic Treaty Organization Collaborative Linkage Grant program, the Fulbright program, the University of South Carolina College of Arts and Sciences, and the Samuel Freeman Charitable Trust. Two reviewers provided constructive criticism.

Read full paper at:

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/688873

 

 

 

December 9, 2016 Posted by | radiation | , , , | Leave a comment

Dr. Timothy Mousseau speaks on consequences of Chernobyl and Fukushima

 

Dr Mousseau’s lecture on consequences of Chernobyl and Fukushima on plants and animals. Nov 4 2016

Dr. Timothy Mousseau speaks Nov. 4, 2016 to students and faculty of U of T about his research into the consequences of the Chernobyl and Fukushima nuclear accidents on plants and animals. His research shows increased mutations, genetic damage, poorer performing and malformed sperm, sterility, pollen inviability, cancers, cataracts, mental retardation, fewer species, fewer numbers, deadzones, and no evidence of adaptation.

His website is: http://cricket.biol.sc.edu/chernobyl/Chernobyl_Research_Initiative/Introduction.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPWRinjQKyg

Nov 4 2016.jpg

December 5, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , , | Leave a comment

Nobel-winning Belarusian writer Alexievich speaks on nuclear disasters and the future of human hubris

Alexievich: “the wonderful civilization turned into garbage” referring to the Fukushima Triple meltdowns…

n-nobel-a-20161128-200x200.jpg

Svetlana Alexievich, winner of the 2015 Nobel Prize in literature, called the nuclear catastrophes at Chernobyl and Fukushima events that people cannot yet fully fathom and warned against the hubris that humans have the power to conquer nature.

The 68-year-old Belarusian writer was in Tokyo at the invitation of researchers at the University of Tokyo, where she gave a lecture on Friday. More than 200 people attended.

The Nobel laureate, who writes in Russian, is known for addressing dramatic and tragic events involving the former Soviet Union World War II, the Soviet war in Afghanistan, the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear disaster and the 1991 collapse of the communist state.

Her style is distinctive in that she presents the testimonies of ordinary people going through traumatic experiences as they speak, without intruding on their narratives.

Alexievich, who visited the Tomari nuclear power plant in Hokkaido in 2003, recalled a remark by an official there that a catastrophe like Chernobyl would not happen in Japan because “Japanese are well-prepared for quakes and are not drunken, unlike Russians.”

But 10 years later, the wonderful civilization turned into garbage,” she said through a Russian-Japanese interpreter, referring to the 2011 Fukushima core meltdowns.

Humans have occupied a position in nature that they should not. It is impossible for humans to conquer nature.

Nature is now rebelling against humans. We need a philosophy for humans and nature to live together,” she said.

Referring to the policies of Japan and other countries to stick with nuclear power even after Chernobyl and Fukushima, she said: “I think that, unless we change our thinking, nuclear power generation will continue.”

Alexievich also said that documenting catastrophes like Chernobyl and Fukushima, whose effects will last for decades, is a big burden for writers. Listening to the voices of people affected by a catastrophe is like being forced to relive it, she explained.

Yet, pointing out that fictional works on Chernobyl, such as novels and movies, have not been successful, she stressed the importance of collecting the voices of citizens.

A catastrophe has not yet been incorporated into culture. The only language that has been able to convey a catastrophe is testimonies (by people who have experienced it), she said.

She cited the story of a Soviet pilot who died of radiation exposure after splashing sand over the radiation-spewing Chernobyl plant. She remembers him as telling her: “I could not understand what I saw with my eyes. You will not understand, either. But you must record it and hand it down to future generations. Then they may understand it.”

Alexievich acknowledged that people today live in a difficult era.

People are looking to the past to find solutions for today’s problems. This trend is testified to by the rise of conservatism. Never before in the past has the vulnerability of democracy manifested itself so clearly,” she said.

Remembering that even German fascism and Soviet communism are gone, intellectuals need to encourage people so that they will not despair.”

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/11/27/national/nobel-winning-belarusian-writer-alexievich-speaks-nuclear-disasters-future-human-hubris

November 28, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , | 1 Comment

Project ETHOS: Living in the Nuclear Garden, a Crime Against Humanity(Part I)

CEPN.jpg

In the words of a recent opinion column, * the planners for mutilated life (life also called half-life **) claim that contamination dangerous in principle, would turn into harmless in real life. This is a lie of extreme violence, an insult to the relatives of victims and survivors, in order to restrict evacuations and protection measures, thus exposing people affected with terrible health damage. It’s a crime.

So it is to stem the horror of the effects of contamination by camouflaging it, by pretending that we can escape danger by confronting it, by managing our fear.

Because in effect it is indeed to block any heresy attempt questioning the religion of the atom, and for that to discreetly fill hospital with patients and cemeteries with victims, rather than to evacuate and to treat populations of lands which became uninhabitable. Therefore no question to recognize the inhumanity and the terrible dangers of the atom.

In what follows we will see how and why everything is done to hide an atomic crime and what it costs to the affected populations, with great responsibility of the French nucleocracy and especially of two of its main representatives Jacques Lochard and Gilles Hériard Dubreuil.

*Tribune libre collective de : Cécile Asanuma-Brice, Jean-Jacques Delfour, Kolin Kobayashi, Nadine Ribault et Thierry Ribault.

http://sciences-critiques.fr/tchernobyl-fukushima-les-amenageurs-de-la-vie-mutilee/

**Michael Ferrier, « Fukushima – Récit d’un désastre » 2012.

Children are particularly affected by nuclear disasters, only one treatment is available : pectin.

Growing children are particularly vulnerable facing contamination by radionuclides dispersed in the environment whether by atomic disaster until thousands of kilometers, or by the multiple incidents that dot the operation of nuclear facilities. What to do to protect the multitude of sick or weakened children living in contaminated territories? Principal victims, their situation worsens from year to year, depending on the content of Césium137 and Strontium 90 in their bodies. It is cesium that lodges itself in all organs (a bit like potassium) which is easier to measure in order to assess the need for treatment. Only pectin, known to enable the removal of heavy metals including these radionuclides, can relieve these young people.

Experience in Belarus show that cures of three weeks of vitamin apple pectin can reduce the cesium, therefore reducing the damages. Those cures can be renewed every three months and must be accompanied by safeguards in the selection and preparation of food.

apple_radioprotective

But the nuclear lobby has blocked the spread of pectin cures.

Incredible as it may seem, apple pectin is a true opponent of nuclear lobby. It is the only explanation for the war the nuclear lobby is conducting against apple pectin. In fact those who are responsible for ensuring protection against the effects of nuclear, claim that the patients are only victims of stress and irrational fears which annihilate the immune system. For the ICRP * and the CEPN ** to recognize that pectin cure, known for its ability to remove cesium and strontium, is effective in improving the health of children, is to recognize that they are contaminated. Thus in the name of the nuclear religion hundreds of thousands of young people are condemned to an amputated life .

It is criminal on the part of our state agencies to propose to Belarus and Japan who are only asking for that, the application of Ethos-Core program which role is to stifle the effects of radioactivity, to save the image of the nuclear industry and of the country, and that to the expense of victims abandoned to their fate. And we can be sure, it will be the same in our home country in case of nuclear disaster, everything will be done to downplay the effects, to hide the reality of the risks and human damages, the goal being to save the nuclear industry regardless of the price, in the name of the identity and the “greatness” of France. …

Let us demand that pectin be provided to second generation children of Chernobyl, almost all sick, and to the first generation children of Fukushima. In view of the nuclear catastrophe that threatens us more and more, also demand that pectin be available for distribution in France, such as iodine for the thyroid.

It is through studies conducted within the framework of the Ethos and Core projects that the strategy of the nuclear lobby has been defined, we must explain what it is so as to understand what is happening in Belarus, in Japan and what is planned for us ….

The Franco-European Ethos project : The ETHOS project was implemented by a research team involving four scientific organizations:

CEPN is a a non-profit organisation created in 1976 to establish a research and development centre in the fields of optimisation of radiological protection and comparison of health and environmental risks associated with energy systems. This program was initially strongly focused on the development and application of the principle of optimization of radiological protection. Over the past few years, however, the group’s research programme has also been directed towards the involvement of stakeholders in radiological risk assessment and management, and spreading the radiological protection culture. The studies are undertaken by a group of around fifteen engineers and economists. The research programme is evaluated by a Scientific Council. The association currently has four members: the French public electricity generating utility (EDF), the Institute of Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), the French Alternatives Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) and AREVA.

http://www.cepn.asso.fr/en

Agro ParisTech (officially French Institut des sciences et industries du vivant et de l’environnement, or Paris Institute of Technology for Life, Food and Environmental Sciences) is a French university-level institution, also known as a “Grande Ecole“. It was founded on January 1, 2007, by the merger of three life sciences grandes écoles. AgroParisTech is the merger of three graduate institutes of science and engineering located around Paris. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agro_ParisTech

The University of Technology of Compiègne (French: Université de Technologie de Compiègne), or UTC is a public research university located in Compiegne, France. It was founded in 1972 by Guy Deniélou and is described as the first experimental technological university in France. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Technology_of_Compi%C3%A8gne

Mutadis that coordinates, was founded in 1990, Mutadis is a multidisciplinary research and intervention team specialised in sustainable development issues  and governance of high-risk activities to society at territorial, national and international levels. http://www.mutadis.org/en/

Ethos Project was presented as to sustainably improve the living conditions of people affected by the long-term presence of radioactive contamination following the Chernobyl accident. This is actually several successive programs, always financed by Europe and France, Ethos 1 and 2, Core, Sage (hereinafter called the “Ethos Project” or even “Ethos” for short). They have been tested on populations living in contaminated territories in Chernobyl, in villages located southeast of Belarus, about 200 km from Chernobyl.

The official purpose was to study how to help people living in territories contaminated by radioactivity. The real purpose is to pretend that we can live there, when observing basic precautions, especially as everything is done to convince that there is little contamination, and can adapt. These campaigns are supported by french “experts” (Gilles Hériard Dubreuil, Jacques Lochard) and international experts, members of organizations responsible for the safety of nuclear power.

These intervenors deny the reality of dangerous contamination. Their criminal strategy will even announce that the damages suffered by the inhabitants are not due to radioactivity, but to the fear and phobia of nuclear power that make them weak and sick. So any therapy such as distribution of pectin, has no place to be … All suiting well the government of that country eager to get rid of this sordid affair.

And it is the same in Japan where Jacques Lochard prevails there to promote the revival of nuclear power under French tutelage in needs of this valued customer…

It will be the same for us after a disaster, it is planned to evacuate the least possible of inhabitants, and to persuade those who remain that it is without risk… For that even to impose a very large received dose standard: In France, the current standard is 1 mSv / year, but if there is an accident, it will be 20 mSv / year and if you are unfortunate enough to live too close to the disaster, it will be 100 mSv / year. Food contamination threshold is also expected to be multiplied in all European countries so as not to hinder trade and exports (business as usual).

The epidemic of fatal or disabling diseases that develop later with pain does not matter to our leaders, health and genetic damages are deferred in time, the crime of the approach will be diluted, especially as the inhabitants will be held responsible for the effects of the disaster of which they are nevertheless victims…

Does not the Ethos project constitute a crime against humanity, to which the responsible are the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the CEPN?

Some figures to clearly see the issues: (see press release of the Criirad of 10.03.2016). Under normal circumstances, the maximum dose limit applicable to the public is 1 mSv / year and this amount is already at a high level of risk… if 66 million French received a dose of 1 mSv, this exposure would cause indeed ultimately probably more than 22,000 radiation-induced cancers, not counting all non-cancer diseases, malformations and genetic diseases. If we multiply these numbers by 20 or 100, the risk levels identified by the authorities are staggering.

It also underlines the very high number of those who will be exposed to lower doses, but which are nonetheless unacceptable: infants, children, teens could receive quite legally dose of 10 mSv / year, that is to say doses that can only be considered for nuclear workers.

More reference levels are high and more the costs of protective measures for people and compensations for damages are alleviated. The choice of the authorities is quite coherent, indeed the nuclear industry is exempt from the application of the polluter-pays principle: for the most part, the health and economic consequences of the disaster will be borne by the victims and the State. The decision to set such high dose thresholds is the result of 20 years of efforts of the nuclear lobby, and more specifically of the French nuclear lobby (CEPN). Rather than offering compensation to start a new life in a healthy environment, they direct the victims to be resilient and adapt to the new reality: that of a contaminated environment. This is obviously all to benefit the nuclear industry. The major nuclear accidents are not disasters anymore but manageable risks.

To be convinced of the crime of applying the ethos program, see these documents:

– Tribune libre collective de : Cécile Asanuma-Brice, Jean-Jacques Delfour, Kolin Kobayashi, Nadine Ribault et Thierry Ribault http://sciences-critiques.fr/tchernobyl-fukushima-les-amenageurs-de-la-vie-mutilee/

And the video (30 min) ‘Save Japan Kids’, a presentation about Ethos Fukushima subtitled in French by Japanese freelance journalist Mari Takenouchi, struggling with Japan Justice for her questioning of the ETHOS project, aiming to maintain and to bring back the people of Fukushima in contaminated areas.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccYPtQwPx78

Notes:
* -The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is an NGO that makes recommendations on the safety measures to be taken on sensitive installations. It bases its recommendations on the basis of the information provided by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, UNSCEAR.
The mandate of UNSCEAR is to report to the Member States of the United Nations on the effects and dangers of radiation in the environment. It is within this body that the official doctrine is developed without any scientific criticism or questioning, the WHO (World Health Organization) having abdicated all competence in the field of radioactivity.

Almost all international regulations, standards and national regulations are based on recommendations aimed above all at not hindering the atomic industry.

* -The CEPN, Center for the Study of the Evaluation of Nuclear Protection, represents the French nuclear lobby. The CEPN is a “false nose” of the CEA where it has its headquarters (in Fontenay aux Roses near Paris), it is an association that brings together: EDF, AREVA, CEA, IRSN!

The members of these structures are all from the same mold, co-opted or appointed out of any democratic process, They are interchangeable. Jacques Lochard is director of the CEPN and vice-president of the ICRP.

Translated from French by Hervé Courtois (Dun Renard)

Vivre dans le jardin nucléaire avec Ethos, un crime contre l’humanité.

http://coordination-antinucleaire-sudest.net/2012/index.php?post/2016/11/07/Vivre-dans-le-jardin-nucleaire-avec-Ethos-un-crime-contre-l-humanite

November 13, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , , , | Leave a comment

Japanese photojournalist documents nuclear crises in Chernobyl, Fukushima

fhkllm.jpg

Ryuichi Hirokawa, a Japanese photojournalist, has documented the world’s two worst nuclear crises — in Chernobyl three decades ago, and the 2011 meltdown at the Fukushima No. 1 power plant.

With this year marking the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, Hirokawa, 72, has released a photo book titled “Chernobyl and Fukushima” compiling his reports on the lives of victims of the catastrophes.

After years of reporting on the two disasters, Hirokawa said he has concluded that nuclear power “is not something human beings can handle or control.”

Born in 1943 in a Japanese community in Tianjin, China, Hirokawa was the first non-Soviet journalist to enter the Exclusion Zone following the accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in April 1986.

He has since visited the area more than 50 times and established in April 1991 a foundation for children suffering from leukemia, thyroid cancer and other diseases caused by exposure to a high level of radiation, in response to requests from their mothers.

The foundation has provided these children with medicine and medical equipment and also built recuperation facilities in Ukraine and Belarus.

One of the photos from Hirokawa’s book shows a 14-year-old Ukrainian girl named Tanya lying on a bed at her home. She was 4 years old and lived in a town close to the Chernobyl plant when the disaster occurred.

A decade later, she suddenly felt agonizing pain all over her body. Her thyroid cancer had spread, including to her brain.

I could do nothing for the girl. All I could do was watch her die,” Hirokawa said. “It was that feeling of helplessness that drove me to support sick children there.”

A quarter of a century later, another devastating nuclear disaster occurred at Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings’ Fukushima No. 1 plant.

When Hirokawa rushed to the scene shortly after the calamity started, the needle of his radiation detector went off the scale in surrounding areas, including in the town of Futaba and the village of Iitate.

It was shocking because it never happened even in Chernobyl,” he said.

Maps comparing radiation levels in Chernobyl and Fukushima, which he attached at the end of his book, show that radiation levels detected in still inhabited areas in Fukushima are almost the same as those in ruined Chernobyl villages.

I can’t tolerate the Japanese government’s policy of allowing children to stay in areas contaminated by such high levels of radiation,” he said.

He has also worked to halt operations of the Sendai nuclear plant in Satsumasendai, Kagoshima Prefecture, in the wake of a series of strong earthquakes in Kyushu in April.

Hirokawa sent a petition to Kyushu Electric Power Co. calling on the utility to immediately halt the Sendai plant, which is the only nuclear plant operating in Japan.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/07/04/national/japanese-photojournalist-documents-nuclear-crises-in-chernobyl-fukushima/

July 4, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , | Leave a comment

Japan report on Chernobyl disaster’s health effects to be publicly released

 

A 50-million-yen Japanese government report on the health effects of the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe that was not released to the general public will be released in the near future, the secretariat of Japan’s nuclear watchdog said on June 7.

The Secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) indicated at a news conference on June 7 that the report would be released on the secretariat’s website. The secretariat will also comply with related requests for information disclosure that it had previously not accepted, it said.

The government’s investigation into the aftereffects of the Chernobyl disaster was budgeted by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. It was carried out between November 2012 and March 2013 — after the Fukushima meltdowns in 2011 — at a cost of 50 million yen.

The NRA secretariat, which took over the role of handling the survey in April 2013, placed it in the National Diet Library without publicly releasing it, drawing criticism from experts in information disclosure.

“It was inappropriate as a way of releasing it,” a secretariat representative said.

http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20160608/p2a/00m/0na/017000c

 

June 13, 2016 Posted by | Japan | , , | Leave a comment

Japanese gov’t withheld report on Chernobyl disaster’s health effects

The Japanese government has withheld an investigative report it compiled on health effects from the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear catastrophe despite spending 50 million yen on the survey in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, it has been learned.

The government’s investigation into the aftereffects of the Chernobyl disaster began in November 2012 — the year after the meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant — under the then Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ)-led administration, and was completed in March 2013 after the Liberal Democratic Party returned to power.

The investigative report denies local documents that confirmed far more serious health hazards from the Chernobyl accident in the former Soviet Union than those recognized by international organizations. An expert familiar with information disclosure points out that the report “should be publicized as a resource for verification from a critical point of view, considering that public money was spent on it” amid sharply divided opinions over nuclear power in Japan.

The investigation was budgeted by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology and was commissioned to a Tokyo-based consulting firm funded by power companies. A committee set up to evaluate the survey results was chaired by Nagasaki University professor emeritus Shigenobu Nagataki, who formerly served as chairman of the Radiation Effects Research Foundation. The investigative team primarily examined and assessed two local reports — “Twenty-five years after the Chernobyl accident: Safety for the future” and “Chernobyl: Consequences of the catastrophe for people and the environment.”

The “Safety for the future” report, which was compiled by Ukraine’s Ministry of Emergencies in 2011, points out that the ratio of healthy workers dealing with post-disaster work in Chernobyl plunged from 67.6 percent in 1988 to 5.4 percent in 2008. The latter report, which was put together by local researchers in 2009, estimates that a total of 985,000 people died from the effects of the Chernobyl disaster between April 1986 and December 2004 after their constant exposure to radiation following the disaster triggered cancer, heart and vein disorders and other ailments.

Both reports claim far more serious health hazards than those recognized by international organs, and gained much public attention here in Japan after the reports were highly publicized in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster.

The Japanese government report’s assessment panel examined the two reports with regard to 124 parts concerning blood and lymphatic disorders and analyzed whether radiation dose assessments were carried out where radiation exposure was linked to health damage. The committee also conducted an on-site investigation and concluded that it couldn’t find any resources with which they could determine the relationship between exposure doses and health damage, based on scientific grounds.

Subsequently, the science ministry department that was in charge of the survey was moved to the secretariat of the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) in April 2013, and the Japanese government’s report was not released. The NRA secretariat eventually placed the report in the National Diet Library by way of the Environment Ministry.

Nagataki told the Mainichi Shimbun, “After we filed the investigation report with the science ministry, the ministry department in charge was shifted to the NRA secretariat, leaving us no clues as to what has become of the report. I felt uncomfortable when I heard the report was kept at the National Diet Library, but I also thought it would be inappropriate for us to demand that the report be released.”

A source close to the government told the Mainichi, “The investigation was decided upon under the DPJ administration, and we had to use up the budget. As the government changed hands, we had no intention of proactively publicizing the report.” Another government insider said, “Nondisclosure of the report was also intended to avoid causing fear among people in Fukushima. It was also aimed at preventing harmful rumors.”

http://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20160604/p2a/00m/0na/006000c

June 4, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , , | Leave a comment

Resuspension and atmospheric transport of radionuclides due to wildfires near the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in 2015: An impact assessment

srep26062-f1

 

In April and August 2015, two major fires in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (CEZ) caused concerns about the secondary radioactive contamination that might have spread over Europe. The present paper assessed, for the first time, the impact of these fires over Europe. About 10.9 TBq of 137Cs, 1.5 TBq of 90Sr, 7.8 GBq of 238Pu, 6.3 GBq of 239Pu, 9.4 GBq of 240Pu and 29.7 GBq of 241Am were released from both fire events corresponding to a serious event. The more labile elements escaped easier from the CEZ, whereas the larger refractory particles were removed more efficiently from the atmosphere mainly affecting the CEZ and its vicinity. During the spring 2015 fires, about 93% of the labile and 97% of the refractory particles ended in Eastern European countries. Similarly, during the summer 2015 fires, about 75% of the labile and 59% of the refractory radionuclides were exported from the CEZ with the majority depositing in Belarus and Russia. Effective doses were above 1 mSv y−1 in the CEZ, but much lower in the rest of Europe contributing an additional dose to the Eastern European population, which is far below a dose from a medical X-ray.

On Sunday 26th April 2015 at 23.30 (local time), exactly 29 years after the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant (CNPP) accident, a massive fire started in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone (CEZ). The next morning (April 27th) at 07.30 the fire was partially stabilised and the fire-fighters focused on only two areas of 4.2 and 4.0 hectares. However, the fire spread to neighbouring areas due to the prevailing strong winds. During the night of April 27th to 28th, 2015, the fire spread to areas close to the Radioactive Waste Disposal Point (RWDP), and burned around 10% of the grassland area at the western of the RWDP1. On April 29th and 30th, 2015, the attempts to stop the fires in the CEZ did not succeed. Fire brigades from Chernobyl and Kiev region supported extinguishing attempts and the last 70 ha were suppressed on May 2nd, 2015. The radiation background is continuously monitored in the CEZ by an automated radiation monitoring system (ARMS) at 39 points1. Given the importance of this fire, background radiation and radionuclide content in the air near the fire were also analysed online.

Another less intensive fire episode took place in August 2015. About 32 hectares were initially burned in the CEZ on August 8th2. The fires started at three locations in the Ivankovsky area. As of 07.00 on August 9th, the fires had been reportedly localized and fire-fighters continued to extinguish the burning of dry grass and forest. The same fire affected another forested area, known as Chernobylskaya Pushcha. The fire spread through several abandoned villages located in the unconditional (mandatory) resettlement zones of the CEZ and ended on August 11th.

Forest fires can cause resuspension of radionuclides in contaminated areas3. This has caused concern about possible fires in heavily contaminated areas such as the CEZ4. While concerns were initially limited to the vicinity of the fires, Wotawa et al.5 have shown that radionuclides resuspended by forest fires can be transported even over intercontinental distances. Earlier in 2015, Evangeliou et al.6, based on a detailed analysis of the current state of the radioactive forests in Ukraine and Belarus, reported that forest cover in the CEZ has increased from about 50% in 1986 to more than 70% today. Precipitation has declined and temperature has increased substantially making the ecosystem vulnerable to extensive drought. Analysis of future climate using IPCC’s (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) REMO (REgional MOdel) A1B climatic scenario7 showed that the risk of fire in the CEZ is expected to increase further as a result of drought accompanied by lack of forest management (e.g. thinning) and deteriorating fire extinguishing services due to restricted funding. The same group8 considered different scenarios of wildfires burning 10%, 50% and 100% of the contaminated forests. They found that the associated releases of radioactivity would be of such a magnitude that it would be identical to an accident with local and wider consequences9. The additional expected lifetime mortalities due to all solid cancers could reach at least 100 individuals in the worst-case scenario.

This paper aims at defining the extent of the radioactive contamination after fires that started in the CEZ on April 26th (ended 7 days after) and August 8th (ended 4 days after) 2015. We study the emission of the labile long-lived radionuclides 137Cs (t½ = 30.2 y) and 90Sr (t½ = 28.8 y) and the refractory 238Pu (t½ = 87.7 y), 239Pu (t½ = 24,100 y), 240Pu (t½ = 6,563 y) and 241Am (t½  = 432.2 y). These species constitute the radionuclides remaining in significant amounts since the Chernobyl accident about 30 years ago, and their deposition has been monitored continuously by the Ukrainian authorities. The respective deposition measurements have been adopted from Kashparov et al.10,11 and are stored in NILU’s repository website (http://radio.nilu.no). Using an atmospheric dispersion model, we simulate the atmospheric transport and deposition of the radioactive plume released by the forest fires. We also estimate the internal and external exposure of the population living in the path of the radioactive smoke. We assess the significance of the emissions with respect to the INES scale and define the regions over Europe, which were the most severely affected.

See more at: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep26062

srep26062-f2

srep26062-f3

May 19, 2016 Posted by | Nuclear | , , , , , | Leave a comment

Mind Control and Peaceful Murder

May 15, 2016 by Mikkai

positive-murder.jpg

 

The sentence: “What will our children think” – is an anachronism. Nothing they will think, because they lack the comparison. The whole organization of public life, of learning in schools and universities, the work of agencies, think tanks and experts has only one aim: The reality is taken as an always “self” updating structure, a constant presence. Thus, disasters become accidents, and accidents become an event. Embedded into “risks” – meaning nothing to worry about. Invisible disasters such as in Japan are perfect to persuade us, as if nothing had happened.
We should not rely on the power of our children, and simultaneously reduce their perception. But that’s what happens every day. Along with the radiation damage, each second.

Why are there protections hoaxes in cyberspace all the time? The sun flowers, the radiation eating bacteria, and the “positive thinking”?

Fake science, fake ethic.

– To keep claims for compensation small and / or unjustified (long time effects of radiation are not accepted by IAEA and WHO, and so by the Health Ministry

– keep evacuation zones small

– The invention of trivialization of nuclear accidents

Limitation of the policy of Decontamination

– How to re integrate irradiated areas into economy

– (increasing or flexible) dose limits for all people

– To force the Japanese population to accept on behalf of the economic efficiency unhealthy living conditions and contaminated food and contaminated water

– To relieve TEPCO: The burden of proof is imposed on the victims rather than on the polluter of the contamination

RESULT: The industry can go on.

Who is behind all this? Well, here is your answer:

Rockefeller founded many organisations and think tanks during World War II. The search was on, for Mind Technology during War Times, to be implemented into the masses, the public. The dream of a solider who sacrifices oneself without thinking (like a japanese kamikaze) for the rulers, without even thinking of it. The public sould become like this, the normal man, even the pregnant women.

Among these organisations and agencies founded was the Centre d’Etudes de Problemes Humaines de Travail, which today is the Centre d’études de l’emploi (CREAPT): http://www.cee-recherche.fr/partenariats-et-evenements/partenariats/creapt

Founded at the same time was also the Association pour la Recherche er L’Intervention Psycho-sociologiques in France: http://www.arip-ics.org

10 years before Chernobyl the Centre d’étude sur l’Evaluation de la Protection dans le domaine Nucléaire was founded: http://www.cepn.asso.fr/en/

As they say on their website, this program has four members (financing) their research: “The association currently has four members: the French public electricity generating utility (EDF), the Institute of Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN), the French Alternatives Energies and Atomic Energy Commission (CEA) and AREVA.”

What has CEPN done? Well, it founded Radiation “Protection” Programs in Belarus and Japan: CORE and ETHOS:

In Japan is the Psychological Institute at Kyushu University, which is represented by the Graduate School of Human-Environment Studies: http://www.hues.kyushu-u.ac.jp/english/

In the U.S.A. there is of course the American Medical Association and the American Psychatric Association: http://www.ama-assn.org/ama and https://www.psychiatry.org/

Reactors explode, irradiate the masses and these organisations, brainwash the victims to stay where they are, in irradiated areas. This avoids the cost explosion of evacuation of maybe hundreds of million of people. With psychological back power they transform the public, the media, the politicians, and even the victims’s thinking, that nothing is as bad as it seems, that one could protect againt radiation effects.

The Nuclear Industrial Military Complex explodes reactors, studies the effects via their own programs, and forces the people into the role of guinea pigs. They eat up all remaining NGOs. And then act for the people. Our perception is then brainwashed by their psychological task force. This causes a psychotic holocaust, which then becomes a cellular holocaust, because of the radiation. Normally this kind of reversing something, a good thing which is bad, feels quite “satanic”.

This is the reason, why there is this radiation “Protection” hoax going around, from sun flowers, to bacteria, that eat radiation and event the crazy “think positive” ideology, especially in Japan’s culture and the 2011 aftermath. It is all done by the same people, who caused all these disasters.

Here is a typical, cynical statements which shows it all, it was said b a CORE expert in Belarus:

If we continue to treat them like victims, they feel like victims” Zoya I. Trafimchik, coordinator of the CORE program: http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=55022&keybold=nuclear%20AND%20%20accident%20AND%20%20fallout%20AND%20%20land

This is the Crime of CORE. Mind Control of the Radiation Victims, and then Peaceful Murdering them.

The Main Pro Nuclear Program in Japan is ETHOS right now, acting as if they help the victims: http://ethos-fukushima.blogspot.de/

To understand this criminal program in Japan, look at the CORE program in Belarus: The Budget of the CORE program: 5 Million EUROs was the CORE budget. But there are also papers which show a Budget of 4 Million EUROs. The truth is: You need Billions of EUROs to “handle” Chernobyl: More than 6 Million people are still living in irradiated areas in Belarus. How to evacuate them? Build endless houses? Why such a small budget? If you would push more money into it you would admit that Chernobyl was what it was: An unpayable Catastrophe. And one 2nd thing: You would admit that atomic power is unpayable – none of the atomic reactors on this planet are assured. A big crash like the Chernobyl one would cause a damage of 2 – 5,000,000,000,000 EUROs in the U.S. or in the E.U.

Here is an Opinion about CORE Program: http://spring96.org/en/news/1244

Chernobyl program CORE has the aim to “end” Chernobyl. By helping people to die (not to live!) in irradiated areas. The only state supported program.

The Chernobyl aid-program in Belarus was stopped in 1994 / 95: PAGE 62 of this presentation : http://www.life-upgrade.com/DATA/NesterenkoChernobyl-Belarus.pdf and a new “pro nuclear” program replaced it

CORE – or “on how to end Chernobyl (atomic reactor explosion 1986 / radiation) and the resettlement of people in contaminated areas in Belarus”

CORE – from “Cooperation” and “Rehabilitation”. Rehabilitation means: Restoration.

CORE – program launched in Belarus: “Bragin”, “Chetschersk”, “Slavgorod” and “Stolin”.

CORE – the successor program of the failed program “ETHOS” http://www.cepn.asso.fr/en/publications/communications/102-radiation-protection-culture-at-school-lessons-from-the-ethos-and-core-projects-in-belarus.html

(http://www.cepn.asso.fr/spip.php?article56).

The already existing Chernobyl NGO’s do not play a role in the CORE program, beside themself participate on CORE – with their own (already short) budget – raised from international donations. Pro nuclear programs CORE and SAGE are powered by french atomic industry: EDF, Areva and the CEA. http://web.archive.org/web/20080110114120/http://www.truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi/34/10015

“For a quarter of a century a systematic crime against humanity has been perpetrated by people in senior positions at the heart of Europe. The people living in Western Europe, so advanced technologically, remain indifferent and largely disinformed. In order to preserve the consensus around the military and civilian nuclear industry, the nuclear lobby and the official medical establishment have, for the past 26 years, knowingly condemned millions of human guinea pigs to an experiment on their bodies with new diseases in the vast laboratory provided by the territories contaminated by Chernobyl. Children are being treated like laboratory animals, under observation from French and German scientists, and French NGO’s like the CEPN, Mutadis Consultants, ETHOS and CORE, who must take their share of the responsibility. (Translator’s note: CEPN is the Centre d’étude sur l’Evaluation de la Protection dans le domaine Nucléaire ; Mutadis, ETHOS and CORE are all offshoots of the French nuclear industry, financed either through Electricité de France or the Autorité de Sureté Nucléaire.) The same fate awaits the Japanese people and their children living in areas contaminated by the Fukushima disaster because the same strategy is being put in place in Japan with the same players, the same pseudo-scientific justifications and under the aegis of the same authorities.” MORE: http://independentwho.org

“…the IAEA will endeavour to organize conferences, seminars and workshops, in cooperation with the University, with the aim of enhancing public awareness of radiological effects on human health and addressing the issue of “radiation fear” and post-traumatic stress disorders in the Fukushima population…” http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/energy/fukushima_2012/pdfs/fukushima_iaea_en_06.pdf

“it is recognized by the World Health Organization that the International Atomic Energy Agency has the primary responsibility for encouraging, assisting and coordinating research and development and practical application of atomic energy for peaceful uses throughout the world without prejudice to the right of the World Health Organization to concern itself with promoting, developing, assisting and coordinating international health work, including research, in all its aspects.” http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Infcircs/Others/inf20.shtml#note_c

It is remarkable how reports always include “stress” / “fear” / “might” / “concern” / “risk” / “Danger” in their headlines and MAINgoals of reporting. The real damage occurring moves into the background. The dead, the injured, not worth looking at, only the concern counts. This is important, especially during nuclear catastrophes (which never end), to create the illusion of an “end”, to overcome the “current situation”. This is not about hope or strength, but to cover up, so that the Holocaust industry can live on.

Nourished by the death of children, sponsored by the IAEA and the World Health Organization. I present you two instruments which are used: 1) The invention of an unethical, non-medical term: “Radiophobia” and 2) the exclusion of NGOs as alarmists. Compare everything you have read and seen with this information. Be ready to see everything in a totally new light. Even the term “stress” is today overused, for everything, as if stress is something new in human history and could be responsible for all the diseases. It’s not. Internal Emitters from Reactors are. Risk is a virtual term, which conceals existing, current, happening damage.

Japanese people hear it from Fukshima day One: “Panic and fear of radiation is much worse than radiation itself” At the Chernobyl IAEA forum the term “Radiophobia” was invented and used: “What’s worse, the IAEA is going public these days with statements ridiculing the so called “radiophobia” of the population and calling for an end of aid programs, which, according to the IAEA report of 2005, only serve to instil a victim mentality in a totally healthy population – a claim not only cynical, but potentially dangerous for the health of the affected population.” Source: http://www.ippnw-students.org/chernobyl/coverup.html

Source: https://tekknorg.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/mind-control-and-peaceful-murder/

 

fear-rad.jpg

May 15, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , | 2 Comments

What is True?

What is true about Chernobyl’s legacy? I offer two competing accounts.

The first account describes Chernobyl as a “wildlife wonderland”:

Karin Brulliard. April 26, 2016. 30 years after Chernobyl disaster, camera study captures a wildlife wonderland. The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/animalia/wp/2016/04/26/30-years-after-chernobyl-disaster-camera-study-captures-a-wildlife-wonderland/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_evening

Anecdotal reports of wildlife doing well in the ruins of Chernobyl have been controversial. Some scientists argue that the disaster has taken a deleterious toll on fauna, causing genetic damage and population declines. A study published last fall, however, backed up the idea of the fallout zone-turned-enchanted forest with data from helicopter observation and animal tracks. They pointed to flourishing animal populations.

The big picture of these pictures? According to Beasley, it’s that radiation does not seem to have kept wildlife from self-sustaining and spreading out across the Belarus evacuation zone. He said he expects another camera trap study being carried out in the Ukraine half of the zone will find the same thing.

I wondered what study “published last fall” backed the idea that the “fallout zone-turned-enchanted forest” had a flourishing animal population. It was apparently Dr. James Beasley’s (from the University of Georgia). He has quite a record of funding from the US Departments of Energy and Defense and is currently a consultant for the IAEA on Fukushima.  I recommend looking at his cv http://srel.uga.edu/facstaffpages/CVs/beasleyCV.pdf.  There is no information available about his methodology in the publication, which is a “correspondence” here: http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.cub.2015.08.017.

In contrast to Dr. Beasley’s glowing account of “fallout zone-turned-enchanted forest” there is Dr. Tim Mousseau’s account of transgenerational effects that include reduced sperm count and smaller bird brains. 

I had the opportunity to listen to Dr. Mousseau describe his research and his extensive field work capturing, sampling and releasing a range of animals in the Chernobyl and Fukushima zones. He is a very careful and methodical scientist who is not funded by US government agencies or the IAEA. He and his research partner have concluded that animals are not in fact adapting to radiation-contaminated zones ( see academic study here  ). Dr. Mousseau describes his findings here:

Timothy Mousseau. April 25, 2016. At Chernobyl and Fukushima, radioactivity has seriously harmed wildlife. The Conversation, https://theconversation.com/at-chernobyl-and-fukushima-radioactivity-has-seriously-harmed-wildlife-57030

…in the past decade population biologists have made considerable progress in documenting how radioactivity affects plants, animals and microbes. My colleagues and I have analyzed these impacts at Chernobyl, Fukushima and naturally radioactive regions of the planet.

Our studies provide new fundamental insights about consequences of chronic, multigenerational exposure to low-dose ionizing radiation. Most importantly, we have found that individual organisms are injured by radiation in a variety of ways. The cumulative effects of these injuries result in lower population sizes and reduced biodiversity in high-radiation areas….

Radiation exposure has caused genetic damage and increased mutation rates in many organisms in the Chernobyl region. So far, we have found little convincing evidence that many organisms there are evolving to become more resistant to radiation. You decide what is true.

http://majiasblog.blogspot.fr/2016/04/what-is-true.html

April 30, 2016 Posted by | Fukushima 2016 | , , , | Leave a comment