A Less than Grand Strategy: NATO’s New Vision, The Preemptive Use of Nuclear Weapons Global Research by Spencer Spratley March 21, 2008 - ‘”A few months ago, a report was published entitled “Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World: Renewing Transatlantic Partnership”. It was written by five generals and it proposes a new vision for the NATO alliance and a strengthening of ties between the United States and the European Union. ………
….The report contains some shocking and alarming statements …………‘The first use of nuclear weapons must remain in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction, in order to avoid truly existential dangers.” …………In sum, nuclear weapons remain indispensable, and nuclear escalation continues to remain an element of any modern strategy.”
In short, the publication suggests that NATO should adhere to the Bush administration’s credo of “strike first” and that the definition of “proportional” can, and must, include the use of tactical nuclear weapons. The flawed logic is that the Western world should be prepared to use nuclear weapons in order to prevent their “enemies” from developing and/or using those same weapons. It goes without saying that that this position carries with it a whole host of problems.
The following issues immediately spring to mind:
1) The naive belief that “mini-nukes” are somehow a safe and proportional response to perceived threats is an unproven and frightening proposition which contains the potential to plunge the world into a nuclear holocaust. ………
..2) A policy of preemptive use eliminates any real notion of deterrence. If a government felt it was being targeted for attack or regime change, what incentive would there be for that nation to refrain from striking first with WMD’s or any other means at their disposal?
3) It’s difficult to imagine a scenario where this policy would not, in fact, encourage the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (and weapons of all kinds). Common sense suggests that nations who feel cornered would likely adopt an attitude of, “If we’re gonna be hit, lets make sure we can hit back.”
4) The publication does not address the long-term implications of a preemptive attack. Decapitating the leadership of a nation and laying waste to its terrain does not provide any reason to hope that from the ashes of such a calamity would emerge a model state which would pose no further threat to the Western world. …………………
……..The report itself contains other flaws and arguments which only serve to polarize groups and nations and move us further from a spirit of co-operation and understanding…………………………………………………..”.
Big boys’ undermining non-proliferation regime
11 Feb 2008 The following is an excerpt from the speech of of Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei at the 44th Munich Conference on Security Policy: “………………………………………
The big boys continue to say we need nuclear weapons, we need to develop more modern nuclear weapons, we need mini-nukes, we need bunker busters, but it is bad for you to have nuclear weapons.
Simply if you go anywhere people will tell you this is called double standard. It is not sustainable. And I try as much obviously in my job to make sure that we do as much to avoid proliferation but we are working against the tide. Unless as Frank Walter mentioned weapon states have to lead an example. They have to show the way that we are making our way to move towards nuclear disarmament.
That is no now a fantasy. When I see people like George Schultz or Henry Kissinger or Sam Nunn talking about abolition, these are not people who are naive or no aware of security deterrents. These are people who through their maturity have come to the conclusion that nuclear weapons as they call it is increasingly hazardous, decreasingly effective and if you really want to protect ourselves, you need to move towards nuclear abolition…………………………………….”.
Top brass call for nuclear first strike
Sydney Morning Herald Ian Traynor in Brussels
January 23, 2008
“THE West must be ready to resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to try to halt the “imminent” spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, according to a radical manifesto for a new NATO.
The document, written by five of the West’s most senior military officers and strategists, has been presented to the Pentagon and NATO’s secretary-general.
They have called for root-and-branch reform of NATO and a new pact drawing the US, NATO and the European Union together in a “grand strategy”.
……………………………………………The manifesto has been written following discussions with active commanders and policy makers, many of whom are unable or unwilling to publicly air their views. It has been presented to the Pentagon in Washington and to NATO’s secretary-general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, over the past 10 days. The proposals are likely to be discussed at a NATO summit in Bucharest in April…………………………
The authors are: General John Shalikashvili, the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff and NATO’s former supreme commander in Europe; General Klaus Naumann, Germany’s former top soldier and former chairman of NATO’s military committee; General Henk van den Breemen, a former Dutch chief of staff; Admiral Jacques Lanxade, a former French chief of staff; and Lord Inge, field marshal and former chief of the general staff and the defence staff in Britain…………………….Guardian News & Media “
India fails to have its way with IAEA
THETIMES OF INDIA 12 Jan 2008 , Rajat Pandit , TNN NEW DELHI: – “Indian negotiators have so far failed to have their way with IAEA on two key issues in what will be yet another setback to the prospect of the operationalization of the Indo-US civil nuclear deal.
Though foreign secretary Shiv Shankar Menon on Friday said the three earlier rounds of talks with the international nuclear watchdog had progressed smoothly, expressing hope that “we would wrap it up in the next round of talks in mid-January”, sources said India has failed to persuade IAEA to meet its concerns on two crucial issues. ………………………
………….While pointing out that it’s not in the business of supplying fuel, IAEA is also wary of conceding anything to India which may become a precedent for other countries to ask for the same……….”.
Iran, Russia, and the Bomb
Iran’s black market dealings are shrouded in mystery, but its procurement networks for nuclear bomb ingredients have most likely focused on the former Soviet Union. Spero News By Rens Lee 21 Dec 07 – “……………………………..what lethal nuclear items Iran may already possess cannot be inferred from the performance of its uranium conversion and enrichment facilities and from the spotty intelligence that shaped the NIE. Indeed, Iran’s highly publicized nuclear energy program could serve as a convenient cover for a parallel small scale-but potentially lethal-weapons-building effort that relies extensively on black market operations to obtain strategic nuclear wares. Iran’s black market dealings are shrouded in mystery, but its procurement networks for nuclear bomb ingredients have most likely focused on the former Soviet Union. Iran’s legal nuclear cooperation with Russia, for example, could mask and facilitate a variety of illegal transfers, and also give Iran plausibility regarding its motives and actions. Also, Iran, like other aspiring nuclear actors, may seek weapons components by means of smuggling chains that they either patronize or control. ……
……….Russia, of course, has long been a focus of proliferation concern ………….Even the most modern security systems are vulnerable to insider theft, especially when senior personnel of the enterprise are involved. (The latter would know how to circumvent or defeat the various steps in procedures designed to contain nuclear material at authorized sites.)…………………………..”
The war of Uranium, the ignored war
uruknet December 7, 2007 “The United States knows how to kill, but kills better with Uranium bombs. Nuclear war has started with the Trojan horse of the bombs and projectiles of uranium used in Iraq and Afghanistan. The effects of the uranium war came home in the bodies of the veterans that participated in the fist war of Golf, who transmitted to their women the destructives genetic effects in the “ardent sperm” and the women passed it to her children that were born with no arms and other mutations. 240.000 veterans of Golf War I are in permanent medical inability and more than 11.000 already died, almost everyone “Cannon fodder” (or of uranium) poor, from Latin origin, afro-American or Asian.
Tons of uranium has fallen over Iraq and Afghanistan. The effects of the metal powder deployed on the winds, the sand storms, the water, the soil and the living creatures affect also a big region that is breathing particles of uranium in Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, China, India, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Israel.
The United States launched experimental mini atomic bombs in the surroundings of Kabul, without anybody knowing, except the victims. Since a decade children with no eyes no encephalon and with other horrendous genetic malformations are being born. The government of Washington and the big media maintain this tragedy in the darkness of secret. A handful of scientists, family of veterans of war and people of press struggles desperately to contain the proliferation of the radioactive contamination in Asian Europe.
Cancer increases in more than 1.000 percent. All of this is coming to knowledge because of t
22 U.S. Physicists Petition Congress To Restrict Bush’s Authority To Use Nuclear Weapons - All Headline News Linda Young -February 2, 2007 Washington, DC (AHN) – “The recent nuclear saber rattling of Pres. George W. Bush in response to the perceived threat of Iran developing nuclear weapons has made some leading U.S. physicists nervous. Bush’s threat to use nuclear force against a nation that does not have nuclear weapons jarred 22 physicists to the point of asking Congress to restrict the president’s power to use nuclear weapons. Washington, DC (AHN) – The recent nuclear saber rattling of Pres. George W. Bush in response to the perceived threat of Iran developing nuclear weapons has made some leading U.S. physicists nervous. Bush’s threat to use nuclear force against a nation that does not have nuclear weapons jarred 22 physicists to the point of asking Congress to restrict the president’s power to use nuclear weapons. ………………The 22 physicists include twelve Nobel laureates”
Bush’s push for new nuclear weapons – New Scientist – 4 August 07 - “WHO wants a shiny new set of nuclear weapons? Hands up, the Bush administration. Who doesn’t? Democrat-controlled Congress.
A statement just submitted to Congress by the Secretaries of Energy, Defense, and State argues that if the “Reliable Replacement Warhead” plan isn’t approved, the US might have to re-test cold war stocks, breaching its moratorium. Critics say the new nukes are not needed and will antagonise other countries.
So far, Congress has sided with the critics, slashing the proposed budget and calling for detailed preliminary studies.Building new weapons and refusing to discuss treaties makes it “hard to convince the world we have peaceful intentions”, says Phil Coyle of analyst group the Center for Defense Information.
‘We have to fulfil our obligations and commitments if we expect non-nuclear parties to cooperate,’ says Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association. President Bush has refused to seek ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban signed by former president Bill Clinton……………………………………….”
From Hiroshima to Iraq, 61 years of uranium wars - A suicidal, genocidal, omnicidal course Global Research, by Leuren Moret June 12, 2007“…………………………………..Carpet and grid bombing with depleted uranium weaponry in Iraq, Yugoslavia and Afghanistan has guaranteed permanent radioactive terrain contamination. The recent discovery that U.S. depleted uranium bombs dropped by Israel on Lebanon in 2006 contained enriched uranium4,5 suggests covert testing of fourth generation nuclear weapons.
The United States and its allies are fully aware that this weaponry violates the Geneva and Hague Conventions and the 1925 Geneva Poison Gas Protocol.6 It meets the definition of WMD in the U.S. Code7 in two out of three categories. And its use violates U.S. military law.8 since the U.S. is a signatory to The Hague and Geneva Conventions…………………………….Heavy grid and carpet bombing with depleted uranium by the U.S. military on the eastern side of Afghanistan beginning in 2001 guaranteed heavy contamination in areas where deep snows in the mountainous regions provide water for Pakistan and parts of western India.
By contaminating vital water supplies in vast regions with radioactive contaminants……………Radioactive wars with low level radiation will mutilate the DNA of all exposed living things. This is not just a war against people; it is a war against the environment. Few living things will escape the slow radioactive poisoning which mutilates DNA and is passed on to all future generations………………………Nuclear power plants deliver the same lethal fission products in their emissions over a period of months and years that a nuclear bomb delivers in a nanosecond. Chronic exposure to low level radiation in emissions released from nuclear power plants may be deadlier in many ways than one acute exposure to a nuclear bomb detonation……………………….
The agreement to build the world’s first thermonuclear reactor, now located at Rokkasho in northern Japan, ironically was made in a 1985 summit between Reagan and Gorbachov. It will release the equivalent emissions in one year of 365 new nuclear reactors. There are only about 411 commercial nuclear reactors in the world. Japan will soon have the equivalent radioactive emissions of 419 nuclear reactors, in a country the size of California. Japan has a magnitude 8 or greater earthquake every 5 years!……………………………………………..”
Explaining How Depleted Uranium Is Killing Civilians, Soldiers, Land – Christopher Bollyn Global Research, June 17, 2007 “Depleted uranium weapons, and the untold misery they wreak on mankind, are taboo subjects in the mainstream media. This exclusive report should break the media embargo imposed on the American people.Despite being a grossly under-reported subject in the mainstream, there is intense public interest in depleted uranium (DU) and the damage it inflicts on humankind and the environment.While American Free Press is actively investigating DU weapons and how they contribute to Gulf War Syndrome, the corporate-controlled press ignores the illegal use of DU and its long-lasting effects on the health of veterans and the public……………..’The numbers are overwhelming, but the potential horrors only get worse,’ Robert C. Koehler of the Chicago-based Tribune Media Services wrote in an article about DU weapons entitled ‘Silent Genocide’ ‘DU dust does more than wreak havoc on the immune systems of those who breathe it or touch it; the substance also alters one’s genetic code,’ Koehler wrote.’The Pentagon’s response to such charges is denial, denial, denial. And the American media is its moral co-conspirator.’The U.S. government has known for at least 20 years that DU weapons produce clouds of poison gas on impact. These clouds of aerosolized DU are laden with billions of toxic sub-micron sized particles. A 1984 Department of Energy conference on nuclear airborne waste reported that tests of DU anti-tank missiles showed that at least 31 percent of the mass of a DU penetrator is converted to nano-particles on impact. In larger bombs the percentage of aerosolized DU increases to nearly 100 percent…………………..Studies have shown that inhaled nano-particles are far more toxic than micro-sized particles of the same basic chemical composition. British toxicopathologist Vyvyan Howard has reported that the increased toxicity of the nano-particle is due to its size………………………………..”
Archive for September, 2008
100 Years of Waste
Jackson FREE PRESS by Greg Williamson
March 12, 2008 - “…………………..Entergy wants to reduce its investment risk. Despite the tremendous demand for electricity in the United States, a nuclear power plant is a dicey investment.
That is why so few plants have been built in the last 20 years. Part of the danger is public aversion to nuclear power, which can slow the building process. Another serious financial hazard is the significantly long-term commitment of waste, which the plant typically stores on-site indefinitely. To add to the problem, at the end of a nuclear power plant’s life, the nuclear reactor itself becomes waste and must either be dismantled and removed to a long-term storage facility or entombed in concrete. The Nuclear Regulatory Agency requires Entergy or any nuclear utility to set aside at least another $300 million for that eventuality and allows up to 60 years to complete the task.
But where does the waste go, and how will it get there? The United States built a long-term repository for high-level radioactive waste in Yucca Mountain, Nev., but the good people of Nevada don’t want it, and who can blame them? It is also a bit of a logistical and public relations nightmare to transport the waste. How are we going to move tons of high-level nuclear waste through the country? Secretly?
Yes, probably, if at all, because of the threat of terrorism and public protest from people who will not want it going through their town.
So, where is the spent nuclear fuel from all those nuclear power plants in the United States and the one current Mississippi plant going now? Absolutely nowhere. As standard practice, it is stored on-site. Virtually every nuclear plant is also, for practical reasons, a nuclear waste storage facility. Spent nuclear fuel rods are too radioactive to be safely moved for at least six months after they are removed from the reactor ……………………….So, what Entergy wants, in essence, is a down payment for a very long-term relationship with nuclear power and nuclear waste that will extend actively at least 100 years into the future…………………………………………..”
The Problem Of Atomic Waste Dealing with the long lived reactor-produced radioactive wastes MOTHER EARTH NEWS .by ANNE AND PAUL EHRLICH 22 Feb 08 – “……………………..What can be done with the remaining long-lived wastes . . . those that will continue to be deadly for 1,000 to 500,000 years? In theory, these reactor by-products can be shipped to a ‘reprocessing plant’ . If the wastes have been held at the power plant for 150 days, they will only contain about three percent of the radioactivity that they had when they were removed from the reactor. But, though this figure may sound small, these elements are still emitting an abundance of lethal radiation.
Furthermore, the heat generated by continuing radioactive decay is so intense that the used fuel rods would melt if they weren’t constantly cooled during shipment. Therefore, any shipment must take place in heavily shielded, cooled casks which can weigh from 35 to 100 metric tons … depending upon whether they’re to be shipped by road or rail.
…………………………….What happens then? Well, first of all, the fuel rods are chopped up by automated equipment and dissolved in acid so that the various elements can be separated chemically. Now unfortunately, current reprocessing-plant design allows some gaseous radioactive isotopes to be routinely released from the plants into the atmosphere. In fact, it is here that the largest routine releases designed into the nuclear fuel cycle occur, and these add a small fraction of natural radiation to the burden of ionizing radiation that humanity must already bear.
But all is not pure waste.Plutonium 239 and uranium 25-both fissile and thus usable as reactor fuel-can be recovered at the reprocessing plant and shipped back to be recycled through the power plant. The rest of the high-level wastes become concentrated into a highly radioactive liquid … about 10,000 gallons of it per power reactor per year.
You will note that we said above that “in theory” this reprocessing could occur. But there are, at present, no reprocessing plants in service in the United States! One such installation (a small capacity plant owned by Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc.) did operate from 1966 until 1971, when it was shut down for repairs and expansion……………
………In many ways, this so-called “back end” of the nuclear fuel cycle is actually the soft underbelly of the whole atomic power establishment. The shipment and especially, the reprocessing of spent fuel are hazardous and technically difficult enterprises. They must be accomplished almost entirely by automation, and the barriers
between the radioactive materials and the environment tend to be much thinner during these processes than at the power plants themselves………..
………..we don’t even know if reprocessing plants can be designed with adequate safeguards against catastrophic accidents, tornadoes, earthquakes, and sabotage. In the meantime, spent fuel elements are constantly accumulated at power plant sites, while we wait for someone to solve the problems…….….…..What then would become of the millions of gallons of highly radioactive, long-lived liquid wastes that would be generated annually?
This particular question has vexed the nuclear establishment from the start…………
…..……Like space disposal, another alternative-ocean disposal- presents known hazards, because a great deal of low-level radioactive waste-encapsulated in steel drums-has already been dumped in the oceans close to our shores. The result? Many of the containers are now leaking … and the degree to which radioactivity will be concentrated in oceanic food chains (thereby threatening humanity) is not yet known. …………………….…………..People sense that our knowledge of geology makes it difficult to guarantee the integrity of burial sites for the requisite hundreds of thousands of years … and they are rightly nervous about the possibility of accidents that may occur in the process of transport and burial. …………………….Finally, techniques must be devised to dispose of the highly radioactive remains of nuclear power plants when their 20- to 40-year service lives are over … to say nothing of the carcasses of failed reprocessing plants….”
Deadly secrets underground Thestar.com By ANGELA CHARLTON 5 Feb 08 – “If the world embraces nuclear energy, where will the deadly waste go?
THOUSANDS of canisters of highly radioactive waste from the world’s most nuclear-energised nation lie, silent and deadly, beneath a jutting tip of Normandy. Above ground at the site in Beaumont-Hague in France, cows graze and Atlantic waves crash into heather-covered hills.
The spent fuel, vitrified into blocks of black glass that will remain dangerous for thousands of years, is in ‘interim storage.’ Like nearly all the world’s nuclear waste, it is still waiting for the long-term disposal solution that has eluded scientists and governments in the six decades since the atomic era began. ………………………………….recent talk of a nuclear renaissance has focused on the ‘front end,’ or reactor construction. Engineers are designing the next generation of reactors to be safer than today’s — and they’re being billed as a solution to global warming. Nuclear reactors do not emit carbon dioxide, blamed for heating the planet. Few people have been talking about the ‘back end’ – industry-speak for the hundreds of thousands of tons of waste that nuclear plants produce each year, and the lucrative, secretive business of storing it away. ………………Greenpeace and Norwegian environmental group Bellona say European nations have for years been illegally shipping radioactive waste to Russia and leaving it there. ……
The French fuel stays in Normandy indefinitely, while bulkier, lower-level nuclear waste is piling up in dumps worldwide………………………………….”.
Solution for deadly nuke waste eludes science
PITTSBURGH TRIBUNE REVIEW By The Associated Press January 27, 2008 BEAUMONT-HAGUE, France -- “Thousands of canisters of highly radioactive waste from the world’s most nuclear-energized nation lie, silent and deadly, beneath this jutting tip of Normandy. Above ground, cows graze and Atlantic waves crash into heather-covered hills.
The spent fuel, vitrified into blocks of black glass that will remain dangerous for thousands of years, is in ‘interim storage.’ Like nearly all the world’s nuclear waste, it is still waiting for the long-term disposal solution that has eluded scientists and governments in the six decades since the atomic era began.
………………………………….recent talk of a nuclear renaissance has focused on the ‘front end‘ or reactor construction. Engineers are designing the next generation of reactors to be safer than today’s — and they’re being billed as a solution to global warming. Nuclear reactors do not emit carbon dioxide, blamed for heating the planet. Few people have been talking about the ‘back end’ industry-speak for the hundreds of thousands of tons of waste that nuclear plants produce each year, and the lucrative, secretive business of storing it away.
Waste ‘is the main problem with this so-called nuclear rebirth,’ said Mycle Schneider, an independent expert who co-authored a recent study for the European Parliament casting doubt on a global nuclear resurgence.
………………………………………Greenpeace and Norwegian environmental group Bellona say European nations have for years been illegally shipping radioactive waste to Russia and leaving it there. …………………….Areva makes $2.2 billion in revenues a year on treating and recycling waste. The plant at Beaumont-Hague takes in 22,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel a year, from France, Japan, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Australia. The foreign fuel by law must be returned to its owners once it has been reprocessed into a more stable form that — through lack of alternatives — is buried or held in storage.
The French fuel stays in Normandy indefinitely, while bulkier, lower-level nuclear waste is piling up in dumps worldwide………………….”
Chernobyl “sarcophagus” to be renovated” MOSCOW. RIA Novosti Tatiana Sinitsyna 17 Jan 08 – “…………………..Tens of thousands of highly-professional clean-up workers, risking their lives, built a gigantic sarcophagus in an extremely short period of time – only six months.
But there are no engineering miracles. A gain in one respect, comes with a loss in another. The remote-control methods used due to the high radiation levels could not achieve the required tightness. The total area of cracks in the shelter reached almost a thousand square meters. Every year they let in up to 2,000 cubic meters of rain and melted snow.
The moisture has steadily found its way into the structures and can spread radioactive material or in a worst-case scenario produce a runaway nuclear reaction.
Radiation also prevented a reliable check on the actual strength of the structures chosen for support. All information was supplied by pictures taken from a helicopter.
“The supporting props were a source of constant alarm: after all, they suffered from an explosion and a fire,” Prof. Borovoi said. “Should one of them shift for some reason (say, in an earthquake), the domino effect could send the rest crumbling. The result would be what foreign experts call ‘a collapse of the shelter’: the structures would cave in and release radioactive dust into the environment.” …………………………..Builders used 750 tons of metal, 245 tons of reinforced steel and falsework, and 4,500 tons of reinforced concrete for the foundation to strengthen the shelter.
GROWING NUCLEAR STOCKPILES REQUIRE NEW SECURITY MEASURES (THE STANLEY FOUNDATION)
UNITED NATIONS – / MaximsNews Network / – 31 October 2007 – “Muscatine, Iowa – Today 2,000 metric tons of separated highly enriched uranium and plutonium stockpiled in civilian and military programs pose a significant proliferation risk. These stockpiles could grow if plans for an expansion in civilian nuclear energy materialize.
Since 2005, more than 20 countries that do not now have nuclear power have expressed interest in installing nuclear reactors. With more reactors, it is likely that additional uranium enrichment and possibly plutonium reprocessing plants would also be built. Current efforts to restrict the expansion of such sensitive technologies are competing with efforts to promote plutonium as an energy resource.
The systems that guard against state diversion of and terrorist access to sensitive materials that could be used in nuclear weapons are already under duress………………………..”
UK lumbered with foreign nuclear waste Just as the Government was mulling a new nuclear programme, an 800 ton problem emerges THE INDEPENDENT 17 June 2007 By Tim Webb “The UK is set to become home to some 800 tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste after it emerged that the disaster-prone Thorp reprocessing plant may have to remain closed permanently. The Government has admitted that the spent nuclear fuel shipped in from overseas and currently stockpiled at Sellafield may have to remain in Britain.The revelation is a major blow to the reputation of the nuclear industry at a time when the Government is mulling whether to approve the construction of a new generation of atomic plants.The admission came as the Department of Trade and Industry prepared the ground for the permanent closure of Thorp, its controversial nuclear reprocessing plant at the sprawling nuclear complex in Cumbria.The £1.6bn plant is now largely obsolete, as reprocessing spent nuclear fuel is no longer considered viable. It has been closed since April 2005 after a major radioactive leak was discovered……….”
New threat perceptions in storing nuclear waste – EARTH Times.org Fri, 12 Jan 2007 Author : Zipporah Koganowich “LONDON: Radioactive waste kept underground in preservative coatings can destroy the coating materials earlier than previously thought and can leak out endangering safety. Scientists at Cambridge University in the U.K. and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in the U.S. have found that the synthetic material called zircon, which is used in preserving plutonium, cannot hold the material until it becomes safe.The material can break down faster than thought earlier when exposed to radiation, the scientists found in their recent research. Zircon is a durable natural chemical and mixing nuclear waste with this material is a recommended method of storing the waste safely for thousands of years.. ……..”
John Gofman vs. the Nuclear Cowboys Dr. Strangelove’s NemesisCounter Punch By FRED GARDNER and SHOBHIT ARORA January 2, 2008 - “Dr. John Gofman left us in 2007 at the age of 88. Edward Teller called him ‘the enemy within’ the nuclear research establishment because Gofman warned the public about the dangers inherent even in peaceful uses. (Teller was proud of his own sobriquet,’father of the H-bomb’ Peter Sellers used Teller as a model when he played Dr. Strangelove in Stanley Kubrick’s great black comedy.) ……………………………………………………..The worst-case scenario is this. Ever since its inception, the Atomic Energy Commission –then called ERDA, then called DOE– has had one thing in mind. ‘Our program is sacrosanct’ And they recognize, as I’ve recognized, that their entire program will live or die based upon one thing.If the public should come to learn the truth about ionizing radiation, nuclear energy and the atomic energy program of DOE is going to be dead. Because the people of this country –and other countries– are not going to tolerate what it implies. The key thing –it’s everything in the DOE program– is:’We must prove that low doses of radiation are not harmful..’ They have been conducting a Josef Goebels propaganda war, saying there’s a safe dose when there has never been any valid evidence for a safe dose of radiation. Yet the DOE and others continue to talk about their ‘zero-risk model’…………………………Gofman:The answer is this: ionizing radiation is not like a poison out of a bottle where you can dilute it and dilute it. The lowest dose of ionizing radiation is one nuclear track through one cell. You can’t have a fraction of a dose of that sort. Either a track goes through the nucleus and affects it, or it doesn’t. So I said ‘What evidence do we have concerning one, or two or three or four or six or 10 tracks.’ And I came up with nine studies of cancer being produced where we’re dealing with up to maybe eight or 10 tracks per cell. Four involved breast cancer. With those studies, as far as I’m concerned, it’s not a question of ‘We don’t know’ The DOE has never refuted this evidence. They just ignore it, because it’s inconvenient. We can now say, there cannot be a safe dose of radiation. There is no safe threshhold. If this truth is known, then any permitted radiation is a permit to commit murder……………………………………………….’.
………………………….”.Don’t buy the nuclear sales pitch - Aspen Daily News Roger Herried – 22 June 07 “……………Moore is not a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace. …………………. Moore and his behavior in the late 1970s wreaked havoc on Greenpeace. Moore has had nothing to do with environmental issues for over 15 years. He’s been using the last 15 years to promote the logging industry and other polluters.The idea that the nuclear industry would hold up such a flagrant example is astounding. One of the real founders of Greenpeace called him a Judas! For anyone with their eyes open, short sales pieces by paid industry spokespeople that have millions of federal pork to spend promoting a plan to get billions more from us, please, if there was ever a time not to trust someone, it is the nuclear industry, during George ‘let’s make a deal on Iraq’s oil’ Bush’s administration.In Feb 1984, Forbes magazine called the nuclear industry the largest financial disaster in U.S. history. The big picture on nuclear power includes the ugly truth that nuclear power and weapons are linked at the hip, and enjoys second to none subsidies that go back over 50 yearsYou wouldn’t know it unless you live in Nevada, that the plan to dump high level waste at Yucca Mountain is facing opposition from both parties there. You wouldn’t know it that when Bush promised not to let Yucca Mountain go ahead unless there was good science that proved its safety. With that promise George Bush won the 2000 election and Nevada’s electoral votes were enough to make the difference in who would be president………………..The nuclear industry wants you to allow the federal government to subsidize private companies to build a new generation of experimental reactors. What will the real cost be? Once they get a hook on your wallet, we all know what a blank check is! The first time around they said it was gonna be too cheap to meter. In 1966, California’s Diablo Canyon was estimated to cost just over $350 million to build two reactors. Twenty years later the construction costs totaled $5.8 billion, with an additional $7 billion in financing costs. The utility got every penny of those costs from the government and ratepayers, plus a profit. The result? California’s rates nearly doubled over a six-year period…………………………..”
. .The spin over the joint nuclear energy plan THE HUFFINGTON POST by Alex Raksin 25/4/07 - “……………….in my over 20 years in journalism ……I have never encountered a slicker spin than the administration’s announcement today, April 25, of a ‘joint nuclear energy action plan’” between the United States and Japan…….it will ’safely and securely, allow developing nations to deploy nuclear power to meet energy needs’and shower lavish financing on companies that agree to ‘construct… nuclear power plants in the United States for the first time in 30 years,’including a promise that U.S. taxpayers will generously compensate any companies that lose money on the deals. The plan, the biggest deal that Bush’s $405-million ‘Global Nuclear Energy Partnership’(GNEP) has scored to date, also makes a host of other promises, from ‘reducing the number of required … waste depositories to one for the remainder of this century”to ‘enhancing energy security, while promoting non-proliferation.’………………………………………. Robert Alvarez, President Clinton’s top energy advisor from 1993-99, released a study documenting the many ways in which the Administration’s nominally ‘environmentally friendly’ GNEP program could become a deadly and costly fiasco…………………….the GNEP would allow large quantities of cesium 135 — a radionuclide with a half life of 2.3 million years — to be disposed in the near surface and pose serious contamination problems for many thousands of years. …………………Despite the Energy Department’s claims that recycling of reactor spent fuel will solve the nuclear waste disposal problem, a small fraction is likely to be recycled.DOE’s plans include the landfill disposal of tens of thousands of tons of recovered uranium. ……………………………the Bush administration had asked Department of Energy officials to bar citizens from commenting on GNEP after April 4.But nuclear safety proponents successfully pressed officials to extend the deadline to June 4, leaving all Americans free to submit their views either to their federal legislator or directly to the administration by contacting Timothy A. Frazier by phone (866-645-7803) or email (GNEP-PEIS@nuclear.energy.gov).You might assume — as most of my good friends are wont to do — that you are too small and powerless to stop the GNEP juggernaut, I have news for you: But you’d be wrong. continued belowThe Bush administration had asked Department of Energy officials to bar citizens from commenting on GNEP after April 4. But nuclear safety proponents successfully pressed officials to extend the deadline to June 4, leaving all Americans free to submit their views either to their federal legislator or directly to the administration by contacting Timothy A. Frazier by phone (866-645-7803) or email (GNEP-PEIS@nuclear.energy.gov).So far, the nation’s legislators and many reporters have been asleep at the nuclear reactor control panel.You can help wake them up by asking them to zero out the budget for the GNEP program that Alvarez’s study shows to be ludicrously impractical.Or you could go further and suggest that the leftover funding be diverted into the scores of demonstrably cost-effective and environmentally safe energy-generating alternatives, such as geothermal and hydropower, that the president — incredibly enough — is now actually pressing legislators to de-fund in next year’s budget.”NUCLEAR POWER ON THE WEB From greenhouse to greenhouse Gerry Wolff 11 April 2007 “Things that appear on the web about nuclear power seem to fall into four main categories:1. Rather bland pro-nuclear articles, typically in minor newspapers, suggesting that the problems with nuclear power are largely in the past, that it is quite safe and, that it is the way to cut CO2 emissions. Most of these articles are very inaccurate and seriously misleading as you will see if you compare them with what Helen Caldicott has to say in her excellent book ‘Nuclear power is not the answer.’2. Seemingly factual reports saying things like ;Such and such nuclear power station produced record output recently or that it has come back on stream.;These reports are probably accurate but they don’t seem to serve any other purpose than raising the profile of nuclear power in the public mind and suggesting in a comforting way that this technology is busy producing the electricity we need so we can rest easy in our minds.3 With Google alerts set on ‘comprehensive’ so that it searches all kinds of web pages and not just news, I have come across a number of blogs preaching a very pro-nuclear line. They all look suspiciously professional in their web design and all have a rather similar layout. They do look to me like things that have been set up deliberately to spread the pro-nuclear word.4 Fortunately, there are some reports and articles that present a more accurate view of nuclear power and its many problems.All of these kinds of articles, reports or blogs provide an opportunity to correct misleading information about nuclear power and raise awareness of a major alternative. “
Nuclear ships ‘threat to Gulf’ Gulf Daily News Bahrain By MANDEEP SINGH 10 March 08 - “THE region is at a serious risk of a major catastrophe due to military nuclear-powered and armed ships and submarines entering Gulf waters, an expert warned yesterday.The vessels “come and go as they please” with no one to monitor them, said Regional Organisation for the Protection of the Marine Environment executive secretary Dr Abdulrehman Al Awadhi.
‘If there is a radiation leak in any of these vessels, it would spell disaster for the area,‘ Dr Al Awadhi told the GDN.
‘When the ship is in port or even in the waters off port, by the time anything could be done, it would be too late.’….……………….He said while it was true that those on board the vessels would also be affected, ‘the damage to people like you and me, the damage to the environment and the effects on the region’s fragile ecology would be tremendous’………………………..”.
Nuclear super-fuel gets too hot to handle
New Scientist Rob Edwards14 April 2008
“IT SEEMS like a no-brainer. Make uranium burn stronger, hotter and longer in nuclear reactors, and you’ll need less fuel, and there’ll be less waste to deal with when it has been exhausted.
For decades, nuclear operators have done just that, but emerging safety and waste-disposal issues are raising questions about this approach. The latest high-efficiency fuel may prove to be unstable in an emergency, and so poses a greater risk of leakage of radioactive material into the environment. What’s more, the waste fuel is more radioactive, meaning it could prove even more difficult than existing waste to store in underground repositories………………………………………..”
‘ Shambolic’ Sellafield in crisis again after damning safety report
THE INDEPENDENT By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
3 February 2008
“Britain’s most notorious nuclear installation was plunged into crisis last week, when vital equipment broke down just as it was recovering from an accident that shut it for two years. Sellafield’s Thorp reprocessing plant has been closed again, while starting only its second job since the shutdown.
And the Cumbrian complex’s crisis is compounded by an excoriating report which shows that its facilities for handling nuclear waste are a shambles and that its safety procedures for preventing accidents – which could kill hundreds of thousands of Britons – are ‘not fully adequate’
The latest incident, which took place on Monday, could not have happened at a worst time for Sellafield or for the nuclear industry as a whole as it tries to generate the confidence needed to persuade investors to build a new generation of atomic power stations
……………….The stinging report, by the Nuclear Installations Inspectorate, reveals the extent of the mess. After reprocessing, highly dangerous radioactive liquid waste is concentrated through evaporation and stored above ground in 21 giant steel tanks before being ‘vitrified’ - bound into glass for disposal. But the report shows that every stage of this process is in crisis.
Two of the three evaporators have been shut due to safety problems, and there are continuing ‘difficulties’ with vitrification.
But the most alarming issue is the failure of equipment needed to cool the waste, which could, at worst, lead to an explosion, scattering radioactivity across much of the country. Studies suggest that for every tank that exploded 210,000 people would die from cancer…………………………………………”
Safety issues cloud nuclear renaissance Developing nations’ track record gives cause for concern San Francisco Chronucle George Jahn, Associated PressGeorge Jahn, Associated Press January 20, 2008 – “………………………………some countries hopping on the nuclear bandwagon have abysmal industrial safety records and corrupt ways that give many pause for thought……………….
………..Of the more than 100 nuclear reactors now being built, planned or on order, about half are in China, India and other developing nations. Argentina, Brazil and South Africa plan to expand existing programs; and Vietnam, Thailand, Egypt and Turkey are among the countries considering building their first reactors……………
……………The concerns are hardly limited to developing countries. Japan’s nuclear power industry has yet to recover from revelations five years ago of dozens of cases of false reporting on the inspections of nuclear reactor cracks.
The Swedish operators of a German reactor came under fire last summer for delays in informing the public about a fire at the plant. And a potentially disastrous partial breakdown of a Bulgarian nuclear plant’s emergency shutdown mechanism in 2006 went unreported for two months until whistle-blowers made it public.
Nuclear transparency will be an even greater problem for countries such as China that have tight government controls on information.
Those who mistrust the current nuclear revival are still haunted by the 1986 meltdown of the Chernobyl reactor and the Soviet Union’s attempts to hide the full extent of the catastrophe. Further back in the collective memory is the partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979……………
……….worries persist that bad habits of the past could reflect on nuclear operational safety.
In China, for instance, thousands die annually in the world’s most dangerous coal mines and thousands more in fires, explosions and other accidents often blamed on insufficient safety equipment and workers ignoring safety rules.
Chinese state media on Saturday reported that nearly 3,800 people died in mine accidents last year. While that is about 20 percent less than in 2006, it still leaves China’s mines the world’s deadliest…………………………….
Countries with nuclear power are obligated to report all incidents to the IAEA. But the study said most Asian governments vastly underreport industrial accidents to the U.N.’s International Labor Organization – fewer than 1 percent in China’s case
Separately, China and India shared 70th place in the 2006 Corruption Perceptions Index, published by the Transparency International think tank that ranked 163 nations, with the least corrupt first and the most last. Vietnam occupied the 111th spot, and Indonesia – which, like Hanoi, wants to build a nuclear reactor – came in 130th……………………………..
….Hans-Holger Rogner, head of the IAEA’s planning and economic studies section, says he is ’suspicious when people say the next (reactor) generation will be safer than the one we have’……………..”
From cocaine to plutonium: mafia clan accused of trafficking nuclear waste - Tom Kington in Rome
Tuesday October 9, 2007
The Guardian – “Authorities in Italy are investigating a mafia clan accused of trafficking nuclear waste and trying to make plutonium.
The ‘Ndrangheta mafia, which gained notoriety in August for its blood feud killings of six men in Germany, is alleged to have made illegal shipments of radioactive waste to Somalia, as well as seeking the “clandestine production” of other nuclear material.
Two of the Calabrian clan’s members are being investigated, along with eight former employees of the state energy research agency Enea………………………………”
Will it shake Jakarta’s NUCLEAR DREAM? Yesterday’s quakes throw spotlight on plant’s position within Pacific Ring of Fire
Electric News September 14, 2007
“WHEN Indonesia recently announced plans to build a nuclear plant in Java, experts said it was a bad idea. Yesterday, Indonesians got another reminder of how potentially bad an idea it could be.
Two massive earthquakes – one measuring 8.4 in magnitude and the other, 6.6 – shook the Sumatra region in the evening, killing at least 10 people and injuring dozens of others.
A 3m-high wave reportedly hit Padang about 20 minutes after the quake. Buildings also collapsed and communication lines broke down.
The quakes prompted Indonesian authorities to issue two tsunami alerts…………….
…………….RUPTURE POSSIBLE A quake like the one that happened yesterday could rupture a reactor and cause a radiation leak that could spread to densely-populated areas, such as Jakarta, which is about 450km away from the proposed site.
In the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine, scientists estimated that radioactive fallout from the damaged plant affected areas more than 2,000kmaway…………………………………”
Next Tokai quake could be massive
BY TAKASHI SOEDA, THE ASAHI SHIMBUN 09/05/2007
“The heavily populated Tokai region, which experts say is due for a major earthquake within 30 years, has experienced at least three ’super’ temblors of unimaginable destruction during the past 5,000 years, according to a study.
Unlike so-called Tokai earthquakes that occur every 100 years or so, a ’super’ earthquake is one that causes dramatic change to the landscape through shifts in the Earth’s crust.
The envisaged Tokai quake, whose epicenter would be in the Bay of Suruga facing Shizuoka Prefecture, has an anticipated 87-percent likelihood of hitting by 2037, according to a government taskforce…………………….
……………The team drilled more than 10 meters at eight sites in an area about 2 kilometers east of the Hamaoka Nuclear Power Plant……………………….”. Worse than Chernobyl: ‘dirty timebomb’ ticking in a rusting Russian nuclear dump threatens Europe - 20,000 discarded uranium fuel rods stored in the Arctic Circle are corroding. The possible result? Detonation of a massive radioactive bomb experts say could rival the 1986 disaster. – The Independent, Rachel Shields, 10 June 2007 – “A decaying Russian nuclear dump inside the Arctic Circle is threatening to catch fire or explode, turning it into a ‘dirty bomb’ that could impact the whole of northern Europe, including the British Isles.
Experts are warning that sea water and intense cold are corroding a storage facility at Andreeva Bay, on the Kola Peninsula near Murmansk. It contains more than 20,000 discarded fuel rods from nuclear submarines and some nuclear-powered icebreakers. A Norwegian environmental group, Bellona, says it has obtained a copy of a secret report by the Russian nuclear agency, Rosatom, which speaks of an “uncontrolled nuclear reaction”……………………
…….The three storage tanks contain more than 32 tons of radioactive material. But the Kola Peninsula is littered with relics of Soviet nuclear facilities, housing more than 100 tons of nuclear waste – the largest concentration in the world.Experts predict that a major explosion at Andreeva Bay could destroy all life in a 32-mile radius, including Murmansk and a sliver of Norway, whose border is only 28 miles away. But a much wider area of Norway, north-west Russia and Finland would be rendered uninhabitable for at least 20 years, and huge quantities of radioactive material would be dumped into the Barents Sea………………………………………………”
Key radiological sites still unsecured - WASHINGTON, March 14 (UPI) – “Just four of 20 nuclear waste storage sites in Russia and Ukraine have been secured, making the remainder vulnerable to thieves and terrorists. The U.S. Energy Department has spent more than $108 million since 2001 helping secure 368 radiological sites in 40 foreign countries.However, some 70 percent of them are medical sites with a single source of radiation to be secured rather than the higher risk commercial, industrial and waste sites that are more expensive to secure, according to a new report from the Government Accountability Office.Meanwhile, 16 of 20 nuclear waste sites in the former Soviet Union are not secured, and some high-risk countries have not given DOE permission to undertake security upgrades at all. There are also more than 700 highly radioactive radioisotope thermoelectric generators — which power lighthouses and weather stations — in the former Soviet Union that are either operational or abandoned, but not secured. ‘DOE says this probably represents largest supply of unsecured radioactive material in the world,’states the report.Loose radioactive materials pose a security concern because with little technological expertise they can be packed in a bomb with conventional explosives and detonated. The radiological fallout could kill additional people beyond the radius of the initial blast, render areas uninhabitable for long periods of time and cause economic devastation.
THE UNTHINKABLE – Can the United States be made safe from nuclear terrorism? – The New Yorker …by STEVE COLL – 6/3/07 (This is a long article exploring the complicated problem of the safety, and safety precautions, regarding radioactive materials)” ……………………………………..The term “dirty bomb” can refer to a wide variety of devices, but generally it describes one that would use a conventional explosive such as dynamite to release radioactive material into the air. The initial explosion and its subsequent plume might kill or sicken a dozen or perhaps as many as a few hundred people, depending on such factors as wind and the bomb-maker’s skill. If the weapon was particularly well made, employing one of the most potent and long-lived types of radioactive materials that are used in medicine and in the food industry, it might also cause considerable economic damage-perhaps rendering a number of city blocks uninhabitable. Radioactive ground contamination cannot easily be scrubbed away, so it might be necessary to tear down scores of buildings and cart the rubble to disposal sites. It’s easy to imagine what the impact of such an attack would be if the contaminated area was, say, a quarter of the East Village, or the Seventh Arrondissement of Paris………………………The available evidence suggests that while jihadi leaders might like to acquire a proper fission weapon, their pragmatic plans seem to run to dirty bombs-a more plausible ambition.Among other things, the international nuclear black market holds more promise for dirty-bomb builders than for those who are interested in fission weapons. In all the cases of nuclear smuggling reported to the International Atomic Energy Agency since the collapse of the Soviet Union, none have involved significant amounts of fissionable materials………………..The Bush Administration has not assigned the same urgency to the dirty-bomb threat that it has to the threat of a terrorist attack using a fission weapon…………………………… The Bush Administration’s fixation on radiation sensors has not been accompanied by a comparably ambitious drive to fund, for example, increased inspections of companies that hold commercial nuclear material that could be used to build dirty bombs, and, as a result, the country’s regulatory system in this area remains strikingly weak………………………….. The final official list contains only fifteen risky isotopes. (Other commercial isotopes, such as polonium, which was employed in London last autumn to murder the former Russian spy Alexander Litvinenko, can kill individuals or small groups but cannot cause damaging long-term ground contamination; these materials are not classified as a security risk.)
French nuclear waste being stored in the U.S.?
CleanTech December 5, 2007
“A prominent researcher shared a nuclear secret today that he said not even everyone in the U.S. Department of Energy knows.
Is the U.S., in fact, storing a large amount of nuclear waste produced by France’s nuclear reactors?
That was the suggestion in a keynote today at the ThinkEquity ThinkGreen conference in San Francisco by Dr. Yogi Goswami, former President of the International Solar Energy Society, and prolific author and University of Florida professor.
‘One small bit of information that most people don’t know, even in our Department of Energy: a large majority of the nuclear waste from France is actually shipped to the U.S.,’ Goswami said.
‘“It’s stored in South Carolina. That’s because when initially the French started building nuclear reactors, the U.S. was suspicious of the French, and said ‘hey, you don’t need to keep that nuclear waste over there, we’ll store it for you.’
‘So there’s a contractual relationship that all of that waste comes to the U.S. and is stored in the Savannah River Laboratory, which is the U.S. Department of Energy lab for nuclear waste,’ he said………….………………………….”
Cheney Pursuing Nuclear Ambitions of His Own
Scoop 6 November 2007,
by Jason Leopold – “While Dick Cheney has been talking tough over the years about Iran’s alleged nuclear activities, the vice president has been quietly pursuing nuclear ambitions of his own. For more than two years, Cheney and a relatively unknown administration official, Deputy Energy Secretary Clay Sell, have been regularly visiting the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to ensure agency officials rewrite regulatory policies and bypass public hearings in order to streamline the licensing process for energy companies that have filed applications to build new nuclear power reactors, as well as applications for new nuclear facilities that are expected to be filed by other companies in the months ahead, longtime NRC officials said. …………
……………….The energy corporations Cheney and Sell have been personally lobbying the NRC on behalf of this year have advised the vice president and his staff on energy policy in a way that would boost their companies’ profit margins. These corporations have also donated millions of dollars to President Bush’s and Cheney’s past presidential campaigns. ………………
……………….At a time when public awareness surrounding renewable energy resources, the devastating effects of global warming and the importance of conservation is at an all-time high, the Bush administration has steered tens of billions in taxpayer dollars toward revamping the dormant nuclear power industry, touting it as the only proven technology to combat climate change. Behind the scenes, Cheney and Sell have worked in tandem with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)……………..
………Cheney and Sell’s behind-the-scenes efforts have been a boon for the nuclear energy industry – and to Westinghouse Electric, a nuclear reactor designer whose AP1000 reactor unit was certified by the Department of Energy. The company stands to earn tens of billions of dollars in profit through the sale of just a few of its nuclear reactor units. Cheney has said publicly he wants to see dozens scattered across the US. ………
………….NRG Chief Executive David Crane told investors recently that massive federal tax incentives and federal loan guarantees included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005 was the deciding factor in steering the company toward the $6 billion nuclear project…………………….’The whole reason we started down this path was the benefits written into the [Energy Policy Act] of 2005,’ Crane said…………………………..The federal loan program automatically requires taxpayers to cover any defaults on the loans. In a February report to Congress, the Government Accountability Office said failure to properly account for default risks in the loan program was one factor that ‘could result in substantial financial costs to the taxpayer.’
A 2003 Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report said the risk of utilities defaulting on loans for new nuclear plants is ‘very high – well above 50 percent.’………………
…………Perhaps the thorniest issue neither Cheney, Sell, Bodman nor the nuclear energy industry has yet to address is how it plans to dispose of nuclear waste………………………..’In over 50 years of operating experience, the nuclear industry still has not managed to solve the problems of safety, security, and disposal of highly dangerous radioactive waste,’said Jon Block, nuclear energy and climate change project manager for the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
‘Until that happens, we’re much better off investing in safer, cleaner energy sources such as renewable wind, geothermal, tidal, and solar projects’…………………………….”
Extent of Windscale contamination was covered up New Scientist Rob Edwards 5 Oct 07 - “At the time it was the world’s worst nuclear accident. Now, 50 years after the fire at Windscale in Cumbria, UK, on 10 and 11 October 1957, it has emerged that the resulting radioactive cloud spread contamination over large parts of Europe, much further than previously admitted.
The fire raged in the bomb-making reactor for 17 hours, dumping contamination over a large swathe of England. Across the north-west of the country radioactive milk was poured away for several weeks. Researchers in the UK and Norway have now shown that radioactivity was blown east over Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany, and north over Scandinavia
‘The plume extended further east than accepted in previous assessments,’ concludes a study funded by the British nuclear industry (Atmospheric Environment). Monitoring measurements from the Norwegian Defence Research Establishment show that fallout ‘extended farther north over Norway than originally considered’………………………………………”
Nuclear Info Kept From Congress and the Public slashdot kdawson August 21 “On March 6, 2006 an accident occurred at Nuclear Fuel Services in Erwin, Tennessee. According to reports, almost 9 gallons of highly enriched uranium in solution spilled and nearly went into a chain reaction. Before the accident in 2004, the NRC and The Office of Naval Reactors had changed the terms of the company’s license so that any correspondence with Nuclear Fuel Services would be marked ‘official use only.’ From the article: ‘While reviewing the commission’s public Web page in 2004, the Department of Energy’s Office of Naval Reactors found what it considered protected information about Nuclear Fuel Service’s work for the Navy.
The commission responded by sealing every document related to Nuclear Fuel Services and BWX Technologies in Lynchburg, Va., the only two companies licensed by the agency to manufacture, possess and store highly enriched uranium.’ The result was that the public and Congress were both left in the dark for 13 months regarding this accident and other issues at the facility.”
(Electric Power Research Institute).EPRI – Exposing the Nuclear/Electricity Industry Dark tower of Secrets OpEdNews.com Sherwood Martinelli 8 August 07 EPRI SECRETS-Nuclear Industry Failing Infrastructure, CRM and Wrongful License Renewals – With the score Nuclear Licensees 48, host communities 0, it seemed obvious that the fix was in and the NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) was intent on bringing forth a Nuclear Renaissance by rubber stamping the License Renewal Applications of every aging, fatigued nuclear reactor in America, against the wishes of the 67 host communities who had agreed to host said reactors for a period of only 40 years
The nuclear industry, NRC/DOE and NEI all needed a way to keep aging and other problems out of the public eye, needed a way to investigate known safety issues, while keeping grassroots environmentalists, opposing attorneys, and even state and local governments from getting their hands on damning documents, documents that would support the oppositions contentions……
Imagine if you will, a impenetrable black tower of Electrical Industry learning and dark sinister secrets, it’s reams of reports and studies off limits to all but the chosen few and the minions that serve them. Those allowed access paying handsomely (rumor has it the fee is $2 million a year) for unfettered corporate access.
Imagine a dark tower of learning so well connected that the DOE funds research meant to protect NRC licensees interest, the studies and reports generated paid for by tax payer dollars, then secreted away, labeled proprietary and security sensitive and not eligible for export. Such an organization exists, and is known as EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute).
the NRC has full and complete access to these documents which outline failures, and presumably has read them, yet time and again the NRC has refused to order even one full and complete ISA (Independent Safety Assessment) of said steam pipe systems at a nuclear reactor. Leaking Butt Welds, thinning walls, and bacteria problems are not the exception in the nuclear industry, but instead the norm,………………..
………We have the power and ability to open the doors to the Dark Tower that is the EPRI library, we can force them to give the public access to the documents paid for fully or partially with tax dollars……………
..Dangerous, aging reactors are being wrongfully relicensed in the name of a Nuclear Renaissance. The documents that prove just how unsafe they are have been hidden behind the corporate veil of EPRI, and we must pierce their veil, gain access to the documents that prove our contentions.“
16 Dirty Secrets About Nuclear Power- Counter Punch 27 June 07 By RUSSELL D. HOFFMAN“1) This is a very long article – so, just a few points have been selected here: -1. Isn’t France almost entirely dependent on nuclear power?Sure, they have something between 70% and 80% nuke-generated electricity (the exact figure depends on who you ask). It’s NOT particularly CHEAP for the French, by the way, and THAT should tell you something.And one more point: AREVA, France’s nuke power company, is even more secretive than our nuke mega-corporations, and their nukes have had serious problems …But more to the point, COULD they have gone with renewables and still achieved their electricity goals (and their rates would now be vastly cheaper)? Certainly!3. Nukes are getting safer all the time, aren’t they? – Actually, they are getting LESS safe The old nuke power plants are rusting, becoming more and more embrittled, and parts that have lasted for 30+ years (and were designed to last only 20) are failing left and right.. The companies all have a “replace on failure” policy for most components, since it would be impossible to guess what’s going to break next. And as for future possible generations of new reactors, they have their own problems INCLUDING unexpectedly rapid embrittlement of the cladding for the radioactive fuel pellets, which could lead to the very catastrophic failures they CLAIM can’t happen. AND the new reactors are no better protected from terrorism than the old ones — a fact of life, but then, so are TSUNAMIS and they are IGNORED, as well (yes, some coastal reactors have sea walls, but they are pitifully small).4) Can’t nuclear power solve the problem of Global Warming? No. First of all, nuclear power doesn’t produce MUCH of our energy mix…..The “20%” figure you might often hear is the percentage of ELECTRICITY nuclear produces, but electricity is a relatively small portion of our total energy usage.Second of all, the global warming problem is (finally) considered IMMINENT. But no workable plan for building new nuclear power plants can possibly contribute more than a small percentage of the needed energy. The plants are too big, the lead time too long, the difficulties of siting them away from population centers and then running high-power lines, all doom the technology even if numerous OTHER important reasons are IGNORED! Third, and most damaging, is that when you take into account: Caring for the nuclear waste afterwards; Caring for cancer victims; The energy needed to mine the uranium; The energy needed to clean up after an accident; All the other costs; Nuclear simply doesn’t produce ANY net energy for the country! Not one watt!8) Doesn’t the nuclear industry protect humans from all its radioactive waste? NO THEY DON’T! Tritium, for instance, is routinely released from ALL operating nuclear power plants. Some kinds of nuke plants release 20 times (or more) more than other types. Is it ALL okay? Not at all. Tritium standards are absurdly lax.10) Don’t some people say that a little radiation might actually be GOOD for you? NO level of radiation is beneficial and all medical radiation is given after a supposedly careful cost-benefit analysis has been done for the patient.14) Why does the industry keep going, if it’s SO bad?The nuclear industry relies on lies and obfuscations to hide its true effect on humanity from curious or prying eyes. ANYONE who begins to understand the truth is immediately labeled an “activist” even if they base every comment they ever make on scientific principles which the pro-nukers cannot and WILL NOT ANSWER. People who are labeled “activists” are soon kicked out of their jobs, so that they can no longer be considered experts who are current in the field. They are ridiculed, and destroyed financially.The “debate” over nuclear power — the one a democratic people SHOULD have had — NEVER HAPPENED…………..What keeps the industry going is government contracts, government subsidies, government insurance, and tax breaks. The government feeds BILLIONS into the industry, financing the ‘”research and development’” of new reactor designs, and the training the commercial reactor operators through the military reactor program. Research reactor institutes are often controlled jointly by the industry and by the government. It’s self-perpetuating.But the biggest break the industry gets is, of course, the fact that if you or your children or loved ones get cancer or leukemia, it COULD be due to anything, NO MATTER HOW CLOSE you live to a reactor, and no matter how many people around you SEEM to be dying as well. To make matters worse, after a meltdown, most people with reactor-caused illnesses will never be paid a red cent by any insurance company, the reactor owners or operators, or any local, state or federal entity.Check your homeowner’s insurance policy if you have one. Reactor accidents are specifically excluded! And you need look no further than the nuclear industry’s under-funded, federally-mandated minimalist insurance policy known as The Price-Anderson Act to KNOW that no citizen will be paid their due if they survive after an accident. You’ll get fractions of a penny on the dollar if you live to collect anything at all. You’ll be called stupid for living so close to a reactor, or paranoid for thinking that accident “X” miles away caused YOUR cancer. “X” could be a little as 11 miles or less!……………………………
…………….“ Don’t buy the nuclear sales pitch – Aspen Daily News Roger Herried – 22 June 07 “……………Moore is not a founder or co-founder of Greenpeace. …………………. Moore and his behavior in the late 1970s wreaked havoc on Greenpeace. Moore has had nothing to do with environmental issues for over 15 years. He’s been using the last 15 years to promote the logging industry and other polluters.The idea that the nuclear industry would hold up such a flagrant example is astounding. One of the real founders of Greenpeace called him a Judas! For anyone with their eyes open, short sales pieces by paid industry spokespeople that have millions of federal pork to spend promoting a plan to get billions more from us, please, if there was ever a time not to trust someone, it is the nuclear industry, during George ‘let’s make a deal on Iraq’s oil’ Bush’s administration.In Feb 1984, Forbes magazine called the nuclear industry the largest financial disaster in U.S. history. The big picture on nuclear power includes the ugly truth that nuclear power and weapons are linked at the hip, and enjoys second to none subsidies that go back over 50 yearsYou wouldn’t know it unless you live in Nevada, that the plan to dump high level waste at Yucca Mountain is facing opposition from both parties there. You wouldn’t know it that when Bush promised not to let Yucca Mountain go ahead unless there was good science that proved its safety. With that promise George Bush won the 2000 election and Nevada’s electoral votes were enough to make the difference in who would be president………………..The nuclear industry wants you to allow the federal government to subsidize private companies to build a new generation of experimental reactors. What will the real cost be? Once they get a hook on your wallet, we all know what a blank check is! The first time around they said it was gonna be too cheap to meter. In 1966, California’s Diablo Canyon was estimated to cost just over $350 million to build two reactors. Twenty years later the construction costs totaled $5.8 billion, with an additional $7 billion in financing costs. The utility got every penny of those costs from the government and ratepayers, plus a profit. The result? California’s rates nearly doubled over a six-year period…………………………..” . .
DUMPING OF TOXIC WASTE ON INDIGENOUS LANDS, DAMAGE FROM MINING, DEFORESTATION AMONG ISSUES, AS INDIGENOUS FORUM DISCUSSION FOCUSES ON PACIFIC REGION Media NewsWire 25 April 08 – “Continuing its seventh annual session with a half-day discussion on the Pacific, delegates to the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues called for the Forum to take a more robust role in inducing other parts of the United Nations system to carry out mandates for securing the rights of the indigenous peoples in the region……
………Michael Dodson, Member of the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues holding the human rights portfolio, said indigenous land and waters were being targeted by industrialized nations for dumping of toxic or radioactive wastes from industrial or military operations, often without informing residents of dangers. …………”
Uranium waste imperils Jharkhand villages The New Nation, Bangladesh Aparna Pallavi March 24, 2008 – “Radioactive waste from three government-owned uranium mines has put about 50,000 people in Jharkhand’s Jaduguda at risk. The people, mostly tribal communities, suffer from serious radiation-related health problems. But the mines in East Singhbhum district continue without adequate safety measures.
On studying more than 9,000 people (over 2,000 houses) in five villages near the mines owned by the Uranium Corporation of India Limited (UCIL), researchers found cases of congenital deformities, sterility, spontaneous abortions and cancer were alarmingly high among the villagers, mostly from the Ho, Santhal, Munda and Mahali tribes.
The mines, set up four decades ago, employ around 5,000 people. A team from the Indian Doctors for Peace and Development (IDPD) and a local NGO Jharkhandi Organisation Against Radiation (JOAR) conducted the study in May-August last year.
According to the union Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, three per cent people in India suffer from physical disabilities; congenital deformity being one of them. In the villages in Jaduguda, the percentage of congenital deformity itself is at 4.49 per cent, as compared to 2.49 per cent in the reference villages. This, says the study, is commensurate with the findings at Church Rock mines in New Mexico, USA. In 1979, a dam at the mining site burst, sending gallons of radioactive mill wastes and triggering an environmental crisis.
The safety situation at the mines is equally dismaying. The company dumps waste from the mines in open fields and transports uranium ore in uncovered dumpers. Just about a decade ago, say villagers, the playgrounds for children and grazing areas were near the three tailing ponds. The company even supplied mine tailings as construction material to the villagers . In December 2006, a pipe burst spilling radioactive waste.
Preparations underway for ‘radiation exposure’ court case ABC Radio Australia 12 March 2008 The French Polynesian Nuclear Test Veteran Association is preparing to bring to court next month, the case of eight Polynesians who formerly worked on Moruroa nuclear sites. Of the eight men who worked on the sites in the 1960s, only three are still alive. They claim their group developed leukaemia due to exposure to radiation during nuclear tests carried out by the French government between 1960 and 1996………………Roland Oldham is the President of Mururoa e Tatou, the French Polynesian Nuclear Test Veteran Association. He says putting the lawsuit together has been extremely difficult.
OLDHAM: French people are more conscious of their legal rights than French Polynesians who lived in atolls far away. Most of them are fishermen. They don’t have a basic knowledge of their rights. And everything in the legal process is carried out in the French language………………………………………………”.
Rio Tinto’s tainted track record ALLIRAN 21 February 2008 - “……………..Rio Tinto’s tainted reputation for being responsible for environmental and human rights violations at its mines and smelters. The company has been regularly embroiled in controversy and accused of corporate misdeeds including suppressing trade unions, taking land from indigenous people without compensation, destruction of the environment, and negligence and complicity in civil war.
Displacement of indigenous people Rio Tinto has an appalling record in its relations with indigenous peoples around the world. …………………In the 1980s, during the construction of the Argyle diamond mines in Western Australia, a large number of Aboriginal sacred sites were desecrated or destroyed. The Tawiyul Women’s Dreaming Place, a most sacred area at the Barramundi Gap and one that played an important role in unifying local groups, was almost completely destroyed. This was done with full awareness of the sacred nature of the site and against the vocal opposition of local Aboriginal groups. Rio Tinto also led the mining industry campaign to oppose native title legislation in Australia in 1997-8………………
When South African armed forces illegally occupied Namibia in the 1970s, Rio Tinto violated United Nations sanctions by establishing a uranium mine and illegally selling its output. The Rossing mine operated at full production to gain maximum profits before Namibia gained independence, despite risks to health and safety.
A UN document described the mining operations there as “mined by virtual slave labour under brutal and unsafe conditions, transported in secrecy to foreign countries, processed in unpublicised locations, marked with false labels and shipping orders, owned by multinational corporations whose activities are only partially disclosed, and used in part to build the nuclear power of an outlaw nation..
The company has consistently refused to apologise for, or even to acknowledge, its operation of the mine during a period in which such operations were proscribed by the United Nations. Mine workers from the pre-independence period now claim to have developed cancer as a result of their work experience. The company has opposed their compensation claims. …
……..(Rio Tinto’s Capper Pass tin smelter in Hull, UK ) Research done by the Scottish Universities Research and Reactor Centre in 1990. (SURRC) noted that ventilator emissions, dust blown by the wind and onto workers, uranium leaching from waste heaps, and, above all, the prevalence of Radon- 222 decay series radio-isotopes could all be having an adverse impact on the workforce and surrounding communities. .” .
Uranium Cuts a Tragic Path Through the Navajo Nation THE WATCH By Amy Levek December 30, 2007 – “……………..Late this year, spurred to action by a series of articles in The Los Angeles Times in 2006, Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) held a hearing on ‘The Health and Environmental Impacts of Uranium Contamination in the Navajo Nation‘ in the House Oversight Committee.The Navajo Nation’s Edith Hood testified at that hearing about “a Navajo concept called hozho.
‘Hozho is how we live our lives. It means balance, beauty and harmony between we, the five-fingered people, and nature. When this balance is disturbed, our way of life, our health and our wellbeing all suffer. The uranium contamination and mining wastes at my home continues to disrupt hozho‘…………..
……..Navajo miners worked in the uranium mines and mills on the reservation in the 1930s and 40s, and then again during the boom that lasted through the cold war of the 1950s and 60s, enthusiastic about the opportunity to be paid relatively and work close to home. Besides the physical after-effects, the Navajo would suffer deep cultural wounds as a result of their work.
……………………………The elevated lung cancer rates, some three to five times higher among Navajo miners than the rest of the American population, is as ironic as it is tragic. Prior to the inception of uranium mining in the 1930s,the Navajo people were virtually cancer-free and had the lowest lung cancer rate of all Native American groups.
.’………………………………………………….Navajo kids were swimming in open pit uranium mines in the 1990s. When the US EPA took readings at one mine site, the radium levels were over 270 times the EPA standard. And that was last year. And American citizens are still drinking contaminated water, breathing in radioactive dust, and likely living in radioactive homes today. That’s happening today, right now‘.-(Waxman)………………………………”
Censored in 2007: Traditional Indigenous People The narcosphere By Brenda Norrell Dec 31st, 2007 “The most censored issue of Indigenous Peoples by the media in 2007 was the ‘Silencing of traditional and grassroots’ voices by those in power’ according to readers voting on a poll at the Censored Blog.
The elected tribal councils in the United States and band councils in Canada attempted to silence Indian spiritual leaders and traditional people by way of silencing and distorting the news in 2007.
‘Nuclear, uranium and coal genocide on Indigenous lands,’ was the second most censored issue. Throughout the Americas, Indigenous lands and people are targeted by coal, uranium, copper and gold mining and toxic dumping that will poison their air, water and land………………Navajos live with the pollution and sickness of unreclaimed uranium mines, power plants, coal mining and hundreds of oil and gas wells in the Four Corners area alone…………The Algonquin, Pueblos, Navajo, Lakota and others are also battling new uranium mining, while Goshute and Western Shoshone fight nuclear dumping on their lands which will be detrimental to future generations…………………………………..”.
Niger: The Touaregs and environmental war - African Path June 25, 2007 - “……………………the Mouvement des Nigeriens pour la Justice (MNJ) has stepped up its activity claiming responsibility for a pitched battle with government troops in March and a recent attack on a uranium exploration team. ……………….
..’The movement was created because nothing has been done by the government,’Moktar Roman, spokesperson for MNJ said. ‘There is no work, no schools, not even drinking water in all Niger. It’s terrible, it’s a genocide, and the government is corrupt, taking money from people and leaving them to live in poverty’ he said. The group is fighting for development in what the United Nations considers the poorest, least developed country in the world, Roman said. ‘It is not just a Touareg movement.’……………………….
…Among the major driving forces are, as always, the underdevelopment of the north and the lack of local control over resource exploitation, particularly gold and uranium. The attack on the uranium exploration team was no accident, given the MNJ’s call for ‘wealth from Niger’s burgeoning uranium mining industry to benefit… the northern region in which the mining is taking place.’
According to Paris-based Niger analyst, Nadia Belamat, though, the uranium exploitation dispute isn’t simply economic: ‘not only is uranium mining in northern Niger not helping the region economically, it is also causing serious ecological and health problems’
Enron prosecutor takes on Navajo uranium cleanup – The tribe hires John C. Hueston to press the U.S. to remove toxic material from its land.- Latimes.com By Judy Pasternak, February 25, 2007 - “The Southern California lawyer who successfully prosecuted top Enron executives has been hired by the Navajo tribal government to seek a full cleanup of the old uranium mines contaminating the country’s largest reservation.John C. Hueston, who gained fame for his questioning of Enron founder Kenneth L. Lay, contacted the tribe in November after reading articles in The Times about the poisoning of the Navajo homeland as the government mined uranium for use in nuclear weapons. The reports detailed how residents had been exposed to radiation and toxic heavy metals in their air, water, soiland even the walls and floors of their homes. The tribe retained the former federal prosecutor Thursday to coordinate an effort to finish the cleanup and eventually to help Navajos made ill by exposure. ……………………………..”
Indigenous Peoples Call for Global Ban on Uranium Mining – Counterpunch 9/2/07 By BRENDA NORRELL – “Indigenous peoples from around the world, victims of uranium mining, nuclear testing, and nuclear dumping, issued a global ban on uranium mining on native lands. The declaration, signed during the Indigenous World Uranium Summit, held Nov. 30-Dec. 2, 2006 on the Navajo Nation in Window Rock, Arizona, brought together Australian aboriginals and villagers from India and Africa. Pacific islanders joined with indigenous peoples from the Americas to take action and halt the cancer, birth defects, and death from uranium and nuclear industries on native lands.This is a very long article, detailing evidence from many indigenous people – from the Navajo Nation, from India, Australia, China, Mexico and Canada. read the whole article at http://www.counterpunch.org/norrell02082007.html
TIMELINEJune 07 Australian Prime Minister guts the Northern Territory’s Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1976 (ALRA) – making it easier for uranium exploration and waste dumping29 June Canada’s First Nations national ‘day of action’ Algonquins blockade of uranium companyJune 07 Nigeria – Touaregs in Mouvement des Nigeriens pour la Justice (MNJ) fight uranium exploration teamJune 04 2007 USA Sioux protestors Grand River Environmental Equality Network (GREEN) occupying U.S. Forest Service land at Slim Buttes protesting uranium runoff, uranium miningMay 07 Canada application for uranium exploration on sacred lands,in the Northwest Territories rejected by Lutselk’e Dene peopleNov-Dec 2006 Indigenous World Uranium Summit, held Nov. 30-Dec Indigenous peoples from around the world issued a global ban on uranium mining on native lands2006 U.N. Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination said the U.S. government is trampling on Shoshone rights in privatization of Shoshone ancestral lands for mining and federal efforts to open a nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain,
Rough waters cause nuclear shutdown NBC3 16 Oct 07 by Katrina Smith
“SCRIBA, N.Y. (AP) – Turbulent water and a build-up of lake debris in a water intake forced operators of the James A. FitzPatrick nuclear plant near Oswego to shut down the reactor over the weekend.
It was the second time in just over a month that the Lake Ontario facility’s water intake became clogged. This time, FitzPatrick spokeswoman Bonnie Bostian says lake algae blocked the intake screening system. As a result, plant operators manually shut down the nuclear facility early yesterday morning………………..A heavy storm on September 12th caused a similar problem………………”
Windscale: A nuclear disaster BBC News By Paul Dwyer 7 Oct 07
Windscale: Britain’s biggest nuclear disaster “Fifty years ago, on the night of 10 October 1957, Britain was on the brink of an unprecedented nuclear tragedy.
A fire ripped through the radioactive materials in the core of Windscale, Britain’s first nuclear reactor………………………………..Now tapes of the inquiry into the accident, heard for the first time in a BBC film, reveal the reasons why the politicians covered up the causes of the accident. Scientists had been warning about the dangers of an accident for some time.
……………………the politicians and the military ignored the warnings; instead they increased demands on Windscale to produce material for an H-bomb. A succession of prime ministers since the war had been determined to persuade the Americans to share the secret of their nuclear weapons with Britain.
Prime Minister Harold Macmillan believed that, if Britain could develop an H-bomb on the scale of the Americans’, they would treat it as a nuclear equal and form an alliance. ………………………………”
Heat Wave Shuts Down Alabama Reactor - Slashdot 18 August 07 “In a first for the US, one of three nuclear reactors at the Browns Ferry nuclear plant in Alabama has been shut down because the Tennessee River is too hot to provide adequate cooling for the waste heat produced by the reactor.
This is happening as the TVA faces its highest demand for power ever, reports the Houston Chronicle.
This effect has been seen in Europe in the past, forcing reduced generation, but the US has until now been immune to the problem. The TVA will buy power elsewhere and impose higher rates, blaming reduced river flow as a result of drought.”
Japan Barely Dodges Nuclear Disaster in Latest Earthquake - Cleveland Leader 16 July 07 – “Shortly after 10am local time on Monday, an earthquake rocked northwestern Japan. Hundreds of homes were destroyed, roads and bridges buckled, and fire started at a nuclear power plant.
So far, at least seven people have died and hundreds more have been injured.Japan’s Meterological Agency measured the earthquake at 6.8 magnitude, while the U.S. Geological Survey said they registered it as a 6.7. Either way, this was a strong one, causing buildings to sway 160 miles away in Tokyo…………
……The hardest hit area appears to have been Kashiwazaki, a city of about 90,000 in the prefecture of Niigata. And while the affects of the earthquake have thus far been disasterous,
Japan can count their blessings on one thing – the fact that they narrowly escaped the destruction of a nuclear reactor.
The earthquake caused a fire to start, as well as an explosion, at the Kashiwazaki nuclear plant. Plant officials have said that water containing some radioactive materials leaked after the quake, and may have been discharged into the sea.
944 incidents reported in German nuclear power plants reported over a six-year period – Islamic Republic News Agency Berlin 11 July 07 – “German nuclear power plants have reported 944 incidents between the period of early 2000 and late 2006, the daily Westdeutsche Allgemeine Zeitung quoted Wednesday statistics released by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS).
Meanwhile the number of registered breakdowns in German nuclear power plants since 1993 stands at 1,945………….The BfS statistics have gained special relevance in the wake of a fire at the north German Kruemmel nuclear plant on June 28 as new disclosures about botched safety procedures to shut down the nuclear facility have surfaced…………………………” .
Power firms hid 10,000 problems’ - Japan Daily Yomuiri Online The Yomiuri Shimbun 7/4/07 – “Utility firms have concealed problems or altered data at power plants more than 10,000 times, the Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan announced Thursday. Federation Chairman Tsunehisa Katsumata reported the findings of an investigation to a Liberal Democratic Party investigation committee Thursday morning. ……………….
The federation reexamined the numbers after receiving a request from the LDP to more accurately count the number of irregularities……………….. According to the new report, there were 450 irregularities at nuclear power plants……………”
India’s processed uranium selling in International black market - Daily Times Pakistan 27/2/07 – “ISLAMABAD: India’s Jaduguda uranium mines in Jharkhand are becoming notorious for the smuggling of processed uranium, or ‘yellow cake’, which is being sold in the international black market, according to ‘WMD Insights’ – a reputable US-based magazine.More recent reports dealing with international discussions on the smuggling of nuclear and radioactive materials have said that uranium ores stolen from the Jaduguda mines in India have found their way to Nepal, from where they are sold to international buyers.
An Indian newspaper, Vijay Times, wrote, ‘In an alarming development, smugglers are sending highly radioactive yellow cake or processed uranium, used in making nuclear weaponry, to Nepal through the clandestine narcotic route via the Jharkhand-Bihar-West Bengal conduit, and it is suspected that the destination might be Al Qaeda.’ India is being projected by some as a responsible nuclear-capable state. In fact this has been cited as a prima facie by the US to offer India civilian nuclear cooperation. However, the facts belie any such presumption…………………….”
Nuclear plant managers let radioactive particles flow into sea - NEWS.scotsman.com 7/2/07 LOUISE HOSIE - “NUCLEAR plant operators yesterday admitted illegally dumping radioactive waste and releasing nuclear fuel particles into the sea more than 40 years ago.The UK Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) pleaded guilty to four chargesunder the Radioactive Substances Act 1960. The breaches happened at the Dounreay site in Caithness…………………The charges were brought against UKAEA after it was reported to the procurator-fiscal following an investigation by the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA)……………………..”.
TIMELINE11 July 07 944 incidents reported in German nuclear power plants reported over a six-year period – June 07 Two German nuclear power stations closed due to transformer station fireJune 07 China – generators at the Lingao nuclear power plant shut due to high temperaturesJune 07 Scotland -Hunterston B power plant in Ayrshire due to temperature problemsJune 07 USA cracks discovered in a component at the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plantMay 07 USA Hope Creek nuclear plant shut down due to fault causing decrease in water level24 May USA Newly restarted nuclear reactor at TVA’s Browns Ferry power plant shut down after fluid leak9 May 07 USA – Nuclear Fuel Services shut down enriched uranium facility due to radioactive spillApril 07 Japan – Federation of Electric Power Companies of Japan announced Power firms hid 10,000 problems – 450 irregularities found at nuclear power plantsApril 07 USA Explosion At Indian Point Nuclear Power PlantApril 07 USA – Fire in transformer shuts Indian Point 3 nuclear plantMarch 07 Japan – cover-up revealed regarding 3 serious accidents at Shika Nuclear Power Station in 1999March 07 Czech Republic 3,000 litres of radioactive water leaked in Temelin nuclear plantMarch 07 USA 2 Incidents Reported at Nuclear Plant Near WashingtonMarch 07 USA Two spills of an enriched uranium solution at Oakridge nuclear weapons plant USAMarch 07 uranium missing from Congo’s nuclear research reactor..March 07 Tokyo Electric Power Co admits nine cases in which data on nuclear power plants was falsifiedFeb 07 India’s processed uranium reported to be selling in International black marketFeb 07 UK Atomic Energy Authority pleads guilty to illegally dumping radioactive waste and releasing nuclear fuel particles into the seaJan 07 USA tractor-trailer overturned with radioactive plutonium on boardJan 07 USA Hanford Nuclear Reservation – A radiation leak and employee falsified recordsJan 07 USA Rats caused wildfire near Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant17 Jan 07 USA Monticello nuclear power plant remains shut down indefinitely – large metal component broke loose inside the plant,Jan 07 Radioactive leak at British nuclear power stationJan 07 USA radioactive leaks at Braidwood, Dresden and Byron nuclear power plants24 Dec Fire Breaks out at Japanese Nuclear PlantDec 06 Texas – Truck carrying uranium crashes in N.CJune 1999 Japan 3 serious accidents atShika Nuclear Power Station
Fallout From Atomic Bombs Still Causing Health Problems Washington Post By Alan Mozes March 14, 2008 –” Among Japanese survivors of the atomic bombs dropped by the U.S. on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, those exposed to radioactive fallout as young children appear to face a greater risk of developing adult cancers than those exposed while still in the womb, new research suggests.
To date, the risk posed by radiation exposure while in the womb has been a little-studied subject, even though many pregnant women worldwide face radiation exposure through their work or as patients. …………….
………….Initially called the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission, the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF)’s mission is to examine the long-term impact of radiation exposure among Japan’s 120,000-plus survivors of the bombings………
…………the new study focused on survivors who were between the ages of 12 and 55 between 1958 and 1999. Nearly 2,500 of the male and female participants were in utero when the bombs fell, while nearly 15,500 were below the age of 6 at the time……………………………………………Preston and his team found that 336 men and 407 women had developed cancer during the study period, with diagnosis rates increasing dramatically after the age of 40. Cancers of the digestive system were most common, accounting for 70 percent of male and 30 percent of female malignancies. Tumors of the breast and reproductive system accounted for 48 percent of malignancies in women.
……………………………………Preston and his colleagues concluded that early childhood atomic bomb exposure was linked to a greater risk for adult cancers than exposure in the womb. . ….”
Aishah Ali’s interview with geoscientist Leuren Moret Tehran Times March 18, 2008 (Source: Madame Chair Magazine) “…………….The February War Crimes Conference in Kuala Lumpur is the most recent of the annual events organized by the Perdana Global Peace Forum. …..Among the eloquent speakers was geoscientist and international radiation specialist Leuren Moret, who gave a startling revelation about the effects of radiation and how our global environment has been contaminated from atomic bomb testing since 1945 to the present ……………
…………Leuren Moret: ‘When a nuclear bomb explodes or when a DU weapon burns, it produces radioactive poison gas. Uranium when it burns is hotter than the sun and it forms extremely tiny particles. These particles stay in the air until rain or snow removes them and they contaminate our soil and water. Areas where there is high rainfall such as Hawaii, or the coastal areas in Southeast Asia, have much higher levels of radiation rained out into the local environment. Of course, this damages all living things, not just humans. ………
……….the radioactive effect where nuclear particles disturb the cells. Our cells communicate with one another but what happens is the radiation damages the signals and cells start to malfunction. The third and most serious effect of DU is the nanoparticle or “particulate” effect. Because the suspended DU particles which travel around the world are so tiny, they disturb the signaling and information flow in the cell processes and functions of the body. ……………
…………….DU is radioactive trash from the atomic weapons project and the nuclear power industry. It is a radioactive metal and occurs in three isotopes (forms of a chemical element differing in their atomic weight) — Uranium 238, Uranium 235 and Uranium 234.
They all behave the same chemically because they have the same number of electrons in the outer shell, but they are slightly different in mass.
The isotope that scientists want is Uranium 235 because it will explode in nuclear bombs like the Hiroshima bomb. Today they mine the uranium and take 0.5 per cent out of U235 from the ore to make into nuclear reactor fuel.
The rest is trash. It’s called depleted uranium or DU because they have removed the half percent of U235.It’s a bomb tester’s term. It does not mean it is depleted in radiation. It is depleted in U235 because the vital half a per cent has been extracted. …………………………..This is in huge junk piles stored in drums in solid metal at the Department of Energy sites in the U.S. The U.S. is using thousands of tons of DU in dirty bombs, dirty missiles and dirty bullets all over the Middle East and Central Asia. We’re importing it from Canada, Belgium and South Africa.
It is very profitable and so investment firms invest in corporations manufacturing DU weapons because they may get as much as a 35 percent return annually on the investment. We have to take the profit out of war in order to end this global, permanent war economy, which is destroying the earth.
Fortunately the Belgian Parliament has just passed a law abolishing all DU weapons manufacturing, testing, storage and sales. It is the first country in the world to do this.
This is extremely significant because Belgium was exporting DU weapons to the U.S.; it is the headquarters of NATO and the seat of the European Parliament. ………………………………’………………………………………………………..”
Child cancer risk higher near nuclear plants: study BERLIN (Reuters) Dec 8, 2007 -
A German study has found that young children living near nuclear power plants have a significantly higher risk of developing leukemia and other forms of cancer, a German newspaper reported on Saturday.
‘Our study confirmed that in Germany a connection has been observed between the distance of a domicile to the nearest nuclear power plant …. and the risk of developing cancer, such as leukemia, before the fifth birthday,‘ Suddeutsche Zeitung newspaper quoted the report as saying.
The newspaper said the study was done by the University of Mainz for Germany’s Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BFS).
The researchers found that 37 children within a 5-kilometer (3-mile) radius of nuclear power plants had developed leukemia between 1980 and 2003, while the statistical average during this time period was 17, the paper said.
The newspaper cited an unnamed radiation protection expert familiar with the study who said its conclusions understated the problem. He said the data showed there was an increased cancer risk for children living within 50 kilometers of a reactor…………………………
Germany plans to prematurely shut down all of its nuclear power plants by the early 2020s.
Muslim Peacemaker Teams: Depleted Uranium Crisis in Najaf
Monitoring Net of Human Rights in Iraq – MHRI
Uruknet infoJanuary 8, 2008 This was not an exhaustive study because of the limits of personnel, resources and equipment. But it did rely on accumulated public data, thorough research, and a major contribution of time and energy. The focus was Najaf, a city of over one million people, and the rural areas in the governate. The area is about 180 miles from where DU was used in the First Gulf War.
Starting in 2004 when the political situation and devastation of the health care infrastructure were at their worst, there were 251 reported cases of cancer. By 2006, when the numbers more accurately reflected the real situation, that figure had risen to 688. Already in 2007, 801 cancer cases have been reported. Those figures portray an incidence rate of 28.21 by 2006, even after screening out cases that came into the Najaf Hospital from outside the governate, a number which contrasts with the normal rate of 8-12 cases of cancer per 100,000 people. Sami Rasouli, Dr. Najim Askouri and Dr. Assad Al-Janabi, members of Muslim Peacemaker Teams (MPT) in Najaf, visited with Christian Peacemaker Teams CPT) in Suleimaniya, Kurdish Iraq, on December 10 and 11. The visit was an opportunity to report the recent activities of the respective peacemaker groups and learn to know new people. But the primary activity was a forum on depleted uranium (DU) presented by Drs. Assad and Najim.
Dr. Assad is the director of the Pathology Department at the 400-bed public hospital in Najaf. Dr. Najim is a nuclear physicist, trained in Britain, and one of the leading nuclear researchers in Iraq until his departure in 1998. They have worked as an MPT team documenting information about the health impact on Najaf of depleted uranium weapons used during the 1991 and 2003 Gulf wars. …..Two observations are striking. One, there has been a dramatic increase in the cancers that are related to radiation exposure, especially the very rare soft tissue sarcoma and leukemia. Two, the age at which cancer begins in an individual has been dropping rapidly, with incidents of breast cancer at 16, colon cancer at 8, and liposarcoma at 1.5 years. Dr. Assad noted that 6% of the cancers reported occurred in the 11-20 age range and another 18% in ages 21-30. ……………………………..Dr. Najim began his report by noting that Coalition Forces, mostly U.S., used 350 tons of DU weapons in about 45 days in 1991, primarily in the stretch of Iraq northwest of Kuwait where Iraqi troops were on their retreat. Then in 2003, during the Shock and Awe bombing of Baghdad, the U.S. used another 150 tons of DU.
When DU hits a target it aerosolizes and oxidizes forming a uranium oxide that is two parts UO3 and one part UO2. The first is water soluble and filters down into the water aquifers and also becomes part of the food chain as plants take up the UO3 dissolved in water. The UO2 is insoluble and settles as dust on the surface of the earth and is blown by the winds to other locations…………………………….”.
Malignancies Cancer research: misspent money, wasted efforts and unconscionable profits ZNet Globe and Mail by Andrew Nikiforuk 20 Nov 07 Review of The secret history of the war on cancer By Devra Davis, basic Books “………………..the cancer establishment has retreated from the truth faster than Canada’s commitment to a greener country. What began as sincere investigation into the economic root causes of a complex set of 200 different diseases, at the turn of the 20th century, quickly degenerated into a single-minded focus on treatments after the Second World War, argues Devra Davis, one of North America’s sharpest epidemiologists……………………..
In the process, industry and its propaganda hit men have used every opportunity to discredit, dismiss or disparage information on cancer hazards in the workplace or at home………..
Consider the invasion of computerized imaging technology (CT scans) in modern medicine. Since its invention in the 1970s, CT scanning has become a $100-billion industry that creates nifty three-dimensional images, yet exposes patients to radiation.
CT scans have become such a favoured technology that one in every three scans recommended for children is probably unnecessary
In the last 25 years, the amount of radiation zapping North Americans from scanning and the like has increased fivefold. ……….
‘Modern America’s annual exposure to radiation from diagnostic machines is equal to that released by a nuclear accident that spewed the equivalent of hundreds of Hiroshimas across much of Russia and Eastern Europe.’
Most physicians don’t know that a typical CT scan equals 400 chest X-rays. A group of researchers at Yale now estimate that radiation from CT scans of the head and abdomen will kill 2,500 people a year……………..”.
Russian villagers living the horror of a nuclear explosion 50 years ago THE ASAHI SHIMBUN BY MASAMI ONO, Tetsu Kobayashi in Tokyo also contributed to this article i: December 20,2007) CHELYABINSK, Russia- “An explosion at the Mayak nuclear plant here that devastated the southern Ural region a half-century ago still casts a shadow over Russians living in the area. The 1957 blast is regarded as having caused the worst contamination in the former Soviet Union until the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.
The facility also dumped radioactive waste into a river or lakes nearby for many years.
At present, the Russian government is taking measures to strengthen the nuclear industry. However, the history of the Mayak facility shows that those measures can pose dangers.
On Sept. 29, 1957, a cooling system for a tank that stored liquid radioactive waste exploded at the Mayak nuclear plant. The facility had manufactured the Soviet Union’s first plutonium for atomic bombs.
The blast scattered radioactive matter over 20,000 square kilometers. In total, 270,000 residents of 217 villages were affected, according to a report compiled by environmental protection group Greenpeace Russia, based on the government’s data and other materials. The worst affected were some 10,000 residents of 23 villages. Their areas were so badly contaminated that they were secretly forced to be relocated to other areas……………………………………………..
The Mayak plant became the source of environmental pollution not only with the explosion, but also with the dumping of radioactive waste into the Techa river between 1949 and 1951. Because of the dumping, the living areas of 124,000 people were contaminated.
In addition, the Mayak area was hit in 1967 by airborne mid-level radioactive waste which was scattered from a contaminated lake near the Mayak plant after the lake had dried up. In that case, the living areas of 42,000 people were contaminated.
……………………………………..In spite of the growing openness to the media, however, local environmental groups warn that a large amount of liquid radioactive waste dating back to the 1960s is still stored there.
Nuclear accidents, such as leakages of radioactive substances, have also taken place. One occurred in late October of this year.
Mid-level radioactive liquid waste spilled from a tank while being transported from one building to another, contaminating a road and adjacent areas in the compound of the facility.
Local residents are also concerned about a group of lakes into which radioactive waste has been dumped.
……………………………………..The Mayak case shows how troublesome radioactive waste is. Once a leak occurs, contamination can continue for decades.
Even if the waste is stored inside the facilities, it must be strictly controlled under cool conditions when it is high-level radioactive waste.
All countries, including Japan, should heed the lessons of the Mayak case.
‘Safe’ uranium that left a town contaminated They were told depleted uranium was not hazardous. Now, 23 years after a US arms plant closed, workers and residents have cancer – and experts say their suffering shows the use of such weapons may be a war crimeDavid Rose in Colonie, New York
Guardian Umlimited November 18, 2007
“……………………………………………The US federal government and the firm that ran the factory, National Lead (NL) Industries, have been assuring former workers and residents around the 18-acre site for decades that, although it is true that the plant used to produce unacceptable levels of radioactive pollution, it was not a serious health hazard.
Now, in a development with potentially devastating implications not only for Colonie but also for the future use of some of the West’s most powerful weapon systems, that claim is being challenged. In a paper to be published in the next issue of the scientific journal Science of the Total Environment, a team led by Professor Randall Parrish of Leicester University reports the results of a three-year study of Colonie, funded by Britain’s Ministry of Defence.
Parrish’s team has found that DU contamination, which remains radioactive for millions of years, is in effect impossible to eradicate, not only from the environment but also from the bodies of humans. Twenty-three years after production ceased they tested the urine of five former workers. All are still contaminated with DU. So were 20 per cent of people tested who had spent at least 10 years living near the factory when it was still working, including Ciarfello.
The small sample size precludes the drawing of statistical conclusions, the journal paper says. But to find DU at all after so long a period is ’significant, since no previous study has documented evidence of DU exposure more than 20 years prior… [this] indicates that the body burden of uranium must still be significant, whether retained in lungs, lymphatic system, kidneys or bone’. The team is now testing more individuals…………
……………………..Inside the body DU travels around the bloodstream, accumulating not only in the lungs but also in other soft tissues such as the brain and bone marrow. There, each mote becomes an alpha particle hotspot, bombarding its locality and damaging cell DNA. Research has shown that DU has the potential to cause a wide range of cancers, kidney and thyroid problems, birth defects and disorders of the immune system……………………………..”
Prior to her death from leukemia in Sept. 2004, Nuha Al Radi , an accomplished Iraqi artist and author of the “Baghdad Diaries” wrote “The depleted uranium left by the U.S. bombing campaign has turned Iraq into a cancer-infested country. For hundreds of years to come, the effects of the uranium will continue to wreak havoc on Iraq and its surrounding areas.”
Inside the nuclear underworld: Deformity and fear
CNN.com 12 Sept 07 By Matthew Chance
CNN Editor’s note: In our Behind the Scenes series, CNN correspondents share their experiences in covering news and analyze the stories behind the events. CNN’s Matthew Chance was given rare access to Kazakh villages where above-ground nuclear tests have left generations scarred. Here, he describes what he saw for CNN.com.
“SEMEY, Kazakhstan (CNN) — Kazakhstan’s nuclear orphans are a distressing sight. The first child I met in the local orphanage was lying limply in his crib. His giant, pale head was perched on his tiny shoulders, covered in bed sores, like a grotesquely painted paper-mâché mask. Peering out, a pair of tiny black eyes darted around.
It took me a few seconds to understand what I was seeing. The doctor told me he was 4 years old.
Through the bars in the next crib, I saw another child, twisted with deformities. His fragile legs and arms turned in impossible contortions.
These are the children of Kazakhstan’s terrifying nuclear past. Decades of Soviet nuclear testing unleashed a plague of birth defects……………………………Almost every family in Seriqkaisha’s village, 20 miles from the old test site, is affected — from cancers to impotency to birth defects and other deformities………………
……………The genetic defections and illnesses that afflict so many here are frequently a source of shame. The doctor told me that people hide their deformed family members from outsiders. For decades, they have felt like animals in a zoo, she said, and had grown to distrust prying eyes.
The region also has one of the highest suicide rates in the world, according to local health officials. Tragically, many young men who discover they are impotent — one of the effects of nuclear fallout — end their own lives………………….
…………………..The problem of defects is so big, there’s even a museum of mutations at the regional medical institute back in Semey, the largest city near the old nuclear testing site. It’s a small room filled with jars containing deformed fetuses and human organs preserved in formaldehyde.
It’s hard to look at them — babies with bulging eyes and malformed brains, or conjoined twins locked in a contorted embrace.
The head of the institute, Tolebae Rakhipbekov, showed me around and told me how this house was more than just a grim collection of anomalies It was the reality for some parents, and a real fear for everyone who lives here……………………….”.
500 YEAR NUKE CURSE NUKE TEST VICTIMS: THE PROOF Shock new study of more than 1,000 veterans proves soldiers who were forced to watch British A-bomb tests in the 1950s and 1960s will pass on crippling health problems to families for 20 generations
Sunday Mirror UK By Susie Boniface 16/09/2007 – “A major scientific study into the families of soldiers used as guinea pigs in Britain’s first nuclear tests shows they will suffer acute health problems for TWENTY generations.
Relatives of up to 22,000 servicemen who witnessed tests in the 1950s have been cursed with massive genetic damage which will be passed on for at least 500 years.
The shocking new study shows how children and grandchildren suffer limb deformities, tumours, heart, eye and hearing problems, epilepsy, autism, brain deformities, twisted spines, missing organs, extra fingers and toes and a range of rare conditions
The survey, of more than 1,000 veterans and their families, has just been completed by radiation expert Dr Chris Busby of the University of Liverpool. The statistics show that compared to the rest of the population children of veterans are:
Ten times more likely to have an inherited genetic deformity
Five times more likely to die as infants
Three times more likely to be stillborn And their grandchildren are:
Eight times more likely to inherit a defect
Twice as likely to get childhood cancer
The findings show that the men who witnessed Britain’s first atom-bomb tests have “scrambled DNA” which has been passed to their descendants. The study, the biggest scientific survey ever carried out on the veterans’ descendants, provides the most damning evidence yet of the horrific legacy of the tests….
….Now campaigners say this new study is the final proof of the horrific cost to their health.
Hundreds of trial atomic and hydrogen bombs were detonated in the South Pacific, America and Australia between 1952 and 1967 as Britain joined the nuclear arms race.
The veterans in Australia and New Zealand are still fighting our MoD for compensation as their governments say it is our responsibility.
Dr Busby says the effects on the British men were similar to those seen in the aftermath of the Chernobyl nuclear power station leak in 1986. He says: ‘The main finding is that the grandchildren are suffering at almost the same rate as the children of veterans. In normal genetics, with each generation the effects would be less as new DNA is added to the family line. But with radiation exposure, what happens is that a kind of instability is passed down – like an alarming message in a bottle passed from mother to child. It tells the child to scramble its genes randomly in all directions, so you get many children with strange deformities’….”.
U.S. nuke work afflicted 36,500 Americans Rocky Mountain News.com By Ann Imse August 31, 2007
“The U.S. nuclear weapons program has sickened 36,500 Americans and killed more than 4,000, the Rocky Mountain News has determined from government figures.
Those numbers reflect only people who have been approved for government compensation. They include people who mined uranium, built bombs and breathed dust from bomb tests.
Many of the bomb-builders, such as those at the Rocky Flats plant near Denver, have never applied for compensation or were rejected because they could not prove their work caused their illnesses. Congressional hearings are in the works to review allegations of unfairness and delays in the program for weapons workers.
More than 15,000 of the 36,500 are workers who made atomic weapons. They were exposed to radiation and toxic chemicals that typically took years to trigger cancer or lung disease. Others were civilians living near the Nevada test site during above-ground nuclear tests; soldiers and workers at test sites; and uranium miners and millers who breathed in radioactive dust until 1972 when the government stopped buying uranium………..
……………..At least 4,000 of the 36,500 died. This number reflects cases where survivors could be paid only if their relative died of the covered illness.
Many more of the 36,500 likely also have died of the deadly diseases triggered by their work. But in most of the compensation programs, the government does not track deaths or cause of death, so the true number who gave their lives to support the nuclear bomb program probably will never be known.
Some were contaminated through accident or ignorance. But government documents have revealed that officials at times risked the health of civilians, soldiers and workers because they believed national security demanded it.
One early Atomic Energy Commission director, Lewis Strauss, wrote to a civilian who had been downwind of atomic test fallout that the danger of fallout was ‘a small sacrifice compared to the infinite greater evil of the use of nuclear bombs in war’…………….”
Chernobyl’s grim legacy lingers in Brooklyn By Mattlee Davis – COURIER LIFE 06/02/2007 “It began 21 years ago in the Ukraine and became known as the worst nuclear reactor disaster in history, but the effects of the Chernobyl nuclear accident have traveled world-wide and have made their way to Brooklyn’s doorstep ‘My specialty is thyroid surgery, and we started seeing people coming in who were from the Chernobyl area with thyroid problems,’ said Daniel Branovan, M.D. of the NY Eye and Ear Infirmary in Manhattan.
Branovan said there are between 150 and 200 thousand people in the NY metropolitan area who come from the affected region, and the ‘cancer rates are going up and up,’ he said………………………..The same people who migrated to Brooklyn and other boroughs from Chernobyl have the same risk as those who chose to stay in the Ukraine, according to Branovan.”The rates of cancer are going up over there [in the Ukraine] and the same thing must be happening here.
…...thyroid cancer – a cancer of the butterfly-shaped thyroid gland under the Adam’s apple – is the greatest known consequence of the Chernobyl nuclear accident. In fact, Branovan stated that scientists know from experience – referring to the World War II bombing of Hiroshima – that it takes about 20 years for to thyroid cancer to appear……………. . “
New UN Radiation Warning: Skull & Crossbones - medGadget February 21, 2007 “……A skull and crossbones, a running person and radiating ionizing waves, all on a deep red triangle, joined other more common warning symbols today as part of a United Nations effort to reduce needless deaths and serious injuries from accidental exposure to large radioactive sources………………………
.The symbol is the result of a five-year project conducted in 11 countries and was tested with different population groups — mixed ages, varying educational backgrounds, male and female — to ensure that its message of ‘danger – stay away’ was crystal clear and understood by all……….”
Depleted Uranium: Pernicious Killer Keeps on Killing - Global Research, by Dr. Craig Etchison February 20, 2007 - “…………………something insidious happens when DU munitions are used. How to explain the exploding rates of cancer, birth defects, and radiation poisoning among Iraqis in the Basra region? How to explain a Department of Veterans Affairs study of 21,000 veterans of the Gulf War that found rates of birth defects were twice as great for male vets and three times as great for female vets who served in the Gulf War compared to vets who did not? How to explain a Washington Post report in January of 2006 that 518,00 of the 580,000 Gulf War veterans were on disability, over half on permanent disability. How to explain over 13,000 dead Gulf War veterans when only 250 were killed and 7,000 injured in the war itself?…………………………………………….
A major problem with most DU assessment is that many effects of alpha radiation on cell structure, including DNA proteins that release biochemical signals and important cell metabolic enzymes, are ignored by nuclear physicists who use dose estimates based on uranium dust in mines, a completely inappropriate approach for a battlefield aerosol. Many medical professionals believe the protein problem is responsible for various neurodegenerative diseases evidenced by Gulf War veterans.
As Dr. Bertell writes, ‘Heavy metal exposure (including uranium) can cause loss of cellular immunity, autoimmune diseases, joint disease such as rheumatoid arthritis, and diseases of the kidneys, circulatory system, and nervous system…. Decline in functional mitochondria is most damaging to the heart, kidney, brain, liver, and skeletal muscle, in that order.’ Loss of cellular immunity opens an organism up to viral, bacterial, and mycoplasmal invasions connected to a variety of diseases’.
Equally important, scientists have found that tiny amounts of DU too small to be toxic and only mildly radioactive seem to reinforce each other in terms of causing cancers and risk to offspring. The Armed Forces Radiobiological Research Institute has even admitted that DU can cause cancer……………………….”
TIMELINE27 June 07 Report details rise in radiation pollution, cancer deaths near Georgia nuclear plantJune 07 USA Radiation and Public Health Project finds high strontium-90 radiation levels in children living near nuke plantsMay 07 UK official documents reveal radiation experiments on humans in 1960sMay 07 UK Parliamentary Inquiry into radiation illnesses in military due to bomb tests in 50sMay 07 US govt may exhume bodies of nuke weapons workers for radiation-caused deathsFeb 07 UN – New radiation warning signFeb 2007 Department of Veterans Affairs study of 21,000 veterans of the Gulf War – high rates of birth defects13 Sept 2001 Elevated radiation readings downwind from the Pentagon U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) confirmed that the Pentagon crash site rubble was radioactive and that the probable contaminant was Depleted Uranium (DU).
Trail of Nuclear Tears, Exposong Nuclear’s Horrid Truths (Part one) OpEd News.com June 18, 2007 - “……………………………There is no bigger myth within the nuclear energy than their claim that nuclear energy and commercial reactors are and environmentally friendly CO2 source of electricity. From the very beginning of the uranium fuel cycle, the massive creation of and dumping of CO2 into our environment begins, as well as a trail of far deadly contaminants.
First, you have to get the uranium out of the ground…uranium mining is very equipment intensive, and the large pieces of equipment use MASSIVE amounts of fossil fuels. Further, it takes tons and tons of of ore containing trace amounts of uranium to get enough actual raw uranium to be of any use. This means said materials have to be carted to processing plants…again, said transporting of such vast quantities of these raw start up materials burn up vast amounts of carbon based fuels, adding to nuclear CO2 contributions to Global Warming.
Once the materials have been mined, they then must be milled, or crushed. These milling operations are usually fairly close to the mines. Once the materials are crushed, various impurities are removed (creating vast amounts of waste), and the end product of this segment of the processing creates what is known as yellowcake. This yellow cake is then packaged into 55 gallon drums, and is ready…TO BE SHIPPED AGAIN, thus using even more fossil fuels………Depending on the country, and enrichment means to be used, the uranium trioxide goes through even more processing at a conversion plant……At this point, the materials are ready…TO BE SHIPPED AGAIN, this time to a fuel fabrication facility
…………………….Factor in the building of the nuclear facilities, and the vast amount of fossil fuels that will be burned in decommissioning, and it is obvious who the major contributor to Global Warming really is.
It would be nice if this was the end of nuclear energy’s CO2 contributions to the environment, but it is not. It would be nice if these CO2 emissions were the only contaminants and contributions to Global Warming that nuclear reactors created, but sadly, it is but the tip of the iceberg.
The fuel rods as one example still have to be SHIPPED to the reactor sites. Again, additional fossil fuels being burned up, and we have not seen one watt of electrical energy produced as of yet….”.
Climate change puts nuclear energy into hot water - Could climate change be the latest jinx on nuclear power? International Herald Tribune By James Kanter May 20, 2007 PARIS:“.……………there is a less well-known side of nuclear power: It requires great amounts of cool water to keep reactors operating at safe temperatures. That is worrying if the rivers and reservoirs which many power plants rely on for water are hot or depleted because of steadily rising air temperatures.
If temperatures soar above average this summer – let alone steadily increase in years to come, as many scientists predict – many nuclear plants could face a dilemma: Either cut output or break environmental rules, in either case hurting their reputation with customers and the public.
Governments and the energy industry are just starting to grasp the vulnerabilities of water-hungry power plants. If the complications prove serious in countries where inland sources of water are growing scarce, where seafront nuclear stations are unwelcome or impractical and where alternative cooling technologies are too expensive, it could take the bloom off of nuclear as a source of clean energy and leave it more unclear than ever where sizable new power supplies might come from.
We’re going to have to solve the climate-change problem if we’re going to have nuclear power, not the other way around’ said David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer who is with the Union of Concerned Scientists.’As the climate warms up, nuclear power plants are less able to deliver,’ he said.
France relies on nuclear power more than any other country and is held up by advocates of nuclear power as a model for how to generate enough cheap and reliable electricity to sell surpluses abroad while reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
But global warming is exposing France to new risks………………
Officials at Électricité de France have been preparing for a possible rerun of a ferocious heat wave that struck during 2003, the hottest summer on record in France, when temperatures of some rivers rose sharply and a number of reactors had to curtail output or shut down altogether.
In countries like Australia, where the government is considering introducing nuclear power, and the United States, which gets about a fifth of its electricity from nuclear power, some officials and operators warn of similar pitfalls if plants are built in areas where there already are water shortages………”
Nuclear risk up in a warming world - (edie news summary 25 January 2007) “Higher risk of flooding in a warming world must be factored into plans for new nuclear power stations in the UK, the Met Office has said. Rising sea levels, stronger winds and more powerful storm surges caused by climate change would strongly affect nuclear plants, traditionally built in remote coastal areas where cooling water is always at hand.The Met Office study, commissioned by nuclear power company British Energy to assess the impacts of climate change on nuclear plants, concluded that the stations would need better flood protection and coastal defences, and would also need to be built further inland……….”
Nuclear power faces stormy seas threat- Alert Net By Daniel Fineren LONDON, Jan 31 (Reuters) – “Dozens of nuclear power reactors around the world could be threatened by rising sea levels and violent storms……
Nuclear power plants need plentiful water for cooling so are usually near the sea or on rivers. All of the UK’s operational plants, most of Japan’s and many in the United States are on the coast……With sea levels likely to rise for at least the next 1,000 years, according to a United Nations report to be published on Friday, bolstering the flood defences of the world’s many coastal reactors looks set to become a more costly and time-consuming job — one that could last for centuries……………
.Nor are inland river-cooled reactors invulnerable to global warming. Hot weather makes it difficult to keep them cool and operate safely. The hotter it gets, the more frequently they may have to close, just when power demand is highest.”
16 June 07 Report: nuclear unable to curb global warming 25 Jan 07 UK Met Office study – nuke plants at risk from rising sea levels2003 – France- reactors shut down in heat wave
Iraq’s Wrecked Environment THE INDYDEPENDENT By Jeffrey St. Clair and Joshua Fran 15 March 08 – “The ecological effects of war, like its horrific toll on human life, are exponential. When the Bush administration (parts one and two) and its congressional allies sent troops to Iraq to topple Saddam Hussein’s regime, they not only ordered these men and women to commit crimes against humanity, they also commanded them to perpetrate crimes against nature. Former Chief United Nations Weapons Inspector Hans Blix, prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, said the environmental consequences of the Iraq war could be more ominous than the issue of war and peace itself. Blix was right.
Months of bombing during the first Gulf War by the United States and Great Britain left a deadly and insidious legacy: tons of shell casings, bullets and bomb fragments laced with depleted uranium. In all, the United States hit Iraqi targets with more than 970 radioactive bombs and missiles.
Depleted uranium (DU) is a rather benignsounding name for uranium-238, the trace element left behind when fissionable material is extracted from uranium-235 for nuclear reactors and weapons
For decades, this waste was a nuisance; by the late 1980s there were nearly a billion tons of the radioactive material piled at plutonium processing plants across the country. Then Pentagon weapons designers discovered a use for the tailings: they could be molded into bullets and bombs. Uranium is denser than lead, making it perfect for armorpenetrating weapons designed to destroy tanks, armored personnel carriers and bunkers. When tank-busting bombs explode, depleted uranium oxidizes into microscopic fragments that float through the air, carried on the desert winds for decades. Inhaled, the lethal bits of carcinogenic dust stick to the lungs, eventually wreaking havoc in the form of tumors, hemorrhages, ravaged immune systems, and leukemia.
More than 15 years later, the dire health consequences of our first radioactive bombing campaign in this region are coming into focus. Since 1990, the incidence rate of leukemia in Iraq has increased over 600 percent………………………………….”
South Africa: Paying the Price for Mining allafrica.com 15 February 2008 - “………….another more troubling legacy is emerging as an increasingly urgent problem: environmental contamination from over 100 years of mining that could severely pollute the country’s water, affecting the food chain and citizens’ health.
the urgency is real. As more mines close and more tests reveal hazardous contamination levels in sediment and local food samples, there is growing concern………
………………..The epicentre of the problem lies southwest of Johannesburg in a valley ringed by mines – both active and closed – where a small river called the Wonderfonteinspruit runs southwest from the mining town of Randfontein to Carletonville and Khutsong, and into the Mooi River, which provides water for Potchefstroom, a large university town.
Over 10 years of scientific studies have established that the sediment in the Wonderfonteinspruit is contaminated with radioactive uranium and high levels of other heavy metals in wastewater discharged from local mines…………
……….environmental activists charge that while laws are now in place, enforcement is not. …………
…………….A second source of pollution is runoff and wind-eroded particles from slime dams – soil residue from within the mines that often contains radioactive elements and heavy metals.
Wind-blown radioactive dust particles from the slime dams could also pose “significant radiation exposure” through inhalation or by contaminating agricultural crops,
Pancevo named Europe’s most polluted town 7 February 2008 | 16:07 | Source: B92 BELGRADE – Pancevo, on the outskirts of Belgrade, is Europe’s most polluted town. - “……………………..Waste, whether it’s chemical or nuclear, is one of the most serious pollutants and is a problem that requires an urgent solution, thinks Miodrag Pantelic, a professor at the Technology Faculty in Cacak.
‘I think we devote very little attention to this, we leave it to the next generation. They should solve the problem of nuclear waste, we’ve not done anything there. That sort of waste is harmful in terms of both bacteria and viruses, pollutes our land and water, and enters our bodies via the food chain, so that our bodies are polluted,’ Pantelic said.
Slobodan Neškovic from the Center for National Security Strategic Investigations says it is necessary to adopt a national interests strategy, with a new national security concept to tackle the problem of pollution.
‘This new concept would put at its forefront individual security, as well as concepts for sustainable development and ecological security’…………………………………………… “
We are seeing the death of nuclear power’s precious myth ZNet Harry Fuller and Heather Clancy 24 Jan 08 – “………………………………..’Good old dependable nuclear power, Always there chruning out the clean electricity. Just as saturdy as a train load of coal, but none of that CO2. Well, forget the problems with indisposable nuclear waste.
Think about the water. ……..how precious water is becoming. Especially critical will be the problems of water as climate change makes the weather more extreme and less dependable.
Take right now, right here in the U.S. where 24 nuclear plants may face shutdown because they are too thirsty in the parched southweastern states. And we can’t just open a giant spigot and give ‘em more water. The arid western states already use huge amounts of energy just to move water from where it is to where it’ll be used. Like Vegas and Phoenix sitting serenely in the desert using water pumped from afar, or below the earth
Oh, and those dependable nuclear plants can’t use abundant salt water. They need stuff that’s at least as clean as what you’d use to do your laundry or water the garden. So the drought is a big “oops” for nuclear just they’d hoped we’d gotten over Chernobyl in our flurry or worry about how we’ll power our air conditioners next summer…………………………”
Disastrous history of nuclear fuels
RUTLAND HERALD ROBERT LINCOLNJanuary 24, 2008 – “…………………………………As for the ludicrous claims on the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel, reprocessing spent nuclear fuel was supposed to be one alternative to lots and lots of mining forever and forever. The biggest experiment in reprocessing was at Sellafield in Britain. In 2005, after decades of contamination and leaks and general spewing of horrible matter into the ocean, air, and land around the reprocessing plant, Sellafield was shut down because a bigger-than-usual leak of fuel dissolved in nitric acid – some tens of thousands of gallons – was discovered. It contained enough plutonium to make about 20 nuclear bombs.
A nuclear dump site just six miles from the famous Champagne vineyards in France is leaking radioactive waste into the groundwater. According to the French nuclear safety authority, the ‘wall of a storage cell fissured’ while concrete was being added to a recent layer of nuclear waste. It showed levels of radioactivity leaking from another dump site run by the same company in Normandy – at up to 90 times above European safety limits. That waste has seeped into underground water used by farmers, with contamination spreading into the countryside and threatening dairy production. The Champagne site will receive a total of 4 thousand terabequerels of tritium — more than three times the amount of tritium waste as the dump site in Normandy………………………………………….”.
THE HEALING ISLAND OR THE RADIOACTIVE DIE-LAND?
Indybay.org North Coast by Marya Mann, Ph. D. ( DrMaryaM [at] aol.com )
20 Oct 2007 - “…………………..(Hawaii) Nobody wants to think about the deadly invisible uranium particles spreading death and mutilation around the world, but the U. S. and other military forces are illegally using nuclear weapons that do just that. They threaten to spread “death by breath” everywhere – unless we tell the U.S. Army to stop! Now! In Hawaii! ………………Hawaiian residents started thinking about the toxic wastes of war 60 years ago when the U. S. Military dumped 2000 fifty-five gallon drums of radioactive toxins off the coast of Oahu at Pearl Harbor. A mixed crew of Hawaiians – hula dancers as well as housewives, retired Marines as well as nurses — are still thinking about the effects of war as they fight the U. S. Military in a David-and-Goliath confrontation they hope will change the fate of the world.
The group is Protect Hawaii (http://www.protecthawaii.ws) and the immediate threat is the U. S. Army, which plans to station about 320 19-ton vehicles and 4,000 soldiers in Hawaii. The Stryker Brigade Combat Team tanks carry Depleted Uranium (DU) weapons, which are Radioactive Uranium (RU). When these radioactive uranium munitions are fired, they spread aerosols into the nearby atmosphere, surface water, flora, fauna, and the entire food chain. Two to five years after exposure, local animals and humans often develop nerve disorders, bleeding, cancers, and tumors. Then deadly uranium particles flow farther into the air, lifting higher into the troposphere, eventually spreading around the globe, resulting in multiple cancers, leukemia, and birth defects all over the planet.
Current medical problems found in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Bosnia where the U. S. uses weapons of mass destruction — neurological disorders, cancers, birth defects, tumors, and bleeding gums — are now showing up in Hawaii. On the islands of Oahu and the Big Island, known by native Hawaiians and tourists as the ‘Healing Island,’ animal tumors, nerve spasms, and other markers for radiation poisoning have alarmed residents……………………………………………………………………”
What’s wrong with nuclear power? Well, a lot, actually...VUE WEEKLY 7 Sept 07 LEILA DARWISH and HELEN LA - “…………………………………………some people have proposed using nuclear energy to fuel unfettered tar sands expansion.
Unfortunately, many of Alberta’s government and industry leaders are currently supporting the latter option. That is, instead of choosing innovation and conservation as a means to ensure a safe, healthy and clean energy future for all Albertans, these representatives have chosen to pursue one of Canada’s most dangerous, polluting and inefficient energy options. Even more alarming is how quickly nuclear proponents have been mobilizing in an effort to build multiple reactors and have them online as soon as possible. Having been rejected already by tar sands companies that recognized the liability and unfeasibility of nuclear power in Alberta, nuclear proponents are currently campaigning to gain support and clientele in communities across the province…………………………………….Nuclear energy was not recognized as a clean energy source in the Kyoto protocol but it continues to be touted as a global solution to climate change. With the threat of nuclear energy looming in Alberta it is important that all the facts around this dangerous and dirty energy source are known.
Beyond the environmentally destructive mining of uranium, nuclear energy produces (both in extraction and production) large quantities of radioactive waste-spent fuel from CANDU reactors contains over 200 deadly radioactive elements. Plutonium, for example, remains radioactive for over 24 400 years. These highly toxic byproducts make long-term storage a serious political and environmental catastrophe. There is not one safe and secure disposal option for the highly radioactive waste produced by nuclear power stations. And the history of Canadian (CANDU) reactors is plagued with problems, with many of them breaking down early or being decommissioned, as the costs of repairs are far greater than initial startup costs. It is also critical to note that accidents do happen, with 22 accidents occurring since the catastrophic incident at Chernobyl.
Plutonium can be released into the environment as a result of nuclear energy development. Concern over the harmful effects of plutonium is growing because of discoveries about the subtle effects of low-level radiation. Plutonium may be many times more dangerous than previously thought.
Besides, at every step of nuclear power generation greenhouse gases are emitted. Approximately 240 000 to 366 000 tonnes of carbon dioxide are produced every year from plant construction, uranium mining, milling uranium ore, road transportation, fuel fabrication, conversion and refining activities. Beyond these direct emissions, low-grade uranium mined from Saskatchewan is upgraded, largely in the United States, using coal fired power-the most carbon intensive energy producer………..
………….Too often local governments and community members are only presented with the slick advertising and false promises of people who stand to gain substantially from fostering a nuclear power industry in Alberta…………………………….”Radiation Degrades Nuclear Waste-Containing Materials Faster Than Expected - All American Patriots: Technology 11/1/2007 “………………………….a team from the University of Cambridge and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory reported in the Jan. 11 issue of Nature. ………………………..The new study used nuclear magnetic resonance, or NMR, to show that the effects of radiation from plutonium incorporated into the mineral zircon rapidly degrades the mineral’s crystal structure………………This could lead to swelling, loss of physical strength and possible cracking of the mineral as soon as 210 years, well before the radioactivity had decayed to safe levels, said lead author and Cambridge earth scientist Ian Farnan.”
Radionuclides spreading around the world - THE NAVHIND TIMES 6/1/2007 .”……….The IAEA, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, reports that it does not control turnover of radionuclides because they are outside its sphere of monitoring…………………The public was shocked to find out that the IAEA only controls nuclear materials, that is, those, which are used in the production of a classic nuclear bomb. A dirty bomb, the terrorists’ dream, is outside their control………….Meanwhile, radionuclides and other radioactive materials have spread so much that it will not be easy to establish rigid control over them. Moreover, it is civilian radioactive sources used in medicine, metallurgy, agriculture, mining, and machine building that are becoming more dangerous than strictly controlled nuclear facilities.”TIMELINE – 27 June 07 Uranium dust found to travel 6 km, last 25 years
7 June 07 radioactive element tritium, found in underground waters near French dump site 6 Sept 06 High l;evels of plutonium found in Los Alamos water
21 Feb 07 High uranium levels found in wells at Phelps Dodge uranium mine11 Jan 07 Report: Radiation Degrades Nuclear Waste-Containing Materials Faster Than Expected6 Jan 07 UN reports Radionuclides spreading around the world