Group items tagged

"Renowned Canadian author and historian Norman Leach will be visiting Terrace this week to speak about his book 'Broken Arrow-America's First Lost Nuclear Weapon' to mark the 60th anniversary of the historic aviation accident. Leach will be lecturing across the Northwest to schools, museums, libraries and community centers from Houston to Terrace to inspire, students and adults alike to develop a healthy interest in their community's local history. On the eve of Valentine's Day, 1950, an American Strategic Air Command B-36 bomber loaded with an atomic bomb, was flying a simulated bombing run from Alaska to San Francisco. "

"Events surrounding the atomic bombs dropped on Japan in 1945 have been recounted, analyzed and moralized by so many others that having Pellegrino reconstruct them implies opportunism once again. Even the attached bibliography appears to attest to this wordsmith's knack at resurrecting history in time for the 65th anniversary of the devastation of two cities that killed almost 200,000 residents."

Beyond ecological imperialism Climate change isn't just a battle between rich and poor - it shows how an obsession with economic growth is a dead end o guardian.co.uk, Monday 21 December 2009 12.30 GMT So the Copenhagen summit did not deliver any hope of substantive change, or even any indication that the world's leaders are sufficiently aware of the vastness and urgency of the problem. But is that such a surprise? Nothing in the much-hyped runup to the summit suggested that the organisers and participants had genuine ambitions to change course and stop or reverse a process of clearly unsustainable growth. Part of the problem is that the issue of climate change is increasingly portrayed as that of competing interests between countries. Thus, the summit has been interpreted variously as a fight between the "two largest culprits" - the US and China - or between a small group of developed countries and a small group of newly emerging countries (the group of four - China, India, Brazil and South Africa), or at best between rich and poor countries. The historical legacy of past growth in the rich countries that has a current adverse impact is certainly keenly felt in the developing world. It is not just the past: current per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the developed world are still many multiples of that in any developing country, including China. So the attempts by northern commentators to lay blame on some countries for derailing the result by pointing to this discrepancy are seen in most developing countries as further evidence of an essentially colonial outlook. But describing this as a fight between countries misses the essential point: that the issue is really linked to an economic system - capitalism - that is crucially dependent upon rapid growth as its driving force, even if this "growth" does not deliver better lives for the people. So there is no questioning of the supposition that rich countries with declining populations mu

Beyond ecological imperialism Climate change isn't just a battle between rich and poor - it shows how an obsession with economic growth is a dead end o guardian.co.uk, Monday 21 December 2009 12.30 GMT So the Copenhagen summit did not deliver any hope of substantive change, or even any indication that the world's leaders are sufficiently aware of the vastness and urgency of the problem. But is that such a surprise? Nothing in the much-hyped runup to the summit suggested that the organisers and participants had genuine ambitions to change course and stop or reverse a process of clearly unsustainable growth. Part of the problem is that the issue of climate change is increasingly portrayed as that of competing interests between countries. Thus, the summit has been interpreted variously as a fight between the "two largest culprits" - the US and China - or between a small group of developed countries and a small group of newly emerging countries (the group of four - China, India, Brazil and South Africa), or at best between rich and poor countries. The historical legacy of past growth in the rich countries that has a current adverse impact is certainly keenly felt in the developing world. It is not just the past: current per capita greenhouse gas emissions in the developed world are still many multiples of that in any developing country, including China. So the attempts by northern commentators to lay blame on some countries for derailing the result by pointing to this discrepancy are seen in most developing countries as further evidence of an essentially colonial outlook. But describing this as a fight between countries misses the essential point: that the issue is really linked to an economic system - capitalism - that is crucially dependent upon rapid growth as its driving force, even if this "growth" does not deliver better lives for the people. So there is no questioning of the supposition that rich countries with declining populations mu

"Most scientists in this field agree that there is danger even in small doses of radiation" You reported the view that radiation risks are exaggerated, but left out vital information on radiation protection (Radiation health threat overstated - Oxford professor, 11 January). The article relied upon and extensively cited a retired ­professor of particle physics, Wade ­Allison, who is neither a radiation ­biologist nor an epidemiologist, and is not in my view an expert in radiation risks. Indeed, the other three scientists quoted in the article pointedly refrained from supporting Allison. His sole contribution to the literature is a self-published book. An article alongside (Nuclear theory: the current consensus) states that "a single dose below 100 millisieverts (mSv) is usually considered safe", and later gives Allison's claim that "there is a threshold of about 200 mSv, below which the body can repair all DNA ­damage caused and, therefore, which is safe". But there is no safe dose of ­radiation: no matter how low it is, a small risk remains."

"Stimulus funding has moved the Department of Energy one step closer to closing the book on the Cold War-era P-Reactor facility at the Savannah River Site. With the installation, testing and startup of six evaporator units, SRS can begin removing about 4.6 million gallons of water from the 105-P Reactor Disassembly Basin - a phase of in-situ decommissioning. "The safe startup of the disassembly basin evaporators marks another milestone for this history-making Recovery Act project," said Ray Hannah, DOE federal project director of the P-Reactor Project. "Removing the water from the disassembly basin and readying it to be filled with grout are important steps in decommissioning this Cold-War relic." Six fuel oil-fired evaporators were installed in the Disassembly Basin's Transfer Bay and started up on April 7 to remove the basin water. An additional four evaporators will be installed in the Monitor Pin Room area of the basin and should be online in mid-May. "

"Israel's President Shimon Peres has denied a report which claims there was an alleged nuclear pact between Israel and apartheid South Africa. Documents to be published in a new book show Israel agreed to give South Africa nuclear weapons in 1975, the Guardian newspaper has reported. Mr Peres was Israel's defence minister at the time and was named in the Guardian article. "

17,000 British nationals could be evacuated as last ditch efforts are made to stop nuclear catastrophe Rich scramble to book private jets out the country as fleeing passengers pack Tokyo airport French say Japanese have 'visibly lost essential control' as they urge their citizens to get out Plans are being drawn up to evacuate every British national in Japan amid mounting fears of a nuclear catastrophe. Thousands of Britons were last night warned to leave Tokyo and all other areas under threat of radiation poisoning. The Foreign Office is even chartering additional planes to ensure that all British citizens can leave the country as thousands of terrified passengers cram into Tokyo airport attempting to flee. It comes as the Japanese authorities resorted to dumping water on over-heating reactors at the Fukushima nuclear plant from helicopters in a desperate last-ditch attempt to stop a catastrophic meltdown.

"* Govt to put about 5 trln yen ($62 bln) into compensation fund -lawmaker * Shareholders to be protected but dividend payment unlikely for 10 yrs -lawmaker * Tepco to post 1 trln yen annual net loss for year that ended Mar 31 -Nikkei * Tepco booking charges for scrapping reactors, tax asset writeoff -Nikkei (Adds Kyodo report on asset sale, streamlining) By Kiyoshi Takenaka and Taiga Uranaka TOKYO, May 11 (Reuters) - Japan's government is planning to inject about $62 billion into a fund to help Tokyo Electric Power compensate victims of the crisis at its nuclear plant and save Asia's largest utility from financial ruin. The scheme, set to be approved by the cabinet as early as Thursday, is designed to protect bondholders and will keep Tokyo Electric shares listed, although the utility will be forced to forgo dividend payments for several years, ruling party lawmakers briefed on the plan said on Wednesday. The plan is the result of weeks of wrangling among government officials, bankers and Tokyo Electric executives over who should foot the bill for the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, which was crippled by the March 11 earthquake and tsunami in northeastern Japan and is leaking radiation."

"The head of Japan's banking lobby said on Thursday that Tokyo Electric could become insolvent if parliament fails to pass a bailout bill by the end of September, when the operator of the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant closes books for the fiscal first half. Katsunori Nagayasu, chairman of the Japanese Bankers Association, told a regular news conference time is running out as the government panel on nuclear damages compensation is set to release guidelines around late July. "It will be known how much the compensation will be in rough figures, but if there is no (government) scheme for that then, Tokyo Electric could immediately become insolvent," he said. "And it will trigger a series of risks for the power industry and the markets and put a damper on Japan's reconstruction efforts," he said. "

During his campaign, Barack Obama lamented our over-reliance on fossil fuels and declared confidently that "the possibilities of renewable energy are limitless." He then called for American investment in "alternative sources of energy like wind power, and solar power, and advanced biofuels." To that list -- or maybe instead of it -- William Tucker would add "nuclear power." [Bookshelf] In "Terrestrial Energy," Mr. Tucker argues that nuclear power is the best option realistically available to us to reduce our national dependence on foreign oil and address the nettlesome matter of "greenhouse" gas emissions. About the other alternatives he is skeptical, believing that they will deliver too little energy at too high a cost. Mr. Tucker, a veteran journalist, has been writing about energy and the environment for some 30 years and knows whereof he speaks.

About a thousand feet below the desert at the Nevada Test site are some two kilometers of tunnels, labs, plutonium and scientists. Often among them is the president of National Security Technologies, Stephen Younger. "I feel perfectly safe there," says Younger, a Las Vegan since taking over the subcontractor NST in 2006. "The Test Site is pristine." Although there have been no nuclear tests since the 1992 Nuclear Testing and Comprehensive Test Ban, a lot still goes on at the Test Site, and a lot goes on in the mind of Younger, who is on a mission to educate people about nuclear weapons and nuclear politics.

City Council gets: Carbon Free and Nuclear Free: A Roadmap for U.S. Energy Policy Stockings filled with coal come by the Wyoming trainload to feed the furnaces powering CPS Energy's plants. But impending federal regulation of carbon emissions is causing utilities nationwide to wrestle with alternatives. CPS's position has been that natural-gas prices are too volatile. Solar's still too small. But does that imply nuclear is just right? San Antonio has been locked in stiff debate over that question this year. Local environmental and energy activists scored a key victory when they got language supporting the proposed doubling of the South Texas (Nuclear)Project stripped from CPS's May rate hike.

Money provided annually to Ocean County towns surrounding the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant to bolster nuclear accident response capabilities has dwindled during the past few years and in 2009 the funding will be about one-third of what it once was. The Treasury Department and State Police need to explain why. The funding, which comes from a special assessment on the state's two nuclear power plant operators, is supposed to go to local, county and state agencies to help pay for equipment and other expenses associated with nuclear security and safety. Ocean County has received around $700,000 in past years from the fund, but only $218,796 is allocated for 2009. The State Police, which distributes money to municipalities, won't say why. The residents of those communities deserve an answer and a full accounting of where every dollar will go in 2009 and where it has gone in the past.

The National Nuclear Security Administration announced today that 100 tons of highly enriched uranium -- enough for about 2,200 nuclear bombs -- had been downblended over the past decade to eliminate its weapons capability. All told, the U.S. government has designated 217 tons of HEU as "excess" and scheduled for downblending.