Group items tagged

BRASILIA, Brazil, May 20 (UPI) -- Brazil soon will have enough processed uranium for its own nuclear plants. Alfredo Trajan Filho, president of the Nuclear Industries of Brazil, or INB, predicts that by 2012 the country will have the means to supply its two nuclear power plants, Angra 1 and 2, with enriched uranium.

Brazil and Argentina are intent on addressing the creation of a binational nuclear energy agency when presidents Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, from Argentina and Brazil respectively, meet next month in Recife, the capital of the Brazilian northeastern state of Pernambuco.

Brazil has become one of just a handful of states to enrich uranium in a controversial bid to boost nuclear power production and ensure future energy independence. In an exclusive interview with the Huffington Post, Nuclear Industries of Brazil (INB) spokeswoman Helena Beltrão confirmed that several of the 10 specially designed centrifuges housed at an enrichment plant in Resende, Rio de Janeiro, would be up and running by the end of March.

Brazil will produce enriched uranium from next month in a factory in the State of Rio de Janeiro, the Brazilian Nuclear Industries (INB) said Tuesday. Brazil will use technology developed by the Brazilian Marine Technology Center in Sao Paulo (CTMSP) and the Institute of Energy and Nuclear Research (IPEN) to produce enriched uranium, according to Samuel Fayad, a high-ranking official at INB.

Russia has offered Brazil modern methods for the production of uranium, new nuclear power plants and superconducting technologies, the CEO of the Rosatom state nuclear corporation said Friday. "The first direction of cooperation is the prospecting and production of natural uranium," said Sergei Kiriyenko, who is in Brazil to lead the Russia Days events.

The Brazilian government has authorized the company, Electronuclear, to go back to work on the nation's third nuclear power plant. Work on the Angra 3 reactor, near Rio de Janeiro, has been stalled for 22 years by a lack of money and political issues.

Two nuclear power stations near a city in southern Brazil hit by deadly landslides may be temporarily shut down, the mayor has said. Mayor Tuca Jordao, of Angra dos Reis, said main roads had been blocked by landslides and could obstruct any evacuation in the case of an emergency. He said the plants - Angra I and Angra II - were not damaged or threatened but should be shut down as a precaution. A landslide that hit a nearby resort on Friday killed at least 29 people.

Two nuclear power stations near a city in southern Brazil hit by deadly landslides may be temporarily shut down, the mayor has said. Mayor Tuca Jordao, of Angra dos Reis, said main roads had been blocked by landslides and could obstruct any evacuation in the case of an emergency. He said the plants - Angra I and Angra II - were not damaged or threatened but should be shut down as a precaution. A landslide that hit a nearby resort on Friday killed at least 29 people.

The Brazilian Mines and Energy minister, Edison Lobão, said today in Angra dos Reis (state of Rio de Janeiro) that Brazil has already decided to give priority to the resumption of the country's nuclear program. Some 60 nuclear power plants should be built in the next 50 years. Each unit should have generation capacity for 1,000 megawatts.

Brazil is to build a further four nuclear power plants in addition to finishing the halted Angra III plant, local media said Tuesday. Two plants will be built in the northeast and the other two will be built in the southeast, where three Angra plants are already located, local media said, adding that the four plants are expected to begin operating by 2014.

French nuclear engineering group Areva has been awarded six contracts in Brazil. The nuclear major received nearly $90 million from Brazilian utility Eletronuclear to carry out extensive service on the Angra-1 and Angra-2 nuclear power plants in Angra dos Reis in the Brazilian state of Rio de Janeiro.

Rio de Janeiro, May 8 (IANS) Brazil plans to move ahead over the next few years with an ambitious nuclear programme that includes power plants and a nuclear submarine, EFE news agency reported Thursday quoting a minister. Speaking to foreign reporters Wednesday, science and technology minister Sergio Rezende said that the government had been discussing the entire programme and President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva "is close to signing an executive order to create a committee to look after the programme."

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

"Agreement may halt UN sanctions against Tehran, although move will do little to slow Iran's nuclear progress A deal brokered by Turkey and Brazil, in which Iran will ship out over a tonne of enriched uranium in return for fuel rods for a nuclear research reactor, could stop new UN sanctions on Tehran, diplomats said yesterday. News of the deal left western capitals scrambling for a coherent and concerted response. It is similar to an agreement they have pushed for during the past six months, yet most observers said it would do little to slow Iran's nuclear progress."

If a friend asked to dump his garbage in your yard because he knew you would know what to do with it, what would you say? Probably, no thanks. That's what the U.S. should say to countries that want to send their nuclear waste here for processing and storage. Thankfully, Sen. Lamar Alexander and U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon are sponsoring legislation in Congress to keep other countries' nuclear waste out of the U.S. No other nation allows the importation and storage of another country's nuclear waste. We shouldn't, either. The controversy arose when a private Utah company, EnergySolutions, asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for permission to bring in 20,000 tons of low-level radioactive waste from Italy. The company would process the waste in Tennessee and store the resulting 1,600 tons at a private facility 80 miles west of Salt Lake City. The NRC also said it has applications from Mexico and Brazil to do the same thing.

If a friend asked to dump his garbage in your yard because he knew you would know what to do with it, what would you say? Probably, no thanks. That's what the U.S. should say to countries that want to send their nuclear waste here for processing and storage. Thankfully, Sen. Lamar Alexander and U.S. Rep. Bart Gordon are sponsoring legislation in Congress to keep other countries' nuclear waste out of the U.S. No other nation allows the importation and storage of another country's nuclear waste. We shouldn't, either. The controversy arose when a private Utah company, EnergySolutions, asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for permission to bring in 20,000 tons of low-level radioactive waste from Italy. The company would process the waste in Tennessee and store the resulting 1,600 tons at a private facility 80 miles west of Salt Lake City. The NRC also said it has applications from Mexico and Brazil to do the same thing.

In the latest twist to the growing nuclear debate in Latin America, Uruguay accused Argentina of neglecting due process of consultation before going ahead with plans to build a new nuclear power station. The first hints of a developing row over Argentina's nuclear plans came nearly a month after Brazil unveiled plans to expand its uranium processing operations, possibly with sights set on export potential, and Venezuela's pledge to explore nuclear energy. Uruguay's open criticism of Argentina, conveyed indirectly through the media, came within a week of near resolution of a 5-year dispute between the two countries on an eucalyptus pulp mill near the shared Uruguay river."

Despite long-standing public concern about the safety of nuclear energy, more and more people are realizing that it may be the most environmentally friendly way to generate large amounts of electricity. Several nations, including Brazil, China, Egypt, Finland, India, Japan, Pakistan, Russia, South Korea and Vietnam, are building or planning nuclear plants. But this global trend has not as yet extended to the U.S., where work on the last such facility began some 30 years ago. If developed sensibly, nuclear power could be truly sustainable and essentially inexhaustible and could operate without contributing to climate change. In particular, a relatively new form of nuclear technology could overcome the principal drawbacks of current methods-namely, worries about reactor accidents, the potential for diversion of nuclear fuel into highly destructive weapons, the management of dangerous, long-lived radioactive waste, and the depletion of global reserves of economically available uranium. This nuclear fuel cycle would combine two innovations: pyrometallurgical processing (a high-temperature method of recycling reactor waste into fuel) and advanced fast-neutron reactors capable of burning that fuel. With this approach, the radioactivity from the generated waste could drop to safe levels in a few hundred years, thereby eliminating the need to segregate waste for tens of thousands of years.

One hundred survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki returned to Tokyo on Tuesday from a four-month voyage around the world to call for the abolition of nuclear weapons and share their experiences with global audiences. During the voyage, organized by the nongovernmental organization Peace Boat, the survivors visited 20 countries to meet with the local people to seek nuclear abolition. In Danang, Vietnam, in September they visited victims of Agent Orange, a chemical dropped by U.S. forces during the Vietnam War, at the Rehabilitation Center for Victims of Agent Orange, while in Papeete, Tahiti, in December, they met with those who were affected by French nuclear tests at the Mururoa Atoll, according to Peace Boat. From Japan, 94 survivors participated in the voyage, with four from South Korea, two from Brazil, and one each from Australia, Canada and Mexico, according to Peace Boat.

EnergySolutions spokeswoman Jill Sigal took issue with my last column about her company. "I'm telling you, you have a false statement in your column," Sigal said. Specifically, she challenged this line: "The company has been quietly preparing a spot for contaminated laundry residue from a reactor in Brazil."

Even as debate has roiled for months over a proposal to bury radioactive waste from Italy in Utah, plans for a shipment from South America have been quietly in the works. But the plan to bring in contaminated laundry waste from a nuclear reactor in Brazil appears dead on arrival. No sooner was the proposal revealed publicly Wednesday than a regional oversight panel made clear its intentions to tell federal regulators the foreign waste won't be allowed at the EnergySolutions Inc. landfill in Tooele County.

Even as debate has roiled for months over a proposal to bury radioactive waste from Italy in Utah, plans for a shipment from South America have been quietly in the works. But the plan to bring in contaminated laundry waste from a nuclear reactor in Brazil appears dead on arrival. No sooner was the proposal revealed publicly Wednesday than a regional oversight panel made clear its intentions to tell federal regulators the foreign waste won't be allowed at the EnergySolutions Inc. landfill in Tooele County.