Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

"Cracked asphalt provides a stark reminder of the nonexistent margin for error at a controversial radioactive waste dump in West Texas. When state inspectors visited the site in Andrews County, they found cracks up to an inch wide in asphalt near canisters of radioactive material. While cracked asphalt is fairly inconsequential - and pretty much par for the course - when it comes to our city streets, it can be a dangerous proposition at a radioactive waste dump. A spokesman for Dallas-based Waste Control Specialists, which operates the low-level radioactive waste site, dismissed the cracks as superficial and said they have been repaired. But as the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has noted, that asphalt pad is an important safeguard against ground contamination. "

"Sweden is to build new nuclear power stations in defiance of a 1980 referendum when Swedes voted to phase out atomic power. After a debate in which Sweden's need for climate friendly, low carbon energy clashed with environmental concerns over atomic energy, Swedish MPs narrowly voted to build new nuclear reactor on Thursday night. "A few months ago, the climate threat dominated the environmental debate. Now it is the oil disaster in the Mexican Gulf that is sparking the world's interest and horror," said Andreas Carlgren, the Swedish environment minister during a heated debate. Related Articles * Eight new nuclear power stations planned for England * Warning signs on nuclear power * Honduras lifts overnight curfew * Iran election: 'unprecedented' turnout boosts challenge to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad * Britain's atomic test veterans remember nuclear tests of 1950s * Iran's president opens door to talks with US on nuclear programme "Both are really two sides of the same coin, namely, we must leave the dependency on oil and fossil energy behind." Construction will begin next year to replace the 10 ageing reactors that still produce 40 per cent of Sweden's electricity. But Sweden's centre-Left opposition, currently running neck and neck with the government in opinion polls ahead of elections is September, have vowed to reinstate the ban. "

"A Public Consultation on the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Bill 2010 on Wednesday held it unconstitutional and violative of the right to life and demanded that it be scrapped. The Bill is currently with the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Science and Technology, which in an advertisement on June 24 had called for wider consultations to include public opinion on the Bill. Organised by the University of Mumbai's Law Department, Greenpeace India and Human Rights Law Network (HRLN), the consultation is an attempt to put forward a strong people's mandate against the Bill by the time it comes up for discussion before the Standing Committee between July 13 to 17. "

"The weaknesses of federal regulatory agencies have been exposed by recent high-profile accidents. Guest columnist Tom Carpenter fears the Department of Energy will reduce its oversight of cleanup at the nation's nuclear waste sites.\n\nBy Tom Carpenter\n\nSpecial to The Times\n\nPREV of NEXT\n\n \n\nRelated\n\nMillions of gallons of oil gush continue to rush unabated from BP's mile-deep well in the Gulf of Mexico, and 11 workers are dead from the massive explosion that caused the biggest oil spill in decades. Weeks before this event, the news was dominated by the preventable explosion that killed 29 West Virginia coal miners.\n\nIn both cases, the not-so surprising news was that the mine and the oil rig had abysmal records of safety violations before the explosions yet were still allowed to operate by the captive regulatory agencies.\n\nWhere is the government accountability? It is the government's job to assure that ultra-hazardous industries operate safely and responsibly.\n\nIs nuclear next? The Department of Energy sits on the nation's biggest nuclear nightmare. Its inventories of highly radioactive and toxic wastes defy comprehension. Washingtonians are familiar with the DOE's No. 1 accomplishment, the Hanford nuclear site, which holds the lion's share of the nation's radioactive detritus. Suffice it to say that the escape of even a small fraction of such material into the environment would constitute a Chernobyl-sized catastrophe."

"Belarus seems to be finding it increasingly hard to sell its nuclear energy plans to European nations, both near and far. This time, Minsk's desire to build a nuclear power plant (NPP) close to the Lithuanian border was thwarted by vigorous objections from Austria: representatives of Austrian NGOs and federal authorities expressed a strong disapproval of Belarus's intent at a hearing in Vienna in mid-May. Hearings similar to the one that took place in Vienna have previously been held in the Lithuanian capital of Vilnius and Kiev, the Ukrainian capital. Ever since it first brought up the subject of building a nuclear power plant to a controversial Russian project, Belarus has been finding itself more and more hard-pressed to convince its neighbours that they have nothing to fear from the future site. For its location, Belarus has settled on the town of Ostrovets, in Grodno Region, just 23 kilometres off the Lithuanian border, and Lithuania has already made its position known, both as a matter of public opinion and on a state level: No, thank you, Minsk."

"In his June 3 letter, Dr. Forrest Remick uses deceptive and even inaccurate statements to suggest I wasn't straight about nuclear power. His many letters to newspapers suggest he is an unabashed cheerleader for nuclear power. While claiming we need an honest discussion, Remick ignores and distorts important facts. Not surprising. Remick worked for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). NRC typically promotes nuclear power at the expense of public interests. I discovered most NRC employees defend the nuclear industry they supposedly regulate, shamefully dismissing serious threats and harms. The Gulf disaster should remind everyone why people like Remick must be challenged and why it's critical to stop funding dangerous, dirty, and costly nuclear power altogether."

"Nearly three-quarters of opinion formers in Britain think the government should either scrap the country's nuclear weapons or look for a cheaper alternative, according to a poll published on Tuesday. Just under a third of business leaders, politicians, academics and journalists polled by YouGov for the Chatham House think tank said Britain should abandon its nuclear deterrent after it expires in 2024. This is higher than a fifth of ordinary voters polled by YouGov who want to scrap it. The replacement of Britain's submarine-launched Trident missile system is expected to cost at least 20 billion pounds, a sum critics say is unthinkable at a time of drastic spending cuts pushed by Prime Minister David Cameron."

"Between 1946 and 1958 the United States tested 66 nuclear weapons on or near Bikini and Enewetak atolls, which had previously been evacuated. Populations living elsewhere in the Marshall Islands archipelago were exposed to measurable levels of radioactive fallout from 20 of these tests. In this carefully considered analysis, National Cancer Institute (NCI) experts estimate that as much as 1.6% of all cancers among those residents of the Marshall Islands alive between 1948 and 1970 might be attributable to radiation exposures resulting from nuclear testing fallout. Due to uncertainly inherent to these analyses, the authors calculated a 90% confidence interval of 0.4% to 3.6%. Why did the NCI investigate this exposure? In June 2004, the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources asked the NCI to provide its expert opinion on the baseline cancer risk and number of cancers expected among residents of the Marshall Islands as a result of exposures to radioactive fallout from U.S. nuclear weapons tests that were conducted there from 1946 through 1958. In September 2004, the NCI provided the Committee with preliminary cancer risk estimates and a discussion of their basis in a report titled Estimation of the Baseline Number of Cancers Among Marshallese and the Number of Cancers Attributable to Exposure to Fallout from Nuclear Weapons Testing Conducted in the Marshall Islands. That analysis was based on a number of conservative assumptions designed to avoid underestimating the actual cancer risks and used information that could be collected quickly to provide a timely response. "

"The majority of Russians (60 percent) are against further nuclear disarmament, with numbers in favor dropping significantly since the end of the Soviet era, the Russia Public Opinion Research Center (VTsIOM) said on Thursday. Half of Russians believe the country needs nuclear weapons to assure its security in case of war, according to VTsIOM's latest survey. A quarter said nuclear weapons should be preserved to demonstrate Russia's political power, with only 4 percent saying the stockpile is needed to counter U.S. military potential."

Ten percent of 20 is two. Five percent is one. To make the deal go down at the Public Service Board level 1 percent of the 20 percent uprated Vermont Yankee power (in 2006 it went from a 540 Megawatt ((Mw)) to a 650 Mw. reactor) was sold to a small utility up north in Vermont at below-market rates. As a result of the uprate decision at the PSB, Entergy must pay taxes to Vermont on all power from the uprate sold out of state. Translated, this means that Entergy must pay taxes on 19 of the uprated 20 percent of the power sold. This is money to the state coffers. The PSB makes decisions based primarily on economics. The PSB will decide to continue Yankee past 2012. The PSB will play their quasijudicial role as arbiter and Entergy will sweeten the deal for the supposed ratepayer advocate Department of Public Service (read: governor's right-and team) in a Memorandum of Understanding just before the PSB decision.

"Unwittingly and without prior consent or vote of acceptance by the people ... we have become the outhouse of the Eastern Seaboard for dumping ... tons of ... wastes. State law should not have allowed this to happen to us, and it shouldn't ever again allow it to happen to anyone." THE LETTER COULD have been written by someone from Lee, Union or Anderson County. If we don't do something to change our burgeoning status as the solid-waste destination, it could be written soon by someone from Williamsburg, Cherokee or Marlboro County - all eyed by out-of-state waste-hauling companies looking to expand the growing list of rural S.C. homes to megadumps designed with the nation in mind.

A slander suit over comments on a proposed nuclear power plant in Elmore County seems to be over, with both sides declaring victory. Alternate Energy Holdings Inc., based in Eagle, sued the Snake River Alliance for defamation in August, basing its case on an Aug. 11 Boise news broadcast in which SRA Executive Director Andrea Shipley called the company "scammers." On Jan. 16, just a few days before both parties were set to appear in court, 4th District Senior District Judge G.D. Carey granted a motion made by the watchdog group to dismiss the case - in which the group argued that Shipley stated her opinion, not a fact, and was protected by the First Amendment. He also told AEHI to cover its opponent's court costs, though those are so minimal that the group won't pursue them, said David W. Knotts, the SRA's attorney.

The Tennessee Valley Authority continues its way on a troubling path of the unknown with nuclear power plants. Given all the potential ramifications of flaws at any nuclear power facility, the public has good reason to question the path taken by TVA. Among the most recent concerns about TVA operations are questions about the design for potential new nuclear reactors at the Bellefonte nuclear power site near Huntsville, Ala. TVA is seeking a license to build a plant based on a new design, the AP-1000 Westinghouse, but environmental groups say while the licensing process goes forward changes are being made to the design. Advertisement TVA insists the changes in the design are only peripheral to the basic plan. Design changes include changes to the pressurizer; changes in the seismic analysis involving rock and soil conditions; changes in instruments and a redesign of fuel racks. Advocates of the licensing process say the design changes at issue are only the kinds of items that can be carried easily on a parallel track with the application process. The basic design is said to be a simpler version of a nuclear reactor. The design is significant because if and when it is approved for Bellefonte, it streamlines the process for other plant sites that might want to build on a Bellefonte model.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is holding a public comment meeting in Idaho Falls Dec. 10 to assess community support for international energy firm Areva's proposed Eagle Rock Uranium Enrichment Facility at a site near the Idaho National Laboratory. The meeting is part of the lengthy application process Areva must go through for licensing of the facility, news station KPVI reports. Areva, which announced that it had selected the Idaho Falls area for its new enrichment plant earlier this year, has already submitted both parts of its loan guarantee application to the Department of Energy, asking for the federal government to guarantee $2 billion in loans to finance the Eagle Rock project.

The incidence of thyroid cancer is rising at an alarming rate in Vermont, as well as across this country and especially in the Northeastern states. No cancer diagnosis is growing as fast according to the National Cancer Institute, with a growth rate of about 6 percent a year since 1997. Most newly diagnosed are women, who are two to three times more likely than men to develop thyroid cancer. Brenda Edwards is a statistician with the National Cancer Institute and reported that the annual rate increase of thyroid cancer doubled from 2 percent in the 1980s to 4.6 percent in the 1990s to 9.8 percent in 2005 for U.S males and females of all ages. That is the latest year publicly reported.

Although AmerGen's Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station operating license does not expire until April, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission appears to have a hurry-up plan to approve the application. It has scheduled an affirmation session for Wednesday, Feb. 4, with the plant's license renewal on the agenda. There are valid concerns about the NRC's incomplete review. In addition, another massive problem the NRC is ignoring is a required environmental review of severely threatened habitat on plant property east of Route 9 known as Finningers Farm.

Nuclear energy is again a hot topic, thanks to a bill filed in Congress that seeks to earmark $1billion for a project to "revive" the Philippine Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) in Morong, Bataan. Due to numerous safety concerns, PNPP was never actually allowed to go on line although for decades it was the country's single biggest source of foreign indebtedness-without producing a single watt of electricity. The bill's proponents, however, have been trying to convince the public that atomic power is the solution to the country's energy problems and that its detractors are merely harping on old fears. Since the 1980s, they add, nuclear technology has undergone much improvement, thus further ensuring its safety. Other sources-expert ones-say otherwise.

Following a 3 1/2-year review of the license renewal application for the Oyster Creek nuclear generating station in Lacey, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Wednesday may, for all intents and purposes, decide whether to allow the plant to operate for another 20 years. To head off any chance the NRC will give Oyster Creek the green light next week, the state Department of Environmental Protection should seek a federal injunction to prevent a vote until all of the recommendations made by the NRC licensing board for further analysis of the plant's drywell - the steel barrier surrounding the reactor that is designed to contain radiation in the event of an accident - are heeded.

Transport of nuclear waste could put area residents at risk Asheville? Nuclear waste? Why worry that Asheville City Council declined to pass a measure that would have sent federal planners the message "Don't come through here" with these deadly wastes? Taken in a larger context, this nonaction by City Council may be vitally important. Folks have a right to know about some very local nuclear history and the potential for future impacts on Asheville residents' safety and welfare. Does the name Sandy Mush mean anything to you? About 25 years ago, a federal agency was studying Sandy Mush-a rural area in Leicester, about 20 miles from City Hall-as a potential site for a permanent high-level nuclear waste dump. Were you part of the citizen action that helped block it?

Less than three weeks after a congressman demanded more transparency from federal regulators about safety issues at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station in Lacey, the agency held a secret meeting with plant operators to discuss the implications of new corrosion discovered during the October outage. U.S. Rep. Christopher Smith, R-N.J., in a Dec. 4 letter to the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, insisted that citizens be apprised of ongoing safety issues, and specifically referred to corrosion discovered during the October refueling as a "significant case of high public interest." He cited the need for "full transparency" in the continuing corrosion and degradation of the reactor's drywell, the steel containment vessel that shields the public from radiation.