Skip to main content

Home/ Open Intelligence / Energy/ Group items tagged New York

Rss Feed Group items tagged

D'coda Dcoda

Devastating review of Yablokov's Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People ... - 0 views

  • Devastating review of Yablokov’s Cherno by l: Consequences of the Catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe for Peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/ple and the Environment by Rod Adams on October 20, 2011 in Accidents , Contamination , Health Effects , Politics of Nuclear Energy htthttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p://www.facebook.com/sharer.https://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phhttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p?u=htthttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe-for-https://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/ple-and-the-environment.html&amhttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p;t=Devastating%20review%20of%20Yablokov%E2%80%99s%20Chernobyl%3A%20Consequences%20of%20the%20Catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe%20for%20Peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastr
  • Devastating review of Yablokov’s Cherno by l: Consequences of the Catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe for Peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/ple and the Environment by Rod Adams on October 20, 2011 in Accidents , Contamination , Health Effects , Politics of Nuclear Energy htthttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p://www.facebook.com/sharer.https://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phhttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p?u=htthttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe-for-https://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/ple-and-the-environment.html&amhttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p;t=Devastating%20review%20of%20Yablokov%E2%80%99s%20Chernobyl%3A%20Consequences%20of%20the%20Catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe%20for%20Peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium
  • Devastating review of Yablokov’s Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe for Peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/ple and the Environment by Rod Adams on October 20, 2011 in Accidents, Contamination, Health Effects, Politics of Nuclear Energy htthttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p://www.facebook.com/sharer.https://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phhttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p?u=htthttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe-for-https://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/ple-and-the-environment.html&amhttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/p;t=Devastating%20review%20of%20Yablokov%E2%80%99s%20Chernobyl%3A%20Consequences%20of%20the%20Catastrohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%2F24479126-6666cb8c/phe%20for%20Peohttps://plusone.google.com/u/0/_/+1/fastbutton?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatomicinsights.com%2F2011%2F10%2Fdevastating-review-of-yablokovs-chernobyl-consequences-of-the-catastrophe-for-people-and-the-environment.html&size=medium&count=true&annotation=&hl=en-US&jsh=r%3Bgc%
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • book titled Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment in a publication called the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. The roots of the decision remain murky. Within a few months after the first printing of the book, Ted Rockwell, a long time member of the Academy, started working to convince NYAS leaders that the decision to print was a grave error that was bad for science and posed a significant risk to the reputation of the Academy as a source of sound, peer-reviewed information. As part of his effort, he encouraged the current editor of Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences to appoint reviewers and to post the results of those reviews.
D'coda Dcoda

East coast earthquake reveals faults in nuclear emergency planning [24Aug11] - 0 views

  • To say that Tuesday's east coast earthquake surprised everyone would be an understatement.
  • This is why our best bet is planning for the worst. And when we look at the US nuclear energy infrastructure, it becomes clear that we aren't planning for the worst – not even close
  • We had a pretty good warning earlier this year, when the tragic earthquake and tsunami in Japan caused an even bigger tragedy when the Fukushima nuclear power plant suffered a meltdown. Tuesday's earthquake was the worst on the east coast of the US since 1944, measuring at 5.8 on the Richter scale. And while we certainly avoided the kind of crisis that Japan has endured, two nuclear reactors near the site, at the North Anna nuclear power plant, were shut down following the quake. The plant temporarily lost power and halted operations until it switched to back-up generators. Twelve other plants around the country were put on alert following the quake.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Though a spokesman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission told reporters that "as far as we know, everything is safe", the event revived fears about the safety of US nuclear plants. Most of the region's reactors were reportedly designed to withstand a 5.9 to 6.1 magnitude quake – which means Tuesday's quake was, for many, too close for comfort.
  • The North Anna plant is located about 15 miles from the epicentre of the quake in Mineral, Virginia. It was designed to withstand a 6.2-magnitude quake, according to its owner, Dominion Resources. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission lists the plant as one of the 10 US plants most at risk of damage in a seismic event. So, it seems like we got lucky in this case.
  • We're also lucky that this particular plant isn't as close to an urban centre as many others in the US. It's nearly 50 miles from Richmond, and about 100 miles from Washington, DC. But the plant that the NRC deemed most at risk was the Indian Point 3 reactor in Buchanan, New York – just 38 miles from New York City. This is the primary reason why New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has called for the plant to be shut down. After Fukushima, everyone within 50 miles of the plant had to be evacuated. Right now, our evacuation plans for all our nuclear sites only cover a 10-mile radius. If something really bad were to happen at Indian Point, it could create the need to evacuate 21 million people
  • don't believe we're going to shut down our existing nuclear energy infrastructure entirely any time soon. But at the very least, the 23 August quake should be a reminder that our worst-case scenarios might not be bad enough. We should perhaps rethink just how ready we are for the worst.
D'coda Dcoda

If Indian Point Nuclear Closes, Plenty of Profits (for natural gas suppliers) [13Jul11] - 0 views

  •  
    (Diigo won't highlight this correctly, putting it in description!) "Matt Wald of the New York Times has finally figured out why there is such a strong push from well connected political types to close the Indian Point Nuclear Power Station. Unfortunately, he and his editor have chosen to put that answer at the very bottom of his recent article titled If Indian Point Closes, Plenty of Challenges . When the demand for natural gas increases, the balance between supply and demand shifts in favor of the sellers, so price inexorably increases. Here is the closing paragraph of that article. It should raise alarm bells for anyone who is a power purchaser instead of a power seller. That description applies to the vast majority of us; part of the challenge is that it only costs each of us a little while concentrating the spoils in the hands of a few victors. Closing the Indian Point reactors would, however, hardly be gloom and doom for everyone. Any company that runs a generator in downstate New York ends up selling its output at a higher price, and would share in the $1.4 billion a year that Con Edison says its customers will pay if the nuclear plant closes."
D'coda Dcoda

Interaction Between Social Media and Nuclear Energy [17Jul11] - 0 views

  • As blogger on nuclear energy for the past five years, I realize I’m writing on a niche subject that isn’t going to pull in millions of readers. Unlike some entertainment blogs, a site on nuclear energy is never going to be able to link the words “reactor pressure vessel” with the antics of a Hollywood celebrity at a New York night club. So, what can be said about the use of social media and how it has evolved as a new communication tool in a mature industry?
  • EBR-1 chalkboard ~ the 1st known nuclear energy blog post 12/21/51 on the Arco desert of eastern Idaho
  • Evidence of acceptance of social media is widespread, with the most recent example being the launch of the Nuclear Information Center, a social media presence by Duke Energy (NYSE:DUK). Content written for the Nuclear Information Center by a team of the utility’s employees is clearly designed to reach out to the general public. This effort goes beyond the usual scope of a utility Web site, which includes things like how to pay your bill online, where to call when the lights go out, and so forth.
  • ...13 more annotations...
  • Most nuclear blogs have a “blog roll”which list other publishers of information on the nuclear energy field.  Areva has done this on its North American blog. Areva handles the issue of avoiding any appearance of endorsement by noting that the list with more than two dozen entries is one of “blogs we read.” Areva also has several years of experience reaching out to the nuclear blogger community with monthly conference calls. The blog of the Nuclear Energy Institute, NEI Nuclear Notes,  lists a wide range of nuclear blogs including this one as well as the blogs published by independent analysts.
  • Duke’s Web site is a completely modern effort set up like a blog, with new entries on a frequent basis. On the right column, the site has a list of other places to get nuclear energy information, including the American Nuclear Society (ANS), the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).
  • The Nuclear Information Center announces right at the top that “In this online space, you will find educational information on the nuclear industry and the nuclear stations operated by Duke Energy. We will feature insights into radiation, new nuclear, emergency planning and more . . . allowing readers to get an inside view of the industry.” That’s a big step for a nuclear utility. The reason is that like many publicly traded electric utilities, it generates electricity from several fuel sources, including coal, natural gas, solar, wind, and nuclear. Because these utilities have huge customer rate bases and supply chains, they are inherently conservative about the information they publish on their Web sites. Also, there are significant legal and financial reasons why a utility might or might not put information out there for public consumption. Press releases receive scrutiny from the general counsel and chief financial officer for very important reasons having to do with regulatory oversight and shareholder value.
  • Idaho National Laboratory, Areva, and recruiter CoolHandNuke.
  • Taken together, the four blogs that reported monthly page views represent 100,000 visits to online information pages on nuclear energy or an effective rate of well over 1 million page views per year. These are real numbers and the data are just for a small sample of the more than two dozen blogs on nuclear energy that update at least once a week. Another interesting set of statistics is who reads North American blogs overseas? It turns out that the international readership is concentrated in a small group of countries. They include, in alphabetical order for the same sample of blogs, the following countries: Australia Canada France Germany India Japan United Kingdom
  • Who reads nuclear energy blogs? So, who is reading nuclear blogs? On the ANS Social Media listserv, I asked this question recently and got some interesting results for the month of May 2011. Here’s a sample of the replies: Michele Kearny, at the Nuclear Wire, a news service, reports for the month of May 18,812 page views. Michele’s blog is a fast-moving series of news links that keeps readers coming back for updates. Will Davis, at Atomic Power Review, who has been publishing high quality, in-depth technical updates about Fukushima, reports 31,613 page views for the same month. Rod Adams, who recently updated the template at his blog at Atomic Insights, reported his numbers in terms of absolute visitors. He cites Google Analytics as reporting 10,583 unique visitors for May. Rod emphasizes commentary and analysis across a wide range of nuclear subjects. At my blog Idaho Samizdat, I can report 6,945 visitors and 24,938 page views for May 2011. The blog covers economic and political news about nuclear energy and nonproliferation issues. At ANS Nuclear Cafe, this blog uses WordPress to track readers, reporting 24,476 page views for the same four-week period as the other blogs. During the height of the Fukushima crisis on a single day, March 14, 2011, the blog attained over 55,000 page views as people poured on to the Internet in search of information about the situation in Japan.
  • 5,000 people interact on LinkedIn, moderated by nuclear industry consultant Ed Kee. It is called “Nuclear Power Next Generation” and is one of dozens of such groups related to nuclear energy on the professional networking site.
  • Nuclear energy is not so widely represented on Facebook as on LinkedIn, despite its enormous popularity, and isn’t conducive to the kinds of technical dialogs that populate other nuclear social media sites. While the Facebook format is attractive to lifestyle information such as dating and the promotion of entertainment, sports, and consumer packaged goods, it doesn’t seem to work as well for business and engineering topics. It turns out Facebook is a good way to offer a “soft sell” for recruitment purposes to drive traffic to nuclear energy organization recruitment pages. It can answer the questions of what’s it like to work for an organization and the attractive amenities of life in the employer’s home town. Videos and photos can help deliver these messages.
  • On the other hand, Twitter, even with its limits of 140 characters, is enormously useful for the nuclear energy field. Twitter users who follow the output of nuclear bloggers number in the tens of thousands, and many nuclear energy organizations, including the major utilities such as Entergy, have invested in a Twitter account to have a presence on the service. The American Nuclear Society “tweets” under @ans_org and posts updates daily on the situation at Fukushima
  • Web sites maintained by NEI and the World Nuclear Organization had to make fast upgrades to their computer servers to handle millions of inquires from the media and the public and on a global scale. Getting out the facts of the situation to respond to these inquiries was facilitated by this online presence at an unprecedented scale. Even so, newspapers often had anti-nuclear groups on speed dial early in the crisis and their voices reached an unsettled public with messages of fear, uncertainty, and doubt. In response, ANS used technical experts on its social media listserv to information media engagements, which reached millions of views on network television and major newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post.
  • This useful mix of free form communication on the listserv and excellent outreach by Clark Communications, working for ANS, made a difference in getting the facts about Fukushima to an understandably anxious public. Margaret Harding, a consulting nuclear engineer with deep experience with boiling water reactor fuels, was one of the people tapped by ANS to be a spokesperson for the society. She wrote to me in a personal e-mail that social media made a difference for her in many ways.
  • In summary, she said that it would have been impossible for her to fulfill this role without many hands helping her from various quarters at ANS. She pointed out that the ANS Social Media listserv group “provided invaluable background information . . that helped me keep up-to-date and ready for the question from the next reporter.” In fact, she said, she might not have even started down this road if the listserv hadn’t already proven itself as a source of information and expertise.
  • Another take on the news media’s shift into anti-nuclear skepticism following Fukushima comes from Andrea Jennetta, publisher of Fuel Cycle Week.  Writing in the March 17 issue, she said that this time the “bunker mentality” that has characterized communications in prior years by the nuclear industry gave way to something new. “But instead of rolling over, the nuclear community for once is mobilizing and fighting back. I am impressed at the efforts of various pronuclear activists, bloggers, advocates and professional organizations.
  •  
    important one
D'coda Dcoda

Southern Gambles on First U.S. Nuclear Reactors in a Generation [26Sep11] - 0 views

  • Southern Co. is poised to end a three-decade freeze on nuclear development as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission holds a final hearing today before granting it a license to build and operate two reactors. The stakes for Atlanta-based Southern are greater than its bottom line, Chief Executive Officer Thomas Fanning said during two interviews. If there is to be a nuclear revival in the U.S., Southern, the largest U.S. power company, must deliver the $14 billion project on-time and on-budget, he said.
  • “We’ve got to be successful,” Fanning said during an interview at Bloomberg headquarters in New York. “This is the first, best shot for the nuclear renaissance in America.” Nuclear expansion ground to a halt in the U.S. as cost overruns, construction delays and a thicket of new regulations after Three Mile Island’s partial-meltdown in 1979 turned some plants into economic disasters, Ted Quinn, past president of the American Nuclear Society, said in a telephone interview.
  • A far worse accident at Japan’s Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear station this March so far hasn’t derailed Southern’s project at Plant Vogtle south of Augusta, Georgia, as critics predicted. Southern is on track to license the plant by early 2012, provided the commission certifies design changes for the Westinghouse AP1000 reactors that will power Vogtle, said Scott Burnell, a commission spokesman, in a telephone interview.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • Success at Vogtle could draw investors to other atomic projects on the drawing boards in Virginia, Florida and the Carolinas, Fanning said. Future Nuclear Development If Vogtle fails, Southern may prove that the time for massive nuclear reactors is over, moving the nation toward smaller modular reactors or away from atomic power altogether, said Chris Gadomski, lead nuclear analyst for Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
  • “If the new projects are fumbled -- over-budget, behind- schedule -- then utilities will be much more hesitant to start new nuclear construction,” Gadomski said in a telephone interview. Southern and its partners have invested more than $3 billion into the site since 2009, Fanning said, receiving special dispensation from the commission to begin work on cooling towers and other structures not deemed essential to nuclear safety while they awaited final approval to build the reactors.
  • So far, Vogtle’s new reactors remain under-budget and on schedule to begin producing power in 2016 and 2017, Southern said in a Sept. 20 filing with Georgia regulators. Georgia consumers will pay $6.1 billion of the project’s costs through rate hikes, while the Obama Administration has pledged loan guarantees for another $8.3 billion.
  • Challenges Remain Vogtle still faces challenges. U.S. Representative Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, on Sept. 23 called for scrutiny of federal nuclear loan guarantees following the collapse of solar panel-maker Solyndra LLC, which received a $535 million loan guarantee. Vogtle’s opponents worry it will suffer the same cost overruns experienced by other first-of-a-kind reactors in the U.S. when new units were being built a generation ago, Sara Barczak, program director with the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, said in an interview.
  • She’s also concerned that Vogtle may have to be redesigned to comply with tougher seismic standards crafted following Fukushima and an August temblor in Virginia. “We want them to get it right, get it worked out, because all they’re going to do is cost ratepayers and taxpayers money,” said Barczak.
  • A Master Plan The 104 nuclear power plants built a generation ago in the U.S. were customized to each operator’s whims and built without a true master plan, said John Polcyn, a consultant and senior nuclear adviser who has worked on about two dozen plants in the U.S., Japan and China. “The one thing the industry has really gotten mature about is standardization,” Polcyn said. “Is it perfect? No. But I tell you we are eons better than we were the last go-round.”
  • Miller and Fanning have sophisticated software to monitor every element of the project and pre-fabricated construction that’s first being tested at two plants in China. Miller describes his management style as “Whac-A-Mole,” dealing with problems immediately as they arise and planning for every contingency. His approach has been tested as Southern and its partners deal with suppliers who haven’t built to nuclear construction’s exacting standards since the 1990s.
D'coda Dcoda

Nuclear Energy Institute Report on Japan's Nuclear Reactors [27Jul11] - 0 views

  • TEPCO to Install Second Water Decontamination System Plant Status Tokyo Electric Power Co. continues its attempts to decontaminate radioactive water that has collected in the basements of buildings and in drains at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear energy facility. With its current decontamination system operating at only 53 percent of capacity, TEPCO is planning to receive new water treatment equipment this week.  TEPCO will use the new system alongside the existing one
  • Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues The government of Japan will buy beef containing radioactive cesium that has reached the country’s distribution chain. NHK news service reports that more than 2,800 cattle that may have been fed radioactive rice straw have been shipped to 46 of 47 prefectures. The government will inspect the beef and buy any that contains higher-than-permissible levels of cesium.
  • Media Highlights NEI briefed financial analysts in New York July 26 on the U.S. nuclear energy industry’s response to the Fukushima Daiichi accident. The presentation is available in the Financial Center on NEI’s website. NEI President and CEO Marv Fertel appeared on CNBC prior to the briefing. Media coverage included Dow Jones Market Watch and a New York Times blog. NEI’s news release on the event is here.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Upcoming Events A July 28 public Nuclear Regulatory Commission meeting will focus on the agency’s near-term task force recommendations for safety enhancements at U.S. nuclear energy facilities after the Fukushima accident. The Foundation for Nuclear Studies will host a July 29 briefing and discussion on the status of Fukushima Daiichi for congressional staff in Washington, D.C. The briefing will be conducted by Lake Barrett, former NRC site director for Three Mile Island and former acting director of the DOE Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
D'coda Dcoda

States Sue Over On-Site Waste Storage [16Feb11] - 0 views

  • A spokesman for NRC defended the rule in the Wall Street Journal, pointing out that plants across the country have stored spent fuel rods safely for years.
  • Attorneys general from New York, Connecticut and Vermont announced Tuesday that they plan to sue the Nuclear Regulatory Commission over a recent ruling on waste storage at nuclear plants
  • Specifically, they object to an NRC rule issued in late December that allows plants to keep spent fuel on site for 60 years after they close, as opposed to 30 years under previous law.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman, who is leading the litigation, accused the agency of making its decision without environmental studies and other procedural steps required by federal law. In a statement issued by his office, Schneiderman singled out Entergy's Indian Point Plant in affluent Westchester County, N.Y., 25 miles from New York City. The plant long has been a target of nuclear energy opponents in the state, and the attorney general said waste storage at Indian Point could lower property values and pollute the area in the future
  • “Before dumping radioactive waste at the site for at least 60 years after it’s closed, our communities deserve a thorough review of the environmental, public health and safety risks such a move would present,” Schneiderman said in the statement. The suit seeks a full environmental review and mitigation plan be drafted for every nuclear plant in the country that stores its own waste before the new rule could take effect.
D'coda Dcoda

Thyroid cancer, fracking and nuclear power [19Jan12] - 0 views

  • Thyroid cancer cases have more than doubled since 1997 in the United States, while deadly industrial practices that contaminate groundwater with radiation and other carcinogens are also rising. New information released by the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) estimates that 56,460 people will develop thyroid cancer in 2012 and 1,780 will die from it.
  • From 1980 to 1996, thyroid cancer increased nearly 300%, while the population increased by (again) 18%. Most thyroid cancers don’t develop for 10-30 years after radiation exposure, but the monstrous spike in thyroid cancer from 1980-2012 is only partly the result of Pennsylvania’s Three Mile Island nuclear accident in 1979 (TMI). Pennsylvania, with its nine nuclear reactors, does have the highest incidence of thyroid cancer across nearly all demographics among 45* states, reports epidemiologist Joseph Mangano, MPH MBA, of the Radiation and Public Health Project. In 2009, he analyzed data from the Centers for Disease Control’s national survey of thyroid cancer incidence for the years 2001-2005 and compared it with proximity to nuclear power stations, finding:
  • M]ost U.S. counties with the highest thyroid cancer incidence are in a contiguous area of eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and southern New York. Exposure to radioactive iodine emissions from 16 nuclear power reactors within a 90 mile radius in this area … are likely a cause of rising incidence rates.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Fracking a ‘Dirty Bomb’
  • TMI also can’t explain why the thyroid cancer rate for the four counties flanking Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant in New York was 66% above the national rate in 2001-2005. Other, more subtle sources may also be contributing to hiked thyroid cancer rates, like leaking nuclear power plants and hydraulic fracturing, both of which contaminate air, soil and groundwater with radiation and other nasty chemicals. Indeed, remarking on this, Mangano (who recently co-authored a controversial study with toxicologist Janette Sherman suggesting a link between Fukushima fallout and US cancer deaths numbering from 14,000 to 20,000) said:
  • From 1970-1993, Indian Point released 17.50 curies of airborne I-131 and particulates…. [That] amount exceeded the official total of 14.20 curies released from the 1979 Three Mile Island accident. In 2007, officials that operate the Indian Point plant reported levels of I-131 in the local air, water, and milk, each of which is a potential vector for ingestion. Iodine-131, or I-131, is a radioactive isotope produced by nuclear fission
  • Radiation isn’t released into the environment only via nuclear plants and bombs. Geologist Tracy Bank found that fracking mobilizes rock-bound uranium, posing a further radiation risk to our groundwater. She presented her findings at the American Geological Society meeting in Denver last November.
  • Because of some 65 hazardous chemicals used in fracking operations, former industry insider, James Northrup, calls it a “dirty bomb.” With 30 years of experience as an independent oil and gas producer, he explains: The volume of fluid in a hydrofrack can exceed three million gallons, or almost 24 million pounds of fluid, about the same weight as 7,500 automobiles. The fracking fluid contains chemicals that would be illegal to use in warfare under the rules of the Geneva Convention. This all adds up to a massive explosion of a ‘dirty bomb’ underground.
D'coda Dcoda

Fukushima desolation worst since Hiroshima, Nagasaki [07Oct11] - 0 views

  • Beyond the police roadblocks that mark the no-go zone around the wrecked Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, 2-meter-tall weeds invade rice paddies and vines gone wild strangle road signs along empty streets. Takako Harada, 80, returned to an evacuated area of Iitate, a village in Fukushima Prefecture, to retrieve her car. Beside her house is an empty cattle pen, the 100 cows slaughtered on government orders after radiation from the March 11 atomic disaster saturated the area, forcing 160,000 people to move away and leaving some places uninhabitable for two decades or more. "Older folks want to return, but the young worry about radiation," said Harada, whose family ran the farm for 40 years. "I want to farm, but will we be able to sell anything?"
  • What is emerging six months since the nuclear meltdowns at the Tokyo Electric Power Co. plant is a radioactive zone bigger than that left by the 1945 atomic bombings at Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
  • While nature reclaims the 20-km no-go zone, Fukushima's ¥240 billion a year farm industry is being devastated and tourists that hiked the prefecture's mountains and surfed off its beaches have all but vanished.
  • ...14 more annotations...
  • A government panel investigating Tepco's finances estimated the cost of compensation to people affected by the nuclear disaster will exceed ¥4 trillion.
  • The bulk of radioactive contamination cuts a 5- to 10-km-wide swath of land running as far as 30 km northwest of the nuclear plant, surveys of radiation hot spots by the science ministry show. The government extended evacuations beyond the 20-km zone in April to cover this corridor, which includes parts of Iitate.
  • No formal evacuation zone was set up in Hiroshima after the U.S. dropped an atomic bomb on the city on Aug. 6, 1945, though as the city rebuilt relatively few people lived within 1 km of the hypocenter, according to the Hiroshima Atomic Bomb Museum. Food shortages forced a partial evacuation of the city in summer 1946.
  • On April 26, 1986, an explosion at the Chernobyl reactor hurled 180 metric tons of nuclear fuel into the atmosphere, creating the world's first exclusion zone of 30 km around a nuclear plant. A quarter of a century later, the zone is still classed as uninhabitable. About 300 residents have returned despite government restrictions.
  • Tepco's decision in the 1960s to name its atomic plant Fukushima No. 1 has today associated a prefecture of about 2 million people that's almost half the size of Belgium with radiation contamination. In contrast, Chernobyl is the name of a small town near the namesake plant in what today is Ukraine.
  • Some people believed A-bomb survivors could emit radiation and others feared radiation caused genetic mutations, said Evan Douple, associate chief of research at the Radiation Effects Research Foundation in Hiroshima. An examination of more than 77,000 first-generation children in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombings found no evidence of mutations, he said.
  • While radiation readings are lower in Fukushima than Hiroshima, Abel Gonzales, the vice chairman of the International Commission on Radiological Protection, said similar prejudices may emerge. "Stigma. I have the feeling that in Fukushima this will be a very big problem," Gonzales said during a symposium held in the city of Fukushima on the six-month anniversary of the disaster. Some children who fled Fukushima are finding out what Gonzales means. Fukushima schoolchildren were being bullied at their new school in Chiba Prefecture for "carrying radiation," the Sankei Shimbun reported in April, citing complaints made to education authorities. An 11-year-old Fukushima boy was hospitalized in Niigata Prefecture after being bullied at his new school, Kyodo News reported April 23.
  • Radiation risks in the 20-km zone forced the evacuation of about 8 percent, or 160,000, of some 2 million people who live in Fukushima. Almost 56,000 were sent to areas outside Fukushima, prefecture spokesman Masato Abe said. More than 8,000 left on their own accord because of radiation fears, Abe said
  • side the evacuation areas, levels of radiation higher than the government's criteria for evacuation have been recorded at 89 of 210 monitoring posts. At 24 of the sites, the reading was higher than the level at which the International Atomic Energy Agency says increases the risk of cancer. Japan Atomic Energy Institute researcher Toshimitsu Homma used science ministry data to compare the geographic scale of the contamination in Fukushima with Chernobyl.
  • He estimates the no-go zone in Fukushima will cover 132 sq. km, surrounded by a permanent monitoring area of 264 sq. km, assuming Japan follows the criteria set by the Soviet Union in 1986. The two areas combined equal about half the size of the five boroughs that comprise New York City. In the case of Chernobyl, the two zones cover a land mass 25 times greater, according to Homma's figures.
  • "Contradiction in some official statements, and the appearance of nonscientifically based 'expert' voices, confused and added stress to the local populations in each case," said Evelyn Bromet, a distinguished professor in the department of psychiatry at State University of New York, Stony Brook. "Lies got told, contradictions got told. In the end it's easier to believe nobody," Bromet said in an interview, citing mental health studies she did on people in the areas.
  • What radiation hasn't ruined, the earthquake and tsunami devastated. Fukushima Prefecture welcomed 56 million domestic and overseas visitors in 2009, equal to 44 percent of Japan's population.
  • The coastal town of Minamisoma this year canceled its annual qualifying stage for the world surfing championship, part of a waterfront that lured 84,000 beachgoers in July and August last year, said Hiroshi Tadano, head of the town's economic division. This year, nobody visited the beaches in the two months. "Most of the beaches are destroyed," Tadano said. "And of course, radiation played its part."
  • The area's biggest festival, Soma Nomaoi, a re-enactment of samurai battles, attracted 200,000 visitors last year. This year 37,000 came. Of the 300 horses typically used in the event, 100 were drowned in the tsunami and another 100 were evacuated due to radiation, Tajino said. Minamisoma resident Miyaguchi, 54, lost his home and parents in the tsunami. He quit his job at Tepco, leaving him unemployed and housed in an evacuation center
D'coda Dcoda

Fracking Radiation Targeted By DOE, GE [03Aug11] - 0 views

  • The Department of Energy and General Electric will spend $2 million over the next two years to remove naturally occurring radioactive materials from the fracking fluids produced by America’s booming shale-gas industry. The New York State Department of Health has identified Radium-226 as a radionuclide of particular concern in the Marcellus Shale formation deep beneath the Appalachian Mountains. In hydraulic fracturing operations, drillers force water and a mixture of chemicals into wells to shatter the shale and free natural gas. The brine that returns to the surface has been found to contain up to 16,000 picoCuries per liter of radium-226 (pdf). The discharge limit in effluent for Radium 226 is 60 pCi/L, and the EPA’s drinking water standard is 5 pCi/L.
  • Uranium and Radon-222 have also been found in water returning to the surface from deep shale wells. In Pennsylvania, produced water has been discharged into streams and rivers from the state’s 71,000 wells after conventional wastewater treatment but without radiation testing, according to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and The New York Times, which drew attention to the radioactive contamination earlier this year after studying internal EPA documents: The documents reveal that the wastewater, which is sometimes hauled to sewage plants not designed to treat it and then discharged into rivers that supply drinking water, contains radioactivity at levels higher than previously known, and far higher than the level that federal regulators say is safe for these treatment plants to handle. via The New York Times
  • GE’s Global Research lab in Niskayuna, NY has proposed removing radioactive elements from produced waters and brine using a membrane distillation system similar to conventional reverse osmosis, but designed specifically to capture these radioactive materials. GE will spend $400,000 on the project and DOE will supply $1.6 million. The Energy Department announced the project Monday. The process will produce concentrated radioactive waste, which will be disposed of through conventional means, which usually means storage in sealed containers for deep geological disposal. The government is seeking to address environmental concerns without stemming a boom in cheap gas unleashed by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, in shale formations.
D'coda Dcoda

NRC seeks comment on DTE's proposed new Mich. reactor[28Oct11] - 0 views

  • No environmental impact found to preclude new reactor * DTE has not decided to build new reactor yet * New reactor could cost about $8.5 billion NEW YORK, Oct 28 (Reuters) - The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) said Friday it was seeking public input on a draft environmental impact statement for DTE's proposed new reactor at the Fermi nuclear power plant in Michigan. In a release, the NRC said its staff found no environmental impacts in its preliminary findings that would preclude the commission from issuing a combined license (COL) for a new reactor at Fermi. Michigan-based power company DTE submitted its new reactor application to the NRC in September 2008, requesting a license to build and operate an Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) at Fermi next to its existing reactor about 25 miles northeast of Toledo, Ohio.
D'coda Dcoda

UPDATE 1-NY can replace Indian Point nuclear power -groups [17Oct11] - 0 views

  • NY Gov. wants Indian Point shut in 2013 and 2015 * Entergy wants to run reactors for another 20 years * NRC to take years to decide on new reactor licenses
  • Two environmental groups said on Monday the giant Indian Point nuclear power plant in New York could be replaced with cleaner, safer energy sources. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Riverkeeper said the region had surplus energy to replace the 2,065-megawatt Indian Point. The groups said the energy could be tapped by running existing generators at modest additional cost, with no impact to reliability of the electric supply until 2020. The group responsible for New York’s power grid disagreed, saying a shutdown of Indian Point could result in blackouts. Indian Point is in Westchester County along the Hudson River, about 45 miles north of midtown Manhattan. The plant, which can power about 2 million homes, supplies about a quarter of the power used in New York City and Westchester.
D'coda Dcoda

Vermont finds contaminated fish as nuclear debate rages [02Aug11] - 0 views

  • Vermont Yankee could close by March 2012 * Entergy fighting for reactor survival NEW YORK, Aug 2 (Reuters) - Vermont health regulators said on Tuesday they found a fish containing radioactive material in the Connecticut River near Entergy's (ETR.N) Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant which could be another setback for Entergy to keep it running. The state said it needs to do more testing to determine the source of the Strontium-90, which can cause bone cancer and leukemia.
  • Vermont Governor Peter Shumlin wants the 620 megawatts reactor shut in March 2012 when its original operating license was to expire. "Today's troubling news from the Vermont Department of Health is another example of Entergy Louisiana putting their shareholders' profits above the welfare of Vermonters," Shumlin said in a statement. "I am asking my Health Department to keep a close eye on test results moving forward to determine the extent of any contamination that has reached the environment."
  • New Orleans-based Entergy, the second biggest nuclear power operator in the United States, however wants to keep the reactor running for another 20 years under a new license. Entergy filed a complaint in federal court to block the state from shutting the reactor next year. Officials at Entergy were not immediately available for comment. "One finding of (Strontium-90) just above the lower limit of detection in one fish sample is notable because it is the first time Strontium-90 has been detected in the edible portion of any of our fish samples," the Vermont Department of Health said on its website. The Health Department said it did not know how the Strontium-90, which is both naturally occurring in the environment and a byproduct of nuclear power production and nuclear weapons testing, got into the fish.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • "We cannot associate low levels of Strontium-90 in fish in the Connecticut River with Vermont Yankee-related radioactive materials without other supporting evidence," the report said. MORE ANALYSIS NEEDED The Health Department asked for additional analysis on the fish obtained on June 9, 2010 that contained the strontium-90 and also on other fish samples. These analyses will take weeks to complete, the Health Department said, noting it is working to obtain additional fish for testing much farther upstream in the Connecticut River. The Connecticut River divides Vermont and New Hampshire before running through Massachusetts and Connecticut. Vermont Yankee is located in Vernon, Vermont, near the border between Vermont, New Hampshire and Massachusetts about 110 miles northwest of Boston.
  • Strontium-90 and other human made radioactive materials come from the fairly constant release of very low quantities from medical and industrial users of radioactive materials, and from infrequent releases such as above-ground nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s, and the nuclear reactor accidents at Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011. Radioactive materials are nothing new for Vermont Yankee. In January 2010, Entergy said it discovered a radioactive tritium leak at the plant. The company stopped that leak in March 2010 but not before the state Senate, which was then led by now Governor Shumlin, voted to block the state from allowing the plant to run beyond March 2012.
D'coda Dcoda

Hiroshima to Fukushima, Finishing the Job | Veterans Today [18Aug11] - 0 views

  • (San Francisco) Two 10,000 lb (4,545 kg) uranium poison gas “dirty” bombs with small nuclear  dispersion devises set Japan on the road to extinction on August 6, 1945 and August 9, 1945 at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. A row of six modified and enlarged US Navy submarine reactors pioneered by US Navy Admiral Hyman Rickover and manufactured by the US based General Electric Corp (GE) finished the kill March 11, 2011. Thanks to the US Navy designed and GE built atomic reactors, the Japanese people are dying, the country of Japan is no more and the land is permanently uninhabitable.
  • Lethal nuclear vapors created by the destroyed Navy/GE reactors and thousands of tons of garbaged and burning old reactor cores are spreading invisible radioactive death and sickness all over the world. What’s more: the atomic reactors spilled their burning guts into the basements and there is evidence the melted reactor cores are still “reacting” 160 days out. Shutting them down is mostly just plain impossible. The burning, radioactive gates of hell are still open wide. Breathe deep everyone. Breathe your own poisoned Fuku tainted air.
  • The Total Fertility Rate (TFR) The best measure of population growth or shrinkage is a country’s Total Fertility Rate (TFR). It is, simply put, the average number of children women have in a society over their child bearing years. Two kids per woman is the “replacement value” for one woman and one male. Two kids per woman means the man and woman replace themselves and the next generation will be the same size as their preceding generation.
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • The higher the TFR number, the more the population will grow and expand. On the other hand, a TFR number below 2 kids per woman means the population is shrinking for the next generation. Nuclear weaponeers who know about these things say it is impossible for a society to recover, or grow again, with a TFR below 1.3 kids per woman. In short, that society is doomed. Japan’s TFR plummeted to 1.2 since the detonation of the two 10,000 lb sperm and ovary destroying uranium poison gas bombs in August, 1945.
  • A few weeks after the atomic bombing, Australian journalist George Weller managed to sneak into occupied Japan and nuked Nagasaki in spite of US Army General Douglas MacArthur’s prohibition. Weller, an experienced war correspondent, was utterly stunned at the extent of the other worldly devastation and killing of the Atomic Bomb. Mr. Weller coined the term “Atomic Plague” which then swept around the world on a wave of revulsion at what the Americans had done. Diplomats and other people politically or militarily in-the-know knew the Japanese were eager to surrender and that President Truman lied in his bull shit speech about the Atomic Bomb “saving American lives” that would be forfeit if the US were to invade Japan.
  • The coming Fuku Kid Disaster and Fuku Kill Off First and foremost will be the ever nasty New York Times (NYT.) When it comes to something really, vitally important to all our futures, our families and friends, we can always count on the NYT to lie through their teeth for the nuclear industry criminals and mass murderers. That is nothing new for the Times, they always have.
  • The Radiation Warfare Committee controlled Manhattan Project to build the Atomic Bomb got its name from its organizer, the Manhattan Engineering District of the US Army Corps of Engineers. The Sultzbergers’ NY Times was only too eager to help the fledgling CIA and the US War Department lie about the nuke bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan that incinerated hundreds of thousands of people. Many were literally vaporized into nothingness. The Big Lie Lives On with the NY Times
  • What’s more, the dominant owners of the NYT, the Sultzberger family, like it that way. The family has had a slash and burn radiation policy ever since Hiroshima in 1945. No Lie was too Big, in fact, the Bigger and more Bizarre the better. Germany’s WWII Fuhrer Adolph Hitler may have coined the concept “The Big Lie;” but, the New York Times spun it out to a degree that would make even Hitler proud.
  • The six devastated US Navy/GE reactors at Fukushima Daiichi finished the Kill Truman ordered 65 years, 7 months, and 6 days later on March 3, 2011. Sayonara, Japan, you are history. “Who’s Next?” Good question. There are 438 big reactors, just stationary nuclear weapons really, in the world. 104 big nuke reactors are in America and many, like the Fuku reactors,  are by the sea due to the exorbitant, one billion gallons a day water demand of the reactors. Even the inland reactors are exquisitely vulnerable to becoming another Fukushima. If any lose electricity and off site feeds, a Fuku type meltdown is guaranteed.
  • The people in the Japanese NHK TV video below live in Northern Japan. They must evacuate and many are dying. Many won’t leave, preferring Denial as the better course to reality and Evacuation. After all, you can’t see, feel, hear or taste radiation as it liquefies your insides. Any of us could be next.
  • The US Military and probably Russia’s Military, the former Soviet Union, possess weapons that can accomplish this kind of devastation. They should, at least the US has devoted billions to controlling what the DOD calls “earth processes” for 60 years. That would be your basic hurricanes, tornadoes, rain, drought, earthquakes, tsunamis, rogue waves and volcanoes. Even a medium sized tropical storm, not even big enough to be a hurricane or typhoon, contains as much energy as 10,000 Hiroshima sized Atomic Bombs. If the War Department, later renamed to the Department of Defense to confuse the do-gooders, could control the weather or “Earth Processes” they would control the world. That’s the long held dream of Psychos and control freaks everywhere.
  •  
    only a partial clipping so read article for more
Dan R.D.

Alec Baldwin Knocks Nuclear Power, Calls Reactors 'Filthy' [02Sep11] - 0 views

  • And there is some evidence that the dangers of nuclear power have been underestimated in the past. An Associated Press analysis of a preliminary government report on nuclear reactor safety found that the risk of an earthquake causing a severe accident at a U.S. nuclear plant is as much as 24 times greater than previously thought, suggesting an urgent need for upgrades.
  • But for some opponents of nuclear power, no amount of planning or patching is enough. The risks to the environment and human health, they say, far outweigh whatever benefits nuclear power might have to offer -- even if those benefits include reducing the nation's reliance on fossil fuels.
  • Among those critics is the actor Alec Baldwin, whose thoughts on the subject carry added weight with his admitted interest in entering politics. Earlier this month, he told The New York Times that while a run is not imminent, he has his eye on the mayor's office.
D'coda Dcoda

Shizuoka Governor Kawakatsu Entertains NY Tea Drinkers [16Jul1]] - 0 views

  • Governor Heita Kawakatsu of Shizuoka Prefecture joined a gathering of green tea lovers in New York on July 14 and appealed the safety of the teas grown in Shizuoka Prefecture, the largest tea producer in Japan.
  • The US is the largest market for Japan's tea export with 46% share. The governor said he wanted to dispel the anxiety due to the Fukushima nuke accident and appeal the safety directly to consumers in New York, where the Japanese food is popular.
  • Governor Kawakatsu explained that Shizuoka Prefecture was far away from Fukushima Prefecture where the accident happened, and that the survey of the dried teas in the prefecture's tea growing regions showed that the levels of radioactive cesium were below the safety limit. He said, "Shizuoka's tea is not only safe but good for your health." At the gathering, there were demonstrations on how to enjoy green tea in different ways.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • The Tea Association of the US's chairman said, "There's nothing in the world like green tea from Japan. If we upload the data [that the governor has given us] to our homepage, the sale of green tea will be back to normal."
  • Answers to the question of what's wrong with the governor's statement:1. Shizuoka is far away from Fukushima, so what? That does not change the fact that radioactive materials have been falling in Shizuoka since the Fukushima blowup, and hasn't stopped at the prefectural border (although initially some people in Shizuoka actually claimed that the Hakone Mountains blocked the radiation).2. The statement that "the levels of radioactive cesium were below the safety limit" is plain wrong. French authorities confiscated the green tea grown and processed in Shizuoka Prefecture when that tea tested over 1000 becquerels/kg of radioactive cesium, twice the loose safety limit of Japan and the EU. Also, the tea from Warashina District tested higher than the 500 becquerels/kg limit, which was first discovered by Radish Boya, an online grocer in Tokyo.
  • 3. Standard? What standard? The radiation safety limit for food in the US is 170 becquerels/kg. Of all teas from Shizuoka's tea growing regions, only 4 would be considered safe, being below 170 becquerels/kg. The data is right there in the Shizuoka prefectural government website.
  • If the governor tries to get away by saying the radioactive materials in the brewed tea in a teacup tested below the safety limit, that's also wrong. The Shizuoka government website also has that data, which shows between 1.6 and 14 becquerels/kg of radioactive cesium. Since it is water that is used to brew the tea, we can translate this as having 1.6 to 14 becquerels/liter of radioactive cesium. It sure clears the Japan's extremely loose standard after Fukushima, which is 200 becquerels/liter.
  • However, the US standard for drinks is 0.11 becquerels/liter. None of the Shizuoka tea, even when brewed, would pass the safety standard of the US. Several would fail the WHO standard, which is 10 becquerels/liter.Maybe the Tea Association chairman didn't know about the standards in the US. Or maybe the strict standards have been modified quietly in the US just like the EU did.
D'coda Dcoda

The yellow powder might be plutonium [25Sep11] - 0 views

  • About the previous post http://fukushima-diary.com/2011/09/news-japan-after-the-typhoon/ I received a message from a reader of this blog. It was to suggest the yellow powder could be plutonium. Here is the explanation. http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/ms2002705/ms2002705.html source for text below
  • Plutonium-239 is one of the two fissile materials used for the production of nuclear weapons and in some nuclear reactors as a source of energy. The other fissile material is uranium-235. Plutonium-239 is virtually nonexistent in nature. It is made by bombarding uranium-238 with neutrons in a nuclear reactor. Uranium-238 is present in quantity in most reactor fuel; hence plutonium-239 is continuously made in these reactors. Since plutonium-239 can itself be split by neutrons to release energy, plutonium-239 provides a portion of the energy generation in a nuclear reactor. The physical properties of plutonium metal are summarized in Table 1.
  • Only two plutonium isotopes have commercial and military applications. Plutonium-238, which is made in nuclear reactors from neptunium-237, is used to make compact thermoelectric generators; plutonium-239 is used for nuclear weapons and for energy; plutonium-241, although fissile, (see next paragraph) is impractical both as a nuclear fuel and a material for nuclear warheads. Some of the reasons are far higher cost , shorter half-life, and higher radioactivity than plutonium-239. Isotopes of plutonium with mass numbers 240 through 242 are made along with plutonium-239 in nuclear reactors, but they are contaminants with no commercial applications. In this fact sheet we focus on civilian and military plutonium (which are interchangeable in practice–see Table 5), which consist mainly of plutonium-239 mixed with varying amounts of other isotopes, notably plutonium-240, -241, and -242.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • Plutonium belongs to the class of elements called transuranic elements whose atomic number is higher than 92, the atomic number of uranium. Essentially all transuranic materials in existence are manmade. The atomic number of plutonium is 94. Plutonium has 15 isotopes with mass numbers ranging from 232 to 246. Isotopes of the same element have the same number of protons in their nuclei but differ by the number of neutrons. Since the chemical characteristics of an element are governed by the number of protons in the nucleus, which equals the number of electrons when the atom is electrically neutral (the usual elemental form at room temperature), all isotopes have nearly the same chemical characteristics. This means that in most cases it is very difficult to separate isotopes from each other by chemical techniques.
  • Plutonium-239 and plutonium-241 are fissile materials. This means that they can be split by both slow (ideally zero-energy) and fast neutrons into two new nuclei (with the concomitant release of energy) and more neutrons. Each fission of plutonium-239 resulting from a slow neutron absorption results in the production of a little more than two neutrons on the average. If at least one of these neutrons, on average, splits another plutonium nucleus, a sustained chain reaction is achieved.
  • The even isotopes, plutonium-238, -240, and -242 are not fissile but yet are fissionable–that is, they can only be split by high energy neutrons. Generally, fissionable but non-fissile isotopes cannot sustain chain reactions; plutonium-240 is an exception to that rule. The minimum amount of material necessary to sustain a chain reaction is called the critical mass. A supercritical mass is bigger than a critical mass, and is capable of achieving a growing chain reaction where the amount of energy released increases with time.
  • The amount of material necessary to achieve a critical mass depends on the geometry and the density of the material, among other factors. The critical mass of a bare sphere of plutonium-239 metal is about 10 kilograms. It can be considerably lowered in various ways. The amount of plutonium used in fission weapons is in the 3 to 5 kilograms range. According to a recent Natural Resources Defense Council report (1), nuclear weapons with a destructive power of 1 kiloton can be built with as little as 1 kilogram of weapon grade plutonium(2). The smallest theoretical critical mass of plutonium-239 is only a few hundred grams.
  • In contrast to nuclear weapons, nuclear reactors are designed to release energy in a sustained fashion over a long period of time. This means that the chain reaction must be controlled–that is, the number of neutrons produced needs to equal the number of neutrons absorbed. This balance is achieved by ensuring that each fission produces exactly one other fission. All isotopes of plutonium are radioactive, but they have widely varying half-lives. The half-life is the time it takes for half the atoms of an element to decay. For instance, plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24, 110 years while plutonium-241 has a half-life of 14.4 years. The various isotopes also have different principal decay modes. The isotopes present in commercial or military plutonium-239 are plutonium-240, -241, and -242. Table 2 shows a summary of the radiological properties of five plutonium isotopes. The isotopes of plutonium that are relevant to the nuclear and commercial industries decay by the emission of alpha particles, beta particles, or spontaneous fission. Gamma radiation, which is penetrating electromagnetic radiation, is often associated with alpha and beta decays.
  • Table 3 describes the chemical properties of plutonium in air. These properties are important because they affect the safety of storage and of operation during processing of plutonium. The oxidation of plutonium represents a health hazard since the resulting stable compound, plutonium dioxide is in particulate form that can be easily inhaled. It tends to stay in the lungs for long periods, and is also transported to other parts of the body. Ingestion of plutonium is considerably less dangerous since very little is absorbed while the rest passes through the digestive system.
  • Plutonium-239 is formed in both civilian and military reactors from uranium-238. The subsequent absorption of a neutron by plutonium-239 results in the formation of plutonium-240. Absorption of another neutron by plutonium-240 yields plutonium-241. The higher isotopes are formed in the same way. Since plutonium-239 is the first in a string of plutonium isotopes created from uranium-238 in a reactor, the longer a sample of uranium-238 is irradiated, the greater the percentage of heavier isotopes. Plutonium must be chemically separated from the fission products and remaining uranium in the irradiated reactor fuel. This chemical separation is called reprocessing. Fuel in power reactors is irradiated for longer periods at higher power levels, called high “burn-up”, because it is fuel irradiation that generates the heat required for power production. If the goal is production of plutonium for military purposes then the “burn-up” is kept low so that the plutonium-239 produced is as pure as possible, that is, the formationo of the higher isotopes, particularly plutonium-240, is kept to a minimum. Plutonium has been classified into grades by the US DOE (Department of Energy) as shown in Table 5.
  • It is important to remember that this classification of plutonium according to grades is somewhat arbitrary. For example, although “fuel grade” and “reactor grade” are less suitable as weapons material than “weapon grade” plutonium, they can also be made into a nuclear weapon, although the yields are less predictable because of unwanted neutrons from spontaneous fission. The ability of countries to build nuclear arsenals from reactor grade plutonium is not just a theoretical construct. It is a proven fact. During a June 27, 1994 press conference, Secretary of Energy Hazel O’Leary revealed that in 1962 the United States conducted a successful test with “reactor grade” plutonium. All grades of plutonium can be used as weapons of radiological warfare which involve weapons that disperse radioactivity without a nuclear explosion.
  • Benedict, Manson, Thomas Pigford, and Hans Wolfgang Levi, Nuclear Chemical Engineering, 2d ed. (New York: McGraw Hill Book Company, 1981). Wick, OJ, Editor, Plutonium Handbook: A Guide to the Technology, vol I and II, (La Grange Park, Illinois: American Nuclear Society, 1980). Cochran, Thomas B., William M. Arkin, and Milton M. Honig, Nuclear Weapons Databook, Vol I, Natural Resources Defense Council. (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Ballinger Publishing Company, 1984) Plutonium(IV) oxide is the chemical compound with the formula PuO2. This high melting point solid is a principal compound of plutonium. It can vary in color from yellow to olive green, depending on the particle size, temperature and method of production.[1]
  •  
    excellent article explains plutonium
D'coda Dcoda

The High Cost of Freedom from Fossil Fuels [10Nov11] - 0 views

shared by D'coda Dcoda on 11 Nov 11 - No Cached
  • During the 1970s and 1980s, at the peak of the nuclear reactor construction, organized groups of protestors mounted dozens of anti-nuke campaigns. They were called Chicken Littles, the establishment media generally ignored their concerns, and the nuclear industry trotted out numerous scientists and engineers from their payrolls to declare nuclear energy to be safe, clean, and inexpensive energy that could reduce America’s dependence upon foreign oil. Workers at nuclear plants are highly trained, probably far more than workers in any other industry; operating systems are closely regulated and monitored. However, problems caused by human negligence, manufacturing defects, and natural disasters have plagued the nuclear power industry for its six decades. It isn’t alerts like what happened at San Onofre that are the problem; it’s the level 3 (site area emergencies) and level 4 (general site emergencies) disasters. There have been 99 major disasters, 56 of them in the U.S., since 1952, according to a study conducted by Benjamin K. Sovacool Director of the Energy Justice Program at Institute for Energy and Environment  One-third of all Americans live within 50 miles of a nuclear plant.
  • At Windscale in northwest England, fire destroyed the core, releasing significant amounts of Iodine-131. At Rocky Flats near Denver, radioactive plutonium and tritium leaked into the environment several times over a two decade period. At Church Rock, New Mexico, more than 90 million gallons of radioactive waste poured into the Rio Puerco, directly affecting the Navajo nation. In the grounds of central and northeastern Pennsylvania, in addition to the release of radioactive Cesium-137 and Iodine-121, an excessive level of Strontium-90 was released during the Three Mile Island (TMI) meltdown in 1979, the same year as the Church Rock disaster. To keep waste tanks from overflowing with radioactive waste, the plant’s operator dumped several thousand gallons of radioactive waste into the Susquehanna River. An independent study by Dr. Steven Wing of the University of North Carolina revealed the incidence of lung cancer and leukemia downwind of the TMI meltdown within six years of the meltdown was two to ten times that of the rest of the region.
  • Although nuclear plant security is designed to protect against significant and extended forms of terrorism, the NRC believes as many as one-fourth of the 104 U.S. nuclear plants may need upgrades to withstand earthquakes and other natural disasters, according to an Associated Press investigation. About 20 percent of the world’s 442 nuclear plants are built in earthquake zones, according to data compiled by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The NRC has determined that the leading U.S. plants in the Eastern Coast in danger of being compromised by an earthquake are in the extended metropolitan areas of Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Chattanooga. Tenn. The highest risk, however, may be California’s San Onofre and Diablo Canyon plants, both built near major fault lines. Diablo Canyon, near San Luis Obispo, was even built by workers who misinterpreted the blueprints.  
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • A Department of Energy analysis revealed the budget for 75 of the first plants was about $45 billion, but cost overruns ran that to $145 billion. The last nuclear power plant completed was the Watts Bar plant in eastern Tennessee. Construction began in 1973 and was completed in 1996. Part of the federal Tennessee Valley Authority, the Watts Bar plant cost about $8 billion to produce 1,170 mw of energy from its only reactor. Work on a second reactor was suspended in 1988 because of a lack of need for additional electricity. However, construction was resumed in 2007, with completion expected in 2013. Cost to complete the reactor, which was about 80 percent complete when work was suspended, is estimated to cost an additional $2.5 billion. The cost to build new power plants is well over $10 billion each, with a proposed cost of about $14 billion to expand the Vogtle plant near Augusta, Ga. The first two units had cost about $9 billion.
  • Added to the cost of every plant is decommissioning costs, averaging about $300 million to over $1 billion, depending upon the amount of energy the plant is designed to produce. The nuclear industry proudly points to studies that show the cost to produce energy from nuclear reactors is still less expensive than the costs from coal, gas, and oil. The industry also rightly points out that nukes produce about one-fifth all energy, with no emissions, such as those from the fossil fuels. For more than six decades, this nation essentially sold its soul for what it thought was cheap energy that may not be so cheap, and clean energy that is not so clean. It is necessary to ask the critical question. Even if there were no human, design, and manufacturing errors; even if there could be assurance there would be no accidental leaks and spills of radioactivity; even if there became a way to safely and efficiently dispose of long-term radioactive waste; even if all of this was possible, can the nation, struggling in a recession while giving subsidies to the nuclear industry, afford to build more nuclear generating plants at the expense of solar, wind, and geothermal energy?
1 - 20 of 51 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page