Group items tagged

Judge David M. Ebel vacated decisions by the U.S. Department of Interior that had blocked construction of the proposed Tooele County facility and remanded Private Fuel Storage's right-of-way application and lease of tribal land to for further consideration.

The Goshute tribe had agreed to lease land to Private Fuel as a long-term solution. Private Fuel obtained a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build and operate the spent fuel storage facility near the U.S. Army's Dugway Proving Ground. The waste would be transported via railway and, for the last 24 miles, by "heavy haul" trucks onto the Goshute land, Ebel said. However, the Interior's Bureau of Land Management denied the consortium's request for a right-of-way access to the land.

The Department of Interior's main concern was that Private Fuel would not be able to dismantle the storage facility after the lease was up. "There is no evidence in the administrative record that [Private Fuel] could not physically dismantle the site and decommission the facility," the judge's 36-page answer states

About 19 percent of airborne fallout from the Fukushima nuclear disaster was deposited in Japan, and only about 2 percent made it to other land areas in Asia and North America, according to a study published this week by the European Geosciences Union. The bulk was absorbed by the Pacific Ocean.

Opponents of nuclear energy have seized on the European study because it describes the total release at Fukushima as “massive.” It finds that twice as much cesium 137 was released at Fukushima than originally reported. And it says “high concentrations” reached North America and Europe. It examines two radionuclides in particular–xenon 133 and cesium 137–and measures the total release in terabecquerels.

Altogether, we estimate that 6.4 TBq of 137Cs, or 19 percent of the total fallout until 20 April, were deposited over Japanese land areas, while most of the rest fell over the North Pacific Ocean,” the authors write. “Only 0.7 TBq, or 2 percent of the total fallout were deposited on land areas other than Japan.” Scientists generally regard ocean absorption of fallout preferable to land deposits, because water absorbs radiation and the volume of the ocean dilutes it. On land, radioactive isotopes can be consumed by livestock and concentrated in milk and other food sources. The study also notes that airborne emissions of cesium 137 continued until March 19, when Japanese authorities began spraying water on the spent fuel pool of reactor #4. “This indicates that emissions were not only coming from the damaged reactor cores, but also from the spent-fuel pool of unit 4 and confirms that the spraying was an effective countermeasure.”

A Canadian company has been threatening to confiscate private land from South Dakota to the Gulf of Mexico, and is already suing many who have refused to allow the Keystone XL pipeline on their property even though the controversial project has yet to receive federal approval.

Randy Thompson, a cattle buyer in Nebraska, was informed that if he did not grant pipeline access to 80 of the 400 acres left to him by his mother along the Platte River, “Keystone will use eminent domain to acquire the easement.” Sue Kelso and her large extended family in Oklahoma were sued in the local district court by TransCanada, the pipeline company, after she and her siblings refused to allow the pipeline to cross their pasture.

“Their land agent told us the very first day she met with us, you either take the money or they’re going to condemn the land,” Mrs. Kelso said. By its own count, the company currently has 34 eminent domain actions against landowners in Texas and an additional 22 in South Dakota.In addition to enraging those along the proposed pipeline’s 1,700-mile path, the tactics have many people questioning whether a foreign company can pressure landowners without a permit from the State Department — the agency charged with determining whether the project is in the “national interest.” A decision is expected by year’s end on the pipeline, which would carry crude oil from Alberta to American refineries.

SUMMARY: The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), a separately organized semi-autonomous agency within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), announces the availability of the Draft Site-Wide Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of the Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada National Security Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada (Draft SWEIS, DOE/EIS-0426D) for public review, as well as the locations, dates and times for public hearings. The Draft SWEIS for the continued management and operation of the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) (formerly known as the Nevada Test Site) and other NNSA-managed sites in Nevada, including the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL) on Nellis Air Force Base, the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF), and the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) on the U.S. Air Force Nevada Test and Training Range, analyzes the potential environmental impacts for three alternatives: No Action Alternative, Expanded Operations Alternative and Reduced Operations Alternative. Each alternative comprises current and reasonably foreseeable activities at the NNSS and the three offsite locations.

The Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing regulations allow an agency to identify its preferred alternative or alternatives, if one or more exists, in a draft EIS (40 CFR 1502.14[e]). NNSA has not currently identified a preferred alternative; however, a preferred alternative will be identified in the Final SWEIS. The U.S. Air Force, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and Nye County, Nevada, are cooperating agencies in the preparation of this Draft SWEIS. In addition, the Consolidated Group of Tribes and Organizations, which include representatives from 17 Tribes and organizations, participated in its preparation.

DATES: NNSA invites comments on the Draft SWEIS during the public comment period which ends October 27, 2011. NNSA will consider comments received after this date to the extent practicable as it prepares the Final SWEIS. NNSA will hold five public hearings on the Draft SWEIS. Locations, dates and times are provided in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION portion of this notice under ``Public Hearings and Invitation To Comment'

It is unconfirmed information, which may not be confirmed at all even if it is true as it may have been the "administrative guidance" from the government without a formal document. Plausible deniability has been one of Japan's forte over hundreds of years if not thousand. A resident of Fukushima City, responding to one of the tweets about why the farmers in Fukushima farmed at all this year and continue to sell produce even when they are aware that the land is heavily contaminated with radioactive fallout from Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant, says the following:

Everyone was saying "We can't farm this year". Then the national government said to them, "Farm as usual".She also says in an earlier tweet:

I live in Fukushima City. None of the people around me eat [Fukushima produce]. Even the farmers say "We can't eat this year['s produce]". I personally believe it's "we can't eat from now on".Vegetables, meat, rice that even some people in Fukushima don't eat are being promoted and sold all over Japan.

The U.S. Army has embarked on an ambitious $7 billion series of utility-scale renewable energy projects. The new program involves building twenty utility-scale renewable energy installations that rely on a mix of solar, wind, geothermal, and biomass power. The installations will be constructed on land owned by the Department of Defense, at Army bases throughout the U.S. The program calls for the Army to use its land as equity to leverage about $7 billion in private investment for the twenty projects.

The Army’s goal is to provide its bases with reliable energy sources that are insulated from price spikes, shortages and grid disruptions. Aside from these energy security issues, reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions are key goals. Rather than paying up front for the installations, the Army plans to attract companies that would build the renewable energy installations in exchange for a commitment from the Army to purchase the energy. This type of arrangement, called a Power Purchase Agreement, is common in the solar industry.

Since many base commanders do not have the resources to initiate or manage utility-scale energy construction projects (defined as about 10 megawatts or more), the Army has formed a new Energy Initiatives Task Force (EITF) composed of a small staff of experts who will assess projects, vet renewable energy companies, develop new technologies and streamline the approval process. EITF was organized over the summer and officially announced that it was open for business on September 15.

TELLURIDE, Colo.— In a major victory for clean air, clean water and endangered species on public lands, a federal judge on Tuesday halted the Department of Energy’s 42-square-mile uranium-leasing program that threatened the Dolores and San Miguel rivers in southwestern Colorado. Five conservation groups had sued to halt the leasing program, charging that the Department of Energy was failing to adequately protect the environment or analyze the full impacts of renewed uranium mining on public lands. “We are pleased that Judge Martinez agreed with the groups, as well as local governments, who have been requesting the federal government take responsible steps to disclose the full range of impacts of mining uranium on public lands in combination with the impacts from Energy Fuels’ proposed uranium mill,” said Hilary White, executive director of Sheep Mountain Alliance. “This is an important ruling that will help ensure that any uranium mining and milling that may take place in the Dolores River watershed is protective of the environment and human health. We look forward to the Environmental Protection Agency’s leadership in disclosing the full impacts of uranium activity in this important watershed.”

A. Stohl1, P. Seibert2, G. Wotawa3, D. Arnold2,4, J. F. Burkhart1, S. Eckhardt1, C. Tapia5, A. Vargas4, and T. J. Yasunari61NILU – Norwegian Institute for Air Research, Kjeller, Norway2Institute of Meteorology, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna, Austria3Central Institute for Meteorology and Geodynamics, Vienna, Austria4Institute of Energy Technologies (INTE), Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona, Spain5Department of Physics and Nucelar Engineering (FEN),Technical University of Catalonia (UPC), Barcelona, Spain6Universities Space Research Association, Goddard Earth Sciences and Technology and Research, Columbia, MD 21044, USAAbstract. On 11 March 2011, an earthquake occurred about 130 km off the Pacific coast of Japan's main island Honshu, followed by a large tsunami. The resulting loss of electric power at the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant (FD-NPP) developed into a disaster causing massive release of radioactivity into the atmosphere. In this study, we determine the emissions of two isotopes, the noble gas xenon-133 (133Xe) and the aerosol-bound caesium-137 (137Cs), which have very different release characteristics as well as behavior in the atmosphere. To determine radionuclide emissions as a function of height and time until 20 April, we made a first guess of release rates based on fuel inventories and documented accident events at the site.

This first guess was subsequently improved by inverse modeling, which combined the first guess with the results of an atmospheric transport model, FLEXPART, and measurement data from several dozen stations in Japan, North America and other regions. We used both atmospheric activity concentration measurements as well as, for 137Cs, measurements of bulk deposition. Regarding 133Xe, we find a total release of 16.7 (uncertainty range 13.4–20.0) EBq, which is the largest radioactive noble gas release in history not associated with nuclear bomb testing. There is strong evidence that the first strong 133Xe release started very early, possibly immediately after the earthquake and the emergency shutdown on 11 March at 06:00 UTC. The entire noble gas inventory of reactor units 1–3 was set free into the atmosphere between 11 and 15 March 2011. For 137Cs, the inversion results give a total emission of 35.8 (23.3–50.1) PBq, or about 42% of the estimated Chernobyl emission. Our results indicate that 137Cs emissions peaked on 14–15 March but were generally high from 12 until 19 March, when they suddenly dropped by orders of magnitude exactly when spraying of water on the spent-fuel pool of unit 4 started. This indicates that emissions were not only coming from the damaged reactor cores, but also from the spent-fuel pool of unit 4 and confirms that the spraying was an effective countermeasure. We also explore the main dispersion and deposition patterns of the radioactive cloud, both regionally for Japan as well as for the entire Northern Hemisphere. While at first sight it seemed fortunate that westerly winds prevailed most of the time during the accident, a different picture emerges from our detailed analysis

Exactly during and following the period of the strongest 137Cs emissions on 14 and 15 March as well as after another period with strong emissions on 19 March, the radioactive plume was advected over Eastern Honshu Island, where precipitation deposited a large fraction of 137Cs on land surfaces. The plume was also dispersed quickly over the entire Northern Hemisphere, first reaching North America on 15 March and Europe on 22 March. In general, simulated and observed concentrations of 133Xe and 137Cs both at Japanese as well as at remote sites were in good quantitative agreement with each other. Altogether, we estimate that 6.4 TBq of 137Cs, or 19% of the total fallout until 20 April, were deposited over Japanese land areas, while most of the rest fell over the North Pacific Ocean. Only 0.7 TBq, or 2% of the total fallout were deposited on land areas other than Japan.Discussion Paper (PDF, 6457 KB)   Supplement (13 KB)   Interactive Discussion (Open, 0 Comments)   Manuscript under review for ACP   

An unstoppable tide of radioactive trash and chemical waste from Fukushima is pushing ever closer to North America. An estimated 20 million tons of smashed timber, capsized boats and industrial wreckage is more than halfway across the ocean, based on sightings off Midway by a Russian ship's crew. Safe disposal of the solid waste will be monumental task, but the greater threat lies in the invisible chemical stew mixed with sea water.

This new triple disaster floating from northeast Japan is an unprecedented nuclear, biological and chemical (NBC) contamination event. Radioactive isotopes cesium and strontium are by now in the marine food chain, moving up the bio-ladder from plankton to invertebrates like squid and then into fish like salmon and halibut. Sea animals are also exposed to the millions of tons of biological waste from pig farms and untreated sludge from tsunami-engulfed coast of Japan, transporting pathogens including the avian influenza virus, which is known to infect fish and turtles. The chemical contamination, either liquid or leached out of plastic and painted metal, will likely have the most immediate effects of harming human health and exterminating marine animals.

Many chemical compounds are volatile and can evaporate with water to form clouds, which will eventually precipitate as rainfall across Canada and the northern United States. The long-term threat extends far inland to the Rockies and beyond, affecting agriculture, rivers, reservoirs and, eventually, aquifers and well water.   Falsifying Oceanography

U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, delivered a speech this week at the International V.M. Goldschmidt Conference in Knoxville.  Alexander serves on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and is the chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority Congressional Caucus.  His remarks as prepared follow:

When

in a speech in Oak Ridge in May of 2009, I called for America to build 100 new nuclear plants during the next twenty years.  Nuclear power produces 70 percent of our pollution-free, carbon-free electricity today.  It is the most useful and reliable source of green electricity today because of its tremendous energy density and the small amount of waste that it produces.  And because we are harnessing the heat and energy of the earth itself through the power of the atom, nuclear power is also natural.

MUMBAI: India should move on to make nuclear energy as safe as possible by taking lessons from the recent Fukushima accident but its imperative to replace the old-era Land Acquisition Act with a more balanced one, to address the country's present huge infrastructure and energy needs, former Atomic Energy Commission Chairman M R Srinivasan said here.

Stating that the resettlement was equally significant in any infrastructure project, he said India's record of resettling project-affected people has been "pathetic". Srinivasan, currently a member of AEC, was delivering the first Homi Sethna Memorial lecture on 'Future of Nuclear Power after Fukushima,' at the Nehru Centre here last evening.

The switch — one that's tripped when Fort Calhoun Nuclear Station needs to safely shut down its reactor — was making an unusual buzzing sound.Plant engineers looked into it, made some repairs and overall didn't think it was a big deal.Turns out they didn't understand the problem as well as they thought they did. During a later test, the switch malfunctioned.

The kind of thinking that led to the switch failure at the nuclear power plant 19 miles north of Omaha has now landed the plant in some hot water with federal regulators. More than a mechanical failing, it suggests a culture that's out of step with the assume-nothing, take-no-chances, stay-on-top-of-things approach that's demanded when working with a technology where multiple errors and failures can cascade into very, very bad results. The switch issue came on the heels of another regulatory write-up Fort Calhoun had received for having inadequate plans for dealing with extremely massive flooding — flooding even greater than the historic high water levels seen at the plant this summer.

Fort Calhoun is one of only two out of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors currently on the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's list of most-troubled plants, and one of only eight to land on it over the past decade.It's all caused a great deal of introspection within the plant's owner, the Omaha Public Power District. While the utility's top leaders say the plant remains a safe one, in hindsight they say the staff's safety focus had slipped."We had a slow, subtle decline,'' Gary Gates, OPPD's president and CEO, said in an interview during a plant visit last week. "This plant is used to running at a high level of performance. We're embarrassed to be in this situation. This is not how Fort Calhoun runs.

The amount of radioactive cesium ejected by the Fukushima reactor meltdowns is about 168 times higher than that emitted in the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, the government's nuclear watchdog said Friday.

The Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency provided the estimate at the request of a Diet panel but noted that making a simple comparison between an instantaneous bomb blast and a long-term accidental leak is problematic and could lead to "irrelevant" results.

The report said the crippled Fukushima No. 1 plant has released 15,000 terabecquerels of cesium-137, which lingers for decades and can cause cancer, compared with the 89 terabecquerels released by the U.S. atomic bombing of Hiroshima.

Nuclear power proponents claim: It has low carbon emissions. It is the peaceful face of the atom and proliferation problems are manageable. It is compact -- so little uranium, so much energy. Unlike solar and wind, it is 24/7 electricity. It reduces dependence on oil. Let's examine each argument.

1. Climate. Nuclear energy has low carbon emissions. But the United States doesn't lack low-carbon energy sources: The potential of wind energy alone is about nine times total US electricity generation. Solar energy is even more plentiful. Time and money to address climate change are in short supply, not low carbon dioxide sources. Instead of the two large reactors the United States would require every three months to significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions, all the breathless pronouncements from nuclear advocates are only yielding two reactors every five years -- if that. Even federal loan guarantees have not given this renaissance momentum. Wall Street won't fund them. (Can nuclear power even be called a commercial technology if it can't raise money on Wall Street?) Today, wind energy is far cheaper and faster than nuclear. Simply put: Nuclear fares poorly on two crucial criteria -- time and money.

2. Proliferation. President Eisenhower spoke of "Atoms for Peace" at the United Nations in 1953; he thought it would be too depressing only to mention the horrors of thermonuclear weapons. It was just a fig leaf to mask the bomb: Much of the interest in nuclear power is mainly a cover for acquiring bomb-making know-how. To make a real dent in carbon dioxide emissions, about 3,000 large reactors would have to be built worldwide in the next 40 years -- creating enough plutonium annually to create 90,000 bombs, if separated. Two or three commercial uranium enrichment plants would also be needed yearly -- and it has only taken one, Iran's, to give the world a nuclear security headache.