Skip to main content

Home/ Open Intelligence / Energy/ Group items tagged law

Rss Feed Group items tagged

D'coda Dcoda

New Japan Law 'Cleanses' Bad Nuclear News [24Jul11] - 0 views

  • Since March 11, 2011 it has been reported that YouTube videos containing footage or comments unfavorable to Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) or the Japanese government have been removed within several hours of their posting. Examples of offending YouTube videos include excerpts of TV shows with controversial comments like footage showing smoke emitted from the nuclear reactors, and an ex-TEPCO employee speaking on his Fukushima experiences. Likewise, Twitter accounts with too much content regarding nuclear power and radiation issues have been disrupted.
  • On June 17, 2011 the Japanese Parliament passed “The Computer Network Monitoring Law” . Prof. Ibusuki of Seijo Univ. Law Dept. comments that “The Computer Network Monitoring Law will enable the police to monitor anyone’s internet activity without restriction.” Although this appears, on the surface, to be beneficial when targeting cyber-attacks, some Japanese commentators are suggesting that the law is un-Constitutional.
  • “Nuclear Power Safety Regulation Publicity Project” stipulates that, “The Contractor is required to monitor blogs on nuclear power and radiation issues as well as Twitter accounts (monitoring tweets is essential) around the clock, and conduct research and analysis on incorrect and inappropriate information that would lead to false rumors, and to report such internet accounts to the Agency. The “Contractor” is required to keep the Agency well informed on the internet accounts and keywords used in the blogs and Twitter accounts that are posting incorrect and inappropriate information. The Contractor is required to maintain sufficient number of personnel for around-the-clock monitoring. The Contractor is required to submit reports on internet accounts via CDR.” The document, however, does not state that blogs or Twitter accounts, which run afoul of METI’s guidelines, are to be banned or frozen.” The question is, will METI draw the line at “clarifying” erroneous information, or will it act to clamp down and suppress sources of information that it finds inconvenient?
D'coda Dcoda

Bundesrat Approves Most of Nuclear Power Exit Energy Package [08Jul11] - 0 views

  • The nuclear phase-out until 2022, which the government proposed in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear accident, and the accelerated transition into an age of renewable energy supply can almost go ahead as planned. The Bundesrat (Federal Council)  followed the Bundestag’s (Federal Parliament’s) vote of 1 July 2011 and approved the energy legislative package in its last session before the summer break. However, the Energy-Efficient Renovations of Residential Buildings Act was rejected. Hence, the laws below can enter into force after having been signed by the Federal President Christian Wulff and following promulgation in the Federal Law Gazette: 13th amendment of the Atomic Energy Act (AtG) – the actual nuclear energy exit law; Act Amending the Legal Framework for the Promotion of the Electricity Generation from Renewable Energy Sources (Gesetz zur Neuregelung des Rechtsrahmens für die Förderung der Stromerzeugung aus erneuerbaren Energien), which most importantly contains amendments of the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG) in Article 1; Act Amending Energy Law related Provisions (Gesetz zur Neuregelung energiewirtschaftsrechtlicher Vorschriften), most importantly of the German Energy Act (EnWG); Act on Measures Accelerating the Expansion of the Electricity Grids (Gesetz über Maßnahmen zur Beschleunigung des Netzausbaus Elektrizitätsnetze), which most importantly includes a new Grid Expansion Acceleration Act (NABEG) in Article 1, but also amends other laws; Act Amending the Energy and Climate Fund Act (Gesetz zur Änderung des Gesetzes zur Errichtung eines Sondervermögens “Energie- und Klimafonds – EKFG -ÄndG); Act Strenghtening Climate-Friendly Measures in Towns and Municipalities (Gesetz zur Stärkung der klimagerechten Entwicklung in den Städten und Gemeinden); First Act Amending Shipping Laws (Erstes Gesetz zur Änderung schifffahrtsrechtlicher Vorschriften). Approval by the Bundesrat, the legislative body that represents the federal states, had been uncertain for many of the bills contained in the package. The CDU/CSU/FDP coalition government does not hold a majority in the Bundesrat. While support for the amendment of the Atomic Energy Act (AtG) in the Bundesrat could be expected after the clear majority that the bill received in the Bundestag’s vote, this was not the case for many the other bills. To be able to decide before the summer break, the Bundesrat had shortened the consultation period for the bills. Still the expert committees of the Bundesrat prepared numerous recommendations to amend the bills.
D'coda Dcoda

Greg Palast » Fukushima: They Knew [10Nov11] - 0 views

  • Here was the handwritten log kept by a senior engineer at the nuclear power plant:
  • Wiesel was very upset. He seemed very nervous. Very agitated. . . . In fact, the plant was riddled with problems that, no way on earth, could stand an earth- quake. The team of engineers sent in to inspect found that most of these components could "completely and utterly fail" during an earthquake. "Utterly fail during an earthquake." And here in Japan was the quake and here is the utter failure. The warning was in what the investigations team called The Notebook, which I'm not supposed to have.  Good thing I've kept a copy anyway, because the file cabinets went down with my office building .... WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWER 1, FIFTY-SECOND FLOOR
  • [This is an excerpt in FreePress.org from Vultures' Picnic: In Pursuit of Petroleum Pigs, Power Pirates and High-Finance Fraudsters, to be released this Monday.  Click here to get the videos and the book.] Two senior nuclear plant engineers were spilling out their souls and files on our huge conference table, blowing away my government investigations team with the inside stuff about the construction of the Shoreham, New York, power station. The meeting was secret. Very secret. Their courage could destroy their careers: No engineering firm wants to hire a snitch, even one who has saved thousands of lives. They could lose their jobs; they could lose everything. They did. That’s what happens. Have a nice day.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • But I had The Notebook, the diaries of the earthquake inspector for the company.  I'd squirreled it out sometime before the Trade Center went down.  I shouldn't have done that.  Too bad. All field engineers keep a diary. Gordon Dick, a supervisor, wasn’t sup- posed to show his to us. I asked him to show it to us and, reluctantly, he directed me to these notes about the “SQ” tests.
  • On March 12 this year, as I watched Fukushima melt, I knew:  the "SQ" had been faked.  Anderson Cooper said it would all be OK.  He'd flown to Japan, to suck up the radiation and official company bullshit.  The horror show was not the fault of Tokyo Electric, he said, because the plant was built to withstand only an 8.0 earthquake on the Richter scale, and this was 9.0.  Anderson must have been in the gym when they handed out the facts.  The 9.0 shake was in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, 90 miles away.  It was barely a tenth of that power at Fukushima. I was ready to vomit.  Because I knew who had designed the plant, who had built it and whom Tokyo Electric Power was having rebuild it:  Shaw Construction.  The latest alias of Stone & Webster, the designated builder for every one of the four new nuclear plants that the Obama Administration has approved for billions in federal studies.
  • SQ is nuclear-speak for “Seismic Qualification.” A seismically qualified nuclear plant won’t melt down if you shake it. A “seismic event” can be an earthquake or a Christmas present from Al Qaeda. You can’t run a nuclear reactor in the USA or Europe or Japan without certified SQ. This much is clear from his notebook: This nuclear plant will melt down in an earthquake. The plant dismally failed to meet the Seismic I (shaking) standards required by U.S. and international rules.
  • From The Notebook: Wiesel was very upset. He seemed very nervous. Very agitated. [He said,] “I believe these are bad results and I believe it’s reportable,” and then he took the volume of federal regulations from the shelf and went to section 50.55(e), which describes reportable deficiencies at a nuclear plant and [they] read the section together, with Wiesel pointing to the appropriate paragraphs that federal law clearly required [them and the company] to report the Category II, Seismic I deficiencies. Wiesel then expressed his concern that he was afraid that if he [Wiesel] reported the deficiencies, he would be fired, but that if he didn’t report the deficiencies, he would be breaking a federal law. . . . The law is clear. It is a crime not to report a safety failure. I could imagine Wiesel standing there with that big, thick rule book in his hands, The Law. It must have been heavy. So was his paycheck. He weighed the choices: Break the law, possibly a jail-time crime, or keep his job.
  • I think we should all worry about Bob. The company he worked for, Stone & Webster Engineering, built or designed about a third of the nuclear plants in the United States.
  •  
    "Completely and Utterly Fail in an Earthquake"The Fukushima story you didn't hear on CNN.Plant engineers knew it would fail in an earthquake.
D'coda Dcoda

A Nuclear Opponent from Half a World Away - India [10Oct11] - 0 views

  • Vermont Law School (a private institution) is known as a leader in environmental law.  Students at the school have an Environmental Law Society and an International Law Society, and on September 30 these societies hosted a public meeting that featured Vaishali Patil, a woman from India who is an “environmental activist” and nuclear power opponent.
  • During the September 30 meeting that featured Patil, everyone in attendance introduced themselves, and Crafton said that she had come to the law school to work against the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant.
  • Speaking from notes on a piece of paper the size of an index card, she gave “red meat” to the audience of about 30 students and three or four older people. Her talk was similar to her speech on this YouTube presentation from earlier this year.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Patil’s topic was the Jaitapur nuclear plant in India, which will consist of six 1650-MWe Areva plants. There are also 18 fossil power plants proposed for the same area. The region is heavily dependent on agriculture and fishing, and the land for the power plants was originally farmed, but had to be taken by eminent domain. Patil told a long and compelling story about the process of land taken for public use, and the many levels of appeal and the struggle to get compensation.
  • The Indian farmers in the area are against the use of coal, so the government said, “Look at the United States as an example, with its many nuclear plants.” To prepare themselves to battle the Jaitapur project, local opponents traveled to the site of India’s first nuclear plants at Tarapur (two boiling water reactors, 150 MWe each, commercial start in 1969) and talked to local residents about the effects of the plants. According to Patil, the travelers heard horror stories from the residents about accidents that are kept secret, high infertility, aborted births, use of contract workers only, contaminated seawater preventing fishing, and radioactivity in a 200-km radius.
  • There have been contentious public hearings about the Jaitapur plants. With the help of nuclear activists from abroad, the local opponents—characterized as “farmers”—filed more than 1000 objections. Generally, she said, there is public fear of radiation in India, with special concern over its effect on the mango crop, which is an important economic export. There had been a previous bad experience for farmers and mangos from the use of pesticides, and so they don’t want the same thing happening with nuclear. Whether nuclear power is good or bad is another issue, Patil said. She claimed that the world is trying to turn India into a uranium market for foreign uranium. “The U.S. people are against nuclear power,” she said. In addition, she charged that approval for the plants in India was signed quickly when President Sarkozy of France visited the country. “We feel like guinea pigs,” she said in closing.
  • After the talk, the audience gathered in the hallway for refreshments and conversation. Then the older people and four or five students went to a lounge adjacent to the classrooms. In the lounge, one of the older people invoked the mass marches against the Seabrook nuclear plant a generation ago. Patil said, “We have to go to the streets at some point” and she passed around a clipboard for signatures for those who want training for the street demonstrations, or to be “legal observers.” She also announced that there would be a demonstration at the Vermont Yankee plant on October 13, complete with puppets and the presentation of a “Trojan Cow.”
D'coda Dcoda

US LLC Rules Allow Nuclear Power Companies To Take Profits, Dump Risk On Taxpayers [09N... - 0 views

  • US nuclear power plants mostly exist in a legal “get out of jail free” land of LLC (Legal Liability Corporation) ownership. While big energy conglomerates like Entergy own the bulk of the commercial nuclear power plants in the US, these plants are owned by individual LLC companies that have one asset, the power plant. Through a network of LLC companies and holding companies these energy giants are able to suck all the profits out of these nuclear power plants but shoulder none of the risk if something goes bad.
  • The US has a nuclear accident liability law, Price-Anderson. This law sets up a limited fund that all licensed nuclear plant owners would pay into in the event of an accident. They only pay premiums into this fund after an accident happens. Under this law each plant is required to have $300 million in liability insurance that would pay before Price-Anderson would kick in. Proving any other sort of cash reserves, ability to pay for an extended outage or an accident (including Price-Anderson premiums) has been largely voluntary by the power companies. Even when proof of financial assets is asked for by the NRC it is calculated based on projected income estimates done by the power company. The NRC admits they are out of their expertise when it comes to finance and also does no investigation to assure these estimates have any basis in fact. The NRC has also complained repeatedly that deregulation of the energy industry is causing a lack of safety and maintenance to become a large problem as companies try to extract as much profit as possible up and out of these LLC companies to the parent company, leaving insufficient money to safely operate these nuclear plants. Many of these plants in LLC situations are among the aging reactor fleet from the 1960′s & 1970′s. As these plants ask for operating license extensions from the NRC, financial soundness is not part of the review.
  • If a nuclear power plant has a major accident, is found to have an expensive damage situation or is facing decommissioning the LLC that owns it can file for bankruptcy and walk away. The parent company has no financial risk or liability. The NRC has expressed doubt about being able to “pierce the corporate veil” in court and has diverted into settlements every time it has run into this issue with an aging plant facing a financial crisis. The NRC also has no special standing in a bankruptcy case where they can compel Price-Anderson premium payments or for the nuclear power company to pay funds towards decommissioning. It is not totally clear where the decommissioning trust fund lies as these funds are “sold” along with the plant when a new company takes over a nuclear power plant.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • If Fukushima happened in the US? The people would pay the bill.
D'coda Dcoda

The Dispatch Queue - An Alternative Means of Accounting for External Costs? [28Sep11] - 0 views

  • Without much going on recently that hasn’t been covered by other blog posts, I’d like to explore a topic not specifically tied to nuclear power or to activities currently going on in Washington, D.C. It involves an idea I have about a possible alternative means of having the electricity market account for the public health and environmental costs of various energy sources, and encouraging the development and use of cleaner sources (including nuclear) without requiring legislation. Given the failure of Congress to take action on global warming, as well as environmental issues in general, non-legislative approaches to accomplishing environmental goals may be necessary. The Problem
  • One may say that the best response would be to significantly tighten pollution regulations, perhaps to the point where no sources have significant external costs. There are problems with this approach, however, above and beyond the fact that the energy industry has (and will?) successfully blocked the legislation that would be required. Significant tightening of regulations raises issues such as how expensive compliance will be, and whether or not viable alternative (cleaner) sources would be available. The beauty of simply placing a cost (or tax) on pollution that reflects its costs to public health and the environment is that those issues need not be addressed. The market just decides between sources based on the true, overall cost of each, resulting in the minimum overall (economic + environmental) cost-generation portfolio
  • The above reasoning is what led to policies like cap-and-trade or a CO2 emissions tax being proposed as a solution for the global warming problem. This has not flown politically, however. Policies that attempt to have external costs included in the market cost of energy have been labeled a “tax increase.” This is particularly true given that the associated pollution taxes (or emissions credit costs) would have largely gone to the government.
  • ...15 more annotations...
  • Well, if we can’t tax pollution, how about encouraging the use of clean sources by giving them subsidies? This has proved to be more popular so far, but this idea has also recently run into trouble, given the current situation with the budget deficit and national debt. Events like the Solyndra bankruptcy have put government clean energy subsidies even more on the defensive. Thus, it seems that neither policies involving money flowing to the government nor policies involving money flowing from the government are politically viable at this point.
  • One final idea, which does not involve money going to or from government, is simply requiring that cleaner sources provide a certain fraction of our overall power generation. The many state Renewable Portfolio Standards (that do not include nuclear) and the Clean Energy Standard being considered by Congress and the Obama administration (which does include nuclear) are examples of this policy. While better than nothing, such policies are not ideal in that they are crude, and don’t involve a quantitative incentive based on real external costs. An energy source is either defined as “clean,” or it is not. Note that the definition of “clean” would be decided politically, as opposed to objectively based on tangible external costs determined by scientific studies (nuclear’s exclusion from state Renewable Portfolio Standards policies being one outrageous example). Finally, there is the fact that any such policy would require legislation.
  • All of the above begs the question whether there is a policy available that will encourage the use of cleaner energy sources that is revenue-neutral (i.e., does not involve money flowing to or from the government), does not involve the outright (political) selection of certain energy sources over others, and does not require legislation. Enter the Dispatch Queue
  • There must be enough power plants in a given region to meet the maximum load (or demand) expected to occur. In fact, total generation capacity must exceed maximum demand by a specified “reserve margin,” to address the possibility of a plant going offline, or other possible considerations. Due to the fact that demand varies significantly with time, a significant fraction of the generation capacity remains offline, some or most of the time. The dispatch queue is a means by which utilities, or independent regional grid operators, decide which power plants will operate in order to meet demand at any given instant. A good discussion of dispatch queues and how they operate can be found in this Department of Energy report.
  • The general goal of the methodology used to set the dispatch queue order is to minimize overall generation cost, while staying in compliance with all federal or state laws (environmental rules, etc.). This is done by placing the power plants with the lowest “variable” cost first in the queue. Plants with the highest “variable” cost are placed last. The “variable” cost of a plant represents how much more it costs to operate the plant than it costs to leave it idle (i.e., it includes the fuel cost and maintenance costs that arise from operation, but does not include the plant capital cost, personnel costs, or any fixed maintenance costs). Thus, one starts with the least expensive plants, and moves up (in cost) until generation meets demand. The remaining, more expensive plants are not fired up. This ensures that the lowest-operating-cost set of plants is used to meet demand at any given time
  • As far as who makes the decisions is concerned, in many cases the local utility itself runs the dispatch for its own service territory. In most of the United States, however, there is a large regional grid (covering several utilities) that is operated by an Independent System Operator (ISO) or Regional Transmission Organization (RTO), and those organizations, which are independent of the utilities, set the dispatch queue for the region. The Idea
  • As discussed above, a plant’s place in the dispatch queue is based upon variable cost, with the lowest variable cost plants being first in the queue. As discussed in the DOE report, all the dispatch queues in the country base the dispatch order almost entirely on variable cost, with the only possible exceptions being issues related to maximizing grid reliability. What if the plant dispatch methodology were revised so that environmental costs were also considered? Ideally, the public health and environmental costs would be objectively and scientifically determined and cast in terms of an equivalent economic cost (as has been done in many scientific studies such as the ExternE study referenced earlier). The calculated external cost would be added to a plant’s variable cost, and its place in the dispatch queue would be adjusted accordingly. The net effect would be that dirtier plants would be run much less often, resulting in greatly reduced pollution.
  • This could have a huge impact in the United States, especially at the current time. Currently, natural gas prices are so low that the variable costs of combine-cycle natural gas plants are not much higher than those of coal plants, even without considering environmental impacts. Also, there is a large amount of natural gas generation capacity sitting idle.
  • More specifically, if dispatch queue ordering methods were revised to even place a small (economic) weight on environmental costs, there would be a large switch from coal to gas generation, with coal plants (especially the older, dirtier ones) moving to the back of the dispatch queue, and only running very rarely (at times of very high demand). The specific idea of putting gas plants ahead of coal plants in the dispatch queue is being discussed by others.
  • The beauty of this idea is that it does not involve any type of tax or government subsidy. It is revenue neutral. Also, depending on the specifics of how it’s implemented, it can be quantitative in nature, with environmental costs of various power plants being objectively weighed, as opposed certain sources simply being chosen, by government/political fiat, over others. It also may not require legislation (see below). Finally, dispatch queues and their policies and methods are a rather arcane subject and are generally below the political radar (many folks haven’t even heard of them). Thus, this approach may allow the nation’s environmental goals to be (quietly) met without causing a political uproar. It could allow policy makers to do the right thing without paying too high of a political cost.
  • Questions/Issues The DOE report does mention some examples of dispatch queue methods factoring in issues other than just the variable cost. It is fairly common for issues of grid reliability to be considered. Also, compliance with federal or state environmental requirements can have some impacts. Examples of such laws include limits on the hours of operation for certain polluting facilities, or state requirements that a “renewable” facility generate a certain amount of power over the year. The report also discusses the possibility of favoring more fuel efficient gas plants over less efficient ones in the queue, even if using the less efficient plants at that moment would have cost less, in order to save natural gas. Thus, the report does discuss deviations from the pure cost model, to consider things like environmental impact and resource conservation.
  • I could not ascertain from the DOE report, however, what legal authorities govern the entities that make the plant dispatch decisions (i.e., the ISOs and RTOs), and what types of action would be required in order to change the dispatch methodology (e.g., whether legislation would be required). The DOE report was a study that was called for by the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which implies that its conclusions would be considered in future congressional legislation. I could not tell from reading the report if the lowest cost (only) method of dispatch is actually enshrined somewhere in state or federal law. If so, the changes I’m proposing would require legislation, of course.
  • The DOE report states that in some regions the local utility runs the dispatch queue itself. In the case of the larger grids run by the ISOs and RTOs (which cover most of the country), the report implies that those entities are heavily influenced, if not governed, by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which is part of the executive branch of the federal government. In the case of utility-run dispatch queues, it seems that nothing short of new regulations (on pollution limits, or direct guidance on dispatch queue ordering) would result in a change in dispatch policy. Whereas reducing cost and maximizing grid reliability would be directly in the utility’s interest, favoring cleaner generation sources in the queue would not, unless it is driven by regulations. Thus, in this case, legislation would probably be necessary, although it’s conceivable that the EPA could act (like it’s about to on CO2).
  • In the case of the large grids run by ISOs and RTOs, it’s possible that such a change in dispatch methodology could be made by the federal executive branch, if indeed the FERC has the power to mandate such a change
  • Effect on Nuclear With respect to the impacts of including environmental costs in plant dispatch order determination, I’ve mainly discussed the effects on gas vs. coal. Indeed, a switch from coal to gas would be the main impact of such a policy change. As for nuclear, as well as renewables, the direct/immediate impact would be minimal. That is because both nuclear and renewable sources have high capital costs but very low variable costs. They also have very low environmental impacts; much lower than those of coal or gas. Thus, they will remain at the front of the dispatch queue, ahead of both coal and gas.
D'coda Dcoda

PIL challenges nuclear civil liability law in SC [15Oct11] - 0 views

  • NEW DELHI: Two NGOs and prominent ex-bureaucrats on Friday moved a PIL in the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of nuclear civil liability law and sought a comprehensive safety review of all nuclear installations in the country by an independent expert group. NGOs ‘Common Cause’ and Centre for Public Interest Litigation along with other petitioners, including former cabinet secretary T S R Subramaniam, former power secretary E A S Sarma and former CEC T Gopalaswami requested the court to cancel clearances given to proposed nuclear power plants till the safety assessment was carried out.
D'coda Dcoda

Florida approves 2012 FPL, Progress nuclear charges [25Oct11] - 0 views

  • FP&L to recover $196 million in 2012 * Progress Energy Florida request cut to $85.9 millionHOUSTON Oct 24 (Reuters) - Florida electric regulators on Monday approved requests from the state's two largest utilities to charge customers more than $280 million next year for work to develop four proposed nuclear reactors and to expand output at two existing plants.Florida is one of a handful of U.S. states in which laws were passed in the mid 2000s to revive the stagnant nuclear industry by offering utilities incentives to reduce the risk of building costly new reactors which take years to site, license and construct.The laws typically allow utilities to charge customers for certain project-related costs during the development and construction years in order to reduce long-term project financing costs.
  • The Florida Public Service Commission approved NextEra Energy's Florida Power & Light's full request to recover slightly more than $196 million from customers next year.Commissioners also agreed to allow Progress Energy's Florida utility to recover nearly $86 million next year for costs associated with a plan to build two new 2,200-MW reactors in Levy County, Florida.FP&L's amount includes costs related to the proposed 2,200-megawatt Turkey Point Units 6 and 7 and costs to add 450 MW of capacity at existing reactors at FP&L's Turkey Point and St. Lucie nuclear stations.That's up from only about $31 million approved for recovery in 2011 after a protracted dispute between the commission and the state's largest utility which has more than 4 million customers.
  • An FP&L spokesman said 90 percent of the funds requested for 2012 will pay for work to increase output at FP&L's existing reactors. About 29 MW is already in service with work to add the remaining 400 MW set for completion in 2013.Commercial operation of the new Turkey Point reactors, expected to cost between $12 billion and $18 billion, has been delayed about four years until 2022 and 2023 after FP&L said growth in power consumption slowed in the state during the economic recession.Progress Energy Florida initially sought $140.9 million, but the commission reduced that amount by more than $50 million under a 2009 plan deferring some early Levy costs due to the state's worsening economy.The proposed Levy County reactors, expected to cost about $20 billion, were originally set to begin operating in the 2016-17 time frame, but Progress delayed the timeline until at least 2020."We're pleased the commission confirmed our plan to make state-of-the-art nuclear power available to our customers in the state of Florida," Progress spokeswoman Suzanne Grant said.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • Progress Energy's 1.7 million Florida customers will pay about $2.93 per month for the first 1,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity for early Levy costs, down from more than $5 a month this year.FPL customers will pay about $2.20 per month for the first 1,000 kwh used.The Florida Legislature passed a law in 2006 to encourage development of new nuclear plants and the PSC adopted a rule to evaluate project-related costs each year. The nuclear-related charges were added to customer bills beginning in 2009.
Jan Wyllie

Full Meltdown: Fukushima Called the 'Biggest Industrial Catastrophe in the History of M... - 0 views

  • Fukushima has three nuclear reactors exposed and four fuel cores exposed," he said, "You probably have the equivalent of 20 nuclear reactor cores because of the fuel cores, and they are all in desperate need of being cooled, and there is no means to cool them effectively.
  • TEPCO has been spraying water on several of the reactors and fuel cores, but this has led to even greater problems, such as radiation being emitted into the air in steam and evaporated sea water - as well as generating hundreds of thousands of tons of highly radioactive sea water that has to be disposed of.
  • "They are pouring in water and the question is what are they going to do with the waste that comes out of that system, because it is going to contain plutonium and uranium. Where do you put the water?"
  • ...13 more annotations...
  • The water picks up enormous amounts of radiation, so you add more water and you are generating hundreds of thousands of tons of highly radioactive water."
  • "They recalculated the amount of radiation released, but the news is really not talking about this," he said. "The new calculations show that within the first week of the accident, they released 2.3 times as much radiation as they thought they released in the first 80 days."
  • a nuclear waste advisor to the Japanese government reported that about 966 square kilometres near the power station - an area roughly 17 times the size of Manhattan - is now likely uninhabitable.
  • far more radiation has been released than has been reported.
  • "We have 20 nuclear cores exposed, the fuel pools have several cores each, that is 20 times the potential to be released than Chernobyl,"
  • the exposed reactors and fuel cores are continuing to release microns of caesium, strontium, and plutonium isotopes. These are referred to as "hot particles".
  • "We are discovering hot particles everywhere in Japan, even in Tokyo," he said. "Scientists are finding these everywhere. Over the last 90 days these hot particles have continued to fall and are being deposited in high concentrations. A lot of people are picking these up in car engine air filters."
  • Clearly people in Fukushima prefecture have breathed in a large amount of these particles. Clearly the upper West Coast of the US has people being affected. That area got hit pretty heavy in April.
  • Why have alarms not been sounded about radiation exposure in the US?
  • Nuclear operator Exelon Corporation has been among Barack Obama's biggest campaign donors, and is one of the largest employers in Illinois where Obama was senator
  • Using nuclear power to produce electricity in Japan is a product of the nuclear policy of the US
  • Gundersen worries about more earthquake aftershocks, as well as how to cool two of the units. "Unit four is the most dangerous, it could topple," he said. "After the earthquake in Sumatra there was an 8.6 [aftershock] about 90 days later, so we are not out of the woods yet. And you're at a point where, if that happens, there is no science for this, no one has ever imagined having hot nuclear fuel lying outside the fuel pool. They've not figured out how to cool units three and four."
  • "With Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, and now with Fukushima, you can pinpoint the exact day and time they started," he said, "But they never end."
    • D'coda Dcoda
       
      Actually, this is exactly what I expected given the history of nuclear energy and the history of inadequate safeguards, ignoring safety regulations, etc.
  •  
    A "NEVER ENDING DISASTER" - A new rendition of Hofstadter's Law about how things take longer than expected ... it's always worse than expected, even when you expect the worse.
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

(Part 3) Professor Tatsuhiko Kodama of Tokyo University Tells the Politicians: "What Ar... - 0 views

  • Testimony by Professor Tatsuhiko Kodama of Tokyo University continues. He goes back to Minami Soma City where his Radioisotope Center has been helping to decontaminate.We at the Radioisotope Center of Tokyo University have been helping to decontaminate Minami-Soma City, sending about 4 people at a time and doing decontamination work for the length of 700km per week.Again, what's happening to Minami-Soma clearly shows that 20 or 30 kilometer radius [from the nuke plant] doesn't make any sense at all. You have to measure in more detail like measuring each nursery school.
  • Right now, from the 20 to 30 kilometer radius area, 1,700 school children are put on the buses to go to school. Actually in Minami-Soma, the center of the city is located near the ocean, and 70% of the schools have relatively low level of radiation. Yet, children are forced to get on the school buses to go all the way to schools near Iitate-mura [where radiation is higher], spending 1 million yen everyday for the busing.
  • I strongly demand that this situation be terminated as soon as possible.What's most problematic is the government's policy that they will compensate the residents for the moving cost only if their areas are designated as official evacuation zones. In a recent committee held at the House of Councilors [Upper House], President Shimizu of TEPCO and Mr. Kaieda, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry answered that way. I ask you to separate the two immediately - compensation criteria issue and children's safety issue.
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • I strongly ask you to do whatever you can to protect the children.Another thing is, what I strongly feel when I'm doing the decontamination work in Fukushima is that emergency decontamination and permanent decontamination should be dealt with separately.
  • We've been doing a lot of emergency decontamination work. For example, if you look at this diagram, you will notice that the bottom of this slide is where small children put their hands on. Every time the rain stream down the slide, more radioactive materials accumulate. There can be a difference in radiation level between the right side and the left side. If such difference occurs and if the average radiation of the slide is 1 microsievert, then one side can measure as high as 10 microsieverts. We should do more emergency decontamination work in such places.
  • The ground right under the roof gutter is also where children frequently put their hands on. If you use high pressure washer you can reduce the radiation level from 2 microsieverts to 0.5 microsievert.However, it is extremely difficult to lower the level to less than 0.5microsievert, because everything is contaminated. Buildings, trees, whole areas. You can lower radiation dose of one place, but very difficult to do that for the whole area.Then, how much will it cost when you seriously do the decontamination work? In case of "Itai-Itai Disease" caused by cadmium poisoning, to decontaminate half of cadmium-contaminated area of roughly 3,000 hectare, the government has spent 800 billion yen so far.How much money will be needed if we have to decontaminate the area 1,000 times as big?
  • Finally, Professor Kodama has 4 demands, although probably due to the time constraint he was able to elaborate only three:So, I'd like to make four urgent requests.First, I request that the Japanese government, as a national policy, innovate the way to measure radiation of food, soil, and water, through using the Japan's state-of-the-art technology such as semiconductor imaging detectors. This is absolutely within Japan's current technological capability.
  • Second, I request that the government enact a new law as soon as possible in order to reduce children's radiation exposure. Right now, what I'm doing is all illegal.The current "Radiation Damage Prevention Law" specifies the amount of radiation and the types of radionuclides that each institution can handle. Now Tokyo University is mobilizing its workforce in its twenty-seven Radioisotope Centers to help decontaminate Minami-Soma City, but many of the centers don't have a permission to handle cesium. It's illegal to transport it by cars. However, we cannot leave highly radioactive materials to mothers and teachers there, so we put them all in drums and bring them back to Tokyo. To receive them is illegal. Everything is illegal.
  • The Diet is to blame for leaving such situations as they are. There are many institutions in Japan, such as Radioisotope Centers at national universities, which have germanium detectors and other state-of-the-art detectors. But how can we, as the nation, protect our children if these institutions' hands are tied? This is the result of the gross negligence by the Diet.
  • Third, I request that the government as a national policy mobilize technological power of the private sector in order to decontaminate the soil. There are many companies with expertise of radiation decontamination; chemical companies such as Toray and Kurita, decontamination companies such as Chiyoda Technol and Atox, andconstruction companies such as Takenaka Corporation. Please mobilize their power to create a decontamination research center in Fukushima as soon as possible.
  • It will take tens of trillions of yen to do the decontamination work. I'm gravely concerned that it might become public works project involving concessions. [In other words, business as usual in Japan where only the businesses and politicians benefit.]We don't have the luxury to spare a single second considering the financial condition of the Japanese government. We must figure out how we really do the decontamination work.What on earth is the Diet doing, when 70,000 people are forced out of their homes and wandering?
D'coda Dcoda

Vermont Yankee, refueling, and solving the problem of intermittent energy sources [26Ju... - 0 views

  • On July 25, Entergy announced that it is ordering fuel for the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant and will conduct the refueling in October. The state of Vermont has passed laws that supposedly give it the right to refuse to let Vermont Yankee operate past March 2012. Entergy’s decision to buy $60-million worth of fuel to be loaded in October was, therefore, no slam-dunk decision.
  • This saga has a long history. Entergy has sued Vermont, and part of its lawsuit was a request for an injunction against the state being allowed to shut down the plant while the suit was ongoing. The story then got complicated. Judge J. Garvan Murtha of the federal court in Brattleboro, Vt., denied the injunction. In his ruling, Murtha said that “Entergy has failed to show that any irreparable harm it may incur between now and a decision on the merits would be, or is likely to be, ameliorated by a preliminary injunction in the short time before this court decides Entergy’s claims.” He also moved up the date of the full hearing to September 12.
  • Murtha said many things that sounded like he had acknowledged Entergy’s having a good case. On the other hand, he also turned down the injunction. This gave commentators lots of room to comment! (There’s never a “slow news day” around this trial.) I commented and some professors at Vermont Law School commented.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • it was all blather. The ball was in Entergy’s court and we commentators were just talking about what we thought might influence its decision. The whole thing was like sports commentary. Would Entergy bet on a favorable outcome to the lawsuit (buy fuel)? Would it hedge its bets and not buy fuel? Opinions varied.  (By the way, my own predictions were wrong. I thought that Entergy would hedge its bets and not buy fuel.)
  • Now Entergy has made the decision to buy fuel, which means that, no matter what the court decides, Vermont Yankee will operate through March 2012. It will not be shut down at the next refueling outage, in October 2011. If the court decides in favor of Vermont Yankee, the plant will operate long past March 2012.  It has a 20-year license extension from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and I hope it will operate until 2032.
  • Looking east to Seabrook
D'coda Dcoda

"Dilute and Sell" - #Radioactive Tea Blended with Non-Radioactive Tea [03Oct11] - 0 views

  • A tea producer blended the tea with radioactive cesium with the tea without radioactive cesium so that he could sell off his radioactive tea. An operator of a sewer sludge plant knowingly sold radioactive sludge to a manufacturer of garden soil because there was no national government standard when he sold it. Their reason: "It's safer that way, as radioactive cesium will be diluted".Many Japanese consumers seem dismayed to find out that there are people among them who would do such a thing, but there are people like that, unfortunately. And as the article cites one government agency, it is clearly none of the government's business to do anything about it anytime soon.From Tokyo Shinbun paper version (not online; 10/3/2011), extremely quick translation subject to revision later if necessary:
  • Dilute cesium and sell - blend tea, garden soil - so that the cesium level is below the limitAfter the Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant accident spread radioactive materials, the provisional safety limit was set for variety of foods and goods. If an item tests less than the provisional limit it is considered "guaranteed safe". As the result, there are businesses that mix [radioactive goods] with those made in places far away from Fukushima Prefecture to dilute radioactive materials and sell them. Currently it is not against the law to do so, but the consumers who doubt the safety of the products and the producers who fear further "baseless rumor" damages are voicing concern.Mixing
  • According to our research, we have been able to confirm instances of goods being sold after diluting the radioactive cesium content - garden soil and green teas.In case of garden soil, sludge from water purification plants and sewage treatment plants had been used as an ingredient of the garden soil before the provisional safety limit for sludge was set. Sludge contains vital ingredients like phosphorus and potassium, and it is mixed with the soil at 10 to 20% ratio to make the garden soil.The safety standard for radioactive materials in sludge was established on June 16, but some water purification plants in Kanagawa Prefecture had sold the total of 4,538 tonnes of sludge to the garden soil manufacturers from April up till June 16.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • As for green tea, the tea producer was mixing the tea that passed the provisional safety limit but which still contained radioactive cesium with the tea made in Kyushu, far away from Fukushima I Nuke Plant. The blend was the radioactive tea 20%, the Kyushu tea 80%.Most water purification plants had voluntarily stopped shipping the radioactive sludge until the provisional safety limit was decided. However, the company who runs this particular water purification plant that continued to ship says, "The detection level was low. If the sludge was made into the garden soil it would be diluted further". The company blames the manufacturers who bought the radioactive sludge, saying "The ultimate responsibility rests with those who make [the sludge] into final products and sell them". The company is currently selling the radioactive sludge to the businesses that supply dirt for construction projects, as the national government has sent out an instruction that "the use of radioactive sludge in the garden soil had better be suspended".According to the green tea producer, there weren't enough of the tea leaves that passed the safety limit [but still contained radioactive cesium] to make it worthwhile to sell, so the company decided to mix it to make a "blend tea". The person in charge of the "blend tea" says "We made it clear in the package that it was a "blend tea", so there should be no problem. We just wanted to make the tea safer for the consumers".
  • SuspicionThese practices are not illegal, and when the contaminated products are mixed with non-contaminated products there should be less ill-effect on humans. However, if this "dilute and sell" model takes hold, it will only add to doubt and confusion for the consumers. Damage from "baseless rumors" may spread to milk and rice. It has been a standard practice to mix milk from different locations. The same goes for rice.The national consumer association federation chief proposes the detailed labeling of the place of manufacture on a prefectural level so that the consumers can choose safely.
  • However, there is no law requiring the place of manufacture for the garden soil, and there is no voluntary guideline by the industry either. The national standard for food labeling only requires the label "Made in Japan" in the case of "blended" produce like rice and tea and processed foods; there is no requirement to show the name of prefecture where the product is made. The Consumer Affairs Agency of Japan [which is supposed to regulate the industries with the welfare of consumers in mind] is not going to do anything at this point, saying "Places of manufacture for the blended goods may change, so it is not practical to require detailed labels".
  • On the other hand, the head of the Worldwide Agricultural Policy Information Center is critical. He says "The role of the national government is to stop the spread of radioactive materials. To allow goods with radioactive materials to be diluted and and sold widely would be considered as approval by the national government to spread the contamination [all over Japan]". JA agricultural co-op Fukushima is also distrustful of the government policy [or lack thereof], saying "There will be no "baseless rumors" if the produce that is found with radioactive materials is not sold".However, for now, we can only count on the voluntary effort by the industries. A new national policy would be necessary, just like when there was a problem of labeling "made in Japan" and "imported" goods.
D'coda Dcoda

Secret US-Israeli Nuke Weapons Transfers Led To Fukushima Blasts [03Oct11] - 0 views

  • Sixteen tons and what you get is a nuclear catastrophe. The explosions that rocked the Fukushima No.1 nuclear plant were more powerful than the combustion of hydrogen gas, as claimed by the Tokyo Electric Power Company. The actual cause of the blasts, according to intelligence sources in Washington, was nuclear fission of. warhead cores illegally taken from America's sole nuclear-weapons assembly facility. Evaporation in the cooling pools used for spent fuel rods led to the detonation of stored weapons-grade plutonium and uranium.   The facts about clandestine American and Israeli support for Japan's nuclear armament are being suppressed in the biggest official cover-up in recent history. The timeline of events indicates the theft from America's strategic arsenal was authorized at the highest level under a three-way deal between the Bush-Cheney team, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Elhud Olmert's government in Tel Aviv.
  • Tokyo's Strangelove   In early 2007, Vice President Dick Cheney flew to Tokyo with his closest aides. Newspaper editorials noted the secrecy surrounding his visit - no press conferences, no handshakes with ordinary folks and, as diplomatic cables suggest, no briefing for U.S. Embassy staffers in Tokyo.   Cheney snubbed Defense Minister Fumio Kyuma, who was shut out of confidential talks. The pretext was his criticism of President George Bush for claiming Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. The more immediate concern was that the defense minister might disclose bilateral secrets to the Pentagon. The Joint Chiefs of Staff were sure to oppose White House approval of Japan's nuclear program.
  • Abe has wide knowledge of esoteric technologies. His first job in the early 1980s was as a manager at Kobe Steel. One of the researchers there was astrophysicist Hideo Murai, who adapted Soviet electromagnetic technology to "cold mold" steel. Murai later became chief scientist for the Aum Shinrikyo sect, which recruited Soviet weapons technicians under the program initiated by Abe's father. After entering government service, Abe was posted to the U.S. branch of JETRO (Japan External Trade Organization). Its New York offices hosted computers used to crack databases at the Pentagon and major defense contractors to pilfer advanced technology. The hacker team was led by Tokyo University's top gamer, who had been recruited into Aum.   After the Tokyo subway gassing in 1995, Abe distanced himself from his father's Frankenstein cult with a publics-relations campaign. Fast forward a dozen years and Abe is at Camp David. After the successful talks with Bush, Abe flew to India to sell Cheney's quadrilateral pact to a Delhi skeptical about a new Cold War. Presumably, Cheney fulfilled his end of the deal. Soon thereafter Hurricane Katrina struck, wiping away the Abe visit from the public memory.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • Since the Liberal Democratic Party selected him as prime minister in September 2006, the hawkish Abe repeatedly called for Japan to move beyond the postwar formula of a strictly defensive posture and non-nuclear principles. Advocacy of a nuclear-armed Japan arose from his family tradition. His grandfather Nobusuke Kishi nurtured the wartime atomic bomb project and, as postwar prime minister, enacted the civilian nuclear program. His father Shintaro Abe, a former foreign minister, had played the Russian card in the 1980s, sponsoring the Russo-Japan College, run by the Aum Shinrikyo sect (a front for foreign intelligence), to recruit weapons scientists from a collapsing Soviet Union.   The chief obstacle to American acceptance of a nuclear-armed Japan was the Pentagon, where Pearl Harbor and Hiroshima remain as iconic symbols justifying American military supremacy.The only feasible channel for bilateral transfers then was through the civilian-run Department of Energy (DoE), which supervises the production of nuclear weapons.
  • Camp David Go-Ahead   The deal was sealed on Abe's subsequent visit to Washington. Wary of the eavesdropping that led to Richard Nixon's fall from grace, Bush preferred the privacy afforded at Camp David. There, in a rustic lodge on April 27, Bush and Abe huddled for 45 minutes. What transpired has never been revealed, not even in vague outline.   As his Russian card suggested, Abe was shopping for enriched uranium. At 99.9 percent purity, American-made uranium and plutonium is the world's finest nuclear material. The lack of mineral contaminants means that it cannot be traced back to its origin. In contrast, material from Chinese and Russian labs can be identified by impurities introduced during the enrichment process.
  • The flow of coolant water into the storage pools ceased, quickening evaporation. Fission of the overheated cores led to blasts and mushroom-clouds. Residents in mountaintop Iitate village overlooking the seaside plant saw plumes of smoke and could "taste the metal" in their throats.   Guilty as Charged   The Tohoku earthquake and tsunami were powerful enough to damage Fukushima No.1. The natural disaster, however, was vastly amplified by two external factors: release of the Stuxnet virus, which shut down control systems in the critical 20 minutes prior to the tsunami; and presence of weapons-grade nuclear materials that devastated the nuclear facility and contaminated the entire region.   Of the three parties involved, which bears the greatest guilt? All three are guilty of mass murder, injury and destruction of property on a regional scale, and as such are liable for criminal prosecution and damages under international law and in each respective jurisdiction.
  • An unannounced reason for Cheney's visit was to promote a quadrilateral alliance in the Asia-Pacific region. The four cornerstones - the US, Japan, Australia and India - were being called on to contain and confront China and its allies North Korea and Russia.. From a Japanese perspective, this grand alliance was flawed by asymmetry: The three adversaries were nuclear powers, while the U.S. was the only one in the Quad group.   To further his own nuclear ambitions, Abe was playing the Russian card. As mentioned in a U.S. Embassy cable (dated 9/22), the Yomiuri Shimbun gave top play to this challenge to the White House : "It was learned yesterday that the government and domestic utility companies have entered final talks with Russia in order to relegate uranium enrichment for use at nuclear power facilities to Atomprom, the state-owned nuclear monopoly." If Washington refused to accept a nuclear-armed Japan, Tokyo would turn to Moscow.
  • Throughout the Pantex caper, from the data theft to smuggling operation, Bush and Cheney's point man for nuclear issues was DoE Deputy Director Clay Sell, a lawyer born in Amarillo and former aide to Panhandle district Congressman Mac Thornberry. Sell served on the Bush-Cheney transition team and became the top adviser to the President on nuclear issues. At DoE, Sell was directly in charge of the U.S. nuclear weapons complex, which includes 17 national laboratories and the Pantex plant. (Another alarm bell: Sell was also staff director for the Senate Energy subcommittee under the late Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, who died in a 2010 plane crash.)   An Israeli Double-Cross   The nuclear shipments to Japan required a third-party cutout for plausible deniability by the White House. Israel acted less like an agent and more like a broker in demanding additional payment from Tokyo, according to intelligence sources. Adding injury to insult, the Israelis skimmed off the newer warhead cores for their own arsenal and delivered older ones. Since deteriorated cores require enrichment, the Japanese were furious and demanded a refund, which the Israelis refused. Tokyo had no recourse since by late 2008 principals Abe had resigned the previous autumn and Bush was a lame duck.
  • The Japanese nuclear developers, under the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, had no choice but to enrich the uranium cores at Fukushima No.1, a location remote enough to evade detection by nonproliferation inspectors. Hitachi and GE had developed a laser extraction process for plutonium, which requires vast amounts of electrical power. This meant one reactor had to make unscheduled runs, as was the case when the March earthquake struck.   Tokyo dealt a slap on the wrist to Tel Aviv by backing Palestinian rights at the UN. Not to be bullied, the Israeli secret service launched the Stuxnet virus against Japan's nuclear facilities.   Firewalls kept Stuxnet at bay until the Tohoku earthquake. The seismic activity felled an electricity tower behind Reactor 6. The power cut disrupted the control system, momentarily taking down the firewall. As the computer came online again, Stuxnet infiltrated to shut down the back-up generators. During the 20-minute interval between quake and tsunami, the pumps and valves at Fukushima No.1 were immobilized, exposing the turbine rooms to flood damage.
  • The Texas Job   BWXT Pantex, America's nuclear warhead facility, sprawls over 16,000 acres of the Texas Panhandle outside Amarillo. Run by the DoE and Babcock & Wilson, the site also serves as a storage facility for warheads past their expiration date. The 1989 shutdown of Rocky Flats, under community pressure in Colorado, forced the removal of those nuclear stockpiles to Pantex. Security clearances are required to enter since it is an obvious target for would-be nuclear thieves.   In June 2004, a server at the Albuquerque office of the National Nuclear Security System was hacked. Personal information and security-clearance data for 11 federal employees and 177 contractors at Pantex were lifted. NNSA did not inform Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman or his deputy Clay Sell until three months after the security breach, indicating investigators suspected an inside job.
  • The White House, specifically Bush, Cheney and their co-conspirators in the DoE, hold responsibility for ordering the illegal removal and shipment of warheads without safeguards.   The state of Israel is implicated in theft from U.S. strategic stockpiles, fraud and extortion against the Japanese government, and a computer attack against critical infrastructure with deadly consequences, tantamount to an act of war.   Prime Minister Abe and his Economy Ministry sourced weapons-grade nuclear material in violation of constitutional law and in reckless disregard of the risks of unregulated storage, enrichment and extraction. Had Abe not requested enriched uranium and plutonium in the first place, the other parties would not now be implicated. Japan, thus, bears the onus of the crime.
  • The International Criminal Court has sufficient grounds for taking up a case that involves the health of millions of people in Japan, Canada, the United States, Russia, the Koreas, Mongolia, China and possibly the entire Northern Hemisphere. The Fukushima disaster is more than an human-rights charge against a petty dictator, it is a crime against humanity on par with the indictments at the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals. Failure to prosecute is complicity.   If there is a silver lining to every dark cloud, it's that the Tohoku earthquake and tsunami saved the world from even greater folly by halting the drive to World War III.
  •  
    A very important report from ex-Japanese Times reporter, Yoichi Shimatsu
D'coda Dcoda

How to Source Radioactive Material-Free Food in Japan: Food Co-Op [08Sep11] - 0 views

  • Not all co-ops (grocery stores operated as cooperatives) are equal, but some are decidedly more customer-friendly (as opposed to producer-friendly) and take care in sourcing the food that are not contaminated with radioactive materials AND disclosing the detailed information of their testing.
  • One of the readers of this blog, William Marcus, has sent me his observations on sourcing the safe food in Japan. William currently lives in Osaka with his family with the toddler son. He says co-ops in Japan are not centralized (which I didn't know), and that more east and north you go co-ops tend not to disclose the details of the testing they do (if they do the testing) on the foodstuff they sell.
  • The particular COOP that he recommends is "Shizenha" co-op headquartered in Kobe, Hyogo Prefecture and has operations in Tokushima Prefecture in Shikoku region. The co-op, he says, has just started to accept membership from Kanto and Tohoku regions.
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • I live in Osaka and sourcing clean food for our toddler son has become the biggest concern of ours, after monitoring the fallout plumes and contamination in our vicinity (which thankfully, seems to be quite limited compared to California, my home state). We have always been interested in buying healthy food and have belonged to COOP for many years.
  • COOP is not centralized -- there is no national standard for COOPs; they are regionally managed, but their membership can be quite spread out; so we recently joined a COOP (Shizenha; based in Shikoku/West Japan) that is quite more transparent in testing and showing the results of these radiation tests. Our original COOP ("S-COOP") is also doing more testing and has invested another 5 million yen in more testing equipment and outsourcing their testing to a subcontractor as well, but they won't disclose the results of the testing -- only if it is above or below the current (inflated), permitted government safety limit. Shizenha has a different 'feel' to it, and discloses the results of their testing weekly both on their website and in the order forms that we receive weekly.
  • Basically, the story is this: the further north and east you go, the less likely the COOPs are to disclose testing results as this might well embarrass their long-standing farming/food sources, while to the south and west, this is less likely to happen as their food sources are generally less suspect.
  • the reports of contaminated food are then commented on by the readers as proof that sourcing food is dangerous and tricky, when actually, if one knows the resources, it is not the case. COOP generally charges 10-20% more than your typical retail supermarkets, but the more radical of the COOPs (like Shizenha) go further by indicating exactly who is tested and what is found. If those who are really concerned about finding safe food for their families are aware of this, they can also benefit from membership to the more transparent COOPs (others probably do exist which I'm not aware of). As of this week, Shizenha will allow shipping to the northern parts of Japan (for a bigger, refundable membership deposit of 20,000 yen vs. the regular 10,000), in an effort to obviously shame the other COOPs who are more hesitant to state reality as it really is, into being more forthcoming with the testing results.
  • There is a war on food truth that is building steam, and it is in the south and west of Japan that is pushing the envelop on that front, or so it seems to us here in Kansai, at least.
  • I was in Kyushu for a week last week, visiting in-laws and it was noted by my Japanese partner and in-laws how many people are migrating permanently from Tohoku and Kanto regions -- the cars were obvious and multiple: middle-class and upper-class vans and sedans; the well-heeled are evacuating -- lucky them. . . sad for those not able to do the same, which speaks to the class-based availability of safety recourse in Japan these days (and COOP membership to a degree also represents this with its mark-up).
  • The other notable thing in Kyushu was how prominently nearly all restaurants advertised their local sourcing of ingredients. This doesn't happen at all in Osaka/Kyoto, which is owing to a few different explanations: not to offend, not to heighten fear, or because the ingredients are suspect, etc.
  • Likely we will also gravitate to Kyushu in the coming year, as at present only COOP is able to provide assurances with our food concerns, whereas in Kyushu, that is much, much less of a concern, and the food is cheaper. . .Thanks again for your fantastic blog -- it is unique and serving an invaluable service in this incredible nightmare that is ongoing. I hope this sheds some light on the food safety countermeasures that n.p.o.'s are enacting to guarantee the food supply.
  • Also, it is evident in Osaka that food origin is getting harder to ascertain in the regular retail supermarkets,
  • While "Shizenha" co-op is not party to the Fukushima Prefecture's PR effort to push Fukushima produce, other co-ops are eagerly selling. One of my Japanese blog readers says her co-op in Kansai has been pushing Fukushima produce (vegetables and fruits) ever since this spring by holding special campaign events at the store. But as William says, each co-op is different, and it is worthwhile to investigate. It is also good to know that people in Kanto and Tohoku may now be able to purchase from a Kansai-based co-op.There is also a grassroots campaign to establish volunteer radiation measuring stations throughout Japan, modeled after the one in Fukushima City (Citizen's Radioactivity Measuring Station), where anyone can bring in a food item and have it tested.
D'coda Dcoda

CWIP Construction Work in Progress Law - 0 views

  • CWIP, or Construction Work in Progress, is a law, fortunately existent only in a handful of U.S. states, that allows a utility to charge ratepayers higher rates to cover future costs of a yet-to-be-constructed reactor, even if that reactor is never built.
Dan R.D.

Village goes to high court over radioactive waste | Environment | guardian.co.uk [02Nov11] - 0 views

  • The residents of a picturesque village in the south of England will on Wednesday go to the high court in a last ditch attempt to prevent thousands of tonnes of radioactive waste being dumped into a nearby landfill site.
  • The case is being brought in the name of Louise Bowen-West on behalf of the King's Cliffe community near Peterborough against secretary of state for communities and local government, Eric Pickles.
  • The minister ruled in May in favour of a plan drawn up by waste management company, Augean, to allow 250,000 tonnes of nuclear materials to be placed in the East Northamptonshire Resource Management Facility.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • He argued the "risk of actual harm from the development would be very low" but the villagers have brought in Richard Buxton, a Cambridge law firm that specialises in environmental and public law.
  • "Obviously the wider background is that the government is desperate to get this cheap dumping going ahead of the next lot of nuclear power stations coming online," said Clare Langan, a local villager and member of the King's Cliffe Waste Watchers campaign group.
  • Critics say the government wants to rush through the Augean plans aware that the the UK's only purpose-built low level waste repositary at Drigg in Cumbria is rapidly filling up.
  • The residents of King's Cliffe say it is unfair that their village would be the first to take radioactive material from the nuclear industry given they are 90 miles away from any power stations. They claim an underground water source runs from below the landfill site and that a number of springs, pools and streams in the village – mentioned in the Domesday Book – could be contaminated.
D'coda Dcoda

Farmer in Evacuation-Ready Zone in Fukushima Insists He Will Sell His Rice [31Oct11] - 0 views

  • In this rare case, I am actually with the farmer who is standing up to the authorities.The evacuation-ready zone was abolished on September 30 and the residents who evacuated are supposed to go back. However, the authorities (the national government and the Fukushima prefectural government) prohibited farmers in the evacuation zones (evacuation-ready, planned evacuation, and no-entry) from growing rice this year. It was a blanket ban on growing rice in these zones regardless of the density of radioactive materials in the soil, while areas outside the evacuation zones but with potentially high levels of radioactive materials in the soil were allowed to be cultivated for rice with only a cursory soil monitoring test.This farmer defied the arbitrary government order, grew rice and harvested. He has declared he wants sell it.From Yomiuri Shinbun (10/30/2011):
  • On October 28, the Fukushima prefectural government advised a farmer (age 58) in Miyakoji-machi in Tamura City to discard the rice he harvested, based on the Food Control Law, because the farmer had grown and harvested the rice in the area designated as "emergency evacuation-ready zone" after the nuclear plant accident.
  • The farmer has said no.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • The national government restricted the cultivation of rice in the no-entry zone, planned evacuation zone, and evacuation-ready zone (which was abolished on September 30) based on the Special Measure for Nuclear Disaster Act.
  • he farmer planted "Koshihikari" rice in his 120-are rice paddies within the evacuation-ready zone, and he has already harvested 1.8 tonnes of rice.
  • According to the Food Control Law, the rice harvested in the restricted areas must be discarded. In response to the prefectural government's advice, the farmer answered, "I grow as I please. I want to sell the rice that I grow."
  • According to Fukushima Prefecture, there are 12 farmers who grew rice in the restricted areas. 11 farmers have followed the advice and discarded the harvested rice or given it up for research.
  • The prefectural government says, "If the consumers know that there is rice grown in the restricted areas, it may cause anxiety and confusion. We would like [the farmer] to consider such consequences."Ha. For this particular prefectural government to say that is too rich for me. Outside the restricted areas, they simply sample-tested the soil, ditto for the harvested rice. Locations that were found with highly contaminated rice hay were all allowed to grow rice. (Planting the rice came before the discovery of contaminated rice hay.) The rice from one particular location tested 500 becquerels/kg of radioactive cesium, and the rice was grown in the soil with only 3,000 becquerels/kg of cesium. There are other locations whose rice exceeded 100 becquerels/kg. They were all good to sell (though the prefectural government ended up buying all of 500 becquerels/kg cesium rice).They should measure the cesium content of the rice that this farmer grew. If it is no different from the rest of Fukushima rice that are being sold, they should allow it to be sold.
1 - 20 of 59 Next › Last »
Showing 20 items per page