Skip to main content

Home/ Open Intelligence / Energy/ Group items tagged peak

Rss Feed Group items tagged

D'coda Dcoda

#Radiation in Japan: Spiders in Iitate-mura Concentrating Radioactive Silver 1,000 Time... - 0 views

  • Dr. Bin Mori is a professor emeritus at University of Tokyo, Faculty of Agriculture. Since the beginning of the Fukushima nuclear crisis on March 11, the professor has been writing his blog focusing on the effect of radiation in plants and remediation of agricultural land.I have featured his autoradiographs of dandelion and horsetail on my blog before.In his post on October 30, Professor Mori wrote about his discovery, probably the world first, he made in spiders (Nephila clavata) he caught in Iitate-mura, Fukushima Prefecture, where the villagers were forced to evacuate after being designated as "planned evacuation zone". The spiders, he found, had radioactive silver (Ag-110m) at 1,000 times the concentration in the environment.The following is my translation of Dr. Mori's October 30 blog post, with his express permission:
  • Since it was difficult to collect plants in the rain in Iitate-mura, I caught instead "nephila clavatas" in the bamboo groves and cedar forest.
  • I don't know whether the spiders eat dirt itself, but I thought they may have concentrated radioactive cesium in their bodies as they were at the top of the food chain in the forest, eating butterflies, horseflies, and drone beetles that they caught in their webs.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • I put 4 nephila cravatas together in the germanium semiconductor detector, and analyzed radioactive cesium (Cs-137 and Cs-134) (Picture 1). Then I noticed an unknown energy peak at 657.8keV, right next to the energy peak of Cs-137 at 661.7keV (Chart 2).
  • When I identified this peak, it turned out to be one of the 4 gamma-ray peaks from Ag-110m (nuclear isomer of silver, half life 249.5 days). The other 3 peaks were also detected (Chart 3).
  • So, the conclusion is that nephila clavatas have concentrated a minute amount of radioactive silver (Ag-110m), which is one of the radioactive fallout materials from Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant.
  • Cs-134(2.9Bq/4匹 )+Cs-137(3.9Bq/4匹) = 3656Bq /kg
  • Ag-110m (2.6Bq/4匹)=1397Bq /kg
  • The densities of the radioactive materials in the spiders were:Radioactive cesium:Cs-134 (2.9 Bq/4 spiders) + Cs-137 (3.9 Bq/4 spiders) = 3,656 Bq/kg live weight versusRadioactive silver:Ag-110m (2.6 Bq/4 spiders) = 1,397 Bq/kg live weight
  • In the forest where the spiders were caught, the ratio of radioactive cesium (134+137) to Ag-110m was about 2,500 to 1. Using the above numbers, I calculated that nephila clavatas bio-concentrated the radioactive silver in the soil to about 1,000 times
  • This is the first discovery in the world that an insect highly concentrates silver. Also, it is evident that bio-concentration of radioactivity in the forest has already started.
  • I will present the details of my research on Saturday November 26 at the Japanese Society of Science and Plant Nutrition's Kanto Branch meeting (Faculty of Horticulture at Chiba University in Matsudo City, Chiba). Please come
D'coda Dcoda

Impacts of the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plants on Marine Radioactivity - Environmental S... - 0 views

  • The impacts on the ocean of releases of radionuclides from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plants remain unclear. However, information has been made public regarding the concentrations of radioactive isotopes of iodine and cesium in ocean water near the discharge point. These data allow us to draw some basic conclusions about the relative levels of radionuclides released which can be compared to prior ocean studies and be used to address dose consequences as discussed by Garnier-Laplace et al. in this journal.(1) The data show peak ocean discharges in early April, one month after the earthquake and a factor of 1000 decrease in the month following. Interestingly, the concentrations through the end of July remain higher than expected implying continued releases from the reactors or other contaminated sources, such as groundwater or coastal sediments. By July, levels of 137Cs are still more than 10 000 times higher than levels measured in 2010 in the coastal waters off Japan. Although some radionuclides are significantly elevated, dose calculations suggest minimal impact on marine biota or humans due to direct exposure in surrounding ocean waters, though considerations for biological uptake and consumption of seafood are discussed and further study is warranted.
  • there was no large explosive release of core reactor material, so most of the isotopes reported to have spread thus far via atmospheric fallout are primarily the radioactive gases plus fission products such as cesium, which are volatilized at the high temperatures in the reactor core, or during explosions and fires. However, some nonvolatile activation products and fuel rod materials may have been released when the corrosive brines and acidic waters used to cool the reactors interacted with the ruptured fuel rods, carrying radioactive materials into the ground and ocean. The full magnitude of the release has not been well documented, nor is there data on many of the possible isotopes released, but we do have significant information on the concentration of several isotopes of Cs and I in the ocean near the release point which have been publically available since shortly after the accident started.
  • We present a comparison of selected data made publicly available from a Japanese company and agencies and compare these to prior published radionuclide concentrations in the oceans. The primary sources included TEPCO (Tokyo Electric Power Company), which reported data in regular press releases(3) and are compiled here (Supporting Information Table S1). These TEPCO data were obtained by initially sampling 500 mL surface ocean water from shore and direct counting on high-purity germanium gamma detectors for 15 min at laboratories at the Fukushima Dai-ni NPPs. They reported initially results for 131I (t1/2 = 8.02 days), 134Cs (t1/2 = 2.065 years) and 137Cs (t1/2 = 30.07 years). Data from MEXT (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology—Japan) were also released on a public Web site(4) and are based on similar direct counting methods. In general MEXT data were obtained by sampling 2000 mL seawater and direct counting on high-purity germanium gamma detectors for 1 h in a 2 L Marinelli beaker at laboratories in the Japan Atomic Energy Agency. The detection limit of 137Cs measurements are about 20 000 Bq m–3 for TEPCO data and 10 000 Bq m–3 for MEXT data, respectively. These measurements were conducted based on a guideline described by MEXT.(5) Both sources are considered reliable given the common activity ratios and prior studies and expertise evident by several Japanese groups involved in making these measurements. The purpose of these early monitoring activities was out of concern for immediate health effects, and thus were often reported relative to statutory limits adopted by Japanese authorities, and thus not in concentration units (reported as scaling factors above “normal”). Here we convert values from both sources to radionuclide activity units common to prior ocean studies of fallout in the ocean (Bq m–3) for ease of comparison to previously published data.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • We focus on the most complete time-series records from the north and south discharge channels at the Dai-ichi NPPs, and two sites to the south that were not considered sources, namely the north Discharge channels at the Dai-ni NPPs about 10 km to the south and Iwasawa beach which is 16 km south of the Dai-ichi NPPs (Figure 1). The levels at the discharge point are exceedingly high, with a peak 137Cs 68 million Bq m–3 on April 6 (Figure 2). What are significant are not just the elevated concentrations, but the timing of peak release approximately one month after to the earthquake. This delayed release is presumably due to the complicated pattern of discharge of seawater and fresh water used to cool the reactors and spent fuel rods, interactions with groundwater, and intentional and unintentional releases of mixed radioactive material from the reactor facility.
  • the concentrations of Cs in sediments and biota near the NPPs may be quite large, and will continue to remain so for at least 30–100 years due to the longer half-life of 137Cs which is still detected in marine and lake sediments from 1960s fallout sources.
  • If the source at Fukushima had stopped abruptly and ocean mixing processes continued at the same rates, one would have expected that the 137Cs activities would have decreased an additional factor of 1000 from May to June but that was not observed. The break in slope in early May implies that a steady, albeit lower, source of 137Cs continues to discharge to the oceans at least through the end of July at this site. With reports of highly contaminated cooling waters at the NPPs and complete melt through of at least one of the reactors, this is not surprising. As we have no reason to expect a change in mixing rates of the ocean which would also impact this dilution rate, this change in slope of 137Cs in early May is clear evidence that the Dai-ichi NPPs remain a significant source of contamination to the coastal waters off Japan. There is currently no data that allow us to distinguish between several possible sources of continued releases, but these most likely include some combination of direct releases from the reactors or storage tanks, or indirect releases from groundwater beneath the reactors or coastal sediments, both of which are likely contaminated from the period of maximum releases
  • It is prudent to point out though what is meant by “significant” to both ocean waters and marine biota. With respect to prior concentrations in the waters off Japan, all of these values are elevated many orders of magnitude. 137Cs has been tracked quite extensively off Japan since the peak weapons testing fallout years in the early 1960s.(13) Levels in the region east of Japan have decreased from a few 10s of Bq m–3 in 1960 to 1.5 Bq m–3 on average in 2010 (Figure 2; second x-axis). The decrease in 137Cs over this 50 year record reflects both radioactive decay of 137Cs with a 30 year half-life and continued mixing in the global ocean of 137Cs to depth. These data are characteristic of other global water masses.(14) Typical ocean surface 137Cs activities range from <1 Bq m–3 in surface waters in the Southern Hemisphere, which are lower due to lower weapons testing inputs south of the equator, to >10–100 Bq m–3 in the Irish Sea, North Sea, Black Sea, and Baltic Seas, which are elevated due to local sources from the intentional discharges at the nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities at Sellafield in the UK and Cape de la Hague in France, as well as residual 137Cs from Chernobyl in the Baltic and Black Seas. Clearly then on this scale of significance, levels of 137Cs 30 km off Japan were some 3–4 orders of magnitude higher than existed prior to the NPP accidents at Fukushima.
  • Finally though, while the Dai-ichi NPP releases must be considered “significant” relative to prior sources off Japan, we should not assume that dose effects on humans or marine biota are necessarily harmful or even will be measurable. Garnier-Laplace et al.(1) report a dose reconstruction signal for the most impacted areas to wildlife on land and in the ocean. Like this study, they are relying on reported activities to calculate forest biota concentrations,
  •  
    From Wood's Hole, note that calculations are based on reports from TEPCO & other Japanese agencies. Quite a bit more to read on the site.
D'coda Dcoda

Fukushima guilty of world's worst sea contamination - YouTube [29Nov11] - 0 views

shared by D'coda Dcoda on 01 Dec 11 - No Cached
  •  
    A new report shows the Fukushima disaster is responsible for the world's worst nuclear sea contamination. During the peak of Chernobyl, the Black Sea was registering 1,000 becquerels per cubic meter of water - at Fukushima's peak, it was 100,000 becquerels. Scientists first believed the ocean would dilute it, but Al Jazeera has learned that dangerous concentrations of radioactive caesium remain. Al Jazeera's Steve Chao reports from Fukushima, Japan
D'coda Dcoda

American Energy Fields - Three Projects in Early Stage Uranium Exploration [08Jul11] - 0 views

  • American Energy Fields, Inc. (OTCBB:AEFI), formerly Sienna Resources, Inc. is a uranium exploration and development company based in Arizona. Their focus is uranium deposits in the United States. The Company’s three main projects (in which they have sole interest) are  the Coso and Blythe  projects in California, and Artillery Peak project in Arizona. All three properties have been previously explored and developed, and are currently in early exploration stages.  A 43-101 technical report for the Artillery Peak project is available for review on American Energy Field’s website. What we like about American Energy Fields, Inc: Over 9.2 million pounds U3O8 historic resources with 2.8 million pounds 43-101 verified More than $25 million in development work, by past operators, has been spent on AEFI’s current projects Committed to near term production of low cost U.S. Uranium
  • The Artillery Peak property consists of 1,777 acres of federal land and is located 112 miles northeast of Phoenix, Arizona. American Energy Fields’ historic records indicate 1.7 million pounds of uranium was previously identified through exploration on Artillery Peak. There has been significant exploration work completed on the property, including over 400 holes drilled by Jacquays Mining, Homestake Mining, Hecla Mining, Getty Oil, Public Service Company of Oklahoma, and Santa Fe Mining between the 1950s-1970s. A 1979 report by Central and South West Fuels, Inc. found that the northern portion of the property contains a historical resource of 1.7 million pounds U3O8 with an average grade of 0.113%. In 2007/2008 new exploration was conducted which included 34 additional drill holes to verify historic drilling and further delineate mineralization. In 1979, the Department of Energy conducted an evaluation of the Date Creek Basin and the Artillery Mountains where they estimated that the area could contain as much as 1,260,000,000 pounds of U3O8. The Company will begin a preliminary exploration program to verify the historic data reported by Central and South West Fuels Inc.
  • Coso – Inyo County – California The Coso project covers 169 federal mining claims and 800 state-owned acres and was previously developed by Western Nuclear, Pioneer Resources, Federal Resources, and Union Pacific Mining/Rocky Mountain Energy. An estimated U.S. $20,000,000.00 was spent on exploration and development of the project, including an engineered pit design, where exploration records indicate 5.5 million lbs. of uranium was identified with an average grade of 0.07 U3O8. American Energy Fields recently received its exploration permit for the 800 state-owned acres from the California Land Department and is currently developing an exploration plan to confirm the historic data with the goal of moving the project towards production. Blythe – Riverside County – California The Blythe project consists of 66 Federal mining claims in Riverside County, California covering 3 historic mines, the Safranek, the McCoy Wash, and the Little Ore Hill operated by Humbug Mining and Bokum Corporation. According to Bokum’s records during the years of 1963 to 1964, the Safranek Mine produced and shipped 1,400 tons of uranium ore averaging 0.80% U308 to the VCA mill in Salt Lake City, Utah for processing. These records also indicate the Safranek site currently contains 100 tons at 0.40% U3O8 and 4,000 tons at 0.30% U3O8 of stockpiled ore, while the McCoy Wash has 3,000 tons of stockpiled ore with a grade of 0.20% U3O8. Bokum Corporation drilled the property in the early 1970s and the results indicated approximately 153,000 lbs of U3O8 while outlining a further potential for an additional 2,000,000 lbs of U3O8. American Energy Fields aims to identify, expand, and develop the ore body with the goal of putting the past producing mines back into production. Management
D'coda Dcoda

Saudi Arabia, peak oil and a man named Rostam Ghasemi [04Aug11] - 0 views

  • Over the years, we’ve heard rumblings about the dwindling supply of precious Saudi oil. Now it’s becoming apparent that not only are they beginning to run dry, they’ve been grossly overstating what they already had (by 40% to be precise).
  • This is alarming if not just for the fact that global peak oil (whilst not being officially acknowledged) is already slowing production in the major oil exporting countries. Saddad al-Husseini, the former head of exploration at the Saudi oil monopoly Aramco, revealed that the Kingdom’s oil capacity “will have hit its highest point by 2012″.
  • However, realists familiar with the engineering reports are saying we hit peak oil two years ago and have simply been going off articifially inflated reserve estimates
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • Enter Rostam Ghasemi. While that might not be breaking news to some, the appointment of Ghasemi (who was also Iran’s Revolutionary Guard’s chief) as OPEC’s new president is sure to rock the boat
  • It’s not beyond the realms of possibility that Ghasemi might spill the beans as to what Saudi Arabia’s actual crude oil reserves are, hence sending the energy-hungry West into damage-control.
  • Ghasemi is currently subject to US, EU and Australian sanctions and his assets have been blacklisted by US Treasury and western powers. After all, this man belongs to the wing of the Iranian military which threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz if Iran is threatened by a foreign power (ie. Israel or the United States). It’s worthwhile to note that 40% of the world’s oil is shipped through that strait. Heres the kicker. Most of that oil comes from Saudi Arabia. War or no war, it seems that supplies are going to dry up regardless due to increased domestic consumption levels. Just last year alone, the Saudi’s consumed more than 2.4 million barrels of oil a day. That’s a 50% increase just within the last seven years. Yep, it’s going fast.
D'coda Dcoda

Addressing the climate crisis with nuclear power would be like using "caviar ... - 0 views

  • As reported by Matt Wald of the New York Times, former NRC Commissioner Peter Bradford strikes again, with a most apt metaphor bringing a dose of reality to the so-called Third Way/Idaho National Lab conference on nuclear power's future. Unmentioned in the reporting, however, is the irony of U.S. Senators Voinovich (R-OH) and Carper (D-DE) hosting the event. It was on Voinovich's watch that the Davis-Besse atomic reactor near Toledo came within 3/16ths of an inch of a meltdown; Carper's political power base in Wilmington could suffer 100,000 "peak early fatalities," over 70,000 "peak early injuries," 40,000 "peak cancer deaths," and over $300 billion in property damage if any one of the three Salem/Hope Creek atomic reactors suffered a catastrophic radiation release, according to NRC's 1982 CRAC-2 study ("Calculation of Reactor Accident Consequences"). Also unreported was the irony that, as Obama administration officials -- Energy Secretary Steven Chu, White House climate and energy czar Carol Browner, NRC chairman Greg Jaczko -- rubbed shoulders with NEI President Marvin Fertel, GE-Hitachi Board Chair Jack Fuller, etc., the nuclear power industry's army of lobbyists worked Capitol Hill to attach a $7 billion nuclear loan guarantee onto the congressional lame duck session Continuing Resolution to fund government operations. NRC's homepage described the gathering as "28 nuclear leaders from government, industry and finance -- focused on long term policy for nuclear energy," but offered no explanation as to why its Chairman would attend an event seemingly largely devoted to nuclear power's promotion -- NRC is not supposed to promote nuclear power, but rather to regulate it in the interests of public health and safety and environmental protection
D'coda Dcoda

Smoking Gun - Jan Lundberg antinuclear activist & heir to petroleum wealth [18Jul11] - 0 views

  • A ‘smoking gun’ article is one that reveals a direct connection between a fossil fuel or alternative energy system promoter and a strongly antinuclear attitude. One of my guiding theories about energy is that a great deal of the discussion about safety, cost, and waste disposal is really a cover for a normal business activity of competing for market share.
  • This weekend, I came across a site called Culture Change that provides some strong support for my theory about the real source of strength for the antinuclear industry. According to the information at the bottom of the home page, Culture Change was founded by Sustainable Energy Institute (formerly Fossil Fuels Policy Action), a nonprofit organization.Jan Lundberg, who has led the organization and its predecessor organizations since 1988, grew up in a wealthy family with a father who was a popular and respected petroleum industry analyst.
  • As Oil Guru, Dan [Lundberg, my father] earned a regular Nightly Business Report commentary spot on the Public Broadcasting System television network in the early and mid-1980s. I helped edit or proof-read just about every one of those commentaries, and we delighted in the occasional opportunity to attack gasohol and ethanol for causing “agricultural strip mining” (as we did in the Lundberg Letter).
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Before entering into the non-profit world, he entered into the family business of oil industry analysis and claims to have achieved a fair amount of financial success. As Lundberg tells the tale, he stopped “punching the corporate time clock” in 1988 to found Fossil Fuels Policy Action.I had just learned about peak oil. Upon my press conference announcing the formation of Fossil Fuels Policy Action, USA Today’s headline was “Lundberg Lines up with Nature.” My picture with the story looked like I was a corporate fascist, not an acid-tripping hippie. The USA Today story led to an invitation to review Beyond Oil: The Threat to Food and Fuel in the Coming Decades, for the quarterly Population and Environment journal. In learning for the first time about peak oil (although I had questioned long-term growth in petroleum supplies), I was awakened to the bigger picture as never before. Natural gas was no answer. And I already knew that the supply crisis to come — I had helped predict the 1970s oil shocks — was to be a liquid fuels crisis.
  • Lundberg tells an interesting story about his initial fundraising activities for his new non-profit group.Setting out to become a clearinghouse for energy data and policy, we had a tendency to go along with the buzzword “natural gas as a bridge fuel” — especially when my previous clients serving the petroleum industry until 1988 included natural gas utilities. They were and are represented by the American Gas Association, where I knew a few friendly executives. Upon starting a nonprofit group for the environment with an energy focus, I met with the AGA right away. I was anticipating one of their generous grants they were giving large environmental groups who were trumpeting the “natural gas is a bridge fuel” mantra.
  • I slept on it and decided that I would not participate in this corrupt conspiracy. Instead, I had fun writing one of Fossil Fuels Policy Action’s first newsletters about this “bridge” argument and the background story that the gas industry was really competing with fuel oil for heating. I brought up the AGA’s funding for enviros and said I was rejecting it. I was crazy, I admit, for I was starting a new career with almost no savings and no guarantees. So I was not surprised when my main contact at AGA called me up and snarled, “Jan, are you on acid?!
  • Here is a quote from his July 10, 2011 post titled Nuclear Roulette: new book puts a nail in coffin of nukesCulture Change went beyond studying the problem soon after its founding in 1988: action and advocacy must get to the root of the crises to assure a livable future. Also, information overload and a diet of bad news kills much activism. So it’s hard to find reading material to strongly recommend. But the new book Nuclear Roulette: The Case Against the “Nuclear Renaissance” is must-have if one is fighting nukes today.
  • He goes to say the following:The uneconomic nature of nuclear power, and the lack of energy gain compared to cheap oil, are two huge reasons for society to quit flirting with more nuclear power, never mind the catastrophic record and certainty of more to come. Somehow the evidence and true track record of dozens of accidents and perhaps 300,000 to nearly 1,000,000 deaths from just Chernobyl, are brushed aside by corporate media and most governments. So, imaginative means of helping to end nuclear proliferation are crucial, the most careful and reasonable-sounding ones being included in summary form in Nuclear Roulette.
Dan R.D.

13-Year-Old Uses Fibonacci Sequence For Solar Power Breakthrough [19Aug11] - 0 views

  •  
    An anonymous reader tips news of 7th grader Aidan Dwyer, who used phyllotaxis - the way leaves are arranged on plant stems in nature - as inspiration to arrange an array of solar panels in a way that generates 20-50% more energy than a uniform, flat panel array. Aidan wrote, "I designed and built my own test model, copying the Fibonacci pattern of an oak tree. I studied my results with the compass tool and figured out the branch angles. The pattern was about 137 degrees and the Fibonacci sequence was 2/5. Then I built a model using this pattern from PVC tubing. In place of leaves, I used PV solar panels hooked up in series that produced up to 1/2 volt, so the peak output of the model was 5 volts. The entire design copied the pattern of an oak tree as closely as possible. ... The Fibonacci tree design performed better than the flat-panel model. The tree design made 20% more electricity and collected 2 1/2 more hours of sunlight during the day. But the most interesting results were in December, when the Sun was at its lowest point in the sky. The tree design made 50% more electricity, and the collection time of sunlight was up to 50% longer!" His work earned him a Young Naturalist Award from the American Museum of Natural History and a provisional patent on the design.
D'coda Dcoda

Fukushima's Contamination Produces Some Surprises at Sea [29Sep11] - 0 views

  • Six months after the accident at Fukushima Daiichi, the news flow from the stricken nuclear power plant has slowed, but scientific studies of radioactive material in the ocean are just beginning to bear fruit.The word from the land is bad enough. As my colleague Hiroko Tabuchi reported on Saturday, Japanese officials have detected elevated radiation levels in rice near the crippled reactors. Worrying radiation levels had already been detected in beef, milk, spinach and tea leaves, leading to recalls and bans on shipments.
  • Off the coast, the early results indicate that very large amounts of radioactive materials were released, and may still be leaking, and that rather than being spread through the whole ocean, currents are keeping a lot of the material concentrated. Most of that contamination came from attempts to cool the reactors and spent fuel pools, which flushed material from the plant into the ocean, and from direct leaks from the damaged facilities.
  • Japanese government and utility industry scientists estimated this month that 3,500 terabecquerels of cesium 137 was released directly into the sea from March 11, the date of the earthquake and tsunami, to late May. Another 10,000 terabecquerels of cesium 137 made it into the ocean after escaping from the plant as steam.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • The leakage very likely isn’t over, either. The Tokyo Electric Power Company, the operator of the plant, said Sept. 20 that it believed that something on the order of 200 to 500 tons a day of groundwater might still be pouring into the damaged reactor and turbine buildings.Ken Buesseler, a scientist at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, who in 1986 studied the effects of the Chernobyl disaster on the Black Sea, said the Fukushima disaster appeared to be by far the largest accidental release of radioactive material into the sea.
  • Chernobyl-induced radiation in the Black Sea peaked in 1986 at about 1,000 becquerels per cubic meter, he said in an interview at his office in Woods Hole, Mass. By contrast, the radiation level off the coast near the Fukushima Daiichi plant peaked at more than 100,000 becquerels per cubic meter in early April.
  • Working with a team of scientists from other institutions, including the University of Tokyo and Columbia University, Mr. Buesseler’s Woods Hole group in June spent 15 days in the waters off northeast Japan, studying the levels and dispersion of radioactive substances there and the effect on marine life.The project, financed primarily by the Moore Foundation after governments declined to participate, continued to receive samples from Japanese cruises into July.
  • While Mr. Buesseler declined to provide details of the findings before analysis is complete and published, he said the broad results were sobering.“When we saw the numbers — hundreds of millions of becquerels — we knew this was the largest delivery of radiation into the ocean ever seen,’’ he said. ‘‘We still don’t know how much was released.’’Mr. Buesseler took samples of about five gallons, filtered out the naturally occurring materials and the materials from nuclear weapon explosions, and measured what was left.
  • The scientists had expected to find ocean radiation levels falling off sharply after a few months, as radioactive substances were dispersed by the currents, because, he said, “The ocean’s solution to pollution is dilution.’’The good news is that researchers found the entire region 20 to 400 miles offshore had radiation levels too low to be an immediate threat to humans.But there was also an unpleasant surprise. “Rather than leveling off toward zero, it remained elevated in late July,’’ he said, up to about 10,000 becquerel per cubic meter. ‘‘That suggests the release problem has not been solved yet.”
  • The working hypothesis is that contaminated sediments and groundwater near the coast are continuing to contaminate the seas, he said.The international team also collected plankton samples and small fish for study. Mr. Buesseler said there were grounds for concern about bioaccumulation of radioactive isotopes in the food chain, particularly in seaweed and some shellfish close to the plants. A fuller understanding of the effect on fish that are commercially harvested will probably take several years of data following several feeding cycles, he said.
  • ‘We also don’t know concentrations in sediments, so benthic biota may be getting higher doses and if consumed (shellfish), could be of concern,’’ he wrote later in an e-mail, referring to organisms that dwell on the sea floor.The study also found that the highest cesium values were not necessarily from the samples collected closest to Fukushima, he said, because eddies in the ocean currents keep the material from being diluted in some spots farther offshore.The overall results were consistent with those previously found by Japanese scientists, Mr. Buesseler said.He said more research was urgently needed to answer several questions, including why the level of contamination offshore near the plant was so high.“Japan is leading the studies, but more work is needed than any one country, or any one lab, can possibly carry out,” he said.
D'coda Dcoda

Effect of contaminated soil on food chain sparks fears [10Sep11] - 0 views

  • Six months after the nuclear meltdowns in Fukushima Prefecture, the public's awareness of the threat posed by radiation is entering a new phase: the realization that the biggest danger now and in the future is from contaminated soil.
  • The iodine-131 ejected into the sky by the Fukushima No. 1 power station disaster was quickly detected in vegetables and tap water — even as far away as Tokyo, 220 km south of the plant. But contamination levels are now so low they are virtually undetectable, thanks to the short half-life of iodine-131 — eight days — and stepped up filtering by water companies.
  • But cesium is proving to be a tougher foe. The element's various isotopes have half-lives ranging from two to 30 years, generating concern about the food chain in Fukushima Prefecture, a predominantly agricultural region, as the elements wash fallout into the ground. The root of the problem is, well — roots. Cesium-134 and cesium-137 are viewed as potential health threats because vegetables can absorb the isotopes from the soil they're planted in.
  • ...9 more annotations...
  • "Until early spring, produce was contaminated (on the surface with radioactive materials) that the No. 1 plant discharged into the atmosphere. But now, the major route of contamination is through plant roots," said Kunikazu Noguchi, a radiation protection expert at Nihon University. Whether absorption by plant roots can affect human health remains to be seen. Experts are warning that the region's soil and agricultural products will require close monitoring for many years.
  • At the moment, sampling data collected by the various prefectural governments indicate that no vegetables, except for those grown in Fukushima Prefecture, have been found to contain more than the government's provisional limit of 500 becquerels per kilogram since June. Likewise, as of Sept. 7, samples of pork, chicken, milk and fruit had also tested within the provisional radiation limit, apart from Fukushima products and tea from Chiba, Kanagawa, Gunma, Tochigi, Saitama and Ibaraki prefectures.
  • In fact, the amount of radioactive materials in most of the food sampled has been steadily declining over the past few months, except for produce from Fukushima. "The results of Fukushima's sampling tests show the amountof radioactive material contained in vegetables has dropped sharply in recent months, including those grown in areas with high radiation levels," Noguchi said. "People shouldn't worry about it much (for the time being)," he said. "But mushrooms and other vegetables grown in contaminated forests are likely tocontain high levels of radioactive materials."
  • Now that soil in a wide area of eastern Japan has been contaminated with cesium, experts are calling for close monitoring of soil and produce. The education ministry conducted soil surveys in June and July at 2,200 locations within 100 km of the crippled plant. At 34 locations in six municipalities in Fukushima Prefecture, including Minamisoma, Namie and Iitate, the data said cesium levels had exceeded 1.48 million becquerels per sq. meter — the same level that was used to define the exclusion zone around Chernobyl in 1986. Yasuyuki Muramatsu, a radiochemistry professor at Gakushuin University, said that agricultural contamination will likely peak this year because cesium binds more strongly with minerals in soil as time passes, making it more difficult to be absorbed by plant roots.
  • "Data from the Chernobyl disaster show that radioactive cesium in soil tends to become fixed more strongly to clay minerals as time passes. So agricultural contamination will lessen next year," he said. Muramatsu urged that special caution should be taken over products grown in soil rich in organic matter, such as in forested areas. "If the soil is rich in organic matter, it makes (cesium) more easily transferable to plants. . . . Forest soil is rich in organic matter, so people should be careful," he said.
  • his year, it's very important to conduct thorough surveys. The contamination will continue for a long time, so data collection is essential," Muramatsu said. "We need to be prepared for the following years by recording data this year and studying the rate at which cesium in the soil is absorbed by each kind of produce," Muramatsu said. In the meantime, the radioactivity itself will continue to weaken over the years. Cesium-134 has a half-life of 2 years and cesium-137 a half-life of 30 years, meaning the radiation they emit will drop by half in 2 years and 30 years.
  • The ratio of cesium-134 to cesium-137 in the Fukushima accident is estimated as 1-to-1, while the ratio during the 1986 Chernobyl disaster was 1-to-2. This indicates the radiation in Fukushima will weaken at a faster rate than at Chernobyl. Between April and early August, the farm ministry tested soil at some 580 locations in six prefectures, including Fukushima, Tochigi and Gunma, to get a better picture of the full extent of contamination.
  • According to the results, 40 locations in Fukushima Prefecture had an intensity exceeding 5,000 becquerels per kilogram — the government's maximum limit for growing rice. Many municipalities within 30 km of the Fukushima No. 1 plant were banned from planting rice based on similar tests conducted in April. In addition, the ministry has asked 17 prefectures in eastern Japan to conduct two-phase radiation tests on harvested rice.
  • So far, none of the tests performed on unmilled rice — including from Fukushima — exceeded the government's limit of 500 becquerels per kilogram. Masanori Nonaka, an agriculture professor at Niigata University who specializes in soil science, said rice grown in contaminated areas is likely to be tainted, but to what extent is anyone's guess. White rice, however, may prove to be safe, Nonaka said. Because most of the radioactive material will adhere to the bran — the part of the husk left behind after hulling — about 60 percent of the cesium can be removed just by polishing it, he explained. Other foods, such as marine produce, won't be as easy to handle, experts say. After the Chernobyl accident, for example, the radioactive contamination of fish peaked between 6 to 12 months after the disaster. The Fisheries Agency, meanwhile, has asked nine prefectures on the Pacific coast to increase their sampling rates to prevent contaminated fish from landing in supermarkets.
Dan R.D.

Despite billions spent on cleanup, Hanford won't be clean for thousands of years [09Fe... - 0 views

  • Some radioactive contaminants at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation will threaten the Columbia River for thousands of years, a new analysis projects, despite the multibillion-dollar cleanup efforts by the federal government.
  • The U.S. Department of Energy projections come from a new analysis of how best to clean up leaking storage tanks and manage waste at Hanford, a former nuclear weapons production site on 586 square miles next to the Columbia in southeastern Washington.
  • Oregon officials say the results, including contamination projections for the next 10,000 years, indicate the federal government needs to clean up more of the waste that has already leaked and spilled at Hanford instead of capping and leaving it, a less-expensive alternative.
  • ...8 more annotations...
  • "We think it should force a re-look at the long-term cleanup plan at Hanford," said Ken Niles, assistant director of the Oregon Department of Energy. "We don't want that level of contamination reaching the Columbia River."
  • The U.S. Department of Energy report says the risks from some high-volume radioactive elements, including tritium, strontium and cesium, have already peaked and should diminish relatively quickly. For all locations at Hanford, the peak radiological risk has already occurred, the report says.
  • But Mary Beth Burandt, an Energy Department manager, said the agency is undecided and will likely propose steps to address public concerns. Such steps could include more treatment, barrier walls to block contaminant flows and limits on long-lived radioactive elements in incoming waste.
  • Hanford produced nuclear materials from 1944 through 1988, operated nine nuclear reactors to produce plutonium and generated millions of gallons of radioactive and hazardous waste. Some of the waste was dumped directly into ditches, some was buried in drums and some was stored in 177 huge underground tanks, including 149 leak-prone single-walled tanks.
  • It's now the nation's most contaminated radioactive cleanup site.
  • A U.S. Government Accountability Office report in September on tank cleanup said the total estimated cost has risen dramatically and could go as high as $100 billion, well above the current $77 billion estimate. The latest deadline for completing cleanup is 2047, though cleanup dates have been steadily pushed back.
  • Much of Hanford's radioactivity comes from strontium-90 and cesium-137, which have half-lives of roughly three decades, the GAO said, meaning much of the risk should fall relatively quickly.
  • Health risks from Hanford's contamination are long-term, not immediate. They're expressed in terms of cancer cases after a lifetime of drinking well water from the site, with a one in 10,000 risk considered high. But many of the contaminant levels at the site exceed health benchmarks by wide margins.
Dan R.D.

Japan winter power enough despite nuclear lack: government | Reuters - 0 views

  • (Reuters) - Japanese utilities will largely avoid power shortages this winter despite prolonged reactor shutdowns amid public concerns over nuclear safety, but hurdles remain for next summer, the government said on Tuesday.
  • It also unveiled ways to bridge the gap next summer, when peak-hour demand is expected to exceed supply by 16,560 megawatts, compared with the biggest gap this winter of 2,530 MW in one area, if no reactors restart by then.
  • Utilities plan to secure additional fossil-fuel capacity of 4,090 MW by next summer, but other plans depend on how far policy initiatives, such as fiscal spending, can encourage energy conservation and the use of solar and wind power, leaving the risk of rolling blackouts.
  • ...3 more annotations...
  • Using gas and oil to make up for the loss of all nuclear power reactors will cost more than 3 trillion yen ($38 billion) a year, based on imported fuel prices and utilization rates in 2009, the government has estimated.
  • "Even if no reactors are restarted by next summer, the government would like to do its utmost through policy efforts to ensure we can meet peak-hour demand and avoid a rise in costs for energy," Trade Minister Yukio Edano said at a news conference after he and other ministers discussed chances of power shortages this winter and next summer.
  • The ongoing radiation crisis at Tokyo Electric Power Co's Fukushima Daiichi plant, triggered by the March earthquake and tsunami, has shaken public confidence in nuclear safety, forcing watchdogs to set stricter regulations for restarting reactors closed for regular checks.
Jan Wyllie

Fracking floors energy giants - Business Analysis & Features - Business - The Independent - 0 views

  • A fortnight after writing $2.84bn (£1.84bn) off the value of its Fayetteville shale gas business in Arkansas, BHP is poised to reveal on Wednesday that the charge helped push down its profits by a massive 40 per cent – to $14.2bn – in the year to June 30.
  • The FTSE 100 mining giant was forced into the writedown after a decade-long stampede into the brave new world of US shale gas produced so much of the stuff that its price tumbled to 10-year lows, taking the value of its producers with them.
  • "The problem is exacerbated because the minerals leasing system in the US obliges lessees to drill fairly quickly or relinquish their drilling rights," he added.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • US gas price fell from $3.88 per thousand cubic feet when the deal was struck to as little as $1.91 in April, before recovering slightly to now hover around $2.75. Today's mildly-improved US gas price is well below its peak of $14 per thousand cubic feet in 2005
  • hile protests in the US have largely failed to curb the shale gas industry's development, the plummeting gas price is now doing the job for them. The number of shale gas rigs operating in the US has tumbled by 44 per cent in the past year to stand at about 300 now, according to industry estimates.
  • Hydrocarbon producers such as Chesapeake and BHP are furiously switching their fracking resources from gas to oil, which is unlikely to suffer the same depression in its price as gas as the US has the infrastructure in place to export much of the additional oil it produces from shale. As a result, the number of shale oil rigs has leapt by 35 per cent to about 860 in the past year.
  • as an expected flurry of LNG export terminals begin to come onstream in about three years, fracking companies will have a valuable further outlet for their gas – the relatively lucrative European and Asian markets.
Jan Wyllie

Physician: International medical community must immediately assist Japanese - Radioacti... - 1 views

  • : Dr. Helen Caldicott
  • All areas of Japan should be tested to assess how radioactive the soil and water are because the winds can blow the radioactive pollution hundreds of miles from the point source at Fukushima. Under no circumstances should radioactive rubbish and debris be incinerated as this simply spreads the isotopes far and wide to re-concentrate in food and fish. All batches of food must be adequately tested for specific radioactive elements using spectrometers. No radioactive food must be sold or consumed, nor must radioactive food be diluted for sale with non-radioactive food as radioactive elements re-concentrate in various bodily organs. All water used for human consumption should be tested weekly. All fish caught off the east coast must be tested for years to come. All people, particularly children, pregnant women and women of childbearing age still living in high radiation zones should be immediately evacuated to non-radioactive areas of Japan. All people who have been exposed to radiation from Fukushima – particularly babies, children, immunosuppressed, old people and others — must be medically thoroughly and routinely examined for malignancy, bone marrow suppression, diabetes, thyroid abnormalities, heart disease, premature aging, and cataracts for the rest of their lives and appropriate treatment instituted. Leukemia will start to manifest within the next couple of years, peak at five years and solid cancers will start appearing 10 to 15 years post-accident and will continue to increase in frequency in this generation over the next 70 to 90 years. All physicians and medical care providers in Japan must read and examine Chernobyl–Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment by the New York Academy of Sciences to understand the true medical gravity of the situation they face. I also suggest with humility that doctors in particular but also politicians and the general public refer to my web page, nuclearfreeplanet.org for more information, that they listen to the interviews related to Fukushima and Chernobyl on my radio program at ifyoulovethisplanet.org and they read my book NUCLEAR POWER IS NOT THE ANSWER. The international medical community and in particular the WHO must be mobilized immediately to assist the Japanese medical profession and politicians to implement this massive task outlined above. The Japanese government must be willing to accept international advice and help. As a matter of extreme urgency Japan must request and receive international advice and help from the IAEA and the NRC in the U.S., and nuclear specialists from Canada, Europe, etc., to prevent the collapse of Fukushima Dai-ichi Unit 4 and the spent fuel pool if there was an earthquake greater than 7 on the Richter scale.As the fuel pool crashed to earth it would heat and burn causing a massive radioactive release 10 times larger than the release from Chernobyl. There is no time to spare and at the moment the world community sits passively by waiting for catastrophe to happen. The international and Japanese media must immediately start reporting the facts from Japan as outlined above. Not to do so is courting global disaster.
  •  
    Like is the wrong word, totally! Will share, thanks for the heads up.
D'coda Dcoda

Tepco officially admitted they don't need nuclear power [22Nov11] - 0 views

  • 11/22/2011, it turned out that Tepco estimated that they can cover all the electric consumption even without nuclear plants. By using pumped-storage power generation and steam-power generation ,next summer they can supply more than 57 million kilowatts, which is the maximum supply capacity of this summer. This year, we did not run out of power. 57 million kilowatts is even OVER supply. The annual peak of the electric consumption is late August in Japan. By proving that they can cover the potential demand of next summer, it has become clear that they don’t need nuclear power through a year. There are 54 nuclear plants in Japan. Tepco owns 17 of them.
D'coda Dcoda

Report doesn't answer blast, radiation leak mysteries [07Dec11] - 0 views

  • Why did such massive amounts of radioactive substances escape from the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant? Why did explosions tear through its reactor buildings? Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s interim report on the accident at the nuclear plant shed some light on some causes of the nation's worst-ever nuclear crisis, but these and other crucial questions remain unanswered. The release of radioactive substances is believed to have peaked on the morning of March 15. As radiation spewed from the plant's reactors, residents in an extensive area--even as far as Iitatemura, Fukushima Prefecture, about 30 kilometers from the plant--were forced to evacuate.
  • The report said the air pressure in the containment vessel of the plant's No. 2 reactor dropped drastically that morning. However, TEPCO says the causal relationship between the pressure drop and the radioactive release is "unclear at this moment." It had been assumed that a blast in the pressure control chamber below the No. 2 reactor's containment vessel caused the increase in radiation leaked into the environment. Analysis of data from a seismometer and other equipment at the complex later showed this hypothesis was incorrect.
  • The report's verification of TEPCO's initial response to the nuclear accident also lacked details. After a hydrogen blast wrecked the No. 1 reactor building shortly after 3:30 p.m. on March 12--a development nobody had anticipated--TEPCO scrambled to prevent similar blasts from occurring at the other reactors.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • The utility arranged to have a hydraulic device break open holes in the reactor buildings to release hydrogen from inside. But shortly after 11 a.m. on March 14, before the device arrived, a hydrogen blast ripped through the No. 3 reactor. The report did not specify why TEPCO failed to prevent this blast, which happened nearly two days after the first explosion. TEPCO Vice President Masao Yamazaki said: "It was difficult to obtain equipment due to bad road conditions and other problems after the [March 11] earthquake. We'll look into the matter further for the final report." There also are some loose ends regarding the injection of cooling water into the reactors.
  • Even after the huge tsunami triggered by the March 11 earthquake hit the power plant and knocked out its cooling systems, the emergency water injection system functioned for about three days at the No. 2 reactor and about 1-1/2 days at the No. 3 reactor. TEPCO had time to prepare substitute water injection methods, such as stationing fire engines at the plant. Its failure to do so eventually resulted in core meltdowns at the Nos. 1-3 reactors. The report says TEPCO's response was delayed because valves to reduce pressure in the reactors could not be operated due to a lack of electricity and "TEPCO workers had to remove batteries from staff cars to collect enough power to conduct the operation." The report did not clarify why TEPCO did not prepare more power sources while the emergency water injection system was in operation.
D'coda Dcoda

Cesium from Fukushima plant fell all over Japan [26Nov11] - 0 views

  • Radioactive substances from the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant have now been confirmed in all prefectures, including Uruma, Okinawa Prefecture, about 1,700 kilometers from the plant, according to the science ministry. The ministry said it concluded the radioactive substances came from the stricken nuclear plant because, in all cases, they contained cesium-134, which has short half-life of two years. Before the March 11 Great East Japan Earthquake, radioactive substance were barely detectable in most areas.
  • the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology's survey results released on Nov. 25 showed that fallout from the Fukushima plant has spread across Japan. The survey covered the cumulative densities of radioactive substances in dust that fell into receptacles during the four months from March through June. Figures were not available for Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures, where the measurement equipment was rendered inoperable by the March 11 disaster. One measurement station was used for each of the other 45 prefectures. The highest combined cumulative density of radioactive cesium-134 and cesium-137 was found in Hitachinaka, Ibaraki Prefecture, at 40,801 becquerels per square meter. That was followed by 22,570 becquerels per square meter in Yamagata, the capital of Yamagata Prefecture, and 17,354 becquerels per square meter in Tokyo's Shinjuku Ward.
  • The current air radiation level in Ibaraki Prefecture is about 0.14 microsievert per hour, equivalent to an annual dose of about 1 millisievert, the safety limit for exposure under normal time international standards. Large amounts of radioactive dust fell in Tokyo, but a separate survey has detected relatively low accumulations of cesium in the soil. "Tokyo has smaller soil surfaces than other prefectures, but road and concrete surfaces are less prone to fixate cesium deposits, which were probably diffused by the wind and rain," a ministry official explained.
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • The fallout densities were considerably lower in the Chugoku and Kyushu regions in western Japan. The smallest figure of 0.378 becquerel per square meter came from Uto, Kumamoto Prefecture. The density in Osaka was 18.9 becquerels per square meter. The peak value in Ibaraki Prefecture was 970,000 times larger than the cumulative fallout density of 0.042 becquerel per square meter in fiscal 2009, found in an earlier nationwide survey before the Fukushima crisis started.
  • Also on Nov. 25, the science ministry released maps of aerially measured radioactive cesium from the Fukushima plant that accumulated in Aomori, Ishikawa, Fukui and Aichi prefectures. This was the final batch of the 22 prefectures in eastern Japan where mapping was to be completed by the end of this year. Nowhere in the four prefectures did the accumulations exceed 10,000 becquerels per square meter, the threshold for defining an area as being affected by the nuclear accident. This reconfirmed the science ministry's view that radioactive plumes wafted only as far west as the border of Gunma and Nagano prefectures and as far north as the border of Miyagi and Iwate prefectures, ministry officials said.
D'coda Dcoda

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

shared by D'coda Dcoda on 11 Nov 11 - No Cached
  • During the 1970s and 1980s, at the peak of the nuclear reactor construction, organized groups of protestors mounted dozens of anti-nuke campaigns. They were called Chicken Littles, the establishment media generally ignored their concerns, and the nuclear industry trotted out numerous scientists and engineers from their payrolls to declare nuclear energy to be safe, clean, and inexpensive energy that could reduce America’s dependence upon foreign oil. Workers at nuclear plants are highly trained, probably far more than workers in any other industry; operating systems are closely regulated and monitored. However, problems caused by human negligence, manufacturing defects, and natural disasters have plagued the nuclear power industry for its six decades. It isn’t alerts like what happened at San Onofre that are the problem; it’s the level 3 (site area emergencies) and level 4 (general site emergencies) disasters. There have been 99 major disasters, 56 of them in the U.S., since 1952, according to a study conducted by Benjamin K. Sovacool Director of the Energy Justice Program at Institute for Energy and Environment  One-third of all Americans live within 50 miles of a nuclear plant.
  • At Windscale in northwest England, fire destroyed the core, releasing significant amounts of Iodine-131. At Rocky Flats near Denver, radioactive plutonium and tritium leaked into the environment several times over a two decade period. At Church Rock, New Mexico, more than 90 million gallons of radioactive waste poured into the Rio Puerco, directly affecting the Navajo nation. In the grounds of central and northeastern Pennsylvania, in addition to the release of radioactive Cesium-137 and Iodine-121, an excessive level of Strontium-90 was released during the Three Mile Island (TMI) meltdown in 1979, the same year as the Church Rock disaster. To keep waste tanks from overflowing with radioactive waste, the plant’s operator dumped several thousand gallons of radioactive waste into the Susquehanna River. An independent study by Dr. Steven Wing of the University of North Carolina revealed the incidence of lung cancer and leukemia downwind of the TMI meltdown within six years of the meltdown was two to ten times that of the rest of the region.
  • Although nuclear plant security is designed to protect against significant and extended forms of terrorism, the NRC believes as many as one-fourth of the 104 U.S. nuclear plants may need upgrades to withstand earthquakes and other natural disasters, according to an Associated Press investigation. About 20 percent of the world’s 442 nuclear plants are built in earthquake zones, according to data compiled by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The NRC has determined that the leading U.S. plants in the Eastern Coast in danger of being compromised by an earthquake are in the extended metropolitan areas of Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Chattanooga. Tenn. The highest risk, however, may be California’s San Onofre and Diablo Canyon plants, both built near major fault lines. Diablo Canyon, near San Luis Obispo, was even built by workers who misinterpreted the blueprints.  
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • A Department of Energy analysis revealed the budget for 75 of the first plants was about $45 billion, but cost overruns ran that to $145 billion. The last nuclear power plant completed was the Watts Bar plant in eastern Tennessee. Construction began in 1973 and was completed in 1996. Part of the federal Tennessee Valley Authority, the Watts Bar plant cost about $8 billion to produce 1,170 mw of energy from its only reactor. Work on a second reactor was suspended in 1988 because of a lack of need for additional electricity. However, construction was resumed in 2007, with completion expected in 2013. Cost to complete the reactor, which was about 80 percent complete when work was suspended, is estimated to cost an additional $2.5 billion. The cost to build new power plants is well over $10 billion each, with a proposed cost of about $14 billion to expand the Vogtle plant near Augusta, Ga. The first two units had cost about $9 billion.
  • Added to the cost of every plant is decommissioning costs, averaging about $300 million to over $1 billion, depending upon the amount of energy the plant is designed to produce. The nuclear industry proudly points to studies that show the cost to produce energy from nuclear reactors is still less expensive than the costs from coal, gas, and oil. The industry also rightly points out that nukes produce about one-fifth all energy, with no emissions, such as those from the fossil fuels. For more than six decades, this nation essentially sold its soul for what it thought was cheap energy that may not be so cheap, and clean energy that is not so clean. It is necessary to ask the critical question. Even if there were no human, design, and manufacturing errors; even if there could be assurance there would be no accidental leaks and spills of radioactivity; even if there became a way to safely and efficiently dispose of long-term radioactive waste; even if all of this was possible, can the nation, struggling in a recession while giving subsidies to the nuclear industry, afford to build more nuclear generating plants at the expense of solar, wind, and geothermal energy?
1 - 20 of 40 Next ›
Showing 20 items per page