Fire Earth

Mass die-offs from human impact and planetary response to the assault could occur by early 2016

Posts Tagged ‘nuclear energy’

Japan Renews Nuke Ambitions Despite Fukushima, Common Sense

Posted by feww on December 14, 2013

Japan should embrace nuclear power: Government panel

“Nuclear energy is an important and fundamental base energy source that will support the stability of energy demand and supply,” the panel wrote in its report.

The panel is headed by the honorary chairman of Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Corp, Japan’s largest steel maker and one of its heaviest energy consumers, said a report.

Unsurprisingly, the panel’s recommendations are driven by economic incentives alone and have no base in science or reason in common sense.

If Japan Prime Minister Shinzo Abe remains in power his government would almost certainly heed the panel’s advice and expand Japan’s reliance on nuclear energy, despite widespread anti-nuclear sentiment after the 2011 Fukushima triple meltdown.

Ironically, the previous government of the Democratic Party of Japan, decided to abandon to abandon nuclear power following a recommendation from a similar panel.

Nuclear reactors in Japan, one of the world’s most seismic prone countries, provided about a third of electricity before the 2011 Fukushima catastrophe.

Prior to the Fukushima incident, the world’s worst nuclear disaster since 1986 Chernobyl meltdown, the government had considered boosting the contribution of nuclear energy to over 50 percent.

Enough said!

CJ Recommendation

The decision by the government to reactivate Japan’s idled reactors would justify any and all future defensive measures taken by nature to neutralize the additional threats, recommends CJ panel.

Posted in Global Disaster watch, Significant Event Imagery, significant events | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Nuked Fukushima Plant: New High Radiation Areas Found

Posted by feww on August 22, 2013

More Radiation Hotspots Found at Fukushima NPP

The operator of Japan’s nuked Fukushima plant has found two new radiation hotspots near storage tanks holding highly irradiated water, raising fear of new leaks as the extent of the disaster widens.

The news follows a press release earlier this week in which Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO), a name now synonymous with incompetence, treachery and cowardice, admitted contaminated water with dangerously high levels of radiation was leaking from one of its purpose-built storage tanks.

The first of the two highly irradiated areas was found near the tank No. 4 in the group B in the H3 area, with a reading of 100mSv/h, and the second was near storage tank No. 10 in the group A in the H3 area, where the reading was 70mSv/h.

The company’s latest press release is posted below.

Press Releases 2013
Press Release (Aug 22,2013) – Water Leak at a Tank in the H4 area in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station (Follow-up Information 10)

This is follow-up information on the “water leak at a tank in the H4 area in Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station” found on August 19.

From around 11:00 AM to around 3:00 PM, we conducted full inspections (appearance inspections and dose measurement) on the flanged tanks in the other areas, which are of the same type as the tank from which water has leaked.

Neither leak nor puddle was found by the appearance inspections on the tanks and the drain valves. However, 2 locations locally showing high dose rates were found around the H3 area tanks.

The surfaces of these locations were dry, and we confirmed that water flowed out neither into the inside of the dike nor into the outside of the dike. We also confirmed that the water levels of these tanks remain unchanged after receiving water.

[High dose rate locations, the surface dose equivalent rates at these locations (γ and β rays (70μm dose equivalent rate)), and tank water levels]
” Near the bottom flange of the tank No. 4 in the group B in the H3 area: 100mSv/h and approx. 97% of the full water level
” Near the bottom flange of the tank No. 10 in the group A in the H3 area: 70mSv/h and approx. 95% of the full water level

No locations around the other tanks and drain valves showed high dose rates.

IMPORTANT NOTICE:

The Internet Mafia has previously censored Public Health Emergency, global health warnings and any and ALL information posted on this blog concerning nuclear disasters, nuclear energy and the global nuclear mafia. The cabal have also blocked or buried blog entrees on Fukushima Daiichi NPP.

What is a lethal dose of radiation from a single Exposure?

Studies of the 1945 atomic bombing at Hiroshima and Nagasaki show that 100 percent of victims whose bodies were exposed to 600,000 millirems (6,000 mSv) died from radiation. About 50 percent of victims who received  450,000 millirems (4,500 mSv) of radiation also died.

(Note: Rem is a unit of ionizing radiation equal to the amount that produces the same damage to humans as one roentgen of high-voltage x-rays.  Source: MIT)

1 rem = 10 mSv  (1 Sv = 100 rem)

Background Radiation in millirems per year (mrem/yr)

  • Average background radiation (US):  300
  • Higher altitudes (e.g, Denver): 400

“Safe Levels” of Radiation (U.S.)

Limits above natural background radiation levels (average 300 millirems per year) and medical radiation:

  • Occupation Limit: Maximum of 5,000  (the limit for a worker using radiation)
  • Average Natural Background: 300

[Note: Lifetime cumulative exposure should be limited to a person's age multiplied by 1,000 millirems, e.g., a 70-year-old person, 70,000 millirems.]

Adults

  • Max single dose for an adult: 3,000
  • Annual total dose: 5,000

Under 18

  • Max single dose for a person aged under 18 years: 300 millirems (whole body equivalent)
  • Annual total exposure: 500

Fetal Exposure

  • Maximum limit for fetal exposure during gestation period:  50 millirems per month above background levels

Medical

  • Single Chest X-ray (the whole body equivalent): 2 millirem

Air Travel

  • Coast-to-coast US round trip flight: 12 millirems

*Note:  Radiation dose of about 2,000 millisieverts (200,000 millirems) cause serious illness.

Half-life of some radioactive elements

[NOTE: Half-life is the time taken for a radioactive substance to decay by half.]

  • Cesium-134 ~ 2  years
  • Cesium-137 ~ 30 years
  • Iodine-131 ~ 8 days
  • Plutonium-239 ~ 24,200 years
  • Ruthenium-103 ~ 39 days [Ruthenium is a fission product of uranium-235.]
  • Ruthenium-106 ~ 374 days
  • Strontium-90 ~ 28.85 years  [Strontium-90 is a product of nuclear fission and is found in large amounts in spent nuclear fuel and in radioactive waste from nuclear reactors.]
  • Uranium-234 ~  246,000 years
  • Uranium-235 ~ 703.8  million years
  • Uranium-238  ~ 4.468 billion years

Probability of a Nuclear Disaster by Country

The following probability figures  calculated by FIRE-EARTH on April 8, 2011 still hold!

  • Japan (880)³
  • United States (865)
  • France (855)
  • Taiwan (850)
  • Belgium, China, Finland, India,  South Korea, United Kingdom, Ukraine, Russia, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Armenia, Slovenia, Croatia, Romania,  Hungary, Bulgaria, Spain,  Pakistan, Argentina, Brazil, Mexico,  South Africa, Canada (810)
  • Germany, Sweden, Netherlands (800)
  • Switzerland  (750)

Notes:

  1. The list represents a snapshot of events at the time of calculating the probabilities. Any forecast posted  here is subject to numerous variable factors.
  2. Figures in the bracket represent the probability of an incident occurring out of 1,000; the forecast duration is valid for the next 50  months.
  3. Probability includes a significant worsening of Fukushima nuclear disaster, and future quakes forecast for Japan.
  4. A nuclear incident is defined as a level 5 (Accident With Wider Consequences), or worse, on the International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES). See below.
  5. Safety issues considered in compiling these lists include the age, number of units and capacity of nuclear reactors in each country/state, previous incidents, probability of damage from human-enhanced natural disasters, e.g., earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic activity, hurricanes, tornadoes, storms, wildfires, flooding…]
  6. The  Blog’s knowledge concerning the extent to which the factors described in (3) might worsen during the forecast period greatly influences the forecast. (Last UPDATED: June 26, 2011)

Related Links

Also search the blog for dozens of additional entries on “Fukushima.”

Posted in disaster watch, disaster watch 2013, disaster zone, disasters, disasters 2011, Global Disaster watch, global disasters, global disasters 2011, global disasters 2013 | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Chernobyl Disaster: Ukraine Marks 27th Anniversary

Posted by feww on April 26, 2013

Radioactive cloud from Chernobyl explosion traveled half way around the world

The explosion at Chernobyl nuclear power plant 27 years ago has so far claimed at least a million lives, and counting. The core meltdown, which occurred on Saturday, April 26, 1986 at reactor No. 4 of the V.I. Lenin Nuclear Power Station, as it was then called, left entire regions in three countries—Ukraine, Russia and Belarus—unlivable.

The radionuclide levels still exceed the normal background in 60 Ukrainian towns and villages.

z-chernobyl-meltdown
Ukraine’s Chernobyl nuclear power plant underwent a core meltdown [center] in 1986 with disastrous consequences. The radionuclide levels still exceed the normal background in 60 Ukrainian towns and villages. This image was taken by authorities in the former Soviet Union.

Ongoing Health Issues

“The nation’s health is deteriorating,” Mykhailo Kurik, director of the Ukrainian Institute of Ecology, told Xinhua, asserting that the damage to nature and environment was severe and long-lasting.

“Just after the accident, a huge quantity of radionuclides, including the burning particles, which are extremely dangerous for the environment, were released. These isotopes have very long half-lives, so Ukraine will feel the devastating effects of the catastrophe for decades,” Kurik said.

Radioactive emissions from Chernobyl explosion were more than 100 times higher than the combined contamination caused by the atomic bombs dropped on Japan’s Hiroshima and Nagasaki, experts have said.

Remembering Chernobyl Victims


The sarcophagus covering the damaged fourth reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant is seen behind a building decorated with a graffiti in the abandoned city of Prypiat April 4, 2011. Belarus, Ukraine and Russia will mark the 25th anniversary of the nuclear reactor explosion in Chernobyl, the place where the world’s worst civil nuclear accident took place, on April 26. Engineers are still struggling to regain control of damaged reactors at the Fuskushima plant after last month’s earthquake and tsunami, in the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl in 1986, with the government urging the operator of the plant to act faster to stop radiation spreading. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich. Image may be subject to copyright. Reuters images …

Never Ending Nightmare at

“In mid-February, a 600-square-meter section of the roof at the Chernobyl site collapsed, sparking fears of another disaster. The collapse occurred 70 meters above the sarcophagus that contains the radiation from the damaged No. 4 reactor.” Said a report.

Experts estimate that 190 tons of reactor fuel remain under the existing sarcophagus that covers the disaster stricken power plant.


Birth defects and cancer were the norm for many years following the Chernobyl disaster.  By the time  residents of Pripyat, a town located near the plant, were ordered to evacuate, about two days after the Chernobyl core meltdown had occurred, many had already been exposed to varying doses of radiation poisoning.

1 Million Killed in Chernobyl Disaster

“A report by Alexey Yablokov, Vassily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko which appeared in the Annals of the New York Academy of Science showed that by 2004, there were 985,000 additional deaths worldwide caused by the nuclear disaster, including 212,000 of them within Western Russia, Belarus and Ukraine.”

Chernobyl fallout covers the entire Northern Hemisphere

Consequences of the Catastrophe. Authors  Alexey Yablokov (Center for Russian Environmental Policy in Moscow), Vassily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko ( Institute of Radiation Safety, Minsk, Belarus) studies about 5,000 reports and scientific  papers mostly published in Slavic languages and compiled their finding in the  book “Chernobyl: Consequences of the Catastrophe for People and the Environment,” which was published last year on the 24th anniversary of the Chernobyl reactor core meltdown.

“For the past 23 years, it has been clear that there is a danger greater than nuclear weapons concealed within nuclear power. Emissions from this one reactor exceeded a hundred-fold the radioactive contamination of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.” They wrote.

“No citizen of any country can be assured that he or she can be protected from radioactive contamination. One nuclear reactor can pollute half the globe,” the authors said. “Chernobyl fallout covers the entire Northern Hemisphere.”

According to the book, a total of about 830,000 people, referred to as the “liquidators,” were responsible for various emergency works at the Chernobyl site including fire extinguishing, decontamination and cleanup.

The authors say between 112,000 and 125,000 of the  liquidators had died by 2005.  The authors also estimate that between 1986 and 2004 some 985,000 people died as a result of Chernobyl fallout {2011 estimates are well over a million deaths.]

“Official discussions from the International Atomic Energy Agency and associated United Nations’ agencies (e.g. the Chernobyl Forum reports) have largely downplayed or ignored many of the findings reported in the Eastern European scientific literature and consequently have erred by not including these assessments.” The authors said last year.

Chernobyl and Other Nuclear Stats

  • More than 95% of the radioactive material (180 metric tons with a radioactivity of about 18 million curies) still remains inside the Chernobyl reactor.
  • The  core meltdown at Chernobyl was said to have released radiation estimated at 50 million curies. Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations said in 1995 that the meltdown had released about 140 million curies. [Researchers Alexey Yablokov, Vassily Nesterenko and Alexey Nesterenko say the radiation released from Chernobyl may have been up to 10 billion curies. In comparison, the Hiroshima bomb released about 3 million curies.]
  • Immediately after the accident, 237 people suffered from acute radiation sickness, and 31 died within the first 90 days of the disaster.
  • About 135,000 people were evacuated from the area surrounding the plant, including 50,000 from the town of Pripyat.
  • The Academy’s  estimate for the number of casualties  are more than 90,000 deaths and more than a quarter of a million cancer cases.
  • The Ukrainian National Commission for Radiation Protection calculates the number of radiation casualties at half a million  deaths so far.
  • In a book published by the New York Academy of Sciences last year on the 24th anniversary of the reactor core meltdown, the researchers maintain that about one million people have died from exposure to radiation released by the Chernobyl reactor so far [as of 2010.]
  • “In the former Soviet Union at least 9 million people have been effected by the accident; 2.5 million in Belarus; 3.5 million in Ukraine; and 3 million in Russia. In total over 160 000 Km2 are contaminated in the three republics.” source
  • Some 441 commercial nuclear power reactors are  operating in 31 countries ( total capacity of 376 gigawatts) each of which is potentially as lethal as Chernobyl, if not worse. [This item, updated here, was written before the Fukushima nuclear disaster began unfolding.]
  • An estimated 56 countries operate more than 250 research reactors.
  • At least 220 nuclear reactors power military ships and submarines.

Legacy: More than 4,000 cases of thyroid cancer were diagnosed among children and adolescents between 1992 to 2002 in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine. Victims under 14 years were most severely affected by the elevated concentrations of radioiodine found in milk.

  • Incidents of skin lesions, respiratory ailments, infertility and birth defects were readily found among the more than five million people who inhabit the affected areas of Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine for many years following the accident.

The Poisoned land. Up to 5 million people continue to live on radioactive contaminated land. About 85% of the children who live in contaminated areas of Belarus today are ill, a near 6-fold increase compared to the time before the explosion (15%), according to The Belarusian National Academy of Sciences.

Fukushima NPP

Fukushima NPP is said to contain about 4,277 tons of nuclear fuel, about 24 times as much as Chernobyl (~ 180 tons).

“The Fukushima Dai-ichi site has a considerable number of fuel rods on hand, according to information provided Thursday by Toyko Electric Power Co., which owns the atomic complex: There are 3,400 tons of fuel in seven spent fuel pools within the six-reactor plant, including one joint pool storing very old fuel from units 3 and 4. There are 877 tons in five of the reactor cores. Officials have said that the fuel in Unit 4′s reactor vessel was transferred to its spent fuel pool when the unit was temporarily shut in November.” AP reported.

On April 12, Japanese authorities raised the measure of severity of the Fukushima NPP disaster to the maximum level of 7 on INES. (See below for details.)

The International Nuclear and Radiological Event Scale (INES)

The INES, a logarithmic scale, which was introduced in 1990 by the IAEA to enable prompt communication, classifies the intensity of nuclear incidents as follows:

7 – Major Accident [Chernobyl disaster, criticality accident, April 1986]

6 – Serious Accident [e.g., Kyshtym incident, Mayak, former Soviet Union, steam explosion released up to 80 tons of highly radioactive material into the atmosphere, September 1957. ]

5 – Accident With Wider Consequences [e.g., Three Mile Island accident  Pen State, U.S., partial meltdown release radioactive gases  into the environment, March 1979.]

4 – Accident With Local Consequences [e.g., Sellafield, UK, at least 5 incidents reported between 1955 to 1979]

3 – Serious Incident [e.g., Vandellos NPP, Spain, fire destroyed control systems; the reactor was shut down, July1989]

2 – Incident [e.g., Forsmark NPP, Sweden, a backup generator failed, July 2006]

1 – Anomaly [e.g., TNPC, France, 1,600 gallons of water containing 75 kilograms (170 lb) of uranium leaked into the environment,  July 2008]

0 – Deviation (No Safety Significance) — [e.g., Atucha, Argentina - Reactor shutdown caused by tritium increase in reactor encasement, December 2006.]

What is a lethal dose of radiation from a single Exposure?

Studies of the 1945 atomic bombing at Hiroshima and Nagasaki show that 100 percent of victims whose bodies were exposed to 600,000 millirems (6,000 mSv) died from radiation. About 50 percent of victims who received  450,000 millirems (4,500 mSv) of radiation also died.

(Note: Rem is a unit of ionizing radiation equal to the amount that produces the same damage to humans as one roentgen of high-voltage x-rays.  Source: MIT)

1 rem = 10 mSv  (1 Sv = 100 rem)

Background Radiation in millirems per year (mrem/yr)

  • Average background radiation (US):  300
  • Higher altitudes (e.g, Denver): 400

“Safe Levels” of Radiation (U.S.)

Limits above natural background radiation levels (average 300 millirems per year) and medical radiation:

  • Occupation Limit: Maximum of 5,000  (the limit for a worker using radiation)
  • Average Natural Background: 300

[Note: Lifetime cumulative exposure should be limited to a person's age multiplied by 1,000 millirems, e.g., a 70-year-old person, 70,000 millirems.]

Adults

  • Max single dose for an adult: 3,000
  • Annual total dose: 5,000

Under 18

  • Max single dose for a person aged under 18 years: 300 millirems (whole body equivalent)
  • Annual total exposure: 500

Fetal Exposure

  • Maximum limit for fetal exposure during gestation period:  50 millirems per month above background levels

Medical

  • Single Chest X-ray (the whole body equivalent): 2 millirem

Air Travel

  • Coast-to-coast US round trip flight: 12 millirems

*Note:  Radiation dose of about 2,000 millisieverts (200,000 millirems) cause serious illness.

Half-life of some radioactive elements

[NOTE: Half-life is the time taken for a radioactive substance to decay by half.]

  • Cesium-134 ~ 2  years
  • Cesium-137 ~ 30 years
  • Iodine-131 ~ 8 days
  • Plutonium-239 ~ 24,200 years
  • Ruthenium-103 ~ 39 days [Ruthenium is a fission product of uranium-235.]
  • Ruthenium-106 ~ 374 days
  • Strontium-90 ~ 28.85 years  [Strontium-90 is a product of nuclear fission and is found in large amounts in spent nuclear fuel and in radioactive waste from nuclear reactors.]
  • Uranium-234 ~  246,000 years
  • Uranium-235 ~ 703.8  million years
  • Uranium-238  ~ 4.468 billion years

Related Links

Related Links:

Posted in environment | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Floods Damage about 4% of Pakistan Crops

Posted by feww on October 11, 2011

FIRST PHASE of GLOBAL CIVIC COLLAPSE STARTING as FORECAST.

Heavy monsoon and severe flooding in Pakistan affect about 9 million people 

Food insecurity remains a major challenge, as floods destroy about 1 million hectares of standing crops including maize and rice.

READ THIS FIRST

Continued hacking and content censorship

In view of the continued hacking and censorship of this blog by the Internet Mafia, the Moderators have decided to maintain only a minimum presence at this site, until further notice.

FIRE-EARTH will continue to update the 2011 Disaster Calendar for the benefit of its readers.

WordPress is HACKING this blog!

WordPress Continues to Hack Fire-Earth, Affiliated Blogs

The Blog Moderators Condemn in the Strongest Possible Terms the Continued Removal of Content and Hacking of FIRE-EARTH and Affiliated Blogs by WordPress!

United States of Censorship

Even Twitter Counters are disabled when Blog posts criticize Obama, or contain “forbidden phrases.”  See also: Google’s Top 10 List of ‘Holy Cows’.

Disaster Calendar 2011 – October 11

[October 11, 2011]  Mass die-offs resulting from human impact and the planetary response to the anthropogenic assault could occur by early 2016.  SYMBOLIC COUNTDOWN: 1,618 Days Left to the ‘Worst Day’ in Human History

  • Sindh Province, Pakistan. Heavy monsoon and severe flooding in Pakistan have affected about 9 million people since August, mostly in southern Pakistan’s Sindh province.
    • “Official estimates indicate that, as of 27 September, over 8.9 million people have been affected and at least 880 000 hectares of standing crops have been damaged. The affected crop land represents 3.7 percent of the total national cropped area.” FAO said.
    • “The affected crop land represents 3.7 percent of the total national cropped area. However, damage to the current paddy crop is moderate and is estimated by FAO and Pakistan’s space agency (SUPARCO), as of 20 September, at about 252 700 tonnes, or 2.5 percent of the normal national production.”
    • Floods have also destroyed or damage about 1.5 million houses.
    • Some 20,000 irrigation structures have also been destroyed.
    • About 92,000 livestock have perished, and FIVE million surviving animals are at risk.
    • Severe losses of crop, livestock and grain stock, as well as wholesale damage to housing and infrastructure have left at least 2.75 million people in immediate need of food [and shelter] assistance, especially in Sindh province, FAO report cited a joint UN-Government assessment.

Other Disasters

  • UK. The nuclear inspector has given the green light to the decrepit and potentially catastrophic nuclear energy industry in the UK.
    • “I remain confident that our UK nuclear facilities have no fundamental safety weaknesses (but) no matter how high our standards, the quest for improvement must never stop,” said the head of UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR).
    • See also: US Nuke Plants Threatened by Extreme Heat

Related Links

Posted in environment, global deluge, global disasters | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Obama Goes Nuclear!

Posted by feww on February 17, 2010

Obama Nuclear Investment Surge to Fight Environment

President Obama has just announced $8.3 billion in loan guarantees to build the first U.S. nuclear power plant in 30 years, a move designed to win the war against the environment.

If you are not one of the millions of readers who have read the post linked to below, now is the time to read it:

On The Way To Armageddon: Could We Make A Detour?

America’s use of illegitimate nuclear energy, instead of reducing its energy waste, is in line with her unsustainable borrowing habits: Spend now; worry about the debt later. The problem being that the consequences of playing with nuclear waste are much deadlier than unmanageable debts.


The Worst President, the Worst Decisions! Click image to enlarge!
[With special thanks to GA for the cartoon.]

The government loan guarantee will help Atlanta-based Southern Co build two nuclear reactors in the state of Georgia at a cost of about $9 billion, which are expected to go on line in 2016 and 2017.

However the above cost does NOT include the cost of decommission the reactors, dealing with piles of nuclear waste, or environmental emergencies arising from potential incidents.

“Unfortunately, the president is setting up the American taxpayer for the next corporate bailout,” said Jim Riccio, a nuclear policy analyst, adding that the Congressional Budget Office had already forecast the probability of loans default at greater than 50 percent, Reuters reported.

Mr Obama said nuclear energy was “safe and clean” and that the plants were needed to meet the country’s future energy needs.

Ironically, the core reason for not building any new nuclear reactors in the US since the 1979 was the partial core meltdown of one of the reactors at Three Mile Island atomic power plant in Pennsylvania, which caused radioactive gases to escape to the atmosphere.

Obama sees the threat of nuclear energy as a ‘DEBATE’

Perhaps the President should go to Chernobyl on a fact-finding mission because he doesn’t seem to have any knowledge of the scope and magnitude of the nuclear power’s past disasters.

“On an issue which affects our economy, our security, and the future of our planet, we cannot continue to be mired in the same old debates between left and right, between environmentalists and entrepreneurs,” said the President.

“To meet our growing energy needs and prevent the worst consequences of climate change, we’ll need to increase our supply of nuclear power. It’s that simple.” [Famous last words, Mr President?]

Primary Energy Consumption by Source and Sector, 2008

What’s Worse? Nuclear Accidents or Nuclear Waste?

Nuclear Power is NOT Clean or Green! Currently 104 nuclear reactors operate in the US, sprawled across 31 states, generating an estimated 769 billion kWh of electricity at a capacity factor of 89 percent (2001 estimate). Up to 60 new nuclear reactors are being built worldwide.

The reactors in the United States produce more than 2,000 metric tons of high-level radioactive waste and at least 34 million liters (12 million cubic feet) of low level radioactive waste annually. Threr are NO solutions for the nuclear waste. Building more nuclear plants means piling up more of the “permanent” radioactive waste.

“Over 54,000 metric tons of irradiated fuel [Waste from Reactors] has already accumulated at the sites of commercial nuclear reactors in the United States. There are several proposals to manage such highly radioactive waste, but none of them would satisfactorily deal with the material.” Public Citizen said.

According to the US Department of Energy (DOE), there are “millions of gallons of radioactive waste”, “thousands of tons of spent nuclear fuel and material” and “huge quantities of contaminated soil and water” in the United States.

The United States has at least 120 sites, some tes of thousands of hectares (acres) large, that are designated as “radioactive contaminated and unusable.”

One such site in the rural town of Fernald, in Hamilton County, Ohio, where “31 million pounds of uranium product,” some “2.5 billion pounds of [nuclear] waste” and “2.75 million cubic yards of [radioactive ] contaminated soil and debris” pose a deadly threat to the environment.

[In 1984 the plant was found to be releasing thousands of tons of  uranium dust into the atmosphere causing a massive radioactive contamination of the surrounding areas.]

A “223 acre portion of the underlying Great Miami Aquifer had uranium levels above drinking standards.”

Oak Ridge National Laboratory, is home to at least “167 known contaminant release sites” in one of the three subdivisions of its 150 km2 (37,000-acre) site alone.

Job Creation Ploy: Don’t billions come with 9 zeros anymore?

Obama says the Georgia project would generate 3,500 construction jobs and 800 permanent ones as soon as the reactors are operational. Don’t billions come with 9 zeros anymore?

What, $9,000,000,000 to create 800 permanent jobs? Isn’t that a whopping $11.25million per job?

At these rates, it would cost about $166.5 trillion (12 zeros to a trillion) to put the 14.8 million or so unemployed people in the U.S. back to work!

America’s energy requirements could be reduced PAINLESSLY and MANY NEW JOBS could be created, if the government cared!

Related Links:


Posted in 3-mile island, decommission nuclear reactors, Georgia reactors, Southern Co, Three Mile Island | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Australian Coal and the Planet

Posted by feww on January 10, 2009

Australia is in the grip of a heatwave

Australia is about to experience some of the hottest temperatures anywhere on the planet!

Quote of the Day:

“Switzerland finances construction of coal plants, Sweden builds them, and Australia exports coal and sets atmospheric carbon dioxide goals so large as to guarantee destruction of much of the life on the planet.” ~ James Hansen, NASA Climatologist.

The above quote is from a letter to Michelle and Barack Obama written by Hanson on December 29, 2008.

Now the $64 trillion question

Why isn’t Hansen advocating a smart option like a low-energy path for the economy?

Related links:

Posted in australia, coal plants, heatwave, Sweden, Switzerland | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

European Pressurized Water Reactor!

Posted by feww on July 4, 2008

Second new reactor for France


Computer designed picture of the planned European Pressurized Water Reactor (EPR). Licensed under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation license, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; source: http://www.framatome-anp.com

The French president told nuclear workers they can “look forward to a second new nuclear construction project.”

France already employs some 58 nuclear power reactors generating about 78% of its electricity [but more of a good thing is never enough!]

It’s believed Sarcozy has already secured himself a position with the new employers of Tony Bliar!

Posted in energy, environment, food, health, politics | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 430 other followers