Today, thanks to decades of citizen organizing and protest; the wise backing of the elected officials of the State of Vermont; the attempted deception of Vermont Yankee owners, Entergy, whose representatives even lied under oath; and the hopeless econo…
Continue reading
A number of CEP members have expressed a strong interest in returning to the matter of long-term spent fuel storage early in 2015. We are fortunate to have been approached by the Washington DC-based Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) to organize a joint meeting with the CEP in January as part of an 18-month effort to generate action on the movement of used nuclear fuel in the U.S. With the short timeframe, we will need to finalize the event very quickly.BPC is working on an initiative, “America’s Nuclear Future: Taking Action to Address Nuclear Waste,” to reinvigorate and expand the discussion on nuclear waste, identify barriers inhibiting progress on nuclear waste, and explore options to break through the barriers. The effort is being run by Tim Frazier who previously ran the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future. I am mindful that a joint program with the BPC will be far more impactful than a program that we might endeavor to execute on our own.
Important to the BPC effort are regional meetings to identify and discuss the barriers to moving forward on nuclear waste and potential actions to remove the barriers. BPC has hosted meetings in the Northeast at MIT in June, in the Southeast at Georgia Tech in Atlanta in September, and in the Midwest in Chicago in November. A joint BPC/CEP meeting for Southern California is planned for the evening of Tuesday, 27 January, or Wednesday the 28th.
Meeting Overview
Plans include two panel discussions. The intent is to present a range of viewpoints and panelists are to be announced. The first panel will focus on federal issues as facilitated by Tim Frazier. David Victor will chair a second panel discussion with a focus on San Onofre and state issues. The second panel discussion will include the full CEP, a facilitated public comment period, and serve as our Regular Meeting for 1Q 2015.
The doors are opening wider on our discussion of Nuclear Waste at San Onofre. Once again we have the opportunity to bring this topic forward on to the national stage. The question is will you join us? Only you can make your voice heard.
Aging Nuke Dumps On Fault Lines In Tsunami Hazard Zones = Fukushimas… Any Questions?
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
A number of CEP members have expressed a strong interest in returning to the matter of long-term spent fuel storage early in 2015. We are fortunate to have been approached by the Washington DC-based Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) to organize a joint meeting with the CEP in January as part of an 18-month effort to generate action on the movement of used nuclear fuel in the U.S. With the short timeframe, we will need to finalize the event very quickly.
BPC is working on an initiative, “America’s Nuclear Future: Taking Action to Address Nuclear Waste,” to reinvigorate and expand the discussion on nuclear waste, identify barriers inhibiting progress on nuclear waste, and explore options to break through the barriers. The effort is being run by Tim Frazier who previously ran the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future. I am mindful that a joint program with the BPC will be far more impactful than a program that we might endeavor to execute on our own.
Important to the BPC effort are regional meetings to identify and discuss the barriers to moving forward on nuclear waste and potential actions to remove the barriers. BPC has hosted meetings in the Northeast at MIT in June, in the Southeast at Georgia Tech in Atlanta in September, and in the Midwest in Chicago in November. A joint BPC/CEP meeting for Southern California is planned for the evening of Tuesday, 27 January, or Wednesday the 28th.
Meeting Overview
Plans include two panel discussions. The intent is to present a range of viewpoints and panelists are to be announced. The first panel will focus on federal issues as facilitated by Tim Frazier. David Victor will chair a second panel discussion with a focus on San Onofre and state issues. The second panel discussion will include the full CEP, a facilitated public comment period, and serve as our Regular Meeting for 1Q 2015.
The doors are opening wider on our discussion of Nuclear Waste at San Onofre. Once again we have the opportunity to bring this topic forward on to the national stage. The question is will you join us? Only you can make your voice heard.
Aging Nuke Dumps On Fault Lines In Tsunami Hazard Zones = Fukushimas… Any Questions?
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
Continue reading PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
A number of CEP members have expressed a strong interest in returning to the matter of long-term spent fuel storage early in 2015. We are fortunate to have been approached by the Washington DC-based Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) to organize a joint meeting with the CEP in January as part of an 18-month effort to generate action on the movement of used nuclear fuel in the U.S. With the short timeframe, we will need to finalize the event very quickly.BPC is working on an initiative, “America’s Nuclear Future: Taking Action to Address Nuclear Waste,” to reinvigorate and expand the discussion on nuclear waste, identify barriers inhibiting progress on nuclear waste, and explore options to break through the barriers. The effort is being run by Tim Frazier who previously ran the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future. I am mindful that a joint program with the BPC will be far more impactful than a program that we might endeavor to execute on our own.
Important to the BPC effort are regional meetings to identify and discuss the barriers to moving forward on nuclear waste and potential actions to remove the barriers. BPC has hosted meetings in the Northeast at MIT in June, in the Southeast at Georgia Tech in Atlanta in September, and in the Midwest in Chicago in November. A joint BPC/CEP meeting for Southern California is planned for the evening of Tuesday, 27 January, or Wednesday the 28th.
Meeting Overview
Plans include two panel discussions. The intent is to present a range of viewpoints and panelists are to be announced. The first panel will focus on federal issues as facilitated by Tim Frazier. David Victor will chair a second panel discussion with a focus on San Onofre and state issues. The second panel discussion will include the full CEP, a facilitated public comment period, and serve as our Regular Meeting for 1Q 2015.
The doors are opening wider on our discussion of Nuclear Waste at San Onofre. Once again we have the opportunity to bring this topic forward on to the national stage. The question is will you join us? Only you can make your voice heard.
Aging Nuke Plants On Fault Lines In Tsunami Hazard Zones = Fukushimas… Any Questions?
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
A number of CEP members have expressed a strong interest in returning to the matter of long-term spent fuel storage early in 2015. We are fortunate to have been approached by the Washington DC-based Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) to organize a joint meeting with the CEP in January as part of an 18-month effort to generate action on the movement of used nuclear fuel in the U.S. With the short timeframe, we will need to finalize the event very quickly.BPC is working on an initiative, “America’s Nuclear Future: Taking Action to Address Nuclear Waste,” to reinvigorate and expand the discussion on nuclear waste, identify barriers inhibiting progress on nuclear waste, and explore options to break through the barriers. The effort is being run by Tim Frazier who previously ran the President’s Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future. I am mindful that a joint program with the BPC will be far more impactful than a program that we might endeavor to execute on our own.
Important to the BPC effort are regional meetings to identify and discuss the barriers to moving forward on nuclear waste and potential actions to remove the barriers. BPC has hosted meetings in the Northeast at MIT in June, in the Southeast at Georgia Tech in Atlanta in September, and in the Midwest in Chicago in November. A joint BPC/CEP meeting for Southern California is planned for the evening of Tuesday, 27 January, or Wednesday the 28th.
Meeting Overview
Plans include two panel discussions. The intent is to present a range of viewpoints and panelists are to be announced. The first panel will focus on federal issues as facilitated by Tim Frazier. I will chair a second panel discussion with a focus on San Onofre and state issues. The second panel discussion will include the full CEP, a facilitated public comment period, and serve as our Regular Meeting for 1Q 2015.
The doors are opening wider on our discussion of Nuclear Waste at San Onofre. Once again we have the opportunity to bring this topic forward on to the national stage. The question is will you join us? Only you can make your voice heard.
Aging Nuke Plants On Fault Lines In Tsunami Hazard Zones = Fukushimas… Any Questions?
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
Beyond Nuclear board member Karl GrossmanOn December 26th, Beyond Nuclear board member, investigative journalist, author, and EnviroVideo host, Karl Grossman, wrote:
“Next week will mark the 24th year for EnviroVideo. Here’s the first documentary we di…
U.S. NRC Chairman Stephen G. BurnsAs reported by the Associated Press, the NRC announced that President Obama has appointed NRC Commissioner Stephen G. Burns (photo, left) to serve as the Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. He will be…
Continue readingDid you know that embrittled nuclear reactors could shatter like glass? Watch Fairewinds Energy Education’s Nuclear Science Guy Arnie Gundersen (photo, left) demonstrate reactor embrittlement and imagine the shattering glass as a shattering nuclear rea…
Continue readingAn artist’s rendition of the GEH ESBWR, proposed by DTE to be built as “Fermi 3” at its nuclear power plant in Monroe Co., MIOn Dec. 16th, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) five Commissioners, in a unanimous ruling, denied an environmen…
Continue readingHarvey WassermanBeyond Nuclear was pleased to be invited back on to Harvey Wasserman’s “Solartopia Green Power and Wellness” radio show today. Here is Harvey’s description:
“A RATEPAYER REVOLT against nuclear power and the nationwide battle for Solarto…
via Japan Times / Decemeber 10, 2014 / As Sunday’s snap election nears, many of the people working toward the decommissioning of the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant say they want voters to know about their harsh working conditions, insufficient pay and worries of radiation exposure. Currently some 6,000 people a day are engaged in the decommissioning work at the plant — a process expected to take 30 to … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia environmentalleader.com / December 12, 2014 / Nuclear and hazardous waste management company Kurion has been awarded a contract by Tokyo Electric Power Company for a second Kurion Mobile Processing System for deployment at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant site. The first system started operating at the site in early October 2014 and has exceeded its performance targets during this period, Kurion says. The second system (pictured), identical to … Continue reading →
Continue readingNRC file photo of Palisades, located in Covert, MI.The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has cited Entergy Nuclear for violating its own workers’ radiological safety at the problem-plagued Palisades atomic reactor on the Lake Michigan shore in s…
Continue readingThe host of the Nuclear Hotseat podcast, Libbe HaLevy, has honored Beyond Nuclear by interviewing Kevin Kamps about the environmental coalition intervention against Entergy Nuclear’s Palisades atomic reactor in Michigan. Palisades has the worst embritt…
Continue reading
In my opinion, I’m very concerned about the way the SCE/CEP was set up and the direction the leadership of SCE/CEP is now taking us. Instead of taking the neutral position and uncovering and observing the evidence as presented they consistently and obviously put a positive spin on it. Everything is fine and SCE is doing the best job possible.- We must ask ourselves does this repeated positive spin serve the public interest? In my opinion No.
- Is this Community Engagement Panel doing the best job possible to protect the safety of our communities and California? In my opinion we are not.
- Can or will the SCE/CEP make the changes necessary in its charter to become an effective and strong safety advocate for the decommissioning and safe storage of nuclear waste at San Onofre that the people of California deserve until such time as the DOE takes possession of this long-term problem? In my opinion that is still up in the air.
To this point SCE’s attempt to be inclusive and transparent clearly has it’s limits. While asking me and others to bring up the safety concerns of the local citizens, SCE and the SCE/CEP leadership has then glossed over them, seeing these concerns only to be checked off their list one by one. Example; Tim Brown told the CA Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee on Aug 12, 2014 that local concerns have be heard and addressed. Implying some sort of conclusion or satisfaction by all with SCE’s predestined decommissioning plan. Link for Senate hearing http://youtu.be/_q6YulhHpcU?t=1h2m9s starting time for Tim Brown 1:02:10 to 1:17:45. Nothing of course could be further from the truth for many in our local communities. SCE, Inclusiveness is not just a tool to be used on the “Yellow Brick Road to decommissioning”, we are not in the Land of Oz after all. We are however in the backyards of over 8.4 million Californians. SCE and its CEP leadership now have a consistent record of spinning information to fit the SCE agenda. For example, regarding “defense in depth”, the chairman, after being concerned at first at the lack of defense in depth for dry cask long-term storage, concluded after his ‘”careful research”, that citizen activists had not asked about ” defense in depth” for waste storage before and that the nuclear industry and the NRC has done a poor job in defining and getting the word out about “defense in depth” for nuclear waste and dry cask storage. Citing “defense in depth” as cladding on fuel rods, ceramics on the fuel pellets , even the 5/8″ thickness of the canister itself and concrete overpack of the casks as if these were “defense in depth” that were unspoken of in the past. And he was right they were not spoken of in the past as “defense in depth” because they were not considered nor should we consider them today as “defense in depth”. While these have some small measure of defense, they are not in anyway sufficient or adequate for long-term storage of nuclear waste within a heavily populated area like Southern California, and everyone in this nuclear industry knows the calculated risk they are betting on with California’s future.
David Victor’s report Safety of Long-term storage in casks: Issues For San Onofre Dec 9, 2014 does have some items we do agree on: “It is likely that spent fuel will be stored in dry casks at the San Onofre nuclear site for very long periods of time—most likely well beyond the 20-‐year period for initial licensing of the casks.” page 2 of report. “Some elements of what will be needed for “defense in depth” are not yet fully in existence—for example, actual equipment that would allow removal of fuel from a cask without an onsite pool has been designed and a prototype was demonstrated in the 1990s, but no such full scale commercial system currently exists. Similarly, full-‐blown procedures for repairing all forms of cask cracking are not yet fully certified” page 4 of report. Other than these items there is not much here other than “pro nuclear industry spin.” Read full report at:https://docs.google.com/document/d/13DurWxC8l3l_VCNEGXz5bg0V4FJteepR7LVuUjPz4Xk/edit?usp=sharing
Related articles
Fukushima Clean-Up Based On Shady Science And Tax Payer Rip-Off
Where will all our nuclear waste go? Disposal is at a critical stage, feds say
State Approves $3.3 Billion Settlement to Close San Onofre
Plan divides billions in closed nuke plant costs
Consumers to pay $3.3 billion in deal to divide costs from closed San Onofre nuclear plant
Ratepayers file suit over San Onofre nuclear plant
Aging Nuke Dumps On Fault Lines In Tsunami Hazard Zones = Fukushimas… Any Questions?
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
In my opinion, I’m very concerned about the way the SCE/CEP was set up and the direction the leadership of SCE/CEP is now taking us. Instead of taking the neutral position and uncovering and observing the evidence as presented they consistently and obviously put a positive spin on it. Everything is fine and SCE is doing the best job possible.- We must ask ourselves does this repeated positive spin serve the public interest? In my opinion No.
- Is this Community Engagement Panel doing the best job possible to protect the safety of our communities and California? In my opinion we are not.
- Can or will the SCE/CEP make the changes necessary in its charter to become an effective and strong safety advocate for the decommissioning and safe storage of nuclear waste at San Onofre that the people of California deserve until such time as the DOE takes possession of this long-term problem? In my opinion that is still up in the air.
To this point SCE’s attempt to be inclusive and transparent clearly has it’s limits. While asking me and others to bring up the safety concerns of the local citizens, SCE and the SCE/CEP leadership has then glossed over them, seeing these concerns only to be checked off their list one by one. Example; Tim Brown told the CA Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee on Aug 12, 2014 that local concerns have be heard and addressed. Implying some sort of conclusion or satisfaction by all with SCE’s predestined decommissioning plan. Link for Senate hearing http://youtu.be/_q6YulhHpcU?t=1h2m9s starting time for Tim Brown 1:02:10 to 1:17:45. Nothing of course could be further from the truth for many in our local communities. SCE, Inclusiveness is not just a tool to be used on the “Yellow Brick Road to decommissioning”, we are not in the Land of Oz after all. We are however in the backyards of over 8.4 million Californians. SCE and its CEP leadership now have a consistent record of spinning information to fit the SCE agenda. For example, regarding “defense in depth”, the chairman, after being concerned at first at the lack of defense in depth for dry cask long-term storage, concluded after his ‘”careful research”, that citizen activists had not asked about ” defense in depth” for waste storage before and that the nuclear industry and the NRC has done a poor job in defining and getting the word out about “defense in depth” for nuclear waste and dry cask storage. Citing “defense in depth” as cladding on fuel rods, ceramics on the fuel pellets , even the 5/8″ thickness of the canister itself and concrete overpack of the casks as if these were “defense in depth” that were unspoken of in the past. And he was right they were not spoken of in the past as “defense in depth” because they were not considered nor should we consider them today as “defense in depth”. While these have some small measure of defense, they are not in anyway sufficient or adequate for long-term storage of nuclear waste within a heavily populated area like Southern California, and everyone in this nuclear industry knows the calculated risk they are betting on with California’s future.
David Victor’s report Safety of Long-term storage in casks: Issues For San Onofre Dec 9, 2014 does have some items we do agree on: “It is likely that spent fuel will be stored in dry casks at the San Onofre nuclear site for very long periods of time—most likely well beyond the 20-‐year period for initial licensing of the casks.” page 2 of report. “Some elements of what will be needed for “defense in depth” are not yet fully in existence—for example, actual equipment that would allow removal of fuel from a cask without an onsite pool has been designed and a prototype was demonstrated in the 1990s, but no such full scale commercial system currently exists. Similarly, full-‐blown procedures for repairing all forms of cask cracking are not yet fully certified” page 4 of report. Other than these items there is not much here other than “pro nuclear industry spin.” Read full report at:https://docs.google.com/document/d/13DurWxC8l3l_VCNEGXz5bg0V4FJteepR7LVuUjPz4Xk/edit?usp=sharing
Related articles
- Fukushima Clean-Up Based On Shady Science And Tax Payer Rip-Off
- Where will all our nuclear waste go? Disposal is at a critical stage, feds say
- State Approves $3.3 Billion Settlement to Close San Onofre
- Plan divides billions in closed nuke plant costs
- Consumers to pay $3.3 billion in deal to divide costs from closed San Onofre nuclear plant
- Ratepayers file suit over San Onofre nuclear plant
Aging Nuke Dumps On Fault Lines In Tsunami Hazard Zones = Fukushimas… Any Questions?
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
Continue reading PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
In my opinion, I’m very concerned about the way the SCE/CEP was set up and the direction the leadership of SCE/CEP is now taking us. Instead of taking the neutral position and uncovering and observing the evidence as presented they consistently and obviously put a positive spin on it. Everything is fine and SCE is doing the best job possible.- We must ask ourselves does this repeated positive spin serve the public interest? In my opinion No.
- Is this Community Engagement Panel doing the best job possible to protect the safety of our communities and California? In my opinion we are not.
- Can or will the SCE/CEP make the changes necessary in its charter to become an effective and strong safety advocate for the decommissioning and safe storage of nuclear waste at San Onofre that the people of California deserve until such time as the DOE takes possession of this long-term problem? In my opinion that is still up in the air.
To this point SCE’s attempt to be inclusive and transparent clearly has it’s limits. While asking me and others to bring up the safety concerns of the local citizens, SCE and the SCE/CEP leadership has then glossed over them, seeing these concerns only to be checked off their list one by one. Example; Tim Brown told the CA Senate Energy, Utilities and Communications Committee on Aug 12, 2014 that local concerns have be heard and addressed. Implying some sort of conclusion or satisfaction by all with SCE’s predestined decommissioning plan. Link for Senate hearing http://youtu.be/_q6YulhHpcU?t=1h2m9s starting time for Tim Brown 1:02:10 to 1:17:45. Nothing of course could be further from the truth for many in our local communities. SCE, Inclusiveness is not just a tool to be used on the “Yellow Brick Road to decommissioning”, we are not in the Land of Oz after all. We are however in the backyards of over 8.4 million Californians. SCE and its CEP leadership now have a consistent record of spinning information to fit the SCE agenda. For example, regarding “defense in depth”, the chairman, after being concerned at first at the lack of defense in depth for dry cask long-term storage, concluded after his ‘”careful research”, that citizen activists had not asked about ” defense in depth” for waste storage before and that the nuclear industry and the NRC has done a poor job in defining and getting the word out about “defense in depth” for nuclear waste and dry cask storage. Citing “defense in depth” as cladding on fuel rods, ceramics on the fuel pellets , even the 5/8″ thickness of the canister itself and concrete overpack of the casks as if these were “defense in depth” that were unspoken of in the past. And he was right they were not spoken of in the past as “defense in depth” because they were not considered nor should we consider them today as “defense in depth”. While these have some small measure of defense, they are not in anyway sufficient or adequate for long-term storage of nuclear waste within a heavily populated area like Southern California, and everyone in this nuclear industry knows the calculated risk they are betting on with California’s future.
David Victor’s report Safety of Long-term storage in casks: Issues For San Onofre Dec 9, 2014 does have some items we do agree on: “It is likely that spent fuel will be stored in dry casks at the San Onofre nuclear site for very long periods of time—most likely well beyond the 20-‐year period for initial licensing of the casks.” page 2 of report. “Some elements of what will be needed for “defense in depth” are not yet fully in existence—for example, actual equipment that would allow removal of fuel from a cask without an onsite pool has been designed and a prototype was demonstrated in the 1990s, but no such full scale commercial system currently exists. Similarly, full-‐blown procedures for repairing all forms of cask cracking are not yet fully certified” page 4 of report. Other than these items there is not much here other than “pro nuclear industry spin.” Read full report at:https://docs.google.com/document/d/13DurWxC8l3l_VCNEGXz5bg0V4FJteepR7LVuUjPz4Xk/edit?usp=sharing
Related articles
- Fukushima Clean-Up Based On Shady Science And Tax Payer Rip-Off
- Where will all our nuclear waste go? Disposal is at a critical stage, feds say
- State Approves $3.3 Billion Settlement to Close San Onofre
- Plan divides billions in closed nuke plant costs
- Consumers to pay $3.3 billion in deal to divide costs from closed San Onofre nuclear plant
- Ratepayers file suit over San Onofre nuclear plant
Aging Nuke Plants On Fault Lines In Tsunami Hazard Zones = Fukushimas… Any Questions?
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
PLEASE Turn off a light for Fukushima USA / San Onofre
via Daily Kos / December 2, 2014 / The purpose of this short diary is to report the results of a very recently published study which used a whole body scanner to look for cesium (134-Cs half life ~ 2 years, 137-Cs half life 30 years) contamination in children directly affected by the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant (NPP) disaster (behind pay wall unfortunately). This diary is part of an … Continue reading →
Continue readingThe Tihange 3 nuclear reactor in Belgium was shut down on November 30 due to a fire. It is now the fourth Belgian nuclear reactor to be out of service, as another plant at Tihange and two at Doel have been shut down due to defects or security concerns….
Continue readingNRC file photo of Entergy’s Palisdes atomic reactor on the Lake Michigan shoreline in southwest MichiganA coalition of environmental groups and concerned local residents has intervened against Entergy Nuclear’s License Amendment Application (LAR) to th…
Continue readingThere’s still time to show your appreciation for the work we do at Beyond Nuclear. We know that “Giving Tuesday” is crowded with appeals. We thank you for making Beyond Nuclear one of the choices for your year-end giving. Click here to give.
Anot…
By Masakazu Honda / Asahi Shimbun / December 2, 2014 /A British scientist who studied the health effects of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster panned a United Nations report that virtually dismissed the possibility of higher cancer rates caused by the 2011 Fukushima nuclear crisis. Keith Baverstock (pictured), 73, made the comments during a visit to Tokyo at the invitation of a citizens group related to the Fukushima disaster. In response … Continue reading →
Continue readingFrom The Asahi Shimbun: A British scientist who studied the health effects of the 1986 Chernobyl disaster panned a United Nations report that virtually dismissed the possibility of higher cancer rates caused by the 2011 Fukushima nuclear…
Continue readingvia EX-SKF.blogspot.com / November 24, 2014 / Plan D of Course! But first, recall that Plan A was to install freezing pipes at the head of the trench leading from Reactor 2 turbine building to create an ice plug so that the extremely contaminated water that had been sitting in the trench since the very beginning of the nuclear accident could be pumped out. TEPCO started the work in April … Continue reading →
Continue readingSanOnofreSafety.org founder Donna Gilmore’s presentation to the NRC on dry cask nuclear waste storage issues at the San Onofre Nuclear Waste Dump, delivered by invitation as part of an NRC Regulatory Conference held Nov. 19-20, 2014 in Rockville, Maryl…
Continue readingvia mainichi.jp / November 23, 2014 / Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) has decided to bury a trench at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 Nuclear Power Plant using concrete after an effort to completely stop the flow of radiation contaminated water failed, it has been learned. TEPCO reported its plan to the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) on Nov. 21, and the NRA approved it, saying that the plan can at … Continue reading →
Continue readingBeyond Nuclear, Don’t Waste Michigan, Citizens’ Resistance at Fermi 2 (CRAFT), and Citizens Environmental Alliance of Southwestern Ontario argued before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in Monroe Michigan on November 20, that the aging Fermi …
Continue readingvia The Guardian / November 14, 2014 / The man in charge of cleaning up the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant has admitted there is little cause for optimism while thousands of workers continue their battle to contain huge quantities of radioactive water. The water problem is so severe that the plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power [Tepco], and its myriad partner firms have enlisted almost all of their 6,000 … Continue reading →
Continue readingKaren Silkwood, Feb. 19, 1946 to Nov. 13, 1974. Nov. 13, 2014 marks the 40th year since her death.Thursday, November 13th marks the 40th year since the tragic, suspicious death of Karen Silkwood, nuclear whistleblower. The Christic Institute Archives o…
Continue readingvia WHOI.edu / November 10, 2014 / Monitoring efforts along the Pacific Coast of the U.S. and Canada have detected the presence of small amounts of radioactivity from the 2011 Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant accident 100 miles (150 km) due west of Eureka, California. Scientists at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution (WHOI) found the trace amounts of telltale radioactive compounds as part of their ongoing monitoring of natural and … Continue reading →
Continue readingIf an earthquake fault caused a nuclear accident at California’s Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, whose fault would it be? Did you know that Diablo Canyon is adjacent to two active earthquake faults: the Hosgri and Shoreline faults? When we think of earthquake damage we think of buildings shaking and crumbling, pipes bursting and breaking. […]
The post Whose Fault? appeared first on Fairewinds Energy Education.
Continue readingvia latimes.com / November 7, 2014 / More than 3 1/2 years after a 50-foot tsunami rushed up the Kitagami River, inundating houses and farms and destroying everything in its path, the road to this city’s port remains unusable. Farmland, tainted by a massive influx of seawater, is still being restored. Hundreds of people remain in shabby temporary housing, with no exit in sight. The only business that really seems … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia NHK World / November 8, 2014 / A hospital in Fukushima Prefecture mailed the results of thyroid examinations to incorrect addresses. Nearly 200 people received somebody else’s test results.
Continue readingvia SBS.com.au / November 8, 2014 / The green light from the assembly and governor of Kagoshima prefecture, in the south of the country, marks a victory for the government of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe which has faced significant public opposition to its drive to re-fire nuclear power. “I want to inform the economy, trade and industry minister about my understanding of the government’s policy to push for restarting nuclear … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia RT.com / November 7, 2014 / Three workers at the troubled Fukushima nuclear power plant were hurt during an operation to set up a coolant tank for contaminated water. A 13-meter-high steel construction collapsed on them. One of the workers has been left in critical condition after being knocked unconscious. He was transported to the hospital from the plant by helicopter, according to a TEPCO spokesman, AFP reported. A … Continue reading →
Continue readingAn environmental coalition embroiled in numerous old, degraded reactor license extension — as well as proposed new reactor construction and operation license — proceedings has filed its “CONSOLIDATED REPLY TO ANSWERS TO PETITIONS TO SUSPEND FINAL REA…
Continue readingThe governor of the Kagoshima prefecture in Japan, in approving the restart of the two Sendai reactors, has failed to understand the lessons of the Fukushima nuclear disaster and is ignoring science, safety and public opinion, Green Action stated today…
Continue readingvia japantimes.com / November 5, 2014 / Taiwan will conduct radiation checks on some types of container cargo arriving from Japan, the island’s legislature said on Wednesday. The body’s Finance Committee ruled that waste materials such as plastic, scrap metal and paper must be checked with radiation meters upon arrival at the island’s four seaports: Keelung, Taipei, Taichung and Kaohsiung. Jao Ping, director general of the Customs Administration agency, told … Continue reading →
Continue readingfrom NHK World / November 5, 2014 / Workers have finished removing highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel from one of the reactor buildings at the crippled Fukushima Daiichi plant. The No.4 reactor had no nuclear fuel when the plant was hit by a massive quake and tsunami in March 2011. But there were more than 1,500 units of spent and unused fuel in the pool in the reactor building. The … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia Asahi Shimbun / November 3, 2014 / The main components of the government’s nuclear fuel recycling project have all been sidelined. But the program was already in a state of collapse even before the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led to a shift in Japan’s energy policy. After the meltdowns at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant, the Democratic Party of Japan-led government considered reviewing the recycling program. However, … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia simplyinfo.org / November 4, 2014 / Drone footage taken of the Unit 3 refueling floor.
Continue readingvia japantimes.com / November 4, 2014 / The Lower House on Tuesday approved a bill for the construction of temporary storage facilities for radioactive waste on land near the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant. The bill is expected to be enacted during the current extraordinary session of the Diet following debate in the Upper House. The bill calls on the government to ensure the safety of the facilities and … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia world-nuclear-news.org / November 4, 2014 / Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) has awarded US-based waste management specialist Kurion a JPY 1 billion ($10 million) grant to demonstrate technology to remove tritium from contaminated water for possible deployment at Fukushima. Kurion’s technology is one of three selected by METI in August to go forward to the demonstration phase, alongside offerings from GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy Canada and … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia ISRN.fr / A video explaining in simple terms how the Fukushima nuclear crisis unfolded on March 11, 2011. Video created in 2012.
Continue readingBy Taiga Uranaka and Antoni Slodkowski / trust.org / October 31, 2014 / Thirty billion dollars in funding for roads, bridges and thousands of new homes in areas devastated by the tsunami in Japan three and a half years ago is still languishing unspent in the bank. That means Keiko Abe is heading into a fourth winter of sub-zero temperatures in a cramped, temporary dwelling that is succumbing to the … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia Japan Times / October 30, 2014 / In the first-ever delay in the plans to dismantle reactor 1 at Tokyo Electric Power Co.’s stricken Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, the government and the utility have agreed to postpone the removal of fuel rods from the spent-fuel pool by two years from the initial plans, NHK reported Thursday. The date of extracting the meltedfuel rods from the reactor core, … Continue reading →
Continue readingBy Nassrine Azimi / Asia-Pacific Journal / October 29, 2014 / The first paragraph in the first volume of A History of Japan, by the scholarly British diplomat Sir George Sansom, is a detailed description of the islands’ geology. Writing in 1958 of the country he so loved, with its “mighty volcanic convulsions”, Sir George depicts the physical drama of peaks soaring two miles above and plunging five miles below … Continue reading →
Continue readingvia japantimes.com / October 29, 2014 / Radioactive soil currently stored at schools in Fukushima Prefecture is not supposed to be transferred to radioactive waste storage facilities planned to be built near the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant, Jiji Press learned Tuesday. This is because decontamination at schools was carried out before a special law on radioactive contamination took effect in January 2012 and thus the Environment Ministry … Continue reading →
Continue readingBy Robert Myles / allvoices.com / October 28, 2014 / A violent gust of wind, Tuesday, indirectly caused a further problem in the shape of a major hole in the cover protecting number one reactor at the stricken Fukushima Nuclear Plant in Japan, according to Fukushima operator, the Tokyo Electric Power. The incident occurred as a result of strong winds when a crane was in motion. A hole about 30 … Continue reading →
Continue readingBy Justin McCurry / theguardian.com / October 28, 2014 / Japan has moved closer to a return to nuclear power, more than three years after the Fukushima disaster, after a town in the country’s south-west voted to approve two reactors coming back online. Nineteen of 26 assembly members in Satsumasendai, located 600 miles south-west of Tokyo, voted in favour of restarting the Sendai nuclear power plant. Four voted against and … Continue reading →
Continue reading