Pregnant! Avoid the Nuclear Power Plants!

When speaking of the dangers of nuclear power plants, most people think of incidents in which radioactivity is released, or they think of large reactor accidents such as Windscale, Chernobyl and Harrisburg. It is less known, though, that everyday normal operations of nuclear facilities and their “tolerable emissions” already are a threat. The closer children live to a nuclear power plant, the higher is their risk of developing cancer. The until now most elaborate study on this issue from 2007 (LINK & SUMMARY) verified that without doubt. But it had no consequences: Instead, supporters of nuclear power strive to conceal the proven link between cancer and nuclear power plants. In this issue, its grave results and discussions about them are described.

more: Pregnant! Avoid the Nuclear Power Plants!

whats up: #BustTheMyth – nukes are NOT carbon-free, clean, safe, green, or affordable!

Risk of another Chernobyl or Fukushima type accident plausible, experts say : Broadcast: News items : University of Sussex

“The next nuclear accident may be much sooner or more severe than the public realizes.”

Biggest-ever statistical analysis of historical accidents suggests that nuclear power is an underappreciated extreme risk and that major changes will be needed to prevent future disasters

A team of risk experts who have carried out the biggest-ever analysis of nuclear accidents warn that the next disaster on the scale of Chernobyl or Fukushima may happen much sooner than the public realizes.

Researchers at the University of Sussex, in England, and ETH Zurich, in Switzerland, have analysed more than 200 nuclear accidents, and – estimating and controlling for effects of industry responses to previous disasters – provide a grim assessment of the risk of nuclear power.

Their worrying conclusion is that, while nuclear accidents have substantially decreased in frequency, this has been accomplished by the suppression of moderate-to-large events.  They estimate that Fukushima- and Chernobyl-scale disasters are still more likely than not once or twice per century, and that accidents on the scale of the 1979 meltdown at Three Mile Island in the USA (a damage cost of about 10 Billion USD) are more likely than not to occur every 10-20 years.

As Dr Spencer Wheatley, the lead author, explains: “We have found that the risk level for nuclear power is extremely high.

“Although we were able to detect the positive impact of the industry responses to accidents such as Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, these did not sufficiently remove the possibility of extreme disasters such as Fukushima. To remove such a possibility would likely require enormous changes to the current fleet of reactors, which is predominantly second-generation technology.”

The studies, published in two papers in the journals Energy Research & Social Science and Risk Analysis, put fresh pressure on the nuclear industry to be more transparent with data on incidents.

“Flawed and woefully incomplete” public data from the nuclear industry is leading to an over-confident attitude to risk, the study warns.  The research team points to the fact that their own independent analysis contains three times as much data as that provided publicly by the industry itself. This is probably because the International Atomic Energy Agency, which compiles the reports, has a dual role of regulating the sector and promoting it...

more: Risk of another Chernobyl or Fukushima type accident plausible, experts say : Broadcast: News items : University of Sussex

whats up: #BustTheMyth – nukes are NOT carbon-free, clean, safe, green, or affordable!

Nuclear Hotseat #274: Journalism’s Fukushima Coverage Failures w/Prof. Celine-Marie Pascale, Shaun McGee in UK on Sellafield Documentary’s Hot Impact, and Excellence in Journalism Report

This Week’s Featured Interviews:

• Prof. Celine-Marie Pascale of American University in Washington, D.C. is a sociologist who did a study of mainstream media coverage in the first two years after Fukushima – and not only are her observations stunning, she’s got the data to back them up.  Originally presented on Nuclear Hotseat #203, May 2, 2015.
• Nuclear Hotseat European correspondent Shaun McGee reports on growing response to the BBC Panorama documentary on nuclear safety problems at the UK’s Sellafield facility.  Watch the Sellafield BBC Panorama documentary!

LISTEN: Nuclear Hotseat #274: Journalism’s Fukushima Coverage Failures w/Prof. Celine-Marie Pascale, Shaun McGee in UK on Sellafield Documentary’s Hot Impact, and Excellence in Journalism Report

Numnutz of the Week:

Thinking about why Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) thinks that nuclear energy is “pollution free” (?!?!?????) is enough to give a girl the (radioactive) vapors!  Has he never heard of plutonium?  Or does he think that’s just one of Walt Disney’s characters?

ACTION REQUESTED:

TWEET THIS IN SUPPORT OF CAPE DOWNWINDERS AND THE CAMPAIGN TO SHUT DOWN PILGRIM NUCLEAR:

Pilgrim nuclear dangers last 2 wks – emergency shutdown, gas & water leaks, malfunctions, no evacuation possible. #ShutPilgrimNow!

more!
http://nuclearhotseat.com/2016/09/21/nuclear-hotseat-274-journalisms-fukushima-coverage-failures-wprof-celine-marie-pascale-shaun-mcgee-in-uk-on-sellafield-documentarys-hot-impact-and-excellence-in-journalism-report/

DNA damage, cancer caused by ionizing radiation identified - UPI.com

Researchers found mutational signatures which appear to indicate changes to DNA caused by exposure to ionizing radiation, which may allow doctors to better treat cancer caused by non-spontaneous mutations. Photo by Constantin-Ciprian/Shutterstock

In a study published in the journal Nature Communications, scientists showed the effects of gamma rays, X-rays and radioactive particles on DNA, deciphering patterns they think will help differentiate between spontaneous and radiation-caused tumors, allowing for better cancer treatment...

more: DNA damage, cancer caused by ionizing radiation identified - UPI.com

whats up: #BustTheMyth – nukes are NOT carbon-free, clean, safe, green, or affordable!

Hinkley C nuclear go-ahead: May caves in to pressure from France and China - The Ecologist

Hinkley is a project from a dying era, which would saddle Britons with eye-watering costs for decades, and radioactive waste for millenia. Renewables, smart grids and energy storage are the fleet-footed mammals racing past this stumbling nuclear dinosaur.

The French and the Chinese may be celebrating the UK's decision to press ahead with the Hinkley C 'nuclear white elephant', writes Oliver Tickell. But the deal is a disaster for the UK, committing us to overpriced power for decades to come, and to a dirty, dangerous, insecure dead end technology. Just one silver lining: major economic, legal and technical hurdles mean it still may never be built.

The UK's energy department, BEIS, today announced the go-ahead for the controversial Hinkley Point C (HPC) nuclear power plant in Somerset.

Only weeks ago Theresa May's government delayed the signing of the deal with EDF to confirm its subsidy package which is likely to cost UK energy users anywhere from £30 billion to over £100 billion for 35 years after it opens...

more: Hinkley C nuclear go-ahead: May caves in to pressure from France and China - The Ecologist

whats up: #BustTheMyth – nukes are NOT carbon-free, clean, safe, green, or affordable!

Amid climate concerns, nuclear plants feel the heat of warming water | Midwest Energy News

Nuclear power proponents say the energy source is crucial to reducing the impact of climate change.

But ironically, “We’ll have to solve global warming if we want to keep using nuclear power,” says Union of Concerned Scientists nuclear safety expert Dave Lochbaum.

That’s because nuclear power plants need large amounts of water for cooling, and overheating can present a major safety risk. As the lakes and rivers that typically supply cooling water become hotter thanks to climate change — and as droughts dry up some water bodies — nuclear power plants face problems, researchers say...

more: Amid climate concerns, nuclear plants feel the heat of warming water | Midwest Energy News

whats up: #BustTheMyth – nukes are NOT carbon-free, clean, safe, green, or affordable!

Can Nuclear Power Slow Down Climate Change? An analysis of nuclear greenhouse gas emissions | The Helen Caldicott Foundation

Can Nuclear Power Slow Down Climate Change  
(click title to access link to PDF of full report)

By Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen Ceedata Consultancy

Commissioned by the World Information Service on Energy (WISE) Amsterdam, The Netherlands, November 2015

Supporting organizations:
Sortir du Nucléaire, France, Women in Europe for a Common Future (WECF), Nuclear Information & Resource Service (NIRS), USA, Ecodefense, Russia, Global 2000 (Friends of the Earth), Austria, Bürgerinitiative Lüchow-Dannenberg, Germany, Folkkampanjen mot Kärnkraft-Kärnvapen, Sweden

This report is sponsored by: the Greens in the European Parliament

Acknowledgement

The author would like to thank Mali Lightfoot, Executive Director of the Helen Caldicott Foundation, for her valuable suggestions and comments.

Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen, MSc storm@ceedata.nl

With this study WISE hopes to contribute to a thorough debate about the best solutions to tackle climate change. Nuclear energy is part of the current global energy system. The question is whether the role of nuclear power should be increased or halted. In order to be able to fruitfully discuss this we should at least know what the contribution of nuclear power could possibly be.

Summary and conclusions (for complete report click on the link  above or go directly to the report on the WISE site which is downloadable)

Starting point

Nuclear power is claimed to be nearly carbon-free and indispensable for mitigating climate change as a result of anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases.
Assuming that nuclear power really does not emit carbon dioxide CO2 nor other greenhouse gases (GHGs), how large is the present nuclear mitigation share and how large could it become in the future? Could the term ‘indispensable’ in this context be quantfied? These issues are assessed from a physical point of view, economic aspects are left outside the scope of this assessment.

How large is the present nuclear mitigation share?

The global GHG emissions comprise a number of different gases and sources. Weighted by the global warming potential of the various GHGs 61% of the emissions were caused by CO2 from burning of fossil fuels for energy generation. Nuclear power could displace fossil-fuelled electricity generation, so hypothetically the maximum nuclear mitigation share would be 61% if the global energy supply were to be fully electric and fully nuclear.

In 2014 the nuclear contribution to the global usable energy supply was 1.6% and consequently the nuclear mitigation share was 1.0%.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) asserts that the nuclear contribution to the global energy supply was 4.6% in 2014. However, this figure turns out to be based on a thermodynamically inaccurate statistical trick using virtual energy quantities.

How large could the nuclear mitigation to climate change become in the future according to the nuclear industry?

We found no hard figures on this issue, for that reason this study analyses the mitigation consequences of the envisioned developments of global nuclear generating capacity. During the past years the International Atomic Energy Agency and the nuclear industry, represented by the World Nuclear Association (WNA), published numerous scenarios of global nuclear generating capacity in the future, measured in gigawatt- electric GWe. Four recent scenarios are assessed in this study, as these can be considered to be typical of the views within the nuclear industry...

more: The Helen Caldicott Foundation | Can Nuclear Power Slow Down Climate Change? An analysis of nuclear greenhouse gas emissions.

whats up: #BustTheMyth – nukes are NOT carbon-free, clean, safe, green, or affordable!

#PETITION :: Clean Up Radioactive Waste Dump Threatened By Melting Ice | ForceChange

Act to prevent the climate change-driven leakage of radioactive waste at Camp Century. 

Melting ice sheets in Greenland may result in the leakage of radioactive waste, buried at a top secret Cold War era U.S. Army base, Camp Century. Between 1959 and 1967, thousands of gallons of radioactive waste was buried under the ice by the U.S. army. The waste was buried with the expectation that it would never be disturbed. 

However, a new study shows that climate change-driven warming in Greenland will unearth the waste, threatening local ecosystems. Given that a certain amount of global warming is already locked in, if the waste is not removed it may cause an ecological disaster. 

Camp Century represents one of many waste disposal sites threatened by global climate change. Given that Camp Century is a former U.S. Army Base, it should fall to the U.S. government to take a leadership role in coordinating the cleanup. Sign our petition and demand that the government devise a plan to ensure that this radioactive waste does not cause an ecological crisis.  

SIGN NOW: Clean Up Radioactive Waste Dump Threatened By Melting Ice | ForceChange

SEE ALSO: Climate change will release toxic waste in the Arctic - Business Insider

Nuclear Hotseat #271: How #Radiation in Oceans Contaminates Our #Food Supply – Tim Deere-Jones

This Week’s Featured Interview:

• Tim Deere-Jones is an independent marine pollution consultant and a specialist in the behavior and fate of marine pollutants in ocean, coastal and estuarine environments. He explains how radiation in the ocean from Fukushima and the UK’s Sellafield nuclear facility have impacted food safety at tremendous distances, as far away as the US West Coast.  A jaw-dropping eye-opening report.  This is an Encore presentation originally presented on Nuclear Hotseat #225 from October 13, 2015.

Numnutz of the Week: The only thing “super” about Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe-Baby showing up dressed as Super Mario at the Rio Olympics is his gall at continuing to lie about the nuclear contamination awaiting anyone who dares to attend the 2020 Tokyo Radioactive NOlympics.  (And that ball he’s holding is pure projection, if not delusion…)

Listen Here: 

Nuclear Hotseat #271: How Radiation in Oceans Contaminates Our Food Supply – Tim Deere-Jones

Missing Links:

• Sign the Petition:  “No Olympics or Paralympics in Radioactive Fukushima!” Learn more by going to Fukushima Fallout Awareness Network.  (Thanks to FFAN for use of their gas-masked baseball pitcher as this week’s Featured Image.
• Grand Canyon tribe fears for its future amid battle against uranium mining
• Greenland Inuit oppose open-pit uranium mine on Arctic mountain-top
• Indigenous Australians Fight Planned Nuclear Dump On Sacred Lands

Coming Attractions:

Next week – USS Reagan Sailors in court on their TEPCO class action lawsuit 

and Nuclear Hotseat is there! 

Nuclear Hotseat #271: How Radiation in Oceans Contaminates Our Food Supply – Tim Deere-Jones