Sea Lion Update, 8/30/13

In a recent report there was no evidence of infection or toxin contributing to the death of the sea pups.   There was no apparent study of the possibility of radiation.  There was simply not enough food.

It’s not easy for scientists to figure out what’s killing animals that spend most of their lives offshore and out of sight. Of the 60 unusual mortality events declared by NMFS since 1991, researchers have found the cause of fewer than half. Marine biotoxins, poisons produced by microscopic algae, accounted for roughly 50 percent of those, and infectious diseases a quarter. The last three events for sea lions were the result of poisoning by domoic acid, a biotoxin that can build up in shellfish, sardines, and anchovies, and affect the neurological functioning of the mammals that eat them, including sea lions and people. Symptoms include seizures and disorientation, including sea lions wandering inland and walking the streets.

But this year, researchers didn’t see symptoms typical of poisoning or infectious disease, says Sarah Wilkin, an NMFS marine biologist and its stranding coordinator for the Southwestern United States. The sea lion pups weren’t having seizures. And on the whole, they weren’t showing signs of disease, such as breathing problems, runny noses, and diarrhea. NMFS researchers took blood and tissue samples from living and dead pups to test for bacteria, viruses, biotoxins, and other contaminants; they checked their stomach contents—measures that Palmer and her team, in crisis mode, didn’t have the resources to handle.

Now, roughly four months later, NMFS researchers are still compiling the test results. But so far, it seems, the pups weren’t sick; they were just hungry. Many arrived weighing less than half of their normal body weight and were dehydrated. For some reason, they had stopped nursing early and weren’t getting as much food as they needed; in many cases, simply providing the pups with fish seemed to restore them to health.

There has been little information about the demise of  the sea pups.  This piece is interesting for what they did not find.   Perhaps it was some unexplainable anomaly.  This story will be followed into next season to see if there is a repeat.

Another posting  looked at fish that have been destroyed by the intake of power plants on the West Coast, and indicates that:

Fish of all species have been dramatically declining in population all along the California coast, which is likely contributing to the starved sea lions that have been washing up on Orange County beaches in large numbers this year, according to a study by the University of California, San Diego.  Based on data collected from the filtration systems of five coastal California power plants since 1972, the study shows a 78 percent drop in not only commercially fished species, but also the smaller “forage” fish like sardines that provide sustenance for larger predatory fish and sea birds.

The data is not detailed enough to know how much of the decline is since the nuclear reactor disaster at Fukushima.   It does show a disturbing loss of fish population over the past 40 years,

Related articles

• WILDLIFE : Galapagos sea lions threatened by human exposure (environmentaleducationuk.wordpress.com)

Vermont Yankee to close, 12/14 !

In a press release today  (h/t to AG member Donna Riley) Entergy announced that they would close the plant at the end of the current fuel cycle, in !2/14.

The decision to close Vermont Yankee in 2014 was based on a number of financial factors, including:

• A natural gas market that has undergone a transformational shift in supply due to the impacts of shale gas, resulting in sustained low natural gas prices and wholesale energy prices.
• A high cost structure for this single unit plant. Since 2002, the company has invested more than $400 million in the safe and reliable operation of the facility. In addition, the financial impact of cumulative regulation is especially challenging to a small plant in these market conditions.
• Wholesale market design flaws that continue to result in artificially low energy and capacity prices in the region, and do not provide adequate compensation to merchant nuclear plants for the fuel diversity benefits they provide.

This is very exciting news.   The Burlington Press had a story, and reported:

Regarding decommissioning, assuming end of operations in fourth quarter 2014, the amount required to meet the NRC minimum for decommissioning financial assurance for license termination is $566 million. The Vermont Yankee decommissioning trust had a balance of approximately $582 million as of July 31, 2013,

Despite all the financial subsidies the reactor at Vermont Yankee is not economical in the current environment.  Fracking has brought down the price of energy.  We await to hear about the environmental impact on the nation brought on by fracking.

Although Entergy plans to shut down the reactor late next year, the fundamental issues remain.    The health risks are the same for the next year.   The question of decommissioning remains.    There are some reports that Entergy plans to use “safe-store;” the reactor will be left alone for 40-60 years.  Other people are arguing that the entire contents should be placed in dry storage instead of wet storage.   The plant is not shut down until it is completely decommissioned.

A recent report in the Burlington Free Press stated:

Entergy will likely need decades to finalize the decommissioning of its Vermont Yankee nuclear plant, according to information on the plant’s website. Workers will remain at the plant until it completely shuts down. Used nuclear fuel will be stored on-site, as its removal is the responsibility of the U.S. government.

The prospects are that reactor will be dangerous for decades to come.

Finally, the Hampshire Gazette ran the following editorial on August 29, 2013:

The fight to close the aging and unsafe Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant shifts now to a cleanup that could last longer than the 41 years the plant has generated electricity.

The surprise many felt Tuesday over news that Entergy Corp. of Louisiana will take the plant off-line for good late next year, when its fuel runs low, may be turning to shock at the enormity of the environmental challenge posed by decommissioning.

Raymond Shadis, technical adviser to the New England Coalition, observed Tuesday that his group and other environmental and public safety advocates must remain involved with the fate of Vermont Yankee. That’s because by next year the plant will no longer be a money-maker for Entergy, but a liability, impure and simple. “Just a nuclear waste pile … from which the public and the environment need to be protected,” Shadis said Tuesday.

The company plans to move the reactor into the “safe store” status outlined by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. By one estimate, it could take 70 years for levels of radiation to subside to levels safe enough to dismantle the structure.

Spent nuclear fuel will be entombed in concrete casks on the site because the nation has no waste storage system for this industry, a problem that has dogged its prospects for decades. A Vermont Yankee decommissioning fund holds nearly half a billion dollars, but even that is expected to fall well short of the costs of safeguarding the public from the residue of its operations.

Plant opponents long argued that Entergy, which bought Vermont Yankee for $180 million in 2002, could not operate it safely. Strong evidence of that came in early 2010, when it was learned that radioactive tritium had been leaking into the ground at the plant from pipes that Entergy officials had repeatedly insisted, in testimony to Vermont regulators in 2009, did not exist. Two years before that, a cooling tower partially collapsed, raising worries about the overall integrity of the facility.

Plant opponents long argued that Entergy, which bought Vermont Yankee for $180 million in 2002, could not operate it safely. Strong evidence of that came in early 2010, when it was learned that radioactive tritium had been leaking into the ground at the plant from pipes that Entergy officials had repeatedly insisted, in testimony to Vermont regulators in 2009, did not exist. Two years before that, a cooling tower partially collapsed, raising worries about the overall integrity of the facility.

Even as it faced huge costs, including a $150 million expense to replace a 40-year-old steam condenser, Entergy spent heavily on its legal battles with the state of Vermont to protect its viability. It had won many of them, particularly a U.S. District Court case in which Judge J. Garvan Murtha decided last year that only the federal government, not Vermont, held the authority to compel the plant to close. The month before, the NRC awarded it a new 20-year license. Things seemed to be going the company’s way. But the rise of relatively cheap natural gas proved a big competitor.

And, significantly, the state of Vermont kept the pressure on. And in the end, though Entergy’s chairman and CEO said Tuesday a changing energy market forced “an agonizing decision and an extremely tough call,” the state of Vermont’s sustained campaign to hold Entergy accountable for environmental hazards must have figured in as well.

Residents of the Valley who live in the evacuation zone, or downwind and downriver, owe a debt of gratitude to Vermont officials who took unpopular stands related to Vermont Yankee. The closing will cost southern Vermont more than 600 jobs — a workforce that will likely never be replicated, even through investments in renewable energy. Hundreds of plant employees live in Massachusetts, whose border is but five miles from the plant.

Though most people reading this will not be alive to see the cleanup be completed, the plant’s closing next year means the Connecticut River will no longer receive millions of gallons of heated water — a form of thermal pollution that degrades habitats and endangers fish populations.

Despite that immediate gain, the call to activism will continue to sound. There is little doubt that Valley residents who have protested the plant’s operation virtually since its opening in 1972 will remain vigilant.

They deserve credit for putting environmental ideals and the public’s well-being ahead of their own interests.

Officials are already promising to press the NRC to see that the Vermont Yankee decommissioning moves along as quickly as possible and that, in time, the hazards it posed to human health fade away.

Related articles

• Vermont Yankee nuke plant to close by end of 2014 (wfaa.com)
• Vermont Yankee to shut down next year (wwlp.com)
• Vermont Yankee Nuke Plant to Close by End of 2014 (abcnews.go.com)
• BREAKING: Vermont Yankee to close its doors in 2014 (GreenMountainDaily.com)
• Entergy sheds light on Vermont Yankee plant’s decommissioning (smartbrief.com)

Greenfield Report, Ed, August 12, 2013

Andy & Robin …

Two and a half days and it’s recording.

I leave tomorrow morning .. back 7 September.

I’ll leave it recording (PRM-9000 next to a cracked window) until then.

Any anomalies during that time, I’ll send them along.

Cheers …  Ed

This is the first report by the Vernon Radiation Committee, and shows results a several day monitoring from Greenfield, MA.   Unfortunately, the screenshot lacks the detail to actually identify the numbers.  I will check with Ed when he returns.

This does show our early success of getting a Geiger Counter, and setting up a computer to monitor data for a period of time.

Related articles

• Vernon Radiation Safety Meeting 7/28/13 (vernonradiationsafety.wordpress.com)

Federal Court rules against Vermont 8/15/13

In distressing news from the Vermont Digger,

Three justices from the U.S. Court of Appeals decided Wednesday that the Vermont Legislature is federally preempted from shutting down the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant.

After U.S. District Court Judge J. Garvan Murtha made the same preemption ruling in January 2012, Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell appealed to the higher court. In a 56-page decision, the appellate judges upheld the crux of Murtha’s ruling in favor of Entergy Corp., Vermont Yankee’s parent company.

The judges agreed that the Legislature was chiefly motivated by concerns of radiological safety when it created two laws aimed at regulating Vermont Yankee. Safety falls under the purview of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission — not state legislatures.

– See more at: http://vtdigger.org/2013/08/14/breaking-state-loses-appeal-on-right-to-close-vermont-yankee/#sthash.vvPqnvFG.dpuf

There is still a determination to be made by the Board of Public Good.  Governor Shumlin was quoted as saying:

While Wednesday’s decision from the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York blocks the Legislature’s efforts to close the plant it does not halt review of the Vernon reactor’s operations by the state Public Service Board.

The board is slated to rule later this year on whether Vermont Yankee and its owner, Entergy Corp., should get a certificate of public good to operate until 2032.

Related articles

• Breaking: State loses appeal on right to close Vermont Yankee (vtdigger.org)
• Court: Vt. Can’t Use Law to Close Nuclear Plant – ABC News (abcnews.go.com)
• Court rules in favor of Entergy on keeping Vermont Yankee open (vttoday.com)
• Public Service Board may find Vermont nuclear plant “not in the public good” (nuclear-news.net)
• Court rules against Vermont State’s attempt to close nuclear plant (nuclear-news.net)

News of the Flotilla at Vernon, 8/10/13

A recent article in the Rutland Herald reported that the NRC has accepted a suit that raises questions about Entergy’s finances.  Deb Katz was quoted as saying:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will investigate the finances of three nuclear reactors owned by Entergy Nuclear — Vermont Yankee, Pilgrim in Massachusetts and the FitzPatrick reactors in New York — as a result of a petition by four anti-nuclear groups.  Deb Katz, executive director of the Citizens Awareness Network, said Saturday that the NRC accepting the petition for review was a major accomplishment for the groups. She said she hoped the NRC would get answers to many people’s questions about Entergy’s financial status.  Katz made her remarks during the “Flotilla 2013” rally and protest Saturday on the banks of the Connecticut River, directly across from the Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon, Vt. .

I went out in a boat and took this picture.  It shows the guard towers with guards who have shoot to kill orders, the fences, and the concertina wire.   It looks like a prison, but it is to keep people out.   The place is that dangerous.   What other industry has such powers of protection other than prisons and the military?   I went further down stream and put a thermometer into the water.   it went from 74 to 84 in about thirty feet at the outflow track.F

Related articles

• Entergy’s finances being probed by Nuclear Regulatory Commission (nuclear-news.net)
• NRC agrees to look at finances at Vermont Yankee, 2 other Entergy plants (vtdigger.org)
• Petition to NRC – Pilgrim Nuclear plant can’t afford safety costs (nuclear-news.net)

Oh, no: Tepco pants on fire, August 11, 2013

In a recent post Tepco spokesperson Masayuki Ono stated

A spokesperson for Tokyo Electric Power Company says the company has known for the past 2 years that a massive amount of groundwater was flowing beneath the Fukushima Daiichi power plant.  Masayuki Ono said on Friday that TEPCO experts estimated hundreds of tons of the water could reach the ocean daily.
Ono said the estimate was based on rough records of groundwater that TEPCO workers had collected.  Until last month, TEPCO officials had denied the possibility that contaminated groundwater was leaking into the ocean.   Ono said he is unable to explain why it took two years to disclose this fact.

The nuclear industry has been based on secrets and lies since the beginning.   They have been found out; at times the truth will prevail.  Will the responsible people be held liable, or will the corporations continue with their criminal behavior?

Related articles

• TEPCO says radioactive water likely flowed over underground wall (english.kyodonews.jp)
• Radioactive water overruns Fukushima barrier – TEPCO (alethonews.wordpress.com)
• Tepco: We’ve known for 2 years that massive amount of water flows under Fukushima plant – Official “unable to explain” why they kept secret (VIDEO) (enenews.com)
• Tepco “In the worse scenario, groundwater may overflow to up-ground” (fukushima-diary.com)

Mud making at Fukushima August 9, 2013

In a post today in Global Research, based on an article in the WSJ, discussed what happens when you pour lots of water onto earth.

      The spent fuel pool at Fukushima Unit 4 is the top short-term threat to humanity, and is a national security issue for America.   As such, it is disturbing news that the ground beneath unit 4 is sinking.   Specifically, Unit 4 sunk 36 inches right after the earthquake, and ha sunk another 30 inches since then.    Moreover, Unit 4 is sinking unevenly, and the building may begin tilting.

You make mud.   The reactor is slowly sinking into the ground.   The science seems primitive, but it makes for good politics: something is being done.

Related articles

• China Syndrome Emergency at Fukushima 8/6/13 update (Trouble Just Beginning) (disclose.tv)
• Official: Tepco Plan Could Cause Fukushima Reactor Buildings to “Topple” (washingtonsblog.com)
• Gundersen: No way to stop Fukushima’s radioactive water going into Pacific – It will continue for at least 20-30 years (enenews.com)

Nagasaki Day 2013

Today  let us remember  the tragic events that occurred 68 years ago today at  Nagasaki.   In the 1500’s the Portuguese set up a trading post there.   St Francis Xavier arrived in 1549 and brought Christianity.  In 1614 the Japanese authorities banned Christianity for over 250 years.  During their banishment hundreds died a martyr’s death.  It was officially recognized in 1889 and the community at Urakami was found to be largely Christian.  When the cathedral at Urakami was finally completed in 1929, it was the largest cathedral in East Asia. Puccini’s opera Madame Butterfly was set in Nagasaki, based upon an event there in the 1890’s.   For much of the war, the residents were relieved that they had not been bombed.

At the start of WWII there was concern that the Germans might develop an atomic bomb and engage in  crimes against humanity.  The United States was opposed to crimes against humanity.  Under deepest secrecy the army, under the direction of Leslie Groves, the Manhattan project was created to make of  an atomic bomb.  The Germans surrendered without developing the bomb.   In April 1945 Truman became president and first learned about the bomb from Secretary of War Simpson.    In May Herbert Hoover wrote Truman to end the war as quickly as possible.  The Potsdam decision demanded unconditional surrender.   The Japanese worried about their emperor, and time passed.

In secrecy men debated about the bombs.   There were two types that had been developed.   One was made out of Uranium, and the other out of Plutonium. Some thought that they should not be used.   There were theoretical concerns that the chain reaction might destroy the entire earth.   Some felt that there should be a demonstration to the Japanese military to see for themselves, but what if the bomb failed?  It would be embarrassing.

On July 19 the US tested the first bomb, name sacrilegiously, Trinity,  made out Plutonium, and the bomb exploded as predicted.     Oppenheimer was to have said: “now we are the creator, now we are the destroyer.”    Truman was convinced by the men around him that he should use the bomb, and he gave the order to use them when they became available.   Leslie Groves was determined to use the bombs.   He felt that the real war was with Russia.  He had a big secret.  Billions of dollars had been spent.  What did they have to show?   He wanted the Russians to know that we had the bomb.  On August 6 Hiroshima, another city that had been left alone,  was bombed with Thin Man, an uranium bomb. Tens of thousand were killed immediately, and many more died subsequently.   Leslie Groves wanted to know which was a better bomb.

On the morning of 9 August 1945,  Sweeney’s crew flew the B-29 Superfortress Bockscar,  carrying Fat Man, another plutonium bomb.     Kokura was the primary target and Nagasaki the secondary target.   Koyoto had been on the list, but Secretary of War Simpson refused Leslie Groves’s request.   Simpson had been there on his honeymoon decades earlier, and could not bear to see such a lovely town hit.   The plane circled  over Kokura three times, but it was covered by clouds.  They proceeded to Nagasaki.   The cloud cover broke at Nagasaki, and the cathedral at Urakami was revealed.   The bomb exploded over the church during mass, killing all in attendance.   Tens of thousands were killed instantly, others later by burns and injuries from debris.   Thousands of koreans died.   The people suffering from radiation sickness, Hibakusha, were shunned by their communities.   Over 100 people who fled from Hiroshima to the safety of Nagasaki were injured in both cities.

My father was a radiologist, and he toured Nagasaki after the bomb.  He wrote a paper in the scientific literature about the effects of the bomb.  He described the skin injuries from the radiation, the fall in the white blood cell count.   He had at times the thousand yard stare seen in victims of trauma.  He could not talk about it.   He said it was like the fire bombing of  Dresden  or Tokyo.

Leslie Groves send investigators to both cities, The Manhattan Project published a book,  The Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.     The book reported that plutonium made a better bomb.   There was no mention of radiation sickness.   The photos of the rivers filled with corpses, who died seeking water, were censored.

There are those people who feel that they can defend the use of the bomb at Hiroshima.   There are many fewer who can defend the bombing of Nagasaki.   Some regard the bombing of Nagasaki a war crime against humanity.  The Nation reported 

“The rights and wrongs of Hiroshima are debatable,” Telford Taylor, the chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials, once observed, “but I have never heard a plausible justification of Nagasaki”—which he labeled a war crime.

At the beginning of the water there was a sentiment that the US would not primarily target civilians, like our enemies, the Germans and the Japanese.   By the end of the war we were capable of the same types of atrocities.  Think how much different the world might have been if the surrender had occurred before the bomb had been developed.

Joseph Conrad famously wrote about “the horror, the horror” about deepest, blackest Africa.   I believe that “the horror, the horror” occurred at Nagasaki, when white men used science to destroy innocent people, and let the nuclear gene out of Pandora’s box.   It it my hope that we contain the nuclear gene before it destroys the earth.

There have been previous mass extinctions in the past.  About 65 million years ago there was a mass extinction.  According to Alvarez a layer of iridium was laid down around the world.  The iridium came from  a meteor.  At Trinity iridium 137 was  created  for the first time in the history off the world and laid down over the earth.   If sentient beings come to our planet in millions of years, they may find the iridium and say that this was done to them.  If  they find the iridium and plutonium and strontium and all the other nucleotides, they will say, this they did to themselves.

Related articles

• Greg Mitchell: After Hiroshima, Truman Failed to Pause–and a U.S. War Crime Followed (huffingtonpost.com)
• Nagasaki marks 68th anniversary of bomb (bigpondnews.com)
• Nagasaki Marks 68th Anniversary of US Atomic Bombing (voanews.com)

Eight women shut down Vermont Yankee briefly on August 6, 2013

There is report today in the enews that eight women briefly shut down Vermont Yankee:

“Vermont Yankee is more deadly than Hiroshima,” proclaims the banner eight women of the Shut It Down Affinity Group employed to block forty cars full of Entergy Vermont Yankee workers from reporting to their5 pm shift for more than a half hour on Tuesday before Vernon police transported them from Entergy’s gate after arresting them.   Shut It Downers acted on the 68th anniversary of the United States’ destruction of Hiroshima, Japan with the world’s first atomic bomb that resulted in more than a hundred thousand immediate deaths and far more deaths and debilitating illnesses from the effects of radiation. The United States is the only nation in the world to have employed atomic weapons, a practice continued today with US weapons tipped with depleted uranium

Tritiated exit signs

A recent comment to my blog stated that there are tritiated exit signs, typically used in dark places such as movie theaters, where there is a need for signs if there is a power failure.   He stated that these signs have billions of Becquerels and I was able to confirm his facts.

The quantity of tritium contained in each tritium exit sign varies with the size of the sign. The tritium exit sign used in Hong Kong may contain tritium with total activity ranging from 0.3 to 0.8 TBq (300 to 800 billion Becquerel (貝克勒爾)).

The NRC states

Many kinds of facilities across the United States use tritium EXIT signs, including public and private office buildings, theaters, stores, schools and churches. The NRC estimates there are more than 2 million tritium EXIT signs in use in the United States.

Tritium is also used in watches

Tufts University has banned the use of tritiated exit signs

Can tritium-containing exit signs be used at Tufts?

No. Tritium exit signs are sold under a general license from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Intact signs can be handled without special precautions except to avoid damaging the sign. However, they contain very large amounts of radioactive material in the form of tritium gas. These signs should not be purchased or used at Tufts University.  Costs can be very high when it is time to dispose of these signs. There are only a limited number of disposal options for them. Some universities have paid thousands of dollars to dispose of just a few tritium exit signs. There have also been incidents where cleanup from damaged tritium exit signs has cost tens of thousands of dollars. Special training is required to ship tritium exit signs.

Tritium produces ionizing radiation.   The more the exposure to radiation, the greater the risks to biological tissues.  Because the signs are common does not mean that they are safe.   There are warnings about the disposal of these signs.  They cannot be disposed of in landfills, according to the NRC.

Related articles

• Huge leak of tritium feared in Fukushima (peakoil.com)