Monthly Archives: October 2014

Japanese doctors intimidated against linking Fukushima cancers, illnesses to nuclear radiation

Truly Frightening”: Doctors being threatened for linking illnesses to Fukushima — Strange tumors, kids dying, pets dying — Much higher incidences of whole range of health problems reported — Experts: 1,000,000 cancers, plus many other ailments possible (AUDIO & VIDEO) http://enenews.com/frightening-doctors-being-threatened-telling-patients-illnesses-related-fukushima-radiation-strange-tumors-kids-dying-pets-dying-higher-incidences-range-health-problems-being-reported-experts Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Energy Education on Radio Ecoshock, released Oct 29, 2014: Alex Smith, […]

http://nuclear-news.net/2014/10/29/japanese-doctors-intimidated-against-linking-fukushima-cancers-illnesses-to-nuclear-radiation/

There is a serious conflict of interest when physicians cannot tell their patients the truth.

Advertisements

US supported Japan’s Secret Nuclear Weapons Programs

I recently found a  post by Joseph Trento about the collaboration between the highest levels of government of Japan and the United States to allow Japan to develop nuclear weapons through the dual program of Atoms for Peace.  The post says:

The United States deliberately allowed Japan access to the United States’ most secret nuclear weapons facilities while it transferred tens of billions of dollars worth of American tax paid research that has allowed Japan to amass 70 tons of weapons grade plutonium since the 1980s, a National Security News Service investigation reveals. These activities repeatedly violated U.S. laws regarding controls of sensitive nuclear materials that could be diverted to weapons programs in Japan. The NSNS investigation found that the United States has known about a secret nuclear weapons program in Japan since the 1960s, according to CIA reports. – See more at: http://www.dcbureau.org/201204097128/national-security-news-service/united-states-circumvented-laws-to-help-japan-accumulate-tons-of-plutonium.html#sthash.2eKA5AWt.dpuf

The article go into great detail outlining the lengthy history of collaboration. It started with President Eisenhower, and his Atoms for Peace.    President Carter, a former nuclear submarine officer, tried to put a stop to the program, but he was reversed by President Reagan, who wholeheartedly supported these programs.

The article goes on to say:

The Agreement between the Energy Department and Japan’s monolithic nuclear energy utility, the Power Reactor and Nuclear Fuel Development Corporation (PNC), violated a laundry-list of anti-nuclear prohibitions. It provided no Japanese guarantee that nuclear material would not be transferred to other countries without American consent, nor any assurance that Japan would not reprocess American reactor fuel into plutonium without prior U.S. approval. In short, the United States abdicated all control of U.S.- origin nuclear material in Japan for the next 30 years.

The deal also violated Carter’s Atomic Energy Act, a U.S. law which mandates that the reprocessing or retransfer of American nuclear material must not increase the risk of proliferation. In particular, the agreement did not ensure timely warning to the United States of any diversion for weapons purposes. In fact, Japan has lost track of more than 70 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium at its accident plagued Tokai reprocessing plant – enough to make more than 20 nuclear weapons. In a single agreement, the United States ceded control of nuclear material and gave up whatever safety margin it had to prevent a rapid nuclear deployment. At the time of the transfer, officials in both Washington and Tokyo knew that the only thing the breeder program would produce reliably was plutonium and that it would churn it out in enormous quantities, and in a form twice as pure as the plutonium used in American nuclear weapons.

The desire to do the corporate deal has overwhelmed the sense the nuclear gene might be dangerous.  The article also makes it abundantly clear that nuclear power and nuclear weapons are inseparable.

Nuclear heartburn: even IEA says solar could become world’s dominant energy source

There is an abundant supply of sun. It should be harnessed.

GreenWorld

IEA projections for solar PV by region. IEA projections for solar PV by region.

Sending chills down the spine of nuclear and coal utility executives across the world, the International Energy Agency (IEA) yesterday released two reports that assert solar power could become the dominant source of global electricity production by mid-century.

This is the same IEA that has consistently and dramatically underestimated the potential contribution of renewables over more than a decade. As we pointed out on July 17, 2014,  since at least 2000, Greenpeace has been far more accurate when projecting renewable energy use than the IEA. As RenewEconomy, based in Australia, put it, “The forecasts from the IEA are not the most dramatic that can be found, but they are significant because the IEA is essentially a conservative organisation that was created in the 1970s to defend developed countries’ access to fossil fuels.” 

Yet, in what will almost certainly prove to be…

View original post 819 more words

France and nuclear power: the end of the affair is coming?

France is making plans to reduce its dependence upon nuclear power.

nuclear-news

plants-downIs France’s Love Affair with Nuclear Over? Oil Price, By Chris Dalby | Sun, 19 October 2014  French President Francois Hollande has promised to limit the growth of the country’s nuclear power, many older reactors have been targeted for decommissioning, and Greenpeace and other environmental groups have been relentless in their anti-nuclear campaigning. But until now, it seemed unlikely that France would ever truly rethink its love affair with nuclear power.

Last week, it did. On Oct. 10, France’s parliament voted to begin moving to undo decades of nuclear growth and to reduce its importance to the country’s energy mix. Over the next 11 years, France will reduce the amount of electricity coming from nuclear by one-quarter — from 75 percent to 50 percent. To do that, estimates are that as many as 20 of France’s 58 reactors would have to be closed.

The vote was part of a package of…

View original post 304 more words

Aging reactors: a failure to plan that will haunt nuclear utilities

The corporations are committed to continuing these boondoggles. They are expensive to operate, and they are expensive to shut down. There are cheaper and safer alternatives in wind and solar

GreenWorld

Exelon's aging GE Mark I reactors at Peach Bottom. Photo by cryptome.org Exelon’s aging GE Mark I reactors at Peach Bottom. Photo by cryptome.org

One reason that giant nuclear utilities like Exelon, Entergy, Duke and others are so aggressively taking extraordinary steps to force ratepayers to keep their obsolete, aging reactors operating at any cost is that these utilities have failed to adequately plan for the reality that reactors have a limited operational life and at some point will have to be retired.

The issue is global, it isn’t confined to the U.S., but the ramifications of this failure to plan, or perhaps to accept the reality that no machinery lasts forever–especially not the kind exposed to the tremendous heat and radiation levels that nuclear reactors are–will have its greatest impact in the deregulated states of the U.S. 

Two recent articles on the idea of extending reactor licenses even further than they already have been (and far further than is reasonable from…

View original post 1,143 more words

Vermont Yankees Says Shutdown to Cost $1.24 Billion

By Michelle Mei 19 October 2014 by Pat Bradley at WAMC Northeast Public Radio Listen to the broadcast here: http://wamc.org/post/vermont-yankee-says-shutdown-cost-124-billion The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant has released a new estimate of what it will cost to decommission the reactor, manage high-level radioactive waste and restore the plant site. The estimate of about $1.

http://afscwm.org/2014/10/21/vermont-yankees-says-shutdown-cost-1-24-billion/

This cost estimate has almost doubled over the last year. There is no source of money to pay for this decommissioning.