Nukewatch

Working for a nuclear-free future since 1979

  • Issues
    • Direct Action
    • Environmental Justice
    • Nuclear Power
      • Chernobyl
      • Fukushima
    • Nuclear Weapons
    • On The Bright Side
    • Radiation Exposure
    • Radioactive Waste
    • Renewable Energy
    • Uranium Mining
    • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Quarterly Newsletter
    • Newsletter Archives
  • Resources
    • Nuclear Heartland Book
    • Fact Sheets
    • Reports, Studies & Publications
      • The New Nuclear Weapons: $1.74 Trillion for H-bomb Profiteers and Fake Cleanups
      • Nuclear Power: Dead In the Water It Poisoned
      • Thorium Fuel’s Advantages as Mythical as Thor
      • Greenpeace on Fukushima 2016
      • Drinking Water at Risk: Toxic Military Wastes Haunt Lake Superior
    • Nukewatch in the News
    • Links
    • Videos
  • About
    • About Nukewatch
    • Contact Us
  • Get Involved
    • Action Alerts!
    • Calendar
  • Donate

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

California Solar Capacity Surpasses Nuclear by 75 Percent

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016

The State of California, a US solar energy leader, reports 3,795 megawatts of solar electricity generation capacity installed across 479,572 projects—many of them home rooftop units—as of February 24. This puts solar at more than 175 percent of the combined 2,160 megawatt generation capacity of the state’s two operating nuclear reactors, at the Diablo Canyon facility near San Luis Obispo.

California plans to invest a total of $3.351 billion over seven years (2007-2016) in encouraging solar electric production through its Go Solar California! initiative, which has apparently surpassed its goal of installing 3,000 megawatts. This investment is approximately equivalent to the $3.3 billion decommissioning tab ratepayers have to pay for California’s San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, which permanently closed in 2013 following a botched steam generator replacement and radioactive leak. The $3.3 billion will be used to cover the cost of the profit San Onofre owners Edison and San Diego Gas & Electric would have made if the facility had continued to operate over the next 10 years. Ratepayers will be responsible for an estimated $10.4 billion in total shutdown costs once decommissioning of the reactor site is completed—that’s about $1,600 per customer meter.

—ASP

—KPBS Aug. 5, 2015; California Energy Commission; Go Solar California

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Renewable Energy

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Global Wind Power Capacity Tops Nuclear for First Time

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016

The capacity of wind power generation worldwide reached 432.42 gigawatts (GW) at the end of 2015, up 17 percent from a year earlier and surpassing nuclear reactor generated electricity for the first time, according to data released by global industry bodies.

The generation capacity of wind farms newly built in 2015 was a record 63.01 GW, corresponding to about 60 nuclear reactors, according to the Global Wind Energy Council based in Brussels. The global nuclear reactor generation capacity was 382.55 GW as of Jan. 1, 2016, the London-based World Nuclear Association said.

Wind energy has captured renewed attention as technological innovation has considerably lowered its generation costs while nuclear reactors continue to suffer a backlash following the 2011 Fukushima meltdowns.

Wind power is the leading energy source in the transition from fossil fuels to renewables, the wind energy council said as it released the data last week.

China led all other countries in wind energy generation capacity with 145.10 GW. China promotes wind power to shift from coal and other fossil fuels to combat air pollution and global warming.

Coming in second behind China is the United States with 74.47 GW, followed by Germany with 44.95 GW, then India with 25.09 GW, and then Spain with 23.03 GW. Japan produced 3.04 GW.

—JL 

—Kyodo News Service, Japan Times, Feb. 20, 2016

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter, Renewable Energy

May 2, 2016 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

60,000 March Against Trident in London

Nukewatch Quarterly Spring 2016
Micheal Kelly, Amy Gilligan, Rae Street, and Sue Eveleigh joined tens of thousands of marches to send a clear message: “STOP TRIDENT.”

Over 60,000 people gathered in London February 27 for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament’s march and rally opposing the United Kingdom’s plans to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system. Platform speakers included MP Jeremy Corbyn, the leader of the Labour Party; Caroline Lucas, the only member of the Green party in the UK Parliament; Leanne Wood, the leader of Plaid Cymru, the Welsh National Party; and Nicola Sturgeon, leader of the Scottish National Party, which is opposed to Trident nuclear-armed submarines—some of which are based in a Scottish port. Representatives from a wide variety of faith groups and the trade union movement, student leaders, and celebrities including Vanessa Redgrave also spoke. Great cheers went up as Jeremy Corbyn called for a nuclear-free Britain in a nuclear-free world.

Nichola Shellard and her daughter Abigail Raby from Norden joined the crowd, taking part in their first demonstration. Shellard said, “This was a great day for us. Anyone who stops to think about it knows that Trident is a useless and dangerous waste of money and that nuclear weapons are an evil we need to get rid of, but too often we sit at home thinking there is nothing we can do about such things. Not today. The enormous turn-out proved that there are tens of thousands of ordinary people who are willing to get up early on a cold February morning to demonstrate against Britain having nuclear weapons of mass destruction which threaten all our futures with unimaginable levels of death and destruction. It also showed that we now have political leaders, like Jeremy Corbyn, who are genuinely committed to a peaceful and nuclear-free future. We need to support them wholeheartedly and to campaign actively for a future in which our country’s resources are spent on what we need not on a useless and evil nuclear weapon’s system. Today’s march and rally was a really positive experience for us. We are more determined than ever to campaign to stop Trident.”

—ASP

—Rochdale and Littleborough Peace Group, Feb. 28, 2016

Filed Under: Direct Action, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Weapons, On The Bright Side, Quarterly Newsletter

December 14, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Child Cancer Cases Soar in Fukushima Contamination Zone

Thyroid Cancer Rates 20 to 50 Times Higher Than Average in Area Surrounding Reactor Meltdowns
Excerpted from the Toronto Star, October 8, 2015

A new study says children living near the Fukushima nuclear meltdowns have been diagnosed with thyroid cancer at a rate 20 to 50 times that of children elsewhere.

“This is more than expected and emerging faster than expected,” lead author Toshihide Tsuda told the Associated Press during a visit to Tokyo. “This is 20 times to 50 times what would be normally expected.”

Most of the 370,000 children in Fukushima prefecture (state) have been given ultrasound checkups since the March 2011 meltdowns at the tsunami-ravaged Fukushima-Daiichi nuclear plant. The most recent statistics, released in August, show that thyroid cancer is suspected or confirmed in 137 of those children, a number that rose by 25 from a year earlier. Elsewhere, the disease occurs in only about one or two of every million children per year by some estimates.

The study was released online this week and is being published in the November issue of Epidemiology, produced by the Herndon, Virginia-based International Society for Environmental Epidemiology.

Right after the disaster, the lead doctor brought in to Fukushima, Shunichi Yamashita, repeatedly ruled out the possibility of radiation-induced illnesses. The thyroid checks were ordered just to play it safe, according to the government.

But Tsuda, a professor at Okayama University, said the latest results from the ultrasound checkups, which continue to be conducted, raise doubts about the government’s view.

David J. Brenner, professor of radiation biophysics at Columbia University Medical Center, agreed. He said in a telephone interview that the higher thyroid cancer rate in Fukushima is “not due to screening. It’s real.”

Nearly 40 Percent of Fukushima Crisis Responders Received Over One Year’s Dose of Radiation

Some 38 percent of those involved in the emergency response operations at the Fukushima complex in March 2011 suffered radiation exposure exceeding the amount permitted to the public by the government, Japanese authorities in Tokyo announced October 28 after surveying nearly 3,000 workers.

The new government-run study revealed that 38 percent of the Self-Defense Forces, police officers and firefighters involved in the immediate operations following the triple reactor meltdowns in March 2011, were exposed to radiation levels higher than the annual public limit.

“The new survey comes as a surprise to the public as they were made to believe that the workers assisting in evacuation efforts suffered zero exposure as they were wearing full-body radiation suits and masks,” Tokyo’s daily Mainichi Shimbun/Reuters reported October 28.

Deadly Amount of Radiation Near Damaged “Containment”

Tokyo Electric Power Co. said October 29 that extremely high radioactivity levels—enough to kill a human being after 45 minutes of exposure—were present in a building connected by a pipe to the so-called containment vessel of reactor No. 2, the Japan Times reported October 30. The reactor was nearly demolished by the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami-caused station black out. The loss of coolant caused the uranium fuel in three out of Fukushima’s six reactors to run out of control and melt down. Radiation levels inside the devastated reactors are too ferocious for monitoring even by remote controlled robots, which have repeatedly malfunctioned in the harsh radiation environment. The paper reported, “Extremely high radiation levels and the inability to grasp the details about melted nuclear fuel make it impossible for the utility to chart the course of its planned decommissioning of the reactors at the plant.”

 

Filed Under: Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

December 14, 2015 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Fukushima Radiation Plume in Pacific Reaches West Coast 

Nukewatch Quarterly Winter 2015-2016
By John LaForge

Officials from Fukushima’s owners, the Tokyo Electric Power Co., have said leaks from the destroyed reactor complex with “at least” two trillion Becquerels of radioactivity poured into the Pacific between August 2013 and May 2014. Yet this nine-month period isn’t the half of it.

“[W]e should be carefully monitoring the oceans after what is certainly the largest accidental release of radioactive contaminants to the oceans in history,” Dr. Ken Buesseler, researcher with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, said September 27.

Instead, the US EPA halted its emergency radiation monitoring of Fukushima’s radioactive plume in May 2011, only three months after the disaster began. Japan isn’t even monitoring seawater near Fukushima, according to the September 28 Ecologist: “Japanese government and IAEA ignore radiation risks to coastal population.”

The amount of cesium in seawater that Buesseler’s researchers found off Vancouver Island is nearly six times the concentration regularly recorded in the Pacific—cesium lingers in the oceans after being deposited in fallout from nuclear bomb tests that ended in 1963. The six-fold increase in Pacific cesium is a stunner and indicates that increases have steadily been accumulating since the Fukushima disaster began pouring contaminated water into the sea in 2011. Cesium-134 concentration in the same waters was only about twice the long-standing (bomb test fallout) average in November of last year, the International Business Times reported.

Dr. Buesseler announced his latest assessment after his team found that cesium drift from Fukushima had reached North America. Further, instead of assuring the public that the radiation plume is harmless, Buesseler said, “[E]ven if they were twice as high and I was to swim there every day for an entire year, the dose I would be exposed to is a thousand times less than a single dental X-ray.”

Cesium is increasing in the levels and number of samples with measurable radioactivity from Fukushima. …levels of cesium were more than 10 million times higher in 2011 off Japan than off the US and Canada today. These levels around Fukushima were a direct threat to marine life. Within months, levels remained thousands of times higher near Japan relative to pre-disaster concentrations and this led to the closure of fisheries, which is important as there is a greater health concern with ingesting these contaminants, than say swimming in the ocean at the same levels. 
—Dr. Ken Buesseler, Nov. 11, 2015

This comparison confusingly obscures important differences between external exposure (from X-rays or swimming in contaminated seawater), and internal contamination from ingesting radioactive isotopes, say with seafood.

Dr. Chris Busby of the Low Level Radiation Campaign in England explains the distinction this way: Think of the difference between merely sitting before a warm wood fire on one hand, and popping a burning hot coal into your mouth on the other. Internal contamination can be 1,000 times more likely to cause cancer than the same exposure if it were external, especially for women and children. And because cesium-137 stays in the ecosphere for 300 years, long-term bio-accumulation and bio-concentration of cesium isotopes in the food chain (in this case the sea food chain), are the perpetually worsening consequences of what has spilled and is still pouring from Fukushima.

Bags of radioactive waste piled up at a temporary storage site in Tomioka, Fukushima Prefecture. Four years after the nuclear disaster began, a final disposal site for tainted debris it created has yet to be designated.

Today, globalized radioactive contamination of the commons by private corporations has become the financial, political and health care cost of operating nuclear power reactors. The International Business Times article noted: “The planet’s oceans already contain vast amounts of radiation, as the world’s 435 nuclear power plants routinely pump radioactive water into Earth’s oceans, albeit less dangerous isotopes than cesium.”

Fifty million Becquerels of cesium per-cubic-meter were measured off Fukushima soon after the March 2011 start of the three meltdowns; cesium-contaminated albacore and bluefin tuna were caught off the US West Coast only four months later; 300 tons of cesium-laced effluent has been pouring into the Pacific every day for the 4½ years since; the Japanese government on September 14 openly dumped 850 tons of partially filtered but tritium-contaminated water into the Pacific. This latest dumping foreshadows what it will try to do with thousands of additional tons now held in shabby storage tanks at the devastated reactor complex.

The fact that Fukushima has contaminated the entire Pacific Ocean must be viewed as cataclysmic. The ongoing introduction of its radioactive runoff may be slow-paced, and the inevitable damage to sea life and human health may take decades to register, but the “canary in the mine shaft” is the Pacific tuna population which should now be perpetually monitored for cesium.

Last November Buesseler warned, “Radioactive cesium from the Fukushima disaster is likely to keep arriving at the North American coast.”

Mayors in Fukushima OK Disposal of “Low-level” Rad-waste

Town leaders in Fukushima Prefecture December 2 accepted a government-proposed disposal plan for storing relatively low-level radioactive waste at an existing facility inside the prefecture. The federal plan calls for the Ecotech Clean Center, a privately run disposal facility in the town of Tomioka, near the destroyed Fukushima No. 1 reactor complex, to be nationalized. The center will then store about 650,000 cubic meters of radioactive garbage contaminated by the disaster.

Fukushima Governor Masao Uchibori then met with Koichi Miyamoto, the mayor of Tomioka, and Yukiei Matsumoto, mayor of the town of Naraha, which accommodates a transportation route to the facility. All the residents of Tomioka, which is less than 20 kilometers from the Fukushima complex, are still living as evacuees because of high radiation levels in the town.

In spite of controversial radiation levels, the government is pushing to lift evacuation orders still in place throughout Fukushima prefecture. The federal government’s plan for overall disposal is to build final facilities in six prefectures that were contaminated with large amounts of the radioactive waste, but prefectures other than Fukushima are strongly opposed to the proposals.

According to an Environment Ministry report, “designated wastes”—contaminated with between 8,000 and 100,000 Becquerels of radioactivity per kilogram—exist in 11 other prefectures. Fukushima Prefecture’s acceptance may fuel calls for concentrating such final disposal there rather than having to overcome widespread opposition elsewhere.

Federal officials first presented their disposal plans to local governments in December 2013. This November, Tokyo unveiled “regional economic promotion measures”—called bribes by skeptics of the dumping, because they include a grant of $81 million—such as the creation of an industrial complex, and “additional safety measures.”

Sources: Japan Times & Asahi Shimbun, Dec. 3, 2015

Filed Under: Environment, Fukushima, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 221
  • 222
  • 223
  • 224
  • 225
  • …
  • 266
  • Next Page »

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Subscribe

Donate

Categories

  • B61 Bombs in Europe
  • Chernobyl
  • Counterfeit Reactor Parts
  • Depleted Uranium
  • Direct Action
  • Environment
  • Environmental Justice
  • Fukushima
  • Lake Superior Barrels
  • Military Spending
  • Newsletter Archives
  • North Korea
  • Nuclear Power
  • Nuclear Weapons
  • Office News
  • On The Bright Side
  • Photo Gallery
  • Protect the Water Close Xcel's Monticello Reactor
  • Quarterly Newsletter
  • Radiation Exposure
  • Radioactive Waste
  • Renewable Energy
  • Social Issues
  • Sulfide Mining
  • Through the Prism of Nonviolence
  • Uncategorized
  • Uranium Mining
  • US Bombs Out of Germany
  • War
  • Weekly Column

Contact Us

(715) 472-4185
nukewatch1@lakeland.ws

Address:
740A Round Lake Road
Luck, Wisconsin 54853
USA

Donate To Nukewatch

News & Information on Nuclear Weapons,
Power, Waste & Nonviolent Resistance

Stay Connected

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

© 2026 · Nukewatch