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

October 11, 2018 by Nukewatch 3 Comments

The Climate’s Already Too Hot for Nuclear Power

Fall Quarterly 2018
The single nuclear reactor Ft. Calhoun station near Omaha, Nebraska was inundated by Missouri River flooding in June 2011. Missouri floodwaters also threatened the Cooper reactor in Brownville, Nebraska, which narrowly escaped a shutdown. Ft. Calhoun was permanently closed in 2016, but still “stores” 600,000 to 800,000 pounds (300 to 400 tons) of high level radioactive waste fuel in the floodplain.
By John LaForge, Nukewatch

With the summer’s record high temp’s all over the world, Andy Rowell asked this pointed question in Oil Change International: “For the last decade the nuclear industry has been telling us it is the solution to climate change. But if their reactors can’t work in our rapidly warming world, are we just building a whole new generation of expensive white elephants?”

Indeed, Reuters reported Aug. 4 that Electricity de France (EDF) in Paris shut down four nuclear reactors at three sites due to the heat summer wave. EDF, the mostly government-owned utility, ordered the shut downs because the scorching summer heat that slammed Europe drastically raised temperatures in the Rhone and Rhine Rivers. Temperatures reached 98.6°F in the Rhone valley, home to 14 reactors. Highs in Spain and Portugal in early August hovered around 104°F and reached 116.6°F.

The warming of seawater caused by Europe’s heat wave forced Finland’s two Loviisa reactors, about 65 miles outside Helsinki, to reduce power in July, just as it did before, in 2010 and 2011, Reuters reported.

The July 2006 heat wave also forced European reactor operators to reduce or halt production due to dramatic increases in the temperature of river waters. The Guardian reported back then that Spain shut down its reactor on the River Ebro. Reactor operators in Germany also cut output then, and several German and French units were allowed to temporarily violate temperature limits on the hot water the reactors return to rivers.

Nuclear reactors exacerbate global warming

In 2003, temperatures in French rivers reached record highs that also forced the temporary powering down of four reactors. France’s nuclear oversight authority then gave some reactor operators permission to return the river water at temperatures not normally allowed, a move that critics said would endanger fish and add to global warming.

Meanwhile, rising sea levels threaten to shutter one-out-of-four of the world’s 460 power reactors currently built on coastlines. John Vidal reports in the Aug. 21 edition of Hakai magazine that experts have warned that even newly built seawalls may not provide sufficient protection. Vidal interviewed Pete Roche, a former adviser to the UK government and Greenpeace, who pointed out that the seawall at the $25-billion “Hinkley Point C” nuclear station being built in southwest England “does not adequately take into account sea-level rise due to climate change.”

“In fact,” Vidal reports, research by Ensia — a nonprofit environmental magazine published at the University of Minnesota — suggests that “at least 100 US, European, and Asian nuclear power stations built just a few meters above sea level could be threatened by serious flooding caused by accelerating sea-level rise and more frequent storm surges.”

The two St. Lucie reactors in Florida are among the US coastal nuclear sites considered most vulnerable to storm surges. While no US reactors have been “in imminent danger of a meltdown because of a storm surge,” Vidal notes, there have been many close calls. “Three US reactors were temporarily shut down because of Hurricane Sandy in 2012 and a fourth, Oyster Creek in New Jersey, was put on alert when water levels rose dramatically, according to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission.”

But the NRC is not concerned about storm surges. In August 2017, as Hurricane Harvey pummeled east Texas, environmental groups called for the immediate shutdown of the two South Texas Project reactors near Bay City. Instead, the twin, 42-year-old behemoths were kept running at full capacity throughout the disaster, the wettest tropical cyclone on record in the United States.

 

Filed Under: Environment, Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste, Renewable Energy, Weekly Column

October 8, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Fukushima Cesium Found in California Wines

The journal Technology Review from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology reports that Fukushima’s radioactive signature has been found in California wine. “The Japanese nuclear disaster bathed North America in a radioactive cloud,” the sub-title blares. Now the journal says, “Pharmacologists have found the telltale signature in California wine made at the time.” In 2001, the French pharmacologist Philippe Hubert discovered that cesium-137 produces distinctive gamma rays in proportion to the amount of isotope present. In 2017, Hubert and colleagues began examining California wines made between 2009 and 2012, in view of the March 2011 Fukushima radiation gusher. The team found “measurable amounts of cesium-137 above background levels in the wine produced after 2011.” Hubert’s group concluded, “It seems there is an increase in [cesium] activity in 2011 by a factor of two.” The amounts are far below what government, industry and the military have declared “allowable,” but internal radiation exposures are thought by experts to be more harmful than external doses. Hubert earlier studied the cesium content in French wines made between 1950 and 2008 and found the amount directly corresponded to the volume of cesium dispersed in the atmosphere by bomb tests and reactor accidents.

—Technology Review, July 19; and SkyNews.com, July 20, 2018

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

October 8, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Pickering Reactors Win 10-Year Extension

The Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) has approved a 10-year extension to the aged Pickering Nuclear Station’s operating license, meaning it could potentially operate until 2028 on the north shore of Lake Ontario north of Niagara Falls. The CNSC dismissed dozens of comments pointing out Pickering’s terrible location surrounded by millions of people, the lack of adequate emergency planning despite 50 years of operations, and the absence of isolation plans for the tons of radioactive waste stockpiled at the site. Instead, the CNSC sided with Ontario Power Generation which claimed that no one has been harmed by the massive radiation releases from the Fukushima disaster, and that “some radiation” is actually good for you!

The CNSC also ignored the findings of nuclear risk expert Dr. Gordon Thompson about the ever-growing volume of highly radioactive waste on the Pickering waterfront—next to the Great Lakes, source of drinking water for 40 million people. Somehow it is OK with the CNSC that Pickering continues to produce close to 20,000 bundles of radioactive waste fuel every year despite a lack of fully secure storage facilities onsite, or any viable long-term plan for dealing with this deadly waste. We need an unbiased review of the true costs and benefits of continuing to operate this high-risk facility, which should have been closed years ago. Please email energy minister Greg Rickford and tell him that closing Pickering now is the best way to cut electricity costs while ensuring the safety of millions on both sides of the border.

— Ontario Clean Air Alliance

Filed Under: Newsletter Archives, Nuclear Power, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

August 30, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

The Tip of the Radiation Disaster Iceberg

In 1959, a partial reactor meltdown struck the Sodium Reactor Experiment at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory (pictured), in the Simi Hills 30 miles from Los Angeles, CA. The incident was successfully kept secret until 1979. According to the 1997 “Epidemiologic Study to Determine Possible Adverse Effects,” Santa Susana Field Lab workers showed higher than expected rates of some cancers. Dept. of Energy photo.

The World Nuclear Association (WNA) says its goal is “to increase global support for nuclear energy” and it repeatedly claims on its website: “There have only been three major accidents across 16,000 cumulative reactor-years of operation in 32 countries.” The WNA and other nuclear power supporters acknowledge Three Mile Island in 1979 (US), Chernobyl in 1986 (USSR), and Fukushima in 2011 (Japan) as “major” disasters.

But claiming that these radiation gushers were the worst ignores the frightening series of large-scale disasters that have been caused by uranium mining, reactors, nuclear weapons, and radioactive waste. Some of the world’s other major accidental radiation releases indicate that the Big Three are just the tip of the iceberg.

CHALK RIVER (Ontario), Dec. 2, 1952: The first major commercial reactor disaster occurred at this Canadian reactor on the Ottawa River when it caused a loss-of-coolant, a hydrogen explosion and a meltdown, releasing 100,000 curies of radioactivity to the air. In comparison, the official government position is that Three Mile Island released about 15 curies, although radiation monitors failed or went off-scale.

ROCKY FLATS (Colorado), Sept. 11, 1957: This Cold War factory produced plutonium triggers for nuclear weapons 16 miles from Denver. It caused 30 to 44 pounds of breathable plutonium-239 and plutonium-240 to catch fire in what would come to be known as the second largest industrial fire in US history. Filters used to trap the plutonium were destroyed and it escaped through chimneys, contaminating parts of Denver. Nothing was done to warn or protect downwind residents.

WINDSCALE/SELLAFIELD (Britain), Oct. 7, 1957: The worst of many fires burned through one reactor igniting three tons of uranium and dispersed radionuclides over parts of England and northern Europe. The site was hastily renamed Sellafield. Another large radiation leak occurs in 1981 and leukemia rates soared to triple the national average.

KYSHTYM/CHELYABINSK-65 (Russia), Sept. 29, 1957: A tank holding 70 to 80 metric tons of highly radioactive liquid waste exploded, contaminating an estimated 250,000 people, and permanently depopulating 30 towns which were leveled and removed from Russian maps. Covered up by Moscow (and the CIA) until 1989, Russia finally revealed that 20 million curies of long-lived isotopes like cesium were released, and the release was later declared a Level 6 disaster on the International Nuclear Event Scale. The long covered-up explosion contaminated up to 10,000 square miles making it the third- or 4th-most serious radiation accident ever recorded.

SANTA SUSANA (Simi Valley, Calif.), July 12, 1959: The meltdown of the Sodium Reactor Experiment just outside Los Angeles caused “the third largest release of iodine-131 in the history of nuclear power,” according to Arjun Makhajani, President of the Institute for Energy & Environmental Research. Released radioactive materials were never authoritatively measured because “the monitors went clear off the scale,” according to an employee. The accident was kept secret for 20 years.

CHURCH ROCK (New Mexico), July 16, 1979: Ninety-three million gallons of liquid uranium mine wastes and 1,000 tons of solid wastes spilled onto the Navajo Nation and into Little Puerco River, and nuclear officials called it “the worst incident of radiation contamination in the history of the United States.” The Little Puerco feeds the Little Colorado River, which drains to the Colorado River, which feeds Lake Mead—a source of drinking water for Los Angeles.

TOMSK-7 (Russia), April 7, 1993: In “the worst radiation disaster since Chernobyl,” Russian and foreign experts said a tank of radioactive waste exploded at the Tomsk nuclear weapons complex  and that wind blew its plume of radiation  toward the Yenisei River and 11 Siberian villages, none of which were evacuated.

MONJU (Japan), Dec. 8, 1995: This sodium-cooled “breeder reactor” caused a fire and a large leak of sodium coolant into the Pacific. Liquid sodium coolant catches fire on contact with air and explodes on contact with water. Costly efforts to engineer commercial models have failed. Japan’s Monju experiment was halted in 2018 after over 24 years of false starts, accidents and cover-ups.

TOKAI-MURA (Japan), Sept. 30, 1999: A uranium “criticality” which is an uncontrolled nuclear chain reaction caused a “neutron burst” that killed three workers and dispersed neutron radiation throughout the densely populated urban area surrounding the factory.

Not to be slighted, deliberate contamination has also been enormous: Five metric tons of plutonium was dispersed over the earth by nuclear bomb testing, and other nuclear weapons processes; Over 210 billion gallons of radioactive liquids were poured into the ground at the Hanford reactor complex in Washington State; and 16 billion gallons of liquid waste holding 70,000 curies of radioactivity were injected directly into Idaho’s Snake River Aquifer at the Idaho National Lab.

—Sources: Nuclear Roulette: The Truth About the Most Dangerous Energy Source on Earth, by Gar Smith (Chelsea Green, 2012); Mad Science: The Nuclear Power Experiment, by  Joseph Mangano (OR Books 2012); In Mortal Hands: A Cautionary History of the Nuclear Age, by Stephanie Cooke (Bloomsbury, 2009); Criticality Accident at Tokai-mura, by Jinzaburo Takagi (Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center, 2000); Nuclear Wastelands: A Global Guide to Nuclear Weapons Production & Its Health & Environmental Effects, by Arjun Makhijani, et al (MIT Press, 1995); The Nuclear Power Deception , by Arjun Makhijani & Scott Saleska (Apex Press, 1999); Nuclear Madness, Revised, by Helen Caldicot (Norton, 1995); Multiple Exposures: Chronicles of the Radiation Age, by Catherine Caufield  (Harper & Row, 1989); Greenpeace Book of the Nuclear Age, by John May (Pantheon, 1989); Deadly Defense: Military Radioactive Landfills, edited by Dana Coyle, et al (Radioactive Waste Campaign 1988); and No Nukes, by Anna Gyorgy (South End Press, 1979).

— John LaForge

Filed Under: Chernobyl, Environment, Environmental Justice, Fukushima, Nuclear Power, Radioactive Waste, Uranium Mining, Weekly Column

August 16, 2018 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

International Summer Camp Protests Nuclear Industry in France and Around the World

By Sortir du nucléaire Aude, Nuclear Heritage Network and Réseau “Sortir du nucléaire”
On August 9, 2018, Participants pose with the symbolic hand gesture of Australian anti-nuclear movement, to show solidarity with their action Walking For Country or, “Walkatjurra Walkabout,” taking place at this time in Australia. Photo credit: Günter Hermeyer

Narbonne, France–During this week of the 73rd anniversaries of the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the International Anti-Nuclear Summer Camp takes place near Narbonne in the south of France from August 6th to 12th. Tents, performances, and debates are waking up a peaceful estate of olive trees and wild thyme. Located a few miles away from Malvési, the Orano uranium-conversion facility (formerly Areva), this meeting of 17 nationalities focuses on all aspects of the nuclear fuel chain.

How can the nuclear industry propagate so much new waste when there is waste that has not been properly cleaned up at uranium mines, nuclear weapons facilities, and nuclear power plants? Why does government allow the nuclear industry to continue, knowing the health and environmental dangers, as well as possible terrorism risks? How do private interests suppress democracy and human rights? What are the solutions to fight against nuclear proliferation? How can we separate nuclear energy into “civilian” and “military” uses? To address these shared problems, the International Anti-Nuclear Summer Camp has designed a week’s long program filled with workshops, discussions, film screenings, debates, activist formations, site visits, music, street actions, and two commemorations for the bombings of Hiroshima (August 6) and Nagasaki (August 9).

From: Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, India, Ireland, Japan, Navajo Nation (Indigenous Nation of Turtle Island), Netherlands, Norway, Peru, Portugal, Russia, Spain, Turkey, United States, and Vietnam, this year, several guests, including nuclear workers, activists, community organizers, and members of civil society are speaking to share experiences and information about nuclear activities in their respective countries. All share a common diagnostic: from uranium mines to radioactive waste, the entire nuclear chain is extremely dangerous, too polluting, too expensive, too anti-democratic, and cannot be a solution to climate change.

This international dialogue depicts an unforgiving reality of the violence created by the nuclear industry and lobbies all around the world. Simultaneously, this international meeting gives a wonderful optimistic outlook: everywhere, resistance is rising. All around the world, courageous people are struggling against a deadly industry and promoting ecological energy transition.

Michiko Yoshii, a professor at Okinawa University of Japan reflects on her workshop entitled How We Successfully Stopped the Nuclear Project of Vietnam, “I was very happy to speak about my experience to the international audiences, giving some optimistic topics to the international battle against nuclear affairs.”

Hervé Loquais, Organizer of the event and Secretary of Sortir du Nucléaire Aude (11) of France says, “I am proud to host brave activists from all over the world in a peaceful and friendly atmosphere.”

Leona Morgan, an indigenous organizer and activist fighting nuclear colonialism in the United States remarks, “It is imperative to work together across cultures, languages, and borders to make a nuclear-free world a reality.”

For More Information:
http://www.sortirdunucleaire.org/
http://www.nuclear-heritage.net/index.php/International_Anti-nuclear_Summer_Camp_2018
www.walkingforcountry.com

Filed Under: Environment, Environmental Justice, Nuclear Power, Nuclear Weapons, Radioactive Waste, Uranium Mining

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • …
  • 94
  • 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