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

April 7, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Will DOE Shirk Proper Clean-up of Santa Susana Field Lab?

By Nukewatch Staff

The U.S. Department of Energy proposed new guidelines for its plan to clean up contaminated soil at the Santa Susana Field Lab, in California, poisoned by weapons testing and the partial meltdown of a nuclear reactor in 1959. The site, in Simi Valley, is about 30 miles from Los Angeles and was home to early, experimental nuclear reactors. The area is managed by Boeing, the DOE, and NASA. Boeing will produce a plan for soil cleanup to be publicly reviewed this summer. All three have been accused of using faulty science to push for shoddy cleanup requirements.

Parents Against Santa Susana Field Lab, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, Physicians for Social Responsibility — Los Angeles Chapter, and the Committee to Bridge the Gap are among the environmental advocacy groups denouncing the DOE’s new guidelines. The groups point out that for the roughly 700,000 people who live within 10 miles of the DOE site, lower standards for cleanup create long-lived risks. For more information on the DOE plan, public comments, or scoping meetings, go online to www.ssflareaiveis.com/seis.

— The Acorn, Jan. 24, 2025; Calif. Dept. of Toxic Substances Control

Filed Under: Direct Action, Environment, Newsletter Archives, Quarterly Newsletter, Radioactive Waste

February 22, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Fukushima Pollution Solution: Spread Radioactivity Far and Wide

By John LaForge, Z., February 22, 2025

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

The dispersal of radioactive wastewater from the Fukushima-Daiichi reactor disaster site to the Pacific Ocean is “in line with international safety standards” according to a task force set up by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN’s nuclear power advocacy program, in a December 24, 2024 report.

Ever since the Tokyo Electric Power Co., or Tepco, first proposed pumping wastewater left from cooling Fukushima’s three hot piles of melted reactor fuel into the Pacific, the IAEA has supported, encouraged, and endorsed the plan, in spite of its own formal published guidelines which advise against it.

In June 2023, Dr. Arjun Makhijani of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, published a scathing critique of the IAEA’s approval, finding the oceanic pollution violates essential provisions of the agency’s own General Safety Guide.

The IAEA’s first 2023 report on the dumping scheme said the plan was “consistent” with its standards, and it claimed even before the first major release of the radioactive water that it would have a “negligible radiological impact to people and the environment.” Now the IAEA’s onsite laboratory in Japan has analyzed the first ten discharges that have been  conducted between August 2023 and October 2024, Nuclear Engineering International reported.

The bulk of the radioactivity in the wastewater being pumped into the ocean is from tritium, the radioactive form of hydrogen, and carbon-14, neither of which can be filtered from water they contaminate. However, analyses of 1.3 million tons of waste coolant now stored in tanks shows a complex mix of other highly radioactive isotopes, including strontium-90, cesium-134 and -137, cobalt-60, americium, technetium, and even tellurium-127. In 2018, Tepco apologized for the failure of its giant filter system to separate all the materials it promised to, and has said it would repeatedly re-filter the contaminated water to try and remove 62 different reactor-borne isotopes before dumping it into the world’s largest ocean.

IAEA approval is license to copy bad actors

Japan’s oceanic radioactive pollution was supposed to have been banned with the 1972 Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter. This monumental international law against disposing of hazardous and radioactive wastes at sea prohibits dumping “from vessels, aircraft, platforms or other man-made structures.”

Yet the use of major undersea pipelines at Fukushima-Daiichi in Japan, at La Hague in France, and at Sellafield in the UK have been granted exemptions — as if the massive pumping systems were not “man-made.” On a yearly basis, the La Hague plutonium processing system discharges some 1.4 million barrels worth of liquid radioactive waste into the North Sea, Greenpeace reports. And the UK’s Sellafield site pumps 24 million barrels of radioactive liquids into Irish Sea every year.

When the IAEA says that Japan’s ocean dumping is “in line with international safety standards,” this is the globalized radioactive polluting that is being referenced and endorsed.

Radioactive soil to be spread nationwide as construction fill

In spite of obvious risks to workers who handle it and the threat of surface water contamination caused by rain runoff and winds, the Japanese government has approved plans to allow 14-million metric tons of radioactive soil — and 300,000 metric tons of radioactive ash from incinerators — to be used in public works projects like road and railway construction, and even agriculture “nationwide,” according to the international news reports.

The government calls the plan “recycling,” and it’s been consistently opposed by critics who point to federal regulations that forbid any use of radioactive materials that are contaminated with more than 100 becquerels of cesium-137 per kilogram (Bq/kg). Waste that’s “hotter” must be disposed of as radioactive waste.

Yet the government intends to allow the use of soil (scraped from thousands of square kilometers that were hit with fallout from the three meltdowns) containing up to 8,000 Bq/kg of cesium, 80 times the federal limit. Radioactive cesium was spewed in large quantities from the triple meltdowns of March 2011 and it persists in the environment for up to 300 years. (Mountain forests in the fallout zones west of Fukushima cannot have topsoil removed and so remain contaminated with cesium which is spread downhill by heavy rains.)

Watchdogs with the Citizens Nuclear Information Center in Tokyo point out that government rules would be violated if the 8000 Bq/Kg limit is allowed. Yumiko Fuseya wrote in CNIC’s newsletter, “Despite the Nuclear Reactor Regulation Act stating that only waste of 100 Bq/kg (becquerels/kilogram) or less can be recycled, [the plan says] ‘removed soil’ of up to 8,000 Bq/kg can be recycled, and this is a double standard.”

Fuseya complained that Japan’s Ministry of Environment, “claims that ‘disposal’ includes ‘recycling,’ even though Article 41 of the Act on Special Measures Concerning the Handling of Materials Contaminated by Radiation does not include ‘recycling.’

The daily Yomiuri Shimbun reported December 5 that about 75% of some 14 million tons of bagged soil has a radioactive cesium count of 8,000 becquerels or less per kilogram.

CNIC also reports that the government has conducted hair-raising agricultural experiments in Fukushima Prefecture, such as growing and harvesting cucumbers and radishes “in fields where the [contaminated] soil has been covered with normal soil.”

Just as the International Atomic Energy Agency has approved of dispersing contaminated wastewater into the Pacific Ocean, the agency last September gave final approval to Japan’s plan for using the radioactive soil and fly ash (now piled in 14 million 1-tonne bags) for public works projects, saying that the scheme is “consistent with IAEA safety standards.”

Ongoing earthquakes & aftershocks

As if accidents with wastewater pumping, Pacific Ocean poisoning with radioactive wastewater, and spreading millions of tons of cesium-tainted soil around the public commons weren’t hazardous enough, routine earthquakes and their aftershocks off northeast Japan relentlessly rock the Fukushima disaster site and threaten to crack open giant tanks now holding 1.3 million tons of highly radioactive wastewater. Relentlessly frequent quakes also endanger the means of water cooling the 880 tons of molten reactor fuel (or ‘corium’) still thermally hot and radioactively unreachable somewhere beneath the three smashed reactors.

On January 23, after a 5.2 magnitude quake hit the Fukushima Prefecture’s Aizu area, the government warned of possible aftershocks and urged people to “stay vigilant” against landslides and avalanches. Last April 4, a 6.1 magnitude quake rattled Fukushima’s coastline just 47 miles off the site of the three meltdowns — far closer than the super quake of March 2011, the biggest in Japan’s recorded history, which was 80 miles offshore.

Clean-up workers increasingly fear contamination

Following a string of clean-up related radiation accidents at the devastated station, Tepco workers have grown more concerned about their safety. The daily Asahi Shimbun reports that a Tepco survey its workers found that over 40 percent of the workforce was worried about jobsite “radiation issues.” Of this group, 52% said “physical contamination” was their main concern, seven percentage points higher than its 2023 survey. Tepco said that the repetition of exposure accidents on site have likely increased workers’ worries.

In October 2024, two workers were hospitalized after being splashed with highly radioactive liquid wastes bursting from a hose that disconnected inside a wastewater treatment building. And in February 2024, about 5.5 cubic meters, or 5.5 metric tonnes, of highly radioactive liquid waste gushed from the a “cesium absorption apparatus” in an incinerator building before a worker noted it and closed a valve.

The Citizens Nuclear Information Center in Tokyo keeps close track of the routine accidents taking place at Fukushima and across Japan’s nuclear industry here.

New documentary: “Unfogging Fukushima”

The China Global Television Network (CGTN) has produced an English language documentary on the three simultaneous reactor meltdowns and their massive radioactive releases which premiered December 31, 2024.The network announced the debut noting, “Despite extensive efforts over the past 13 years, problems such as discharging nuclear-contaminated water into the sea still exist. CGTN visited the worst-hit area, measured nuclear radiation, and investigated the truth behind the enduring consequences of the accident.” The film is available here.

–Oirginally at Znetwork.com, and CounterPunch.org

Filed Under: Environment, Environmental Justice, Fukushima, Nuclear Power, Radiation Exposure, Radioactive Waste, Weekly Column

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

On Guard! The Nuclear Industry is Up to Tricks Again

Opinion by Kelly Lundeen

A few short years ago the nuclear renaissance was a dream crushed by the reality of Fukushima’s meltdown, the ever-rising costs of licensing and constructing an operational reactor, and the increasing availability of more affordable renewable energy sources. Yet, the clever nuclear establishment has finagled a way to assure its preservation despite all common sense. Against this well-connected, highly-subsidized industry, the forces of truth, environmental justice, science, ethics, and ecological sustainability have a bigger challenge than ever to confront. This year’s vast giveaways and unabashed promotion of nuclear power have been the culmination of its proponents’ effective campaign on Capitol Hill.

How did they get away with it? As the nuclear power industry was facing an existential threat, its lobby machine and a few extremely wealthy backers found a new way to present itself, this time in environmentally friendly, sustainable wrapping paper.

Let’s look at the most recent wave of welfare. In 2016 reactors started getting bailed out in the billions of dollars at the state level after the industry newly labelled itself as “green.” Then in 2021 the federal government stepped in with the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), followed by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), both of which were touted as major climate bills. Nuclear Information and Resource Service analyzed the bills and revealed the quantity of funding dedicated to the promotion of nuclear energy. The IIJA provided a whopping $11 billion for nuclear. The IRA went fiscally berserk and lavished the industry with a $134 billion handout.

In March 2024, the perpetrators of radioactive violence were gifted once again with the reauthorization of the Price-Anderson Act. This allows the nuclear industry to continue to freely produce the most toxic and dangerous catastrophes known to humankind without the burden of covering the cost of hundreds of billions of dollars per accident.

In June the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) expired after 34 years of providing necessary compensation for certain groups of people affected by radiation exposure. Extending Price-Anderson and ending RECA gave the industry a green light to continue poisoning air, water, and the food chain knowing there will be no consequences to the polluters and no compensation for the survivors.

Just when the industry thought it couldn’t get any better, they hit a grand slam with the passage of the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act in July. While the implications of this sweeping bill are yet to be tested, Congress is forcing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to rewrite its mission statement to include promoting nuclear power in addition to its current goal of protecting the health and safety of the public and the environment. The bill’s backers hope it further degrades NRC authority by fast-tracking reactor licensing and small modular nuclear reactor development and weakening safety and security oversight.

As nightmares of Fukushima have now faded, the nuclear industry’s dreams may come true: extending licenses of decrepit nuclear reactors to 80 years, reviving closed reactors, and starting up new reactors. If so, it will mean more uranium mining, more destruction of land, more radioactive transport, more radioactive releases and accidents along the entire fuel chain, more high-level radioactive waste, more money in the pockets of the already-rich, more energy consumption, and less renewable energy.

Which way will it go: common sense protection of the Earth and its inhabitants or a bottomless tax-payer charity for private industry with no questions asked? The answers remain partly with a new administration — eager to promote fossil fuels but in favor of all things nuclear and very inclined to deregulate — and partly with the resilience of our anti-nuclear movement.

⸺ NRC, July 2024; Beyond Nuclear, Mar. 2024; NIRS “Summary of New Federal Incentives for Nuclear Energy,” 2022

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

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Targets Site for Deep Geological Repository

Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) announced November 28 that it had chosen the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation and the Township of Ignace in northwest Ontario as the future site for Canada’s Deep Geological Repository (DGR) for the abandonment of all of Canada’s high-level radioactive waste reactor fuel.

The site is north of Lake Superior, 90 miles northeast of Minnesota’s Voyageurs National Park and 150 miles north of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.

The NWMO’s public announcement does not mention that the “not-for-profit” NWMO is wholly owned by the three radioactive waste-producing utilities in Canada. These NWMO owners profit indirectly from Canada’s willingness to take possession and accept liability for the deadly, long-lived industrial waste material that was profitably produced by private corporations for decades.

The small town of Ignace (population 1,200) has given its consent for NWMO to build a DGR at the Revell Lake area. However, the Indigenous community of Wabigoon First Nation (population 800) has only agreed to study the proposal, announcing on November 18, “The yes vote does not signify approval of the project; rather, it demonstrates the Nation’s willingness to enter the next phase of in-depth environmental and technical assessments to determine safety and site suitability.”
Approval was neither sought from nor given by any of the communities along the 1,615-mile transportation corridor that would be used to ship the reactor fuel from New Brunswick, Quebec, and Southern Ontario over public roads, for half a century or more.

While Laurie Swami, NWMO President and CEO said in the announcement, “This project will solve an environmental issue.” The same press release says that the project has a “175-year timeline.”

The NWMO’s announcement claims, “There is international scientific consensus that a deep geological repository is the safest way to manage used nuclear fuel over the long term.” However, the watchdog group We the Nuclear-Free North (www.wethenuclearfreenorth.ca) reports, “The nuclear industry likes to portray the use of deep geological repositories as an accepted practice, asserting there is an ‘international consensus’ about their use. But that ‘consensus’ reflects agreement among proponents, not the public or independent experts. In fact, there is a list of technical and scientific uncertainties.” (See: https://nonuclear.se/files/rock-solid-a-scientific-review.pdf)

⸺ Thanks to Gordon Edwards, President of the Canadian Coalition for Nuclear Responsibility, and Brennain Lloyd with Northwatch and We The Nuclear Free North, for reporting.

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

January 15, 2025 by Nukewatch Leave a Comment

Hurricane Helene Floods Duke Reactor in Florida, Two Reactors in Georgia Powered Down

The Florida Department of Environmental Protection reported that 12-foot storm surge from Hurricane Helene inundated the shuttered Duke Energy Corporation’s Crystal River nuclear reactor. The reactor, which shut down in 2013, began accelerated decommissioning in 2020 in partnership with NorthStar Group Services and Orano USA.

“The whole site was flooded, including buildings, sumps, and lift stations. Industrial Wastewater Pond #5 was observed overflowing to the ground due to the surge,” according to a report filed one day after Helene made landfall.

“We are still in the process of obtaining access and assessing the damage, but due to the nature of this event we anticipate difficulty with estimating the total discharge amount of wastewater, and impacts are unknown at this time,” the report said. Despite this, Duke Energy assured the public in its statement that “all radioactive material has been … permanently packaged in shielded containers impervious to the effects of extreme weather.”

Edwin Lyman, a nuclear specialist with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in an email quoted by Bloomberg News, “There is probably still quite a bit of low-level radioactive waste awaiting shipment, and it’s likely the site’s wastewater has low levels of radioactive contamination.” Newsweek reported that the site was also flooded by Hurricane Idalia in 2023. Highly radioactive waste fuel is projected to stay on site until 2037.

Reuters reported that Helene also caused Southern Company to power down a nuclear reactor at its Edwin I. Hatch facility in Georgia, and to reduce power at its second Hatch reactor.

⸺ Bloomberg News, Sept. 28; Reuters, Sept. 27, 2024

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

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • …
  • 69
  • 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