Friday, 31 August 2012

Nuclear Weapons-- Prevention of Kansas Citys Future Financial Involvement in Nuclear Weapons Components Facilities


  • 8-30-2012
Press Release : Kansas City Peace Planters    August 30, 2012
Contacts:
Rachel M. MacNair, Ph.D., Petition Coordinator, 816.753.2057
Henry M. Stoever, Attorney-at-Law, 913.375.0045           

Web page: foolish-investment.com

Initiative: Prevention of the City’s Future Financial Involvement in Nuclear Weapons Components Facilities
The City of Kansas City, Missouri ("the City") shall not enter into, facilitate, nor give permission for any future contracts whereby it will be directly financially involved in any facilities that produce or procure components for, assemble, or refurbish nuclear weapons (except for outside infrastructure improvements customarily provided by cities and governmental services ordinarily provided to citizens). The City is also barred in the future from funding or subsidizing such a facility through taxes, bonds, loans, tax credits, credit, or any other financial scheme or mechanism. The definition of such a facility does not include providers of goods and services which were not produced for the purpose of nuclear weapons components production but which may be purchased by such a facility as a consumer.

At this afternoon’s legislative session, the Kansas City Missouri City Council voted to place the citizen’s initiative (wording below) on the ballot for April 2, 2013.
They did first add an amendment to clarify that they were voting for it because they legally had to according to the Charter, even though they disapproved of it. Since this was adding a detail which was true, and which may have made them more likely to place it on the ballot, this did not strike us as a problem. This amendment will not be on the ballot, but only the ordinance wording as below.

The reason for the April 2 date instead of November 6 is that the deadline for November passed on August 28. .......
  
Prevention of the City’s Future Financial Involvement in Nuclear Weapons Components Facilities
.
The City of Kansas City, Missouri ("the City") shall not enter into, facilitate, nor give permission for any future contracts whereby it will be directly financially involved in any facilities that produce or procure components for, assemble, or refurbish nuclear weapons (except for outside infrastructure improvements customarily provided by cities and governmental services ordinarily provided to citizens). The City is also barred in the future from funding or subsidizing such a facility through taxes, bonds, loans, tax credits, credit, or any other financial scheme or mechanism. The definition of such a facility does not include providers of goods and services which were not produced for the purpose of nuclear weapons components production but which may be purchased by such a facility as a consumer.

(original http://www.nuclearfreeplanet.org/news/2012/08/30/prevention-of-kansas-citys-future-financial-involvement-in-nuclear-weapons-components-facilities.html)

Thursday, 30 August 2012

Palisades Nuclear Plant Returned To Service

(Photo: mandj98 via Flickr.com)
http://michiganmessenger.com/wp-content/uploads
/2009/03/mimsg_fermi2nuclearplant-bw-mandj98fli
ckr-300x200.jpg
VAN BUREN COUNTY
The Palisades nuclear plant in southwestern Michigan returned to service Thursday following a shutdown that began Aug. 12 because of a minor steam leak.
The plant in Covert Township will be brought up to full power over several days, spokesman Mark Savage said. It has received more attention since February, when the Nuclear Regulatory Commission labeled it one of the nation's four worst-performing nuclear plants.
The increased scrutiny followed performance and equipment failures. One lapse was an electrical fault caused by plant workers that shut down the reactor and half of the control room indicators and triggered safety systems that actual conditions did not justify. In another instance, a water pump failed.
Anti-nuclear activists have called for closing the plant. But the NRC told nearby residents this year that there was no reason to fear for their safety.  (original...http://www.freep.com/article/20120831/NEWS05/308310095/Nuclear-plant-returning-to-full-power?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|s
----------------------------------------------------------

Fermi 3 opposition takes legal action to block new nuclear reactor

A coalition of environmental groups is asking federal regulators to put the brakes on the proposed expansion of the Fermi nuclear power plant in Monroe County on the grounds that it is unnecessary and poses threats to the environment and human health.
Beyond Nuclear, Citizens for Alternatives to Chemical Contamination, Citizens Environment Alliance of Southwestern Ontario, Don’t Waste Michigan and the Sierra Club, are all representing locals who live within 50 miles of Fermi and therefore have legal standing to intervene in the reactor permitting process.
According to Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Scott Burnell, the Atomic.(Keep reading..... http://michiganmessenger.com/14545/fermi-3-opposition-takes-legal-action-to-block-new-nuclear-reactor  ----------------------------------------------------------

Feds: No danger from Michigan Palisades water tank leak

Fed regulators say water tank leak at Palisades nuclear plant poses no health or safety risk 

http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/Feds-No-danger-from-Michigan-Palisades-water-tank-leak/-/1719418/15581550/-/sw5200z/-/index.html

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

WWMT Newschannel 3 :: News - Top Stories - Mich. reminds people near Palisades about pills
Friday, July 20 2012, 09:26 AM EDT
Mich. reminds people near Palisades about pills
COVERT TOWNSHIP, Mich. (AP) - Michigan health officials are reminding people who live, work or visit within 10 miles of Palisades nuclear plant in southwestern Michigan to have potassium iodide pills on hand.
   
The Michigan Department of Community Health makes the pills available for free to people near the plant and the state's other nuclear power plants.
   
The pills may help prevent illnesses associated with radioactive iodine if an accident were to occur. MLive.com reports the department issued the reminder this week.
   
New Orleans-based Energy Corp. owns the plant in Van Buren County's Covert Township. Palisades has been designated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission as one of the nation's four worst-performing nuclear plants, and it's come under increased public and federal scrutiny recently.
   
Entergy says it's working to improve the plant's safety culture.http://www.wwmt.com/shared/newsroom/top-stories/stories/wwmt_vid_3098.shtml?wap=0

 

Hello World! “OCCUPY FUKUSHIMA” “It’s homicide, isn’t it?…” Do YOU Remember THIS article and that WE are the Media now?!!

REMEMBER WHEN this article first made the rounds in facebookland?

“OCCUPY FUKUSHIMA”   
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/10/29/occupy-fukushima/      READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE, AND SHARE IT AGAIN….THINGS ARE WORSE, NOT BETTER, AND WILL GET EVEN WORSE………

There is no happy ending to this nuclear disaster….for ANYBODY.

How did YOU use it?

How do you continue to use it?

How many friends and neighbors did YOU share it with? (and did you tell them to tell their friends & neighbors?)

How many new GROUPS have YOU joined, created, strengthened etc. since initial publication?

If YOUR group got listed here, in this GLOBAL PUBLICATION, what did YOU do with the media opportunity?
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
WHOSE JOB IT IS??? 
This is a story about four people named Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody.   


Posted by Mochizuki on August 30th, 2012 ·

Japanese government is being cautious about the possible radiation effect on DNA.
On 8/30/2012, Hosono, the minister of environment commented they were going to start genomic analysis for Fukushima people.
Hosono stated to the press, he was going to start genomic analysis for the possible health problem in future though it may not reassure Fukushima people promptly.
It’s planned to start as of next year.The purpose is to analyze the radiation effect on human DNA.
They also plan to invest 6.1 billion yen on Fukushima medical university for the new facility of perinatal and pediatric medical care.
Related article..Thyroid test to be conducted out of Fukushima, “Gov can no longer ignore it.”
Source   http://fukushima-diary.com/2012/08/jp-gov-will-start-genomic-analysis-for-fukushima-people/#.UD_BRGD-VYs.facebook


Arctic sea ice shrinks to lowest extent ever recorded


Record is widely seen by scientists as strong signal of long-term climate warming


Email
John Vidal, environment editior
guardian.co.uk, Monday 27 August 2012 18.18 BST

The Arctic sea ice has hit its lowest extent ever recorded, according to the US-based National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, and Norwegian, Danish and other government monitoring organisations.

With possibly two weeks' further melt likely before the ice reaches its minimum extent and starts to refreeze ahead of the winter, satellites showed it had shrunk to 4.1m sq km (1.6m sq miles) on Sunday. The previous record of 4.3m sq km was set in 2007. The Guardian reported earlier this month that such a record low was likely to be hit imminently.

NSIDC scientist Walt Meier said: "This is an indication that the Arctic sea ice cover is fundamentally changing."

"The previous record, set in 2007, occurred because of near perfect summer weather for melting ice. Apart from one big storm in early August, weather patterns this year were unremarkable. The ice is so thin and weak now, it doesn't matter how the winds blow," said the NSIDC director, Mark Serreze.

The record is widely seen by scientists at the NSIDC and elsewhere as a strong signal of long-term climate warming.

"The Arctic used to be dominated by multiyear ice, or ice that stayed around for several years," Meier said. "Now it's becoming more of a seasonal ice cover and large areas are now prone to melting out in summer," said Serreze.

"These figures are not the result of some freak of nature but the effects of man-made global warming caused by our reliance on dirty fossil fuels," said John Sauven, the Greenpeace UK director.

"These preliminary figures provide irrefutable evidence that greenhouse gas emissions leading to global warming are damaging one of the planet's critical environments, one that helps maintain the stability of the global climate for every citizen of the world," said Sauven.

Arctic sea ice follows an annual cycle of melting through the warm summer months and refreezing in the winter. It has shown a dramatic overall decline over the past 30 years.

"Record-breaking ice minimums are becoming the new normal," says Clive Tesar of WWF's global Arctic programme. "We're breaking records on a regular basis as the sea ice continues its decline."

According to many scientists, the sea ice plays a critical role in regulating climate, acting as a giant mirror that reflects much of the sun's energy, helping to cool the Earth.

The formation of the sea ice produces dense saltwater, which sinks, helping drive the deep ocean currents. Without the ice, many scientists fear this balance could be upset, potentially causing major climatic changes.
(keep reading.....http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/aug/27/arctic-sea-ice-shrinks-lowest-extent?intcmp=239

The day the world went mad


As record sea ice melt scarcely makes the news while the third runway grabs headlines, is there a form of reactive denial at work?

Yesterday was August 28th 2012. Remember that date. It marks the day when the world went raving mad.

Three things of note happened. The first is that a record Arctic ice melt had just been announced by the scientists studying the region. The 2012 figure has not only beaten the previous record, established in 2007. It has beaten it three weeks before the sea ice is likely to reach its minimum extent. It reveals that global climate breakdown is proceeding more rapidly than most climate scientists expected. But you could be forgiven for missing it, as it scarcely made the news at all.

Instead, in the UK, the headlines concentrated on the call by Tim Yeo, chair of the parliamentary energy and climate change committee, for a third runway at Heathrow. This sparked a lively debate in and beyond the media about where Britain's new runways and airports should be built. The question of whether they should be built scarcely arose. Just as rare was any connection between the shocking news from the Arctic and this determination to increase our emissions of greenhouse gases.

I wonder whether we could be seeing a form of reactive denial at work: people proving to themselves that there cannot be a problem if they can continue to discuss the issues in these term..(read more..... http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/aug/27/arctic-sea-ice-shrinks-lowest-extent?intcmp=239)

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Record is widely seen by scientists as strong signal of long-term climate warming


Email
John Vidal, environment editior
guardian.co.uk, Monday 27 August 2012 18.18 BST

The Arctic sea ice has hit its lowest extent ever recorded, according to the US-based National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), the Japanese Aerospace Exploration Agency, and Norwegian, Danish and other government monitoring organisations.

With possibly two weeks' further melt likely before the ice reaches its minimum extent and starts to refreeze ahead of the winter, satellites showed it had shrunk to 4.1m sq km (1.6m sq miles) on Sunday. The previous record of 4.3m sq km was set in 2007. The Guardian reported earlier this month that such a record low was likely to be hit imminently.

NSIDC scientist Walt Meier said: "This is an indication that the Arctic sea ice cover is fundamentally changing."

"The previous record, set in 2007, occurred because of near perfect summer weather for melting ice. Apart from one big storm in early August, weather patterns this year were unremarkable. The ice is so thin and weak now, it doesn't matter how the winds blow," said the NSIDC director, Mark Serreze.

The record is widely seen by scientists at the NSIDC and elsewhere as a strong signal of long-term climate warming.

"The Arctic used to be dominated by multiyear ice, or ice that stayed around for several years," Meier said. "Now it's becoming more of a seasonal ice cover and large areas are now prone to melting out in summer," said Serreze.

"These figures are not the result of some freak of nature but the effects of man-made global warming caused by our reliance on dirty fossil fuels," said John Sauven, the Greenpeace UK director.

"These preliminary figures provide irrefutable evidence that greenhouse gas emissions leading to global warming are damaging one of the planet's critical environments, one that helps maintain the stability of the global climate for every citizen of the world," said Sauven.

Arctic sea ice follows an annual cycle of melting through the warm summer months and refreezing in the winter. It has shown a dramatic overall decline over the past 30 years.

(keep reading.....http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/aug/27/arctic-sea-ice-shrinks-lowest-extent?intcmp=239)

Wednesday, 29 August 2012

Nuclear Waste - Time to open up about pros and cons of DGR


By Phil McNichol
Dr. Gordon Edwards spoke at Dumpstock about the recent deep geological repository  discussion. He was to provide a different perspective than that of NMWO.
Dr. Gordon Edwards spoke at Dumpstock about the recent deep geological repository discussion. He was to provide a different perspective than that of NMWO.
There’s a good chance a community in Bruce County on or near the Lake Huron shoreline will be picked as the host site for the long-term underground storage of Canada’s growing stockpile of highly radioactive and dangerous “used” nuclear fuel.

Most (80%) of the 2.3 million bundles of used fuel currently in storage under water or in specially built dry containers are at three nuclear plants in Ontario, on the shores of Lake Huron (Bruce Nuclear) and Lake Ontario (Pickering and Darlington). By the time the proposed Deep Geological Repository (DGR) is ready that number could be as high as 7.2 million bundles. The Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) has estimated a DGR big enough to store that amount of used nuclear fuel would cost $24.5 billion in today’s money.

Yet, the Southampton Curling Club, with enough chairs set up for 600 or 700 people, was only half full for last Saturday’s “No Nuke Dump” town hall event, organized by the Save Our Saugeen Shores (SOS) citizens’ group.

A few local reporters were there, but none from the big city or national media. Just one member of Saugeen Shores’ municipal council, Taun Frosst, was there. The absence of area provincial and federal politicians was noted. Most obvious was the empty chair reserved for the “NWMO.” The organization had been invited to participate in a panel discussion, but didn’t send anyone.

Five of the 19 communities in Canada that have formally notified the NWMO of their interest in being chosen as the “willing” host site for its proposed Deep Geological Repository (DGR) are in southern Bruce County, near the Bruce nuclear plant.

The keynote presenter at the SOS event was Dr. Gordon Edwards, a recognized Canadian and international expert on nuclear safety for many years.

His power-point presentation was indeed powerful and certainly informative, even for an old hand who’s been following this issue, and nuclear safety in general for years. The questions and concerns he raised should have been heard by anyone with an interest in the DGR proposal, and nuclear energy in general, for that matter.

And that means not just everybody in this part of southern Ontario, but everybody in Canada, and even the world, Cheryl Grace told me right after the SOS event ended. “It’s a world issue,” said the SOS founding member and spokesperson, while trying to put the best face on a disappointing turn-out and especially the lack of media coverage.

Edwards started with the global perspective. He called last year’s earthquake/tsunami/nuclear disaster in Japan a “wake-up call” for the nuclear industry. “We have to change our attitude toward nuclear power,” he said. “Anything can happen. We have to really be prepared for the unexpected.”

But even more to the point, especially for this area, “turns out it was the nuclear waste inside the (four Fukushima) reactors that exploded,” he said. “The damage was due solely to the nuclear waste inside.”
First the main power was knocked out, and then the tsunami drowned out the back-up electrical generators. As a result, the pumps that are supposed to keep water circulating around the stored used nuclear fuel to keep it cool stopped working. The fuel overheated catastrophically. Containment walls melted, hydrogen gas levels rose and the reactor buildings exploded, releasing dangerous levels of radioactive products like Strontium 90 and Cesium into the environment.

Once inside the human body each radioactive particle emits potentially deadly radiation as it continues its prolonged disintegration, Edwards explained. He illustrated the point with a microscopic photograph of such a particle shooting out straight lines of radiation into the surrounding tissue. “They’re just like projectiles that crash into cells and do damage.”

Edwards said it’s hugely misleading to call used nuclear fuel “spent” as it sometimes is; it’s even too benign to call it “used.” It’s “many times more radioactive” than new fuel bundles before they’re put into reactors and subjected to the atom-splitting process, or “fission,” that unleashes huge amounts of energy, and radioactivity.

“That’s what they’re talking about finding a home for,” he said.

Used nuclear fuel buried in deep-rock caverns will continue to produce dangerous levels of radiation and heat in the form of “thermal pulses” with the potential to crack the rock for thousands of years, he said.
“If the Egyptian pyramids had been nuclear waste repositories we’d all be dead,” Edwards said. “They’ve all been looted.”

The NWMO says its Adaptive Phased Management plan for the locating and developing the proposed DGR
“involves realistic, manageable phases — each marked by explicit decision points with continuing participation by interested Canadians.  It is flexible, allowing for go, no-go decisions at each stage to take answer session with the advantage of new knowledge or changing societal priorities.”

But Edwards said the science to justify the proposed DGR is still too incomplete to proceed. “There are too many unanswered questions.”

He said there’s no point in packaging and transporting such dangerous material and burying it underground, and possibly having to re-package and transport it again if problems develop. “All the packaging and repackaging adds to the problem.

“Let’s frankly admit we don’t know how to deal with this.”

Later in a question and answer session Edwards called the NWMO’s current plan implementation, still in the early stages of finding a willing host community for the DGR site, “a deeply flawed process.” He said it appears to be politically motivated to show Canada has solved the used nuclear fuel storage problem when it actually hasn’t. “That’s why we need an unbiased organization.”

Edwards noted the Seaborn Panel in the late 1990s recommended the Canadian government quickly set up an organization to study all the options for the long-term storage of used nuclear fuel. Its first recommendation was that such an organization should be “arm’s length,” free of any conflict of interest involving the utilities that own and operate Canada’s nuclear plants.

But the board of directors of the NWMO, set up in 2002 by the former Liberal government of Jean Chretien, is made up of representatives of the utilities, with OPG in the majority position. “That’s not what was intended,” Edwards said.
Sure enough, OPG appears to have had a major influence on the direction NWMO study and planning has taken.
Before the NWMO was created it was widely thought the Canadian Shield, with its hard and very old igneous rock, was the most likely location for the safe, deep-rock burial of Canada’s used nuclear fuel. But the NWMO’s plan, approved by the Conservative government, leaves the door open for any “suitable” rock formation, including sedimentary.

The NWMO began looking at the possibility of locating such a facility in sedimentary rock formations, like those underlying southwestern Ontario, after OPG brought a detailed report of a study on the subject to it for consideration. The study was done by geologist Martin Mazurek at the University of Bern for OPG. It specifically mentions the Bruce Megablock, the area of limestone bedrock underlying much of Grey-Bruce, as suitable for development of a DGR for nuclear waste.

OPG was already planning development of a DGR for what it calls low and intermediate-level nuclear waste in the vicinity of its Western Waste Management Facility at the Bruce nuclear site.

Shortly after the NWMO got the OPG/Mazurek report it shut down a facility in northern Manitoba where 15 years of research had gone into studying the suitability of the Canadian Shield for a DGR. By 2006 sedimentary rock formations were the NWMO’s focus.

Edwards said it’s “astounding” the NWMO is now thinking about putting the DGR beside Lake Huron.
OPG is currently seeking final approval from the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) for its low/intermediate DGR which it hopes to begin work on next year.

The NWMO is working closely with OPG on that project, including the effort to get final regulatory approval.

Municipalities in the vicinity of Bruce nuclear, including Saugeen Shores, have signed an agreement with OPG to use their “best efforts” to support its DGR or risk losing millions of dollars worth of annual compensation payments.

The NWMO, with the OPG and its obsession with message-control in the driver’s seat, has so far shown no interest in a wide-open public discussion of the pros and cons of putting a deep-rock storage dump for highly radioactive used nuclear fuel beside one of the Great Lakes.

“There’s something fishy going on here,” Edwards said at one point during last Saturday’s SOS event.
I couldn’t agree more. I’ve been smelling it for a long time.

Phil McNichol appears Saturdays.  (Original Lucknow Sentinel  )

Chinese Translation:

Excellent statement by Gordon Edwards on Canada's nuclear waste problem, and "spent" fuel: "...it’s hugely misleading to call used nuclear fuel “spent” as it sometimes is; it’s even too benign to call it “used.” It’s “many times more radioactive”  than new fuel bundles before they’re put into reactors and subjected to the atom-splitting process, or “fission,” that unleashes huge amounts of energy, and radioactivity.
戈登 · 愛德華茲對加拿大的核廢物問題和稱為"廢"燃料:"... ...,是非常誤導稱呼使用後的核燃料為"消耗 "(spent),  ;甚至太良性的叫它"使用"。  它比之前他們放入反應爐的新燃料束產生" 更多更多倍的放射性",這是因為在原子分裂的過程中或"裂變"所施展的大量的能量和放射性。

“That’s what they’re talking about finding a home for,” he said.
" 那就是他們說找個家的東西" 他說。

Used nuclear fuel buried in deep-rock caverns will continue to produce dangerous levels of radiation and heat in the form of “thermal pulses” with the potential to crack the rock for thousands of years, he said.
使用後的核燃料被埋在深層岩石洞室將會繼續產生輻射和熱"熱脈衝", 會造成岩石崩裂, 危險ˊ之高將歷時數千年 ,他說。

“If the Egyptian pyramids had been nuclear waste repositories we’d all be dead,” Edwards said. “They’ve all been looted.”
"如果埃及的金字塔 是核廢物處置庫,我們早就死光了,"愛德華茲說。"他們已經全部被掠奪。"
 - 海倫凱帝克博士

主文
在安大略省的社區上或附近的休倫湖海岸線將被拾起的主機網站的長期地下儲存的加拿大越來越庫存的高放射性和危險的“使用”核燃料機會很大的。 大多數(80%)在安大略省的3個核電廠的230萬束在水中或在專門修建的乾燥容器中使用過的燃料,目前在存儲,(布魯斯核)休倫湖和安大略湖(Pickering和達林頓)的海岸上。

建議深地質處置庫(DGR)已經準備好時,這一數字可能高達720萬束。核廢物的管理組織(NWMO)已估計一個DGR大存儲,量使用過的核燃料將花費在現今的錢$ 245億元。 然而,在南安普敦冰壺俱樂部,有足夠的椅子為600或700人成立,是唯一的上週六的“無核武器轉儲”市政廳事件的保存我們的Saugeen的海岸(SOS)的公民團體,只有組織的一半。

有 一些地方的記者在那裡,但沒有從大的城市或國家的媒體來的記者。Saugeen海岸市議會裡的一員Taun Frosst在那裡。省和聯邦的政客完全沒有注意到。最明顯的空椅子為“NWMO保留。”該組織已被邀請參加了小組討論,但沒有派任何人來。

在加拿大的19個社區中選擇作為主要地點已有5個已正式通知NWMO他們的興趣,其建議的深地質處置庫(DGR)在布魯斯郡南部,布魯斯核電廠附近 。

的主旨演講在SOS事件是戈登博士愛德華茲認可的加拿大和國際核專家多年的安全。 他的力量的投影的確是強大的和肯定的信息,即使是老手,誰一直在關注這一問題,並在多年的核安全。任何人有興趣在DGR的建議,和一般的核能應該已經聽到他所提出的問題和關注,對於這個問題, 這意味著不只是每個人在安大略省南部的這部分,但每個人都在加拿大,甚至全世界。

SOS事件一結束後, 桂斯謝麗爾 告訴我說:“這是一個世界問題,”SOS創始成員和代言人,在令人失望的開端同時努力朝向最好  ,尤其是缺乏媒體的報導。

 愛德華茲開始用全球的角度來看。他稱去年在日本的的地震/海嘯/核災難為“敲響了核工業的警鐘”。“我們必須改變我們的核電態度,”他說。“任何事情都有可能發生。我們必須準備意想不到的。“ 但更重要的是,尤其是對於這方面,“原來,這是核廢料(4福島縣)反應堆發生爆炸,”他說。“損害完全是因為裡面的核廢料。” 首先,主電源被淘汰,然後在海嘯淹沒了後備發電機。其結果是,應該保持水圍繞所存儲的使用過的核燃料循環,以保持它冷卻泵停止工作。燃料過熱的災難性。容器壁熔化,氫氣水平上升,反應堆廠房爆炸,釋放出危險的放射性產品,如鍶90和銫到環境中, 一旦進入人體的放射性粒子放射出可能致命的輻射,因為它繼續其長期的解體,愛德華茲解釋。

他說明了這一點,這樣的粒子拍攝出直線的輻射到周圍組織的顯微鏡照片。“它們就像是核彈崩潰進入細胞,並造成傷害。” 愛德華茲說,稱呼使用後的核能燃料為“消耗”是嚴重的誤導性作為 有時 甚至良性稱它“使用。”這和之前新的燃料包相比是含有“許多倍的放射性“,他們投入反應堆的原子分裂過程中,或”裂變“,釋放大量的能量,以及放射性物質。 “這是他們在談論什麼找到一個家, “他說。 埋在深岩洞的使用過的核燃料將繼續產生危險水平的輻射和熱量的潛力,破解岩石千百年來的“熱脈衝”的形式,“如果埃及的金字塔 是核廢物處置庫,我們早就死光了,"愛德華茲說。

NWMO 對OPG 和主消息控制的狂熱, 到目前為止未顯示出對放置高放射性核廢料在深岩層儲藏庫將對大湖區產生的利弊做個公民討論。

 " 事有玄機", 愛德華茲在上周六SOS會議中說 "我已經懷疑有詐很久了"

Fukushima - Local Children Unwitting (and Unwilling) Radioactive Guinea Pigs

Pacific Free Press
by John C.K. Daly l Oil Price.com
     Seventeen months after the earthquake and tsunami that destroyed the Tokyo Electric Power Company’s six–reactor complex at its Fukushima Daiichi, discussions continue about the possible effects of the radiation “dusting” the prefecture’s inhabitants received, and their consequences.

Far outside most media coverage, 2012 is shaping up to be the media battleground between the massed proponents of the ongoing ‘safety’ of nuclear power, as opposed to a motley coalition of environmentalists, renegade nuclear scientists and anti-nuclear opponents, largely bereft of media contact.

The 11 March 2011 earthquake and tsunami double punch that effectively destroyed Tokyo Electric Power Company’s power plant complex has effectively become the newest “ground zero” in the debate over nuclear power. Advocates pro and con debate the implications of everything from the amount of damage to the release of radionuclides to the long term health effects on the Japanese population.

The stakes are high – quite aside from Japan’s multi-billion dollar investment in civilian nuclear energy, dating back to the 1960s, there remains the issues of Fukushima’s radioactive debris polluting neighbours.

All sides in the debate are playing for massive stakes, with the Japanese government and the nuclear industry broadly indicating the issue is under control. Accordingly, every issue from the amount of radiation released to the long term health consequences of the Fukushima disaster are subject to acrimonious debate.

That said, there is an involuntary irradiated “test” Fukushima group monitored since March 2011 displaying disturbing health abnormalities that may ultimately decide the debate, should the global media report it, forcing governments to debate its consequences.

The children of Fukushima

The issue of nuclear radiation on human health cites besides Fukushima the August 1945 U.S nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the April 1986 explosion of the Chernobyl reactor complex in Ukraine, but in reality, there are no comparisons to evaluate Fukushima.

The 1945 U.S. Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were weapon “air bursts,” raising no nuclear debris from the ground. Furthermore, the Japanese medical establishment had no experience with the problem and when U.S. military forces arrived over a month later, information about the human cost of the bombings was censored for decades. Showing pictures of destroyed buildings, okay – showing victims with kimono patterns seared into their skin, no.

As for Chernobyl, the 26 April 1986 catastrophe represented a major black eye for Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev’s “glasnost” policy. Thanks to the heroic efforts of Soviet emergency workers, the Chernobyl smoking nuclear roman candle burned for nine days before being extinguished.

In contrast, Fukushima Daiichi has been like a suppurating wound, leaching radionuclides into the environment since March 2011, and since then furious arguments have swirled about not only how much radiation Fukushima released, but the potential long term health consequences.
But both disputes ultimately devolve into pure speculation.
Only two months ago TEPCO stated that the Fukushima debacle may have released twice as much radioactivity than Japan’s government initially estimated.

Accordingly, how can anyone estimate long term health effects when actual exposure rates are unknown?

That said, scientists do have a well defined test group – the population of Fukushima Prefecture surrounding the stricken NPP.

And the sixth report of the Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey, which was released in April, revealed after the survey examined 38,114 local children that 36 percent of Fukushima children have abnormal thyroid growths.

The Fukushima Prefecture Health Management Survey revealed that 13,460 children, or 35.3 percent, had thyroid cysts or nodules up to 0.197 inches long growing on their thyroids and 0.5 percent of the children had growths larger than 0.197 inches.

So, why might this be significant? According to the American Thyroid Association (ATA), thyroid problems from nuclear events occur when radioactive iodine is leaked into the atmosphere and thyroid cells that absorb too much of this radioactive iodine may become cancerous, with children being particularly susceptible.

Furthermore, the ATA reports noted that thyroid cancer "seems to be the only cancer whose incidence rises after a radioactive iodine release" and that that babies and children are at highest risk. The estimated lifetime radiation doses among the children are still low, but they do exist, the Japan’s National Institute of Radiological Sciences stated at a10 July international symposium in Chiba Prefecture.

Who cares about such an arcane issue? Well, the National Institute of Radiological Sciences conclusions refute the government’s assertion that Japanese children in effect received zero thyroid radiation doses from Fukushima.

Re Fukushima children’s health, the news just gets better. Two months ago Tokyo Shinbum reported that 60 percent of Fukushima children under 12 have tested positive for diabetes, according to Dr. Miura, the director of Iwase’s general hospital.
Why, possibly?
Because the Strontium-90 radioactive isotope quickly decays to become Yttrium-90, which can concentrate in the pancreas, causing pancreatic cancer or diabetes. That said, while noting the abnormality, Dr. Miura declined to link it to Fukushima radiation exposure.
So, where does the Japanese government go from here?

It might do worse than to follow the advice of Australian pediatrician Dr. Helen Caldicott, who after observing that "It is extremely rare to find cysts and thyroid nodules in children," added that "you would not expect abnormalities to appear so early - within the first year or so - therefore one can assume that they must have received a high dose of (radiation)" before concluding, "it is impossible to know, from what (Japanese officials) are saying, what these lesions are."

Calidcott also noted that Japanese officials are not sharing the ultrasound results with foremost experts of thyroid nodules in children before noting, "The data should be made available. And they should be consulting with international experts ASAP. And the lesions on the ultrasounds should all be biopsied and they're not being biopsied. And if they're not being biopsied then that's ultimate medical irresponsibility. Because if some of these children have cancer and they're not treated they're going to die."

Nothing to see here, move along – unless your child is part of that 35.3 percentile.

Still, something for Westerners to think about the next time their government promotes building a nuclear power plant nearby - or if you live close to an existing one.
 By. John C.K. Daly of Oilprice.com 
(original  Pacific Free Press)

The UPAs Love for Nuclear Suppliers: A Liability on the Indian People


The parliament’s Committee’s report on the nuclear liability rules, along with the CAG’s report on nuclear safety in India and the Madras High Court’s observations on Koodankulam are the voices of  our collective conscience against leaving Indian people’s safety and future hostage to nuclear predators. It will be suicidal to ignore them.
The Indian nuclear establishment’s best attempts at circumventing the democratically mandated legislation to safeguard people’s interests in the event of a nuclear accident have met yet another roadblock: the Indian parliament’s Committee on Subordinate Legislation.
In its report on the draft Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage (CLND) Rules 2011 to support the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010, the Committee headed by Mr. P Karunakaran, a senior member of the Indian parliament, has criticised the Department of Atomic Energy(DAE) for diluting and contradicting the spirit of the Act itself.
Liability Rules: Delayed and Still Incomplete?
The Committee has openly criticised the DAE for inordinate delay in framing the CLND Rules, reflecting its “lackadaisical” approach. The Rules should have been framed along with the drafting of the Act itself in 2010. Although the DAE in its clarification has cited “legal consultations”, the Rules are far from complete even after 13 months! The DAE is yet to frame rules under Section 11 and 12 of the Act dealing with the terms and conditions of service of the Claims Commissioner. The parliament’s Committee has said that it is ‘distressed’ by such delay.
The actual reasons for this delay in drafting the CLND Rules have been the essentially political designs to out-manoeuvre  the Indian parliament in order  to provide the international nuclear suppliers a liability-free playing field.
To achieve a seat on the elusive high table of nuclear weapon states, the Indian elite has been using the safety, lives and livelihoods of Indian common people as a bargaining chip in the international negotiations. The Manmohan Singh’s government under UPA-I promised to buy 10,000 MWs each from the US and French nuclear corporations on the eve of  NSG clearance in September 2008. This was done without any independent assessment of  nuclear power’s role and desirability in catering to India’s energy needs. Since then, the Indian nuclear story has its proverbial horse behind the cart.
So, after the global nuclear cartels are allowed entry into India, the need for having a liability legislation was felt. Definitely not for safeguarding the Indian people’s lives and safety. After all, there was no nuclear liability mechanism for last 60 years and the Supreme Court’s “polluter pays” directive and other laws of the land would have come to people’s rescue, notwithstanding the nuclear establishment’s attempts to callously play down any such accident, as it has done in the past with many minor and major accidents. Understandably, the Civil Liability for Nuclear Damage Act 2010 had to be brought actually to define and limit the supplier’s liability so that they don’t get caught into any Bhopal-like criminal legal case haunting Dow Chemicals even today.
As an aside, the Nuclear Safety Regulatory Authority (NSRA) Bill, currently under discussion in the parliament, was claimed to be the government’s attempt to beef up nuclear safety in India post-Fukushima. But even this piece of legislation is actually going to be instrumental in enabling foreign nuclear suppliers’ entry in India. The existing AERB, although very limited in its scope and entirely dependent on the DAE for its staff and resources, starts regulating the nuclear power plants at the inception itself – at the planning and site selection stage and is supposed to licenses any design only after thoroughly examining it all. The proposed NSRA’s mandate prevents it from looking into the preliminary decision to import a particular reactor for a given site. It will start looking into safety aspects of the projects once the decision to import is taken by the government. Apart from other dangerous loopholes in the proposed NSRA Bill, this is definitely something which can be envisaged only when the policy makers take the nuclear imports such as Areva’s reactors in Jaitapur as non-negotiable.
There is a distinctive pattern of keeping the foreign corporates’ interests first at every important juncture over the last 7 years.
And reasons for this are not difficult to understand. The delay in framing the CLND Rules bears that unmissable stamp: as recently as June this year, the US Assistant Secretary of State Robert Blakementioned some “unresolved” concerns over the nuclear liability. Even the French and the RussianAmbassadors and officials in New Delhi have gone public in demanding a liability-free business.
If even after 13 months, some parts of the Rule have remained incomplete, the DAE should clearly be accused of trying to buy more time probably to accommodate the foreign suppliers’ interests further.
Indemnifying the Nuclear SuppliersLiability as “Reimbursement”
The Committee has exposed the government’s attempts to further dilute the suppliers’ liability, albeit already limited under the section 17 (A) of the CLND Act 2010.  The same dichotomy was underlined by Mr. Soli Sorabjee, India’s former Attorney general, when he asserted that the CLND Rules are ultra virus of the Act and are thus invalid.The Rules put further limitation of suppliers’ liability in 2 ways:
by bringing in the “product liability period”, maximum of 5 years, when the supplier can be held liable. The DAE’s lame defense before the Committee betray its true loyalty: within 5 years, the skilled operator and the regulator would find any major latent and patent defects, hence no need to tie the supplier!
by further capping the liability to the value of the contract or the liability of the operator, whichever is less. So, even in a clear case of accident ascribed to the supplier’s fault, it will be liable to pay only the price of its equipment even if the total damage runs into crores. “A criterion such as the value of the contract has no rational nexus to the object sought to be achieved and hence there is no rational basis for curtailing supplier’s liability” – was Justice Soli Sorabjee’s remark on this dichotomy.
The operator’s maximum liability in case of a commercial reactor is kept 1500 crores while for spent fuel pool and research reactors it is capped at Rs. 300 and 100 crores. So if a catastrophic accident in a spent fuel pool causes damage worth billions of dollars, the supplier will still be liable for a maximum of Rs. 300 crores!
However, the DAE’s clarification to the Committee reduced liability into “reimbursement”! In its note, the DAE has said, “It is a kind of reimbursement. You can’t reimburse an amount larger than what you have paid”
The clarification on capping liability ends with an emphatic”that’s all.”
The DAE must acknowledge that liability is not a largesse. It is also a mechanism to ensure that the companies adhere to best safety practices.  The IAEA itself has underlined these roles of nuclear liability mechanisms- to protect the public, the environment and to enhance nuclear safety. After Fukushima, the need to revisit and revise the nuclear liability regulations has been widely recognised. As Mark Cooper noted in his article in Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists,
When governments socialize risk — shift it from the private sector to the public — they create what economists call moral hazard. This is the hazard that the private actor, who no longer bears the risk, will do more risky things than he would have done, if he had borne the full liability of his actions. It is a moral problem; the irresponsible actions of one person or entity harm an innocent bystander. It is also an economic problem because it induces firms to engage in uneconomic activities.
The parliament’s Committee has frowned over the fact that there is no clarity over the definition of “legal representative” of the potential victims. It has also highlighted the unnecessary reference to other legislations such as the Atomic Energy Act 1962 and the Atomic Energy (Radiation Protection) Rules of 2004.  In its clarification, the DAE has said that a reference to these legislations would mean that “any change therein will Automatically be reflected in the Rules”. Isn’t it then like keeping back-doors open for introducing further changes silently? Evidently, the Committee has found the DAE’s clarification “not convincing”.
Notification of Nuclear Accident: Time and Scope for Playing Down
The Committee has expressed concern regarding the period of 15 days for notification of a nuclear accident as it is “on the higher side”. It has emphasised that such accidents should be handled at “war footing”. The DAE has cited “complex technical issues, analysis of data, deliberations by experts, decisions by the AERB” as well as a complete analysis of the radiation distribution in the area and pathological determination of the radiation inhaled by people.
It is noteworthy that the analysis of radiation distribution in Fukushima is still in process and it will take years and probably decades to determine the total radiation inhaled by people and absorbed by the immediate atmosphere, water and land. Evidently, all this cannot be done in 15 days. In fact to notify an accident, one doesn’t need to do all this. The operator would know the extent of damage done to the reactor and the amount of radiation released by its plant. Based on which, it can notify about the accident and later even revise the notified scale of accident as happened in Fukushima. But in India, the DAE would take 15 days for notification and make it subject to pathological assessment of radiation inhaled which obviously can be manipulated and downplayed.
Responding to Dr. Kalam’s article supporting Koodankulam Nuclear Power Project, M V Ramana rightly argued:
“If there was really a “0% chance” of an accident, why would nuclear vendors work so hard to indemnify themselves?…….. When nuclear companies are unwilling to stake their financial health on these claims of “100% safety,” how can the government ask local residents to risk their lives?”
Despite the shadow-boxing on the liability for still-under-consideration Reactors 3 & 4 in Koodankulam, our Prime Minister has avoided any mention of liability for the Reactors 1 and 2 which his government is bent on commissioning despite massive protests and objections raised by independent experts and members of GoI’s own National Expert Committee like Ms. Aruna Roy.
The parliament’s Committee’s report on the nuclear liability rules, along with the CAG’s report on nuclear safety in India and the Madras High Court’s observations on Koodankulam are the voices of  our collective conscience against leaving Indian people’s safety and future hostage to nuclear predators. It will be suicidal to ignore them.
Other useful resources:

The Opal File – The Round Table – A 20 Year History In Brief – 10 August 2012


by Author Unknown
submitted by Denise Prichard
from DavidIcke.net Website

What is the Opal File? Most of our guests ’down under’ probably know about the Opal File. The Opal File was produced in Australia. It presents a string of evidences in support of the continuing conspiracies by the global elite. Many of our subscribers from around the world need to be aware - just how ’global’ or world-wide this conspiracy is. It’s not just a conspiracy against or by the the U.S. or the U.K.!


A 20 Year History In Brief

"Fear them not, therefore;
for there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed;
and hidden, that shall not be known.
What I tell you in darkness, that speak in light;
and what ye hear in the ear, that proclaim upon the housetops."
Matthew

18th May, 1967:
Texas oil billionaire Nelson Bunker Hunt, using a sophisticated satellite technique to detect global deposits, discovers a huge oil source south of New Zealand in the Great South Basin.

10th June, 1967:
Hunt and New Zealand Finance Minister reach an agreement: Hunt will receive sole drilling rights and Muldoon will receive a $US100,000 non-repayable loan from Hunt’s Placid Oil Co.

8th September, 1967:
Placid Oil granted drilling rights to the Great South Basin.

10th May, 1968:
Hawaiian meeting between Onassis and top lieutenants William Colby and Gerald Parsky to discuss establishment of a new front company in Australia - Australasian and Pacific Holdings Limited - to be managed by Michael Hand. Using Onassis-Rockefeller banks, Chase Manhattan and Shroders, Travelodge Management Ltd sets up another front to link the operations to the US.

Onassis crowned head of the Mafia; Colby (head of CIA covert operations in S.E. Asia) ran the Onassis heroin operations in the Golden Triangle (Laos, Burma, Thailand) with 200 Green Beret mercenaries - i.e. the Phoenix Programme.

Gerald Parsky deputy to ex-CIA/FBI Robert Maheu in the Howard Hughes organization, took orders from Onassis and was made responsible for laundering skim money from the Onassis casino operations in Las Vegas and the Bahamas.

Mid-July, 1968:
Placid Oil Co and the Seven Sisters (major oil companies) begin Great South Basin oil exploration - Hunt finances 45.5% of exploration costs, Gulf Oil 14.5%, Shell (US) 10%, B.P. Oil 10%, Standard Oil California 10%, Mobil 6.5% and Arco 6.5%.

12th October, 1968:
Hunt and Seven Sisters announce confirmation of new oil source comparable to the Alaskan North Slope - gas reserves estimated at 150 times larger than the Kapuni Field.

Early 1969:
Mafia consolidates its banking operations; David Rockefeller becomes Chairman of Chase Manhattan; Wriston at Citibank and Michele Sindona captures the Vatican Bank, Partnership Pacific launched by Bank of America, Bank of Tokyo and Bank of New South Wales.

24th February, 1969:
Onassis calls Council meeting in Washington to discuss strategy to monopolize the Great South Basin discovery. Council members included Nelson Rockefeller and John McCloy, who managed the Seven Sisters, and David Rockefeller, who managed the Mafia’s banking operations.

McCloy outlines the plan to capture all oil and mineral resources in Australia and N.Z.

10th March, 1969:
Parsky and Colby use Australasian and Pacific Holdings to set up a ’front’ company in Australia. Using old banks - Mellon Bank and Pittsburgh National Bank - they buy control of near-bankrupt Industrial Equity Ltd (I.E.L.) managed by New Zealander Ron Brierly. ’Australasian and Pacific Holdings’ ’consultant’ Bob Seldon helps Michael Hand set up the new organization. Seldon took orders from Mellon and Pittsburgh National Banks, while Hand was directly responsible to Gerald Parsky and William Colby. Ron Brierly would take orders from Hand.

24th July, 1969:
New board established for I.E.L. includes Hand, Seldon, Ron Brierly, plus two Brierly associates - Frank Nugan and Bob Jones. Both are appointed consultants to Australasian and Pacific Holdings Ltd.

Jones will help Brierly launder funds into real estate (Brierly/Jones Investments) while Seldon and Nugan will channel funds into oil and mineral resources through I.E.L.

October 1969:
Chase Manhattan begins new operation in Australia with National Bank Australasia and A.C. Goods Associates - Chase-NBA.

J.C. Fletcher appointed chairman of Seven Sisters’ company - British Petroleum (N.Z.).
(Keep reading...
http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_sociopol_opalfile.htm

Tuesday, 28 August 2012

Tampa Authorities Empty Jail In Anticipation Of Mass Arrests At GOP Convention

Tampa Authorities Empty Jail In Anticipation Of Mass Arrests At GOP Convention: pThousands of Republicans from around the country will descend upon Tampa, Florida next week for the Republican National Convention, and if recent history is any guide, so too will hundreds of protesters. To prepare, Hillsborough County Sheriff David Gee has ordered the Orient Road Jail, a 1,700 bed prison in Tampa, emptied, relocating some inmates [...]/p

I am a doctor, being victimized for telling radiation truth: Dr.V.Pugazhenthi from Kalpakkam

Dr. V. Pugazhenthi is acclaimed for his rigorous and credible studies on health impact of radiation around Kalpakkam nuclear site. He is one of the members of people’s expert committee in the ongoing anti-nuclear movement in Koodankulam. We have been publishing Dr. Pugazhenthi’s articles, jointly written with Dr. V T Padmanabhan and Dr. R. Ramesh on DiaNuke.org in last few months. It is unfortunate that he is being victimized to this extent. From the past, we know about the story of Dr. B K Subbarao’s victimization at the hands of the nuclear establishment.
Here are some of Dr. Pugazhenthi’s recent articles:
And here is an article from Outlook Magazine about Dr. Pugazhenthii’s selfless medical work among the rural poor.

Dr. V.Pugazhenthi MBBS,
1/187, Mudhaliyar Street,
Sadras, Kanchipuram District,
Tamil Nadu, India
603 102
Ph: 8870578769

To: All the Democratically Concerned People of Tamil Nadu, India and the World

Respected Friend, Madam/Sir:

Subject: False Charges filed on me to curtail my professional and democratic duty to warn the people I am serving about the ill effects of the nuclear radiation around the Kalpakkam Nuclear Power Plant
I am a medical doctor practicing in Sadras village near the Kalpakkam Nuclear Power Plant in Tamil Nadu, India, since 1989. I was a gold medalist during my undergraduate years at Madurai Medical College, but chose not to pursue higher education because I felt I should work among the poor masses in the villages. I chose Sadras as the place for my practice since I had many friends at Kalpakkam, who happened to work in the Kalpaakam Nuclear Power Plant.

From 1989 to 2000, my professional work was focused principally on serving the Dalit and the Fisher folks. My interests were in Primary Heath Care and I had devised many innovative cost efficient methods to treat the most prevalent diseases among the masses. I had written profusely about these methods in many journals and have published books highlighting these. My work was recognised by the local and national media and they had interviewed me many a times with regard to this. The noted magazine “Outlook” conducting a survey on the incidence of Polydactyly ( people with more than 5 fingers/toes in each hand or foot) in this region. This was early 2001 and was related to the public hearing process for the Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor scheduled to be held on 27 July 2001.

The survey showed a very high incidence and this made me plunge into studying the effects of radiation among the local populace. I have not looked back ever since and have conducted many a health surveys since. I have remained a whistle blower who have ardently asked the Nuclear Power Plant authorities to follow nationally and internationally accepted safety codes. Appreciating my work, I have been asked to become the technical and medical consultant to a group of concerned local citizens on the ill effects of radiation. This group called “ Anuk Kathirveechu Paathukaappukkaana Makkal Iyakkam” (Peoples Movement for Protection Against Nuclear Radiation)” is to conduct a protest on 12 December 2011 against the breech of nationally and internationally laid safety codes by the authorities of the Kalpakkam Nuclear Power Plant. Their contention has valid scientific proofs. People belonging to this movement are working for the past one month to make this protest a successful one.

It is in this background, I received a telephone call at 6 PM on 1 December 2011 from the Puthupattinam police station. The police inspector Mr.Siva Kumar, told me that the Puthupattinam Panchayat Chief had filed a petition against me and whether I could go to the Police Station for an enquiry in this regard. I was busy in my clinic and told him once my works were over I would meet him at the station. I went to the police station at 7.30 PM. I was asked to wait. The police inspector then telephoned the panchayat chief. He arrived at the station by 8..10 PM. The enquiry lasted for about 30 minutes. I left the place by 8.50 PM.
The police inspector narrated the charges filed against me by Mr.Kaliaperumal :
  1. Mr.Kaliyaperumal, the Panchayat Chief of Puthupattinam village has filed a petition against me and one Mr.Nehru. He is charging us both that we had threatened to murder him if he does not cooperate with out anti nuclear work.
  2. The alleged threat was sent to him in the form of an anonymous letter, which he said was penned by Mr.Nehru under my direction.
  3. An SMS to his mobile phone from an unknown mobile phone number had also threatened to murder him. This is also alleged to have been sent by someone close to me under my directions.
  4. Many SMS notes keep coming to his mobile phone from unknown numbers abusing him. He believes that all these SMS notes are sent to him under my directions.
I gave the following replies to the police inspector with respect to the above charges:

I do not involve myself in any anti nuclear work. I am only discharging my professional service by telling everyone about the findings culled from my two decade long work and critical studies related to health and nuclear radiation in general and Kalpakkam Nuclear Power Plant in particular. I am not an organiser of any anti nuclear movement but am and will remain a technical and medical consultant of such movements. Recently I have been asked by People’s Movement Against Nuclear Energy that spearheads people’s agitation against Kudankulam Nuclear Power Project, to share my professional experiences as one of its panel of experts. Like this, I have shared my experiences and studies with people all around the country.
I have met the Panchayat Chief Mr.Kaliaperumal on various occasions. I have even congratulated him on the day he had won the local election. I have talked to him cordially always. I have explained to him as I explain to everyone I meet, about the issue of nuclear radiation around. As I work as a medical professional and not as a political organiser, where does the question of me threatening him to join my work? My work is to treat, study and share. Where does his charge fit in?

However, as you are asking me a particular question, I state here that I have not at any moment threatened Mr.Kaliaperumal to join an anti nuclear agitation.

I have nothing to do with the anonymous letter that threatens Mr.Kaliaperumal with death. I know Mr.Nehru, but under no circumstance he is working with me. The charge that Mr.Nehru wrote this letter under my influence is a concocted lie.

I have nothing to do with any of the SMS notes that are alleged to be received by Mr.Kaliaperumal.
As I finished with my reply, the police inspector said he has not filed the First Information Report. However, he asked me to give in writing that “I would be present at the police station whenever I am summoned by him for further enquiries. If I am not present for such enquiries, then I agree that the charges kept on me is true.” I told him what that would mean to my daily professional schedule. I explained to him how the poor patients who come to see me from miles afar would deeply suffer. However, he insisted that I should give this in writing. At last, as a good samaritan,I gave him in writing that whenever he summons me I would be present at the police station.

Once I gave him this written note, he told me in a very harsh warning voice: “ Doctor! Do you know that I can book you under national Security Act for whatever the works that you are doing? By the way…. Have you ever heard anything about “police encounter”? So, be careful.”

I remain baffled. However, there’s no way my professional and democratic work can be suspended by any force whatever.

I strongly suspect the hand of the authorities of the Kalpakkam Nuclear Power Plant behinnd all this. They are particularly disturbed by the facts I have recently published with respect to the safety codes being practiced by them. They are, I suspect, disturbed by a news that I am about to publish a book that is to question the various safety issues related with the power plant. I think, by intimidating me with such police threats, they believe that they will be able to make the Kalpakkam environment radiologically safe.
I have been open always for discussion with the authorities of the power plant. I have met them many a times and have always shared all the data available with me. However, they have, over the past 10 years have not tried to answer any of my questions in the earnest. Now, I suspect, that they have decided to opt other means to silence my work.

It is in this regard, I request all of you – my democratically minded brethren – to pray and voice for me and my family members.

Sincerely Yours

Dr.V.Pugazhenthi MBBS
Puthupattinam,
Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu, India
2 December 2011

Clean energy from an inexhaustible source

25 november 2010
 
Energy transmission by laser – the solution for the Earth’s future energy supply?
 
The issue of global warming is of concern to all. Reduction of energy consumption is an important factor but still it will not bring the additional energy needed for developing populations without increasing the effect of global warming.

The root cause of this warming effect is that, in the conversion to electricity, all of our current energy sources release around 50% in heat into the atmosphere plus some greenhouse gases and other unwanted particulates. The quest to find a long-term solution to providing power which does not increase the heat and gas rejected in the atmosphere is becoming urgent.

laser
The solution Astrium has come up with is to extract energy from the solar flux available around the Earth and convert it in space into a beam of infra-red energy pointed to a highly efficient receiver. The key difference here is that the conversion losses from solar flux to infra-red beam (25% multispectral solar cell efficiency and 50% efficiency in conversion to laser) would be dissipated in space and therefore would not affect the Earth.

In terms of impact on the environment, therefore, only the conversion from light to electricity (the best for narrow band photovoltaics is currently around 50%, but could be up to 80% in the future) needs be considered.

What about the safety of high energy beams?

We have selected energy transmission at an infra-red wavelength of 1.5 microns because at that wavelength we can transmit up to 1,000 W/m² to ground safely. This is comparable with normal sunlight at 1,300 W/m² with no dust or atmospheric losses. A human passing through such a beam would receive as much heat as if he were exposed directly to the sun, but without the secondary effects of UV contained in the sunlight. Any other object or animal would also be able to safely cross the 1.5 micron beam. 

Original http://www.astrium.eads.net/en/articles/clean-energy-from-an-inexhaustible-source.html

Protect Lake Ontario: Stop Darlington


Protect Lake Ontario: Stop Darlington

Greenpeace Canada Blogpost by Shawn-Patrick Stensil - August 24, 2012 
Protect Lake Ontario
Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) Darlington nuclear station has been killing millions of fish every year, in contravention of federal environmental law. You can help stop this.
At public hearings in 2011, a representative from the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) admitted that OPG had been operating Darlington in contravention of the Fisheries Act for years.  So while aware that Darlington was flouting the law, DFO did nothing to enforce the Fisheries Act, which is intended to protect fish and fish habitat.
This has caused a great deal of harm to Lake Ontario.
Nuclear stations need massive amounts of water to prevent the reactor core from overheating and causing an accident.

This is why people visualize large cooling towers emitting steam when they think of nuclear stations.  Cooling towers are installed to protect aquatic ecosystems.  They allow cooling water to be recycled instead of continually sucked from a lake.
The Darlington nuclear station is a dirty exception.  Darlington takes its cooling water directly from Lake Ontario and in so doing sucks up and kills millions of fish annually.  The station’s hot, chemical laden waste water is then dumped back into Lake Ontario.
OPG designed Darlington without cooling towers in the 1970s to save money.  OPG chose profits over environmental protection. 
This wouldn’t be accepted today by our southern neighbours. And it shouldn’t be OK in Canada.
In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of California are telling power plant operators to phase-out once-through cooling systems (the system used at Darlington).
And reactors on the American side of Lake Ontario, such as Nine Mile Point, already have cooling towers. 
Here in Canada, however, the federal government seems more interested in protecting OPG’s profits than the environment.
OPG has asked the federal government for permission to keep running the four Darlington reactors until 2055.
OPG says it will cost anywhere between $8 and 14 billion dollars to keep Darlington running.  This is almost commensurate with the original cost of building Darlington. (Darlington ended up costing $14 billion in 1992. That’s about $20 billion today, when you take inflation into account.)
The high cost says it all. OPG is effectively rebuilding Darlington. You would think then that the federal government would require OPG to upgrade the station to meet modern environmental standards, especially since Darlington has been operating in contravention of the Fisheries Act for years.   But no.
I reviewed the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) and DFO’s environmental review of the proposed life-extension of Darlington last month.  It doesn’t even consider options for eliminating or limiting Darlington’s impact on Lake Ontario.
Given there’s cost-effective options to protect Lake Ontario, this is appalling.
This is where you can help.
This Fall the federal government will ask whether you think Darlington should be allowed to operate until 2055.
Please tell the CNSC and DFO that their mission is not to protect OPG’s profits, but to protect people and the environment.  Their job is to protect Lake Ontario not OPG.
Sign-up here and we’ll make sure you get the information and tools you need.
And for more information on Darlington’s impact on Lake Ontario, please read this backgrounder.
Talk to you soon.
Shawn-Patrick Stensil, Greenpeace (original......

Enough radiation to cause a ” global life extinction event” sits precariously in a cracked pool. What can you do?






MAIN STORY< READ FIRST (takes 10 minutes). More high resolution photos courtesy of Air Photo Service Co Ltd. Japan here. This shows reactor 4, the roof  blown off not because of the tsunami, but because of an inherent flaw in the design of these GE mark 1 reactors (see post on this). Hydrogen gas collects and with no safety escape, it causes a massive explosion, resulting in the situation above; a fuel pool with no containment, but directly open to the environment, 100 feet in the air, the crane fallen into the pool, the building about to collapse, walls buckling, support columns sheared, unapproachable, unresolved,  & unreal. The US has 23 of these, and some are MUCH larger than Fukushima no. 4.

Continue reading →http://meltdowndanger.com/