US Army Corps Will Not Grant Dakota Access Easement – Now Will Everyone Go South to Protect the Sacred Black Hills-Pine Ridge Reservation from the Invisible Threat of Uranium Mining?

GOod News on the Dakota pipeline…Now WHat about the new rush for uranium mining in Dakota? There are already lots of abandoned uranium mines, meaning that drinking water is already compromised …and yet companies are quietly lining up the ducks for new even more dangerous in situ uranium mining which works a bit like fracking, Huge quantities of water and chemicals are used to push the uranium out of the ground. The mega media attention on the pipeline has been a force for good but in its narrow focus has masked another arguably much more dangerous industry. Pretty much what has happened with fracking and nuclear here in the UK??

Mining Awareness +

Mt. Rushmore, NPS gov
Mt. Rushmore, Black Hills, South Dakota
Tulsi Gabbard 4 hrs · Today we have shown the power of people’s voices standing together to protect our water. Water is life. We cannot live without it. While we celebrate today’s news, we cannot be complacent. We must continue to protect our water and preserve our land. #StandWithStandingRock#WaterIsLifehttps://www.facebook.com/VoteTulsi/?hc_ref=PAGES_TIMELINE&fref=nf

How about the invisible radioactive threat to land, air, and water from the proposed Dewey Burdock uranium mine in the area of the Sacred Black Hills and Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota? Not only the mining, but how about the invisible legal and illegal radioactive discharges from the Nuclear Industry that uranium feeds? And, the radioactive waste, some of which will be there for longer than humans have even existed? Will that be the next stop for everyone?If the toxic radiation emitted daily from every nuclear reactor and other…

View original post 1,570 more words

Pave Paradise Put Up A Nuclear Plant?

paveparadiseputupanuclearplant-sellafieldfootprint

If you look at a satellite map of Cumbria it is obvious to all but the most wilfully nuclear blind that Sellafield is the biggest single solid concrete mass.  This weeks Podium piece in the Westmorland Gazette written by John Woodcock MP for Furness  invokes the Jodi Mitchell song “Big Yellow Taxi.”  The famous “pave paradise” lyrics are spoken by John Woodcock to divert attention away from the growing concrete nuclear mass which he supports and to divert attention to the pylons.  What a brass neck – and the Westmorland Gazette are only too happy to hand him the brasso while ignoring the main event.  The Furness MP fails to mention that should Moorside be allowed to happen the most important role of the various transmission lines of pylons, would be their role in taking electricity TO the proposed Moorside nuclear reactors.

I’m not sure that Joni Mitchell will be too thrilled to be called upon as a diversion from what is being proposed at the end of the pylons.  Namely three reactors and associated sprawl that many including the Nuclear Free Local Authorities are saying have “significant and alarming problems …that could lead to catastrophic damage..”  Incredibly this has not been reported in the Westmorland Gazette and John Woodcock MP is certainly not going to draw attention to the growing horror at what would lie at the end of the pylons.

Nuclear Free Local Authorities Steering Committee Chair Councillor Ernie Galsworthy said:

I welcome this detailed report on the safety issues of the AP1000 reactor and hope the report will be carefully considered by the nuclear regulatory agencies. From reading this report it is clear to me that there are significant and alarming problems with this reactor design that could lead to catastrophic damage in the event of a serious accident. NFLA calls on the regulator to refuse design acceptance for the AP1000 as it currently stands. It is currently too big a risk for the people of Cumbria and for communities across both sides of the Irish Sea coast to go ahead with it.”

Report author Pete Roche said:

Experience gained by trying to build these reactors in the US and China on time and budget shows that they are no better than the disastrous French EPR reactor-type proposed for Hinkley Point and Sizewell. Yet the design attempts to make savings by reducing all sorts of safety-related equipment and relying on so-called natural processes. It’s about time that the ONR proved that it does have teeth after all and refused these reactors a license to be built in the UK.”

 john-woodcock-podium-westmorland-gazette-dec-1-2016

Joni Mitchell: Thousands join nuclear protest Print-ready version

by Beth Rosenfeld
Daily Collegian
May 9, 1979

An estimated 65,000 to 150,000 protesters, including Jerry Brown, Ralph Nader, Jane Fonda, Jackson Browne and Joni Mitchell-assembled in from of the nations’ Capitol Sunday to demonstrate against the government’s pro-nuclear policies.

Sponsored by the May 6 Coalition which represent more than 200 consumer, labor, environmental, minority, senior citizens’, women’s and peace organizations, it was the largest anti-nuclear rally ever held in the United States. Furthermore, it was organized in only three weeks.

Save

cumbriatwinnedwithfukushima

Moorside: Nuclear Free Local Authorities Endorse Damning Report

PRESS RELEASE FROM NUCLEAR FREE LOCAL AUTHORITIES

NFLA endorse report which outlines serious design concerns with the AP1000 reactor proposed for the Sellafield Moorside site

The Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA) have formally supported and endorsed an independent assessment of the Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactor that outlines a number of serious safety concerns.

The independent report was drafted by Pete Roche, the NFLA Scotland Policy Advisor and an independent consultant on nuclear policy. It was commissioned by the Cumbrian NGO Radiation Free Lakeland. With the author and group’s permission, it has been developed into a NFLA New Nuclear Monitor and the NFLA have formally submitted their support of the report to the Office of Nuclear Regulation (ONR). (1)

The AP1000 reactor design is currently going through an extensive ‘Generic Design Assessment’ (GDA) by the ONR. Yesterday, the ONR were reported as saying that the design still has a number of areas of concern and the GDA is unlikely to be concluded by the planned process end date of late March 2017. (2) The design is being taken up by Westinghouse’s owner Toshiba, who as part of the NuGen consortium with Engie, is proposing to build three new nuclear AP1000 reactors at the Sellafield Moorside site.

The key conclusions of this detailed report include:

The AP1000 advanced passive nuclear reactor design has a weaker containment, and fewer back-up safety systems, than current reactor designs.
Its so-called ‘advanced passive’ design makes the reactor particularly vulnerable to a very large release of radioactivity following an accident if there were just a small failure in the steel containment vessel, due to what is known as the chimney effect. (3)
A thorough review of the AP1000 design in the light of the Japanese accident at Fukushima has shown that the containment is dangerously close to exceeding the maximum post accident pressure that it could withstand. Several ways in which the AP1000 design could lose the ability to cool the reactors in an emergency have been identified, and Fukushima has shown that a containment breach is possible, and that arrangements for keeping the spent fuel ponds cool are inadequate.
The AP1000 reactor design is therefore not fit for purpose and so should be refused a Design Acceptance Confirmation (DAC) and Statement of Design Acceptability (SDA) by the Office for Nuclear Regulation and the Environment Agency.
NFLA call on the ONR and Environment Agency to carefully consider in full this independent report and continue to rigorously challenge Westinghouse over what appears to the NFLA to be critical safety failings. On the basis of this independent report, NFLA also agree that the AP1000 reactor design looks not fit for purpose and should not be approved by the nuclear regulatory agencies in March 2017.

Given the close proximity with which these proposed nuclear reactors will be to the existing Sellafield legacy site – parts of which are noted already as an ‘intolerable risk’ by the nuclear regulators – it is essential that close scrutiny of the technical issues with the AP1000 should take place.

NFLA Steering Committee Chair Councillor Ernie Galsworthy said:

I welcome this detailed report on the safety issues of the AP1000 reactor and hope the report will be carefully considered by the nuclear regulatory agencies. From reading this report it is clear to me that there are significant and alarming problems with this reactor design that could lead to catastrophic damage in the event of a serious accident. NFLA calls on the regulator to refuse design acceptance for the AP1000 as it currently stands. It is currently too big a risk for the people of Cumbria and for communities across both sides of the Irish Sea coast to go ahead with it.”

Report author Pete Roche said:

Experience gained by trying to build these reactors in the US and China on time and budget shows that they are no better than the disastrous French EPR reactor-type proposed for Hinkley Point and Sizewell. Yet the design attempts to make savings by reducing all sorts of safety-related equipment and relying on so-called natural processes. It’s about time that the ONR proved that it does have teeth after all and refused these reactors a license to be built in the UK.”

Ended

Notes for editors:

(1) New Nuclear Monitor 44, which profiles the report, is attached with this media release and can be found on the NFLA website http://www.nuclearpolicy.info

(2) World Nuclear News, 28th December 2016
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/RS-UK-regulators-may-move-GDA-target-date-for-AP1000-28111601.html

(3) For more information on the ‘chimney effect’ go to:
Independent 16th March 2015 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/nuclear-expert-arnie-gundersen-warns-of-chernobyl-on-steroids-risk-in-uk-from-proposed-cumbria-plant-10109930.html
Fairewinds 19th March 2015 http://www.fairewinds.org/demystify/fairewinds-nuke-truth-at-house-of-commons?rq=Chernobyl%20on%20Steroids

Did Nuclear Weapons tests damage our Ozone Layer?

Nuclear Power…trashing the climate and much more besides

Greens Against Nuclear Power

An interesting letter appeared in the Sheffield Star back in March 2015 arguing the possibly of the Ozone Layer being damaged by decades of Atmospheric Nuclear Bomb tests -until they were banned by an international treaty. They sort of claim you’d think we’d have heard debated for years already. The science sure adds up – something New Zealand based scientists Bill Hartley has researched in depth. 

Hartley believes “Starfish Prime”, a upper atmospheric nuclear test by the U/.S that is witnessed in 1962, is partly to blame for the ozone hole.

“The light show was something unearthly and huge. For fun some weeks before, I had read Revelations, so I was shocked to see the moon glowing red in the now pink rays of light expanding from the central ball of golden light.”

He connected the event with the hole in the ozone layer in the 1980s when he read Earth’s…

View original post 395 more words

One Day Left To Comment on Dangerous Reactors

There is one day left.  Tomorrow is the last day to comment on the dangerous reactors planned for Cumbria.  Thanks to ITV for the coverage (in which NuGen try to belittle the report) but on the whole the nuclear industry and our pronuclear government have done a fantastic job of keeping this “opportunity” for public comment as secret as they can.  Local press have done a pretty good job of keeping it quiet too…the Westmorland  Gazette hasn’t even bothered to report on it (countless reports on the pylons) and the national press – well….

So its up to You to Spread the Word to Save Cumbria.
Make a comment (ideally in your own words but feel free to use info here)

Tell the Office for Nuclear Regulation to Stop the Dangerous Moorside AP1000s, to REFUSE THE REACTOR DESIGN  by Wednesday, 30th of November:

Email.   New.Reactor-Build@onr.gov.uk

Conclusions of a summary technical report on the Westinghouse Toshiba AP 1000 design, written by Peter Roche on behalf of Radiation Free Lakeland:
“The AP1000 advanced passive nuclear reactor design has a weaker containment, and fewer back-up safety systems than current reactor designs.

Its so-called advanced passive design make the reactor particularly vulnerable to a very large release of radioactivity following an accident if there were just a small failure in the steel containment vessel, due to the chimney effect.

A thorough review of the AP1000 design in the light of the Japanese accident at Fukushima has shown that the containment is dangerously close to exceeding the maximum post accident pressure that it could withstand.

Several ways in which the AP1000 design could lose the ability to cool the reactors in an emergency have been identified, and Fukushima has shown that a containment breach is possible, and that arrangements for keeping the spent fuel ponds cool are inadequate.

The AP1000 reactor design is not fit for purpose and so should be refused a Design Acceptance Confirmation (DAC) and Statement of Design Acceptability (SDA) by the Office for Nuclear Regulation and the Environment Agency.”

The AP1000 Report by Peter Roche, Edinburgh Energy Consultancy: http://www.theecologist.org/_download/402328/ap1000-report.pdf ,

More info:

https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2016/11/27/moorside-toshiba-engie-ap1000-endangers-the-uk-and-europe-comment-deadline-looms-wednesday-30-november/

Moorside: Toshiba-Engie AP1000 Nuclear Power Station Endangers the UK and Europe – Comment Deadline Looms (Wednesday, 30 November)

Mining Awareness +

Make a comment by Wednesday, 30th of November: New.Reactor-Build@onr.gov.uk
See more: https://mariannewildart.wordpress.com/2016/11/21/cumbria-nuclear-plan-slammed-by-new-expert-report-only-9-days-to-comment-on-dangerous-reactor-design
Moorside Sheep looking toward Sellafield StreetviewMoorside Sheep looking toward Sellafield-Streetview.
Moorside is now estimated to have a physical footprint of over 500 acres:
The ‘biggest construction project in Europe’ is expanding from Nugen’s original 200 hectare site to 552 hectares of farmland reaching right up to two villages and an 11th Century church. But with compulsory purchase on the cards, there’s nothing locals can do except keep on fighting the entire deeply flawed project.“. http://www.theecologist.org/campaigning/2966465/moorside_cumbria_the_great_nuclear_land_grab.html (Or the locals may be intimidated into silence due to compensation fears related to compulsory purchase, i.e. expropriation).

NUGEN is a consortium of Japan’s Toshiba and France’s ENGIE – formerly called GDF-Suez.

While with UK BREXIT Moorside, sitting upon the Irish Sea, may no longer be in the EU, a nuclear accident would most likely impact Europe, including Ireland, based on the distances the radioactive…

View original post 126 more words

CUMBRIA NUCLEAR PLAN SLAMMED BY NEW EXPERT REPORT – only 9 days to comment on dangerous reactor design

cumbriatwinnedwithfukushima

Today a report slamming the new build plan has been handed into Cumbria County Council, The National Park Authority, Natural England, Friends of the Lake District.  The report will also be sent to the leaders of neighbouring European countries.

There is a CONsultation taking place on the AP1000 reactor design – we found out only by accident through social media – and this CONsultation ends on the 30th November (while all attention is focused deliberately on the pylons).

**Please use the information below to write in your own words to the Office for Nuclear Regulation.   Urge the Office for Nuclear Regulation to refuse a Design Acceptance Confirmation (DAC) and Statement of Design Acceptability (SDA) for the AP1000 reactors. 

PLEASE Make a comment in the next 9 days, email: New.Reactor-Build@onr.gov.uk

“BIGGEST NUCLEAR DEVELOPMENT IN EUROPE” SLAMMED BY NEW EXPERT REPORT

The new report describes the proposed Reactors in Cumbria as being:

  • Not fit for purpose
  • too great a risk to public health and safety
  • high, probability of Containment System failure
  • significant releases of radioactivity directly into the environment
  • post accident radiation doses to the public could be one hundred to one thousand times higher than those assumed by Westinghouse..

 Between the Lakeland Mountains and the Irish Sea lays the delightful village of Beckermet. This small West Lakeland village is holding its breath.   Not because of the proposed pylons across Cumbria, but because of what would be at the end of those pylons. Namely “the biggest nuclear development in Europe” just 700 metres from the village school.

A new report by Edinburgh Energy and Environment Consultancy and written by Pete Roche has been commissioned through crowd funding by campaign group Radiation Free Lakeland.

Former US Nuclear Regulator Arnie Gundersen has described the AP1000 reactor design as “Chernobyl on steroids One problem identified by Gundersen is that during an accident if there were just a small failure in the steel containment vessel of the AP1000 reactor, the radioactive gasses inside the reactor would leak directly into the environment, because the gasses would be sucked out the hole in the top of the AP1000 Shield Building in what is known as the chimney effect.

The Office for Nuclear Regulation’s “interim” approval for the AP1000 contains 51 unresolved “issues.” The new Generic Design Assessment process is being carried out in, what is described as, an ‘open and transparent manner, designed to facilitate the involvement of the public.’ Deadline for making a comment to the UK regulators on the AP1000 as part of the GDA process is 30th November 2016.

The Report Conclusions:

“The AP1000 advanced passive nuclear reactor design has a weaker containment, and fewer back-up safety systems than current reactor designs.

Its so-called advanced passive design make the reactor particularly vulnerable to a very large release of radioactivity following an accident if there were just a small failure in the steel containment vessel, due to the chimney effect.

A thorough review of the AP1000 design in the light of the Japanese accident at Fukushima has shown that the containment is dangerously close to exceeding the maximum post accident pressure that it could withstand. Several ways in which the AP1000 design could lose the ability to cool the reactors in an emergency have been identified, and Fukushima has shown that a containment breach is possible, and that arrangements for keeping the spent fuel ponds cool are inadequate.

The AP1000 reactor design is not fit for purpose and so should be refused a Design Acceptance Confirmation (DAC) and Statement of Design Acceptability (SDA) by the Office for Nuclear Regulation and the Environment Agency.”

QUOTES:

Clive Semmens nuclear engineer: “emergency core cooling systems don’t work nearly as well as you might expect”

Martyn Lowe of Close Capenhurst: “It is the difference between a belt and braces approach to safety systems, and what can only be refereed to as a hope and pray approach”

Irene Sanderson of North Cumbria CND: “Moorside has the unique combination of being: Too early – We have yet the problem of nuclear waste disposal and this is nowhere near solved; Too late – It won’t come on-line until after the global warming crisis has been resolved or has become unresolvable; Too new – There are years to go to iron out the problems with containment and other safety aspects; Too old – Nuclear energy is now just a stopgap until it can be replaced by safer renewable sources. Too costly or too cheap – How much should we pay to this company who created Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station Unit 3, still out of control and acknowledged as one of the greatest manmade disasters.”

Marianne Birkby of Radiation Free Lakeland: “Beckermet’s 1400 acres of greenfields and River Ehen floodplain near Sellafield should be a buffer zone, not a new nuclear sacrifice zone with untried untested reactors, this report exposes a special kind of insanity and it is called Moorside.”

FULL REPORT :ap1000-report

ARTICLE in THE ECOLOGIST: http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/commentators/2988356/ap1000_reactor_design_is_dangerous_and_not_fit_for_purpose.html

Crowdfunding

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/marianne-birkby

https://www.justgiving.com/crowdfunding/StopMoorside

Stop Moorside Petition

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-moorside-biggest-nuclear-development-in-europe

Save

Cancer patient compensated for Fukushima work to sue TEPCO

Is this what our Unions want for their workers? More of this?

Fukushima 311 Watchdogs

caklmm

Damage from an explosion remains at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant’s No. 4 reactor building in March 2013.

A 42-year-old man diagnosed with leukemia after working at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant plans to sue Tokyo Electric Power Co., saying the utility failed to take adequate precautions against radiation exposure.

He will also sue Kyushu Electric Power Co., operator of the Genkai nuclear plant in Saga Prefecture where he had also worked, in the lawsuit expected to be filed at the Tokyo District Court on Nov. 22.

The man, who is from Kita-Kyushu in Fukuoka Prefecture, will demand about 59 million yen ($541,000) in total compensation from the two utilities.

TEPCO and Kyushu Electric, as the managers of the facilities, are responsible for the health of workers there, but they failed to take adequate measures to protect them from radiation exposure,” said one of the lawyers…

View original post 180 more words

Calder Hall -Truth Hurts!

calder-hall

A photograph not shown on the ITV news bulletin – Calder Hall …. with hundreds of resting (and nesting) herring gulls.

The recent news item on Calder Hall was, in fact, parroted propaganda from a Sellafield press release .  Aimed at the hearts and souls of the Cumbrian public who are being relentlessly softened up for the nuclear “renaissance” including most significantly Moorside and the geological dumping of nuclear wastes.

Here is a letter of complaint to ITV –  please do write a letter of your own to btvnews@itv.com

Dear ITV

HALF WAY THERE ON DECOMMISSIONING CALDER HALL

Radiation Free Lakeland are a volunteer nuclear safety group in Cumbria. We have become used to the hubris of Sellafield’s statements over the decades but we were shocked to see ITV repeat Sellafield’s puff piece of propaganda on Calder Hall earlier this week.

Your item of the 15th November 2016 stated : “Calder Hall produced electricity and radio cobalt – used in the treatment of cancer, for 47 years before it closed in 2003. Now, workers have reached the halfway point in the defueling programme which began in 2011. They have to remove tens of thousand of fuel rods from the site’s reactors. It is scheduled for completion in 2019 and then it can be fully decommissioned and shut down.”

This ‘news’ item is wrong on every level. It is no secret that Calder Hall’s primary purpose was to produce plutonium for WMD. Electricity was (and is) a by product. To big up Sellafield’s impact on health as positive is cynical propaganda. Radio cobalt is being phased out by many hospitals because it is just too “dangerous requiring heavy shielding and high levels of security to protect. The unstable material is constantly decaying and cannot be turned off.”   Why didn’t ITV point out that Calder Hall’s legacy includes Sellafield’s own Compensation Scheme for Radiation Linked Diseases? This covers a wide variety of cancers and diseases of the central nervous system.   The Compensation Scheme applies only to nuclear workers and not those outside the fences on the receiving end of the emissions. A recent Freedom of Information Request is included below.

Calder Hall is a long long way off Halfway through Decommissioning. The nuclear wastes from Calder Hall need to be kept separate from the biosphere for tens of thousands of years. This has never been done….ever. “Decommissioning” will continue into eternity.

Sellafield has the press officers, the PR and the weight of a vested pronuclear government behind it. But a functioning democracy demands that the people of Cumbria deserve at least balanced reporting on this, the most extreme industry there is.

Yours sincerely,

Marianne Birkby

Radiation Free Lakeland

 

From: “CSRLD Executive Secretary (SL)” csrld.executive.secretary@sellafieldsites.com> Date: 14 October 2016 at 13:15:07 BST

To: ‘marianne Birkby’

Subject: RE: FOI Dear Ms Birkby, In response to your request the 29 claims (last year) were against the following eligible diseases:

Prostate

Cataracts

NHL

Bladder

Orbital

Melanoma

Colon

Breast

Kidney

Tonsil

Lung

Myeloma

Oesophageal

Thyroid

UnknownPrimary

Myxofibrosarcoma

Leiomyosarcoma

Merkel Cell Carcinoma

Further information on diseases covered by the Scheme can be found on the Schemes website in the Q&A and Reference material sections: http://www.csrld.org.uk/default.php Yours sincerely,

John Johnstone CSRLD Secretariat

 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

 

Radio Cobalt

Why use X-ray versus Gamma produced Ionizing Radiation?

Gamma ionizing radiation is produced by radioactive sources such as cobalt 60 or cesium 137 and is dangerous requiring heavy shielding and high levels of security to protect. The unstable material is constantly decaying and cannot be turned off. X-ray ionizing radiation is produced by a X-ray tube therefore it can be turned off when it is not being used and it requires much less shielding. At the end the of unit’s lifecycle, the unit does not have any radioactive source and therefore does not require the expensive disposal costs associated with radioactive sources that continue to degrade over hundreds of years.

http://www.radsource.com/technology-comparisons/

Save

Offshore Geological Disposal

This Article from Cumbria Trust misses a trick. . Geological “Disposal” of nuclear waste is impossible…it cannot be “disposed” of and to suggest otherwise is to give the industry a green light to continue polluting. The ship needs to have sailed on deep drilling and mining in Cumbria…the risk of earthquakes in the Sellafield area from such activity is just too risky.

Cumbria Trust

The last failed search process, Managing Radioactive Waste Safely (MRWS) restricted the search area to the volunteer boroughs and a 5km offshore strip for coastal areas. As we know, only Copeland and Allerdale volunteered and the process was vetoed by Cumbria County Council which recognised the overwhelming local opposition to the proposal amongst a long list of concerns.

A great deal is known about Cumbria’s geology from previous failed attempts, including the £400m Nirex spent before reaching the conclusion that the geology was so complex that they couldn’t even model groundwater flow between two boreholes just 200 metres apart. The Nirex Inquiry Inspector Chris McDonald concluded that the search process should move away from Cumbria to an area of simple geology, largely found in eastern and southern England. More recent attempts by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority to mislead the public by suggesting that Nirex could have found Cumbria to be…

View original post 808 more words