Mr.Big Meat McGee
All Star
Mental Note : Never eat fish or drink water from Cali.
The F(N)ukushima Thread .... and Related Nooklear Concerns
- Thread starter newworldafro
- Start date
Mental Note : Never eat fish or drink water from Cali.
Red Shield
Global Domination
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Apparently, not just your friendly neighborhood NWA is 
on this topic. According to Gallup, 54% are anti-nook now. For First Time, Majority in U.S. Oppose Nuclear Energy
on this topic. According to Gallup, 54% are anti-nook now. For First Time, Majority in U.S. Oppose Nuclear Energy
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
any other sources for this
I doubt any MSM outlet is going to report this, if that is what you looking for. Not saying believe me, but they have been discussing F(n)ukushima since the event. PLENTY of animal related stories here...http://enenews.com/
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Europe faces €253bn nuclear waste bill
Europe faces €253bn nuclear waste bill
Disposal and decommissioning of plants in EU’s 16 nuclear nations outstrips available funds by €120bn, European commission study reveals
Europe is facing a €253bn bill for nuclear waste management and plant decommissioning which outstrips available funds by €120bn,
according to a major stock-take of the industry by the European commission.
The sum breaks down into €123bn for the decommissioning of old reactors and €130bn for the management of spent fuel, radioactive waste and deep geological disposal processes.
Of the EU’s 16 nuclear nations, only the UK had enough money ring-fenced to cover the coming financial crunch, according to the Nuclear Illustrative Programme of the Commission (Pinc), which covers trends to 2050.
Greenpeace EU’s energy policy adviser Tara Connolly said: “The €120bn figure is a whopping shortfall but it’s not surprising given that there is still no workable solution for the nuclear waste problem.
With the huge resources needed to keep nuclear power alive, Europe could make a lot of progress towards a 100% renewable energy system instead.”
Some 90% of the continent’s nuclear plants are set to shut by 2050 – almost half within the next decade – and the paper sets out a daunting picture of the scale of the challenge facing nuclear power: up to €500bn will be needed to meet the cost of new plant builds and lifetime extensions, it says.
By 2050, a 47% increase in the cost of additional capacity is foreseen, combined with a 20% reduction in nuclear’s contribution to Europe’s electricity mix.
Mark Lynas, a pro-nuclear environmental campaigner said: “If that is the case, the EU will not meet its CO2 targets. It is simply not possible for the continent of Europe to run modern lifestyles in cities and industry using renewables. It really is a straightforward choice: either get over this anti-nuclear paranoia or throw the climate targets out of the window.”
The EU’s climate commissioner Miguel Arias Canete struck an upbeat note, arguing that the report showed that Europe had “learned the lessons” from the Fukushima disaster, with its first ever examination of the costs of the whole nuclear lifecycle, based on data provided by EU states.
He said: “Together, we should be able to identify ways to cooperate across Europe to ensure that knowledge about the safest use of nuclear power plants is shared, rather than done separately by each regulator, and that the management of radioactive waste is secured financially by member states until its final disposal.”
Under EU conventions, national governments are ultimately responsible for the disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste management.
But the Green party reacted angrily to what they saw as an EU exemption of private operators from bearing clean-up costs.
The Green MEP Claude Turmes said: “It is the nuclear operators who are liable to pay for the waste, not the taxpayer, so how can Canete put out a statement like this, openly flouting the ‘polluter pays’ principle?”
More broadly, anti-nuclear groups criticised what Turmes called a “deliberate manipulation downwards of costs” by EU governments.
At present, nuclear reactors make up 27% of Europe’s energy capacity and produce less carbon over their lifetime than fossil fuels such as gas, coal or oil. But no solution has yet been found for the long-term storage of radioactive waste.
The commission’s experts considered closed fuel recycling of plutonium and uranium in ‘fast breeder reactors’ so long-term and uncertain a prospect that they did not forecast possible scenarios for its becoming available this century.
That leaves Europe with an increasingly haggard fleet of large scale reactors, whose average age is over 30 years.
Mini-reactors have been touted as one potential alternative, securing £250m of funding from George Osborne as an innovative nuclear technology. The report paints a mixed picture of their prospects, welcoming their potential but noting that they will have higher relative unit costs, lower economies of scale and burdens from licensing requirements.
Europe faces €253bn nuclear waste bill
Disposal and decommissioning of plants in EU’s 16 nuclear nations outstrips available funds by €120bn, European commission study reveals
Europe is facing a €253bn bill for nuclear waste management and plant decommissioning which outstrips available funds by €120bn,
according to a major stock-take of the industry by the European commission. The sum breaks down into €123bn for the decommissioning of old reactors and €130bn for the management of spent fuel, radioactive waste and deep geological disposal processes.
Of the EU’s 16 nuclear nations, only the UK had enough money ring-fenced to cover the coming financial crunch, according to the Nuclear Illustrative Programme of the Commission (Pinc), which covers trends to 2050.
Greenpeace EU’s energy policy adviser Tara Connolly said: “The €120bn figure is a whopping shortfall but it’s not surprising given that there is still no workable solution for the nuclear waste problem.
With the huge resources needed to keep nuclear power alive, Europe could make a lot of progress towards a 100% renewable energy system instead.”Some 90% of the continent’s nuclear plants are set to shut by 2050 – almost half within the next decade – and the paper sets out a daunting picture of the scale of the challenge facing nuclear power: up to €500bn will be needed to meet the cost of new plant builds and lifetime extensions, it says.
By 2050, a 47% increase in the cost of additional capacity is foreseen, combined with a 20% reduction in nuclear’s contribution to Europe’s electricity mix.
Mark Lynas, a pro-nuclear environmental campaigner said: “If that is the case, the EU will not meet its CO2 targets. It is simply not possible for the continent of Europe to run modern lifestyles in cities and industry using renewables. It really is a straightforward choice: either get over this anti-nuclear paranoia or throw the climate targets out of the window.”
The EU’s climate commissioner Miguel Arias Canete struck an upbeat note, arguing that the report showed that Europe had “learned the lessons” from the Fukushima disaster, with its first ever examination of the costs of the whole nuclear lifecycle, based on data provided by EU states.
He said: “Together, we should be able to identify ways to cooperate across Europe to ensure that knowledge about the safest use of nuclear power plants is shared, rather than done separately by each regulator, and that the management of radioactive waste is secured financially by member states until its final disposal.”
Under EU conventions, national governments are ultimately responsible for the disposal of spent fuel and radioactive waste management.
But the Green party reacted angrily to what they saw as an EU exemption of private operators from bearing clean-up costs.
The Green MEP Claude Turmes said: “It is the nuclear operators who are liable to pay for the waste, not the taxpayer, so how can Canete put out a statement like this, openly flouting the ‘polluter pays’ principle?”
More broadly, anti-nuclear groups criticised what Turmes called a “deliberate manipulation downwards of costs” by EU governments.
At present, nuclear reactors make up 27% of Europe’s energy capacity and produce less carbon over their lifetime than fossil fuels such as gas, coal or oil. But no solution has yet been found for the long-term storage of radioactive waste.
The commission’s experts considered closed fuel recycling of plutonium and uranium in ‘fast breeder reactors’ so long-term and uncertain a prospect that they did not forecast possible scenarios for its becoming available this century.
That leaves Europe with an increasingly haggard fleet of large scale reactors, whose average age is over 30 years.
Mini-reactors have been touted as one potential alternative, securing £250m of funding from George Osborne as an innovative nuclear technology. The report paints a mixed picture of their prospects, welcoming their potential but noting that they will have higher relative unit costs, lower economies of scale and burdens from licensing requirements.
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
TV: EPA data reveals “sharp spike in radiation level” around US nuclear site — “It’s been reportedly leaking huge amounts of radioactive materials for more than 2 weeks” — Evacuations enacted… Almost 50 workers have sought medical attention… Symptoms include bleeding ulcers, burned lungs (VIDEOS)
Is This the 4th Recent Nuclear Disaster to Strike the U.S.?
Is This the 4th Recent Nuclear Disaster to Strike the U.S.?
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Happy 2017 KTL Brehs.
This Thread Is like Bad Boy Records: "Can't Stop, Won't Stop"
.....for a couple 100,000 up to millions of years depending on isotopes and shiit.....yet policy makers continue to tell its all good and safe technology. 
.
Well let's start off the year with that in mind...it's all good right??
RADICAL DRINKING WATER RADIATION RISE CONFIRMED IN EPA PLAN
EPA hid planned radiation exposure 1,000s of times Safe Drinking Water Act limits
EPA HID PLANNED RADIATION EXPOSURE 1,000S OF TIMES SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT LIMITS
Published: January 1, 2017
Washington, DC — In the last days of the Obama Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is about to dramatically increase allowable public exposure to radioactivity to levels thousands of times above the maximum limits of the Safe Drinking Water Act, according to documents the agency surrendered in a federal lawsuit brought by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). These radical rollbacks cover the “intermediate period” following a radiation release and could last for up to several years. This plan is in its final stage of approval.
The documents indicate that the plan’s rationale is rooted in public relations, not public health. Following Japan’s Fukushima meltdown in 2011, EPA’s claims that no radioactivity could reach the U.S. at levels of concern were contradicted by its own rainwater measurements showing contamination from Fukushima throughout the U.S. well above Safe Drinking Water Act limits. In reaction, EPA prepared new limits 1000s of times higher than even the Fukushima rainwater because “EPA experienced major difficulties conveying to the public that the detected levels…were not of immediate concern for public health.”
When EPA published for public comment the proposed “Protective Action Guides,” it hid proposed new concentrations for all but four of the 110 radionuclides covered, and refused to reveal how much they were above Safe Drinking Water Act limits. It took a lawsuit to get EPA to release documents showing that –
Despite claims of transparency, EPA solicited public comment on its plan even as it hid the bulk of the plan’s effects. Nonetheless, more than 60,000 people filed comments in opposition.
“The Dr. Strangelove wing of EPA does not want this information shared with many of its own experts, let alone the public,” added Ruch, noting that PEER had to file a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to force release of exposure limits. “This is a matter of public health that should be promulgated in broad daylight rather than slimed through in the witching hours of a departing administration.”
This Thread Is like Bad Boy Records: "Can't Stop, Won't Stop"
.....for a couple 100,000 up to millions of years depending on isotopes and shiit.....yet policy makers continue to tell its all good and safe technology. .Well let's start off the year with that in mind...it's all good right??
RADICAL DRINKING WATER RADIATION RISE CONFIRMED IN EPA PLAN
EPA hid planned radiation exposure 1,000s of times Safe Drinking Water Act limits
EPA HID PLANNED RADIATION EXPOSURE 1,000S OF TIMES SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT LIMITS
Published: January 1, 2017
Washington, DC — In the last days of the Obama Administration, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is about to dramatically increase allowable public exposure to radioactivity to levels thousands of times above the maximum limits of the Safe Drinking Water Act, according to documents the agency surrendered in a federal lawsuit brought by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER). These radical rollbacks cover the “intermediate period” following a radiation release and could last for up to several years. This plan is in its final stage of approval.
The documents indicate that the plan’s rationale is rooted in public relations, not public health. Following Japan’s Fukushima meltdown in 2011, EPA’s claims that no radioactivity could reach the U.S. at levels of concern were contradicted by its own rainwater measurements showing contamination from Fukushima throughout the U.S. well above Safe Drinking Water Act limits. In reaction, EPA prepared new limits 1000s of times higher than even the Fukushima rainwater because “EPA experienced major difficulties conveying to the public that the detected levels…were not of immediate concern for public health.”
When EPA published for public comment the proposed “Protective Action Guides,” it hid proposed new concentrations for all but four of the 110 radionuclides covered, and refused to reveal how much they were above Safe Drinking Water Act limits. It took a lawsuit to get EPA to release documents showing that –
- The proposed PAGs for two radionuclides (Cobalt-60 and Calcium-45) are more than 10,000 times Safe Drinking Water Act limits. Others are hundreds or thousands of times higher;
- According to EPA’s own internal analysis, some concentrations are high enough to deliver a lifetime permissible dose in a single day. Scores of other radionuclides would be allowed at levels that would produce a lifetime dose in a week or a month;
- The levels proposed by the Obama EPA are higher than what the Bush EPA tried to adopt--also in its final days. That plan was ultimately withdrawn; and
- EPA hid the proposed increases from the public so as to “avoid confusion,” intending to release the higher concentrations only after the proposal was adopted. The documents also reveal that EPA’s radiation division even hid the new concentrations from other divisions of EPA that were critical of the proposal, requiring repeated efforts to get them to even be disclosed internally.
Despite claims of transparency, EPA solicited public comment on its plan even as it hid the bulk of the plan’s effects. Nonetheless, more than 60,000 people filed comments in opposition.
“The Dr. Strangelove wing of EPA does not want this information shared with many of its own experts, let alone the public,” added Ruch, noting that PEER had to file a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit to force release of exposure limits. “This is a matter of public health that should be promulgated in broad daylight rather than slimed through in the witching hours of a departing administration.”
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Chinese, Germans Bidding To Turn Abandoned Nuclear Wasteland Of Chernobyl Into Solar Farm | Zero Hedge
Imagine if we just invested in solar power from the get go at this level, instead of continuing to build these nook power plants and risk it all, and have regions uninhabitable for centuries.
Keep in mind these are solar panels in the Ukraine...which isn't sunny like Florida or Arizona. No excuse why higher latitude places that generally recieve less sunlight can't have massive solar farms from the get go.
Imagine if we just invested in solar power from the get go at this level, instead of continuing to build these nook power plants and risk it all, and have regions uninhabitable for centuries.
Keep in mind these are solar panels in the Ukraine...which isn't sunny like Florida or Arizona. No excuse why higher latitude places that generally recieve less sunlight can't have massive solar farms from the get go.
Last edited:
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Northern Hemisphere Potentially In Great Danger As Fukushima Radiation Spikes To ‘Unimaginable’ Levels
"According to the Japan Times, the level of radiation inside the containment vessel of reactor 2 is now estimated to be “530 sieverts per hour”…
The radiation level in the containment vessel of reactor 2 at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 power plant has reached a maximum of 530 sieverts per hour, the highest since the triple core meltdown in March 2011, Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc. said.
Tepco said on Thursday that the blazing radiation reading was taken near the entrance to the space just below the pressure vessel, which contains the reactor core.
The high figure indicates that some of the melted fuel that escaped the pressure vessel is nearby.
It is hard to find the words to convey how serious this is.
If you were exposed to a radiation level of just 10 sieverts per hour, that would mean almost certain death. So 530 sieverts per hour is simply off the charts. According to the Guardian, this recent measurement is being described by scientists as “unimaginable”…
The recent reading, described by some experts as “unimaginable”, is far higher than the previous record of 73 sieverts an hour in that part of the reactor.
A single dose of one sievert is enough to cause radiation sickness and nausea; 5 sieverts would kill half those exposed to it within a month, and a single dose of 10 sieverts would prove fatal within weeks.
And the really bad news is that there appears to be a 2 meter hole that was created by melted nuclear fuel “in the metal grating under the pressure vessel in the reactor’s primary containment vessel”. The following comes from Bloomberg…
New photographs show what may be melted nuclear fuel sitting under one of Japan’s wrecked Fukushima reactors, a potential milestone in the search and retrieval of the fuel almost six years after it was lost in one of the worst atomic disasters in history.
Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc., Japan’s biggest utility,released images on Monday showing a grate under the Fukushima Dai-Ichi No. 2 reactor covered in black residue. The company, better known as Tepco, may send in a scorpion-likerobot as soon as February to determine the temperature and radioactivity of the residue.
If that isn’t frightening enough, one Japanese news source is reporting that this melted nuclear fuel “has since come in contact with underground water flowing from the mountain side”…"
"According to the Japan Times, the level of radiation inside the containment vessel of reactor 2 is now estimated to be “530 sieverts per hour”…
The radiation level in the containment vessel of reactor 2 at the crippled Fukushima No. 1 power plant has reached a maximum of 530 sieverts per hour, the highest since the triple core meltdown in March 2011, Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc. said.
Tepco said on Thursday that the blazing radiation reading was taken near the entrance to the space just below the pressure vessel, which contains the reactor core.
The high figure indicates that some of the melted fuel that escaped the pressure vessel is nearby.
It is hard to find the words to convey how serious this is.
If you were exposed to a radiation level of just 10 sieverts per hour, that would mean almost certain death. So 530 sieverts per hour is simply off the charts. According to the Guardian, this recent measurement is being described by scientists as “unimaginable”…
The recent reading, described by some experts as “unimaginable”, is far higher than the previous record of 73 sieverts an hour in that part of the reactor.
A single dose of one sievert is enough to cause radiation sickness and nausea; 5 sieverts would kill half those exposed to it within a month, and a single dose of 10 sieverts would prove fatal within weeks.
And the really bad news is that there appears to be a 2 meter hole that was created by melted nuclear fuel “in the metal grating under the pressure vessel in the reactor’s primary containment vessel”. The following comes from Bloomberg…
New photographs show what may be melted nuclear fuel sitting under one of Japan’s wrecked Fukushima reactors, a potential milestone in the search and retrieval of the fuel almost six years after it was lost in one of the worst atomic disasters in history.
Tokyo Electric Power Co. Holdings Inc., Japan’s biggest utility,released images on Monday showing a grate under the Fukushima Dai-Ichi No. 2 reactor covered in black residue. The company, better known as Tepco, may send in a scorpion-likerobot as soon as February to determine the temperature and radioactivity of the residue.
If that isn’t frightening enough, one Japanese news source is reporting that this melted nuclear fuel “has since come in contact with underground water flowing from the mountain side”…"
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Radioactive Diamond Batteries: Making Good Use Of Nuclear Waste
^^^^Interesting way to potentially handle waste................but it just gives the industry an excuse to continue to run these plants. In midst of an emergency you can't turn the material into diamonds....you're to busy trying to cool things down.
It's cool, but letting these jokers try and promote this concept while the Pacific Ocean turns into a cesspool os a slap in the face. It should be used to cease this region destroying technology not promote it.
This is the only energy producer that can make an entire region uninhabitable in matter of hours if it stops operating....it's crazy
^^^^Interesting way to potentially handle waste................but it just gives the industry an excuse to continue to run these plants. In midst of an emergency you can't turn the material into diamonds....you're to busy trying to cool things down.
It's cool, but letting these jokers try and promote this concept while the Pacific Ocean turns into a cesspool os a slap in the face. It should be used to cease this region destroying technology not promote it.
This is the only energy producer that can make an entire region uninhabitable in matter of hours if it stops operating....it's crazy
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
future generations will not judge us kindly.
it's unforgivable that there is no plan to deal with waste that will be dangerous for millennia.
it's unforgivable that there is no plan to deal with waste that will be dangerous for millennia.
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
newworldafro
DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
This my home state.
I hope nothing happens that would impact these power plants, and this is not the first hurricane rodeo, but this is why this technology is frightening and needs to be paused ...for times like this.
Nuclear Power Plants At Risk Of Direct Hit By Hurricane Florence
I hope nothing happens that would impact these power plants, and this is not the first hurricane rodeo, but this is why this technology is frightening and needs to be paused ...for times like this.
Nuclear Power Plants At Risk Of Direct Hit By Hurricane Florence