40年超原発再稼働是非、議論要請へ

福井県知事が県議会に、美浜町長同意で

via 福井新聞

 福井県美浜町の戸嶋秀樹町長は2月15日、運転開始から40年を超える関西電力美浜原発3号機の再稼働に同意したと国と県、美浜町議会に報告した。立地町長が40年超原発の再稼働に同意するのは高浜原発1、2号機に続き2例目で、3基の再稼働は知事と県議会の判断が焦点となる。戸嶋町長との面談後、杉本達治知事は記者団に、16日に開会する定例県議会の提案理由説明で、議会側に再稼働の是非に関する議論を要請する考えを明らかにした。

[…]

杉本知事は記者団の取材に対し、美浜、高浜両町長の同意に加え、県が求めていた使用済み核燃料中間貯蔵施設の県外候補地について関電と国から一定の回答を得られたとして、「議論の前提は満たした。県議会で(再稼働の是非を)検討いただくようお願いしたい」と述べた。期限は求めないとした。

 戸嶋町長は杉本知事との面談に先立ち、町役場で経済産業省資源エネルギー庁の保坂伸長官と電話会談、竹仲良廣町会議長と面談して同意を報告。保坂長官は「感謝申し上げる」と回答したという。竹仲議長は「今後も安全安心に向けて議会とともにチェックする必要がある」と述べた。

[…]

全文

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

Nuclear Rockets to Mars? via CounterPunch

By Karl Grossman

A report advocating rocket propulsion by nuclear power for U.S. missions to Mars, written by a committee packed with individuals deeply involved in nuclear power, was issued last week by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine.

The 104-page report also lays out “synergies” in space nuclear activities between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the U.S. military, something not advanced explicitly since the founding of NASA as a civilian agency supposedly in 1958.

The report states: “Space nuclear propulsion and power systems have the potential to provide the United States with military advantages…NASA could benefit programmatically by working with a DoD [Department of Defense] program having national security objectives.”’

The report was produced “by contract” with NASA, it states.

The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NAS) describes itself as having been “created to advise the nation” with “independent, objective advice to inform policy.”

[…]

Bruce Gagnon, coordinator of the Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space, from its offices in Maine in the U.S., declared: “The nuclear industry views space as a new—and wide-open—market for their toxic product that has run its dirty course on Mother Earth.”

“During our campaigns in 1989, 1990, and 1997 to stop NASA’s Galileo, Ulysses and Cassini plutonium-fueled space probe launches, we learned that the nuclear industry positioned its agents inside NASA committees that made the decisions on what kinds of power sources would be placed on those deep space missions,” said Gagnon. “Now it appears that the nuclear industry has also infiltrated the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine that has been studying missions to Mars.  The recommendation, not any surprise, is that nuclear reactors are the best way to power a Mars mission.”

“It’s not the best for us Earthlings because the Department of Energy has a bad track record of human and environmental contamination as they fabricate nuclear devices. An accident at launch could have catastrophic consequences.”

Stated Gagnon: “We fought the DoE and NASA on those previous nuclear launches and are entering the battle again. The nuclear industry has its sights set on nuclear-powered mining colonies on an assortment of planetary bodies—all necessitating legions of nuclear devices being produced at DoE and then launched on rockets that blow up from time to time.”

“We urge the public to help us pressure NASA and DoE to say no to nukes in space. We’ve got to protect life here on this planet. We are in the middle of a pandemic and people have lost jobs, homes, health care and even food on their table.”

“Trips to Mars can wait,” said Gagnon.

[…]

The worst U.S. accident involving the use of nuclear power in space came in 1964 when the U.S. satellite Transit 5BN-3, powered by a SNAP-9A plutonium-fueled radioisotope thermoelectric generator, failed to achieve orbit and fell from the sky, disintegrating as it burned up in the atmosphere, globally spreading plutonium—considering the deadliest of all radioactive substances. That accident was long linked to a spike in global lung cancer rates where the plutonium was spread, by Dr. John Gofman, an M.D. and Ph. D., a professor of medical physics at the University of California at Berkeley. He also had been involved in developing some of the first methods for isolating plutonium for the Manhattan Project.

NASA, after the SNAP-9A (SNAP for Systems Nuclear Auxiliary Power) accident became a pioneer in developing solar photovoltaic power. All U.S. satellites now are energized by solar power, as is the International Space Station.

The worst accident involving nuclear power in space in the Soviet/Russian space program occurred in 1978 when the Cosmos 954 satellite with a nuclear reactor aboard fell from orbit and spread radioactive debris over a 373-mile swath from Great Slave Lake to Baker Lake in Canada. There were 110 pounds of highly-enriched (nearly 90 percent) of uranium fuel on Cosmos 954.

[…]

But, as The Atlantic magazine noted in a 2019 article titled, “Why There Are No Nuclear Airplanes”:

“The problem of shielding pilots from the reactor’s radiation proved even more difficult. What good would a plane be that killed its own pilots? To protect the crew from radioactivity, the reactor needed thick and heavy layers of shielding. But to take off, the plane needed to be as light as possible. Adequate shielding seemed incompatible with flight. Still, engineers theorized that the weight saved from needing no fuel might be enough to offset the reactor and its shielding. The United States spent 16 years tinkering with the idea, to no avail…

The Eisenhower administration concluded that the program was unnecessary, dangerous, and too expensive. On March 28, 1961, the newly inaugurated President John F. Kennedy canceled the program. Proposals for nuclear-powered airplanes have popped up since then, but the fear of radiation and the lack of funding have kept all such ideas down.”

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | 7 Comments

東日本大震災の余震1万4590回、過去の地震を大幅に上回る…終息の見通し立たずvia 讀賣新聞

東日本大震災の余震とみられる有感地震(震度1以上)は、発生から9年11か月がたった11日までに1万4590回に上ることが気象庁のまとめでわかった。

[…]

昨年3月11日以降だけでも約350回発生しており、終息の見通しは立っていない。

 余震のうち最大震度が震度5弱より大きかったのは80回で、津波(若干の海面変動を含む)は8回観測された。余震は時間とともに減る傾向があるが、昨年3月11日以降に最大震度5弱の余震が4回あり、今回の余震では福島、宮城両県で震度6強を観測した。東京大の小原一成教授(地震学)は「東日本大震災のように本震規模が大きければ、余震の回数は増え、期間も長くなる」と説明している。

全文

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged | 5 Comments

使用済み核燃料プール、地震で少量の水あふれ 福島第一 via 朝日新聞

 東京電力は14日、福島第一原発福島県大熊町・双葉町)5・6号機の原子炉建屋上層階にある使用済み核燃料プールの近くで、水たまりを確認したと発表した。13日深夜に起きた最大震度6強の地震で冷却水がプールからあふれたとみられる。福島第二原発(同県富岡町・楢葉町)の1号機でも燃料プールから少量の水があふれた。いずれも建屋外への流出はなかったとしている。

 東電によると、燃料プールは5・6号機の建屋5階にあり、水たまりは4カ所で見つかった。さらに、1~6号機の使用済み燃料を保管する共用プールでも1カ所に水たまりがあったという。いずれも流出はなく、周辺の放射線量を測定するモニタリングポストの値にも変化はなかった。

原文

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , | 5 Comments

Big money, nuclear subsidies, and systemic corruption via The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists

By Cassandra JefferyM. V. Ramana | February 12, 2021

The “largest bribery, money-laundering scheme ever perpetrated against the people and the state of Ohio” came to light during an unexpected press conference in July 2020 in Columbus. Speaking haltingly and carefully, US Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio David DeVillers announced “the arrest of Larry Householder, Speaker of the House of the state of Ohio and four other defendants for racketeering. The conspiracy was to pass and maintain a $1.5 billion bailout in return for $61 million in dark money.”

Unravelling an intricate web of alleged illegal activities used to launder money, DeVillers broke down the complicated modus operandi of “Company A.” With a gentle smile on his face, he said, “everyone in this room knows who Company A is, but I will not be mentioning the name of Company A because of our regulations and rules. They have not, and no one from that company has as of yet, been charged”.

Company A is FirstEnergy Solutions, a fact most Ohians had been aware of long before the July 2020 press conference. FirstEnergy, now called Energy Harbour, is one of Ohio’s largest utility corporations. For years, the firm lobbied to get a subsidy to continue operating its unprofitable nuclear plants and maintain its revenue flow. When lobbying efforts failed to produce subsidies, it resorted to bribery to gain legislative support for House Bill 6, 2019 legislation that forces state consumers to pay into something called “the Ohio Clean Air Fund.” The green language is a smoke screen for the real purpose: to siphon nearly $150 million annually to FirstEnergy to keep its Perry and Davis-Besse nuclear power plants and two coal-fired power plants operating, while simultaneously gutting Ohio’s renewable energy standards. Also gone were the state’s energy efficiency programs, which had saved consumers and corporations millions of dollars. When citizens tried to organize a referendum to repeal the bill, FirstEnergy indulged in various dirty tactics to thwart this democratic opposition.

Ohio is not alone in its nuclear energy corruption. Also in July 2020, Commonwealth Edison (ComEd), a subsidiary of Exelon, was charged with bribery to “Public Official A” in Illinois. Though not named, the filing makes it clear that “Public Official A” is Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, who has denied wrongdoing. ComEd has agreed to pay a $200 million fine to resolve this case. Exelon also finds itself at the centre of another ongoing investigation by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. The focus of the investigation is reportedly Anne Pramaggiore, a former Exelon CEO who stepped down from the company and from his post chair of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. As in Ohio, the corruption charges relate to lobbying for state subsidies and special treatment of nuclear power plants.

Three other states—New Jersey, Connecticut, and New York—have implemented similar subsidies (although, to date, no allegations of wrongdoing related to them have been made public). 

[…]

Changing economics of electricity generation. These “economic reasons” have to do with an ongoing massive transformation of the energy sector. Over the last decade, the cost of renewables like solar and wind have dropped substantially; these renewables can generate electricity at much lower costs than fossil fuels and, especially, nuclear power. In the United States, unsubsidized wind power costs fell by 71 percent between 2009 and 2020, whereas unsubsidized utility scale solar energy costs declined by 90 percent during the same period. Nuclear energy costs increased by 33 percent between 2009 and 2020. The International Energy Agency has dubbed solar energy “the new king of electricity” and foresees it dominating future deployment in the electricity sector for decades.

The major beneficiaries of the subsidies for nuclear plants are large corporations: PSEG in New Jersey and Dominion in Connecticut, besides Exelon and FirstEnergy. […]

These companies and various associated organizations have engaged in extensive lobbying and large-scale propaganda campaigns to get governments pass legislation that makes consumers pay more for the electricity they use. In that sense, what has resulted would be better described as corporate welfare than as subsidies. The subsidies have improved these companies’ financial situation, which in turn contributes to their clout in state and national policy making and their ability to fund advocacy efforts—and even to pay politicians tidy sums of money. The larger significance of the political power these large utilities have amassed is their ability to block transition to a fully renewable and more environmentally sustainable energy system.

Financial subsidies. Subsidies take different forms in different states. In New York and Illinois, utility companies are required to purchase a specific amount of zero-emission credits from authorized nuclear generating stations, all of which are owned and operated by Exelon Corporation. Purchasing contracts in both states will be in effect for 10 to 12 years, and utility companies are mandated to tack on the cost to consumer bills. Over in New Jersey, “each electric public utility” is required to purchase “Nuclear Diversity Certificates” from nuclear power plants, with consumers paying for these programs through higher utility bills.

[…]

The NEI also tried to influence the appointment of officials to oversight bodies, including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), declaring that it “shared names of potential candidates with the Trump administration and worked with member companies to urge Congress to communicate with the White House the need to nominate and confirm commissioners.” The NRC is the agency tasked with overseeing safety, and in 2017, the NEI proudly announced that it had “worked with the House Appropriations Committee to again reduce the NRC’s budget.”

[…]

Money begets money. The effects of enacting laws that favor nuclear energy firms are clear from the financial status of these corporations. Exelon share prices increased from $34.63 on April 1, 2017 to a high of $50.95 exactly two years later, while Dominion’s stock price grew from $64.19 on May 1, 2018 to $83.70, as of November 6, 2020. Similar increases have been recorded by FirstEnergy and PSEG.

[…]

The legislative means used to take money away from electricity consumers and bail out economically failing nuclear plants owned by these large corporations helps further their market power, as illustrated by Dominion’s value rising from $49.5 billion in 2018 to $69.4 billion in 2019. While it is well known that wealthy corporations have a lot of political power, it seems from these examples that the converse might also be true: The political power enjoyed by these large corporations is at the root of their economic power. Indeed, as political economists Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler have argued at length, the standard economic concept of capital symbolizes “organized power writ large,” challenging the conventional division between politics and economics. The various bills passed in state legislatures offer a political assurance to investors that revenues for these utilities are assured for the foreseeable future, which naturally translates into higher stock prices and market capitalizations.

[…]

At a larger scale, Germany has shown that it is possible to retire nuclear plants and reduce emissions at the same time.

[…]

While the actions taken against these individuals have captured headlines, the picture painted in the media still misses the mark on less egregious, everyday forms of political action. Lobbying by deep-pocketed industries and other efforts to capture regulators are pernicious but often go unremarked, in part because under the rules that govern politics in the United States, such actions are often legal. Addressing these problems with the urgency they require will necessarily involve confronting the economic and political system that privileges profits and capital over people and the environment.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Big money, nuclear subsidies, and systemic corruption via The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists

At least 102 hurt in ‘aftershock’ of 2011 Tohoku quake disaster via The Asahi Shimbun

More than 100 people were injured in a magnitude-7.3 earthquake that struck on Feb. 13 in the same Tohoku region that was devastated by the Great East Japan Earthquake and tsunami 10 years ago.

As of 9 a.m. on Feb. 14, at least 102 people in seven prefectures, including Fukushima and Miyagi, were confirmed to have been injured in the quake that occurred the previous night, triggering widespread blackouts, local authorities said.

No deaths were reported.

[…]

The agency labeled the quake a likely aftershock of the magnitude-9.0 Great East Japan Earthquake that struck the Tohoku region on March 11, 2011, leaving nearly 20,000 dead or unaccounted for mainly as a result of towering tsunami generated by the event.

The agency called on the public to remain alert over the coming week or so, citing the likelihood of more temblors of a scale similar to that of the Feb. 13 quake hitting, particularly in a few days for now.

The quake was felt as far away as Hokkaido, the northernmost main island, and the Chugoku region in western Japan as well as Tokyo.

[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , | 8 Comments

小泉純一郎氏「脱原発にかじ切る方が夢ある」 「核のごみ」映画の試写会 via 東京新聞

 原発から出る「核のごみ」の最終処分場を巡る映画「地球で最も安全な場所を探して」のオンラインでの試写会とトークイベントが13日に開かれ、ゲストで参加した小泉純一郎元首相はトークイベントで「処分場を見つけることがどれだけ大変か。原発をゼロにするべきだと改めて思った」と述べた。

原発ゼロ・自然エネルギー推進連盟の顧問を務める小泉氏は、東京都千代田区の東京新聞(中日新聞東京本社)で映画を視聴。最終処分場の候補地に北海道の2町村が名乗りを上げていることに関連し、「今ある原発を全て廃止するからということで理解を求めた方がいい」と訴えた。

(略)

映画は、核のごみを捨てる場所が地球上で見つかるのかと問題提起する内容で、試写会には事前抽選により80人が参加した。20日から東京・渋谷のシアター・イメージフォーラムなど全国で順次公開される。(加藤健太)

全文は小泉純一郎氏「脱原発にかじ切る方が夢ある」 「核のごみ」映画の試写会

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , | 5 Comments

「2023年末を最終期限に」関西電力が約束を再び先送り 原発の使用済み核燃料、福井県外への搬出先探しでvia東京新聞

 関西電力の森本孝社長は12日、福井県庁で杉本達治知事と面会し、県内の原発で保管が続いている使用済み核燃料の県外搬出先の確定について「2023年末を最終の期限に取り組む」と表明した。ただ、関電はこれまで福井県との約束破りを繰り返しており、新たな約束が実現できる見通しは全く立っていない。森本社長は「不退転の覚悟」と強調し、運転期間40年を超えた美浜原発3号機と高浜原発1、2号機(いずれも福井県)の3基の再稼働について、県の同意を取り付けたい考えだ。(小川慎一、福岡範行)

◆実現見通せぬ中 関電社長「不退転の覚悟」

[…]

関電は、使用済み核燃料の搬出先について、2020年内に示すと約束していたが守れず、これまでも約束破りを繰り返している。1990年代から県に核燃料の搬出先の提示を求められ、当初は使用済み核燃料を保管する中間貯蔵施設の稼働を「2010年ごろ」と回答。その後「18年に計画地点を示す」に変わり、それができないと「20年を念頭にできるだけ早い時期」へ先送り。昨年末に回答できなかった際は、「早めに」と答えていた。

◆青森・むつ市の中間貯蔵施設共用案巡り 国が地元に説明へ

 使用済み核燃料の保管先確保は、原発を保有する電力会社にとって大きな課題となっている。電気事業連合会(電事連)は昨年12月、青森県むつ市で建設が進む中間貯蔵施設を、電力各社で共同利用する検討を始めたと表明。この施設は、東京電力と日本原子力発電が出資して作った会社が建設し、21年度の操業開始を予定している。共同利用案について、関電の森本社長は「積極的に参画したい」と話していた。 しかし、中間貯蔵施設があるむつ市の宮下宗一郎市長は「市は核のごみ捨て場ではない。全国の燃料を引き受ける必然性はない」と反発。共同利用が確実に進むかは、全く見通せない。資源エネルギー庁の保坂長官は「青森県やむつ市に対し、できるかぎり早く、政策的視点からの説明をしたいと考えている」と、この日の面会で方針を示した。

◆梶山経産相 原発3基の再稼働「理解と協力を」

 梶山経産相は、関電が目指す運転期間40年超の原発3基の再稼働についても触れ、「2030年のエネルギーミックス(電源構成)の実現、2050年のカーボンニュートラル(温室効果ガスの排出実質ゼロ)の実現を目指し、足下では安全性を大前提に再稼働を進めることが必要」との認識を示した。その上で、「40年超運転を進めていくにあたっては、運転が終わった後の地域社会のあり方も含めて、将来の立地地域の目指すべき方向性を地域の皆さまと一緒に真剣に検討していくことが必要と考えている。例えば、産業の複線化や新産業の創出など地域の持続的な発展につながる取り組みについて、経済産業省として、他省庁の施策の活用も含めて、最大限支援をしていく」と述べ、3基の再稼働への理解と協力を求めた。

[…]

全文

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , , | 7 Comments

Nuclear Suicide by Embrittled Reactors: Karl Grossman – #503 via Nuclear Hotseat

by Libbe HaLevy | Feb 10, 2021 

See more.

Listen Here:

Audio Player00:0000:00Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

Podcast: Download

This Week’s Featured Interview:

See more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | 6 Comments

We used to dump nuclear waste into the ocean. Here’s how it went. via Teenlytical

Regardless of whether such waste negatively impacts the environment or not, it is generally agreed that nuclear waste does not belong in the ocean.

By Mark Pan

[…]

Into the ocean it goes

There were several methods proposed on how to manage nuclear waste: underground storage, reprocessing, even so far as launching it into space*. However, prior to 1993, one of the most cost-effective methods was to simply discard waste into the oceans: the first dumping operation was 80 kilometres off the coast of California in 1946. From then on, countries such as the Soviet Union, the UK, and France joined in on ocean disposal, and this continued on: in total, 13 countries have disposed of nuclear waste in the ocean.

[…]

In 1972 the London Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Waste and Other Matter (or the London Dumping Convention, as everyone refers to it) set forth a precedent which came into effect in 1975, prohibiting the dumping of high-level radioactive waste. This includes irradiated (exposed to radiation) nuclear fuel, and any waste material exceeding the following concentrations: 5×10-5 TBq/kg (terabecquerel/kilogram) of alpha radiation emitters; 2×10-2 TBq/kg of beta or gamma radiation emitters with half lives lasting longer than 1 year; and 3 TBq/kg of tritium or beta/gamma radiation emitters with half lives less than 1 year.

[…]

Albeit the London Dumping Convention outlawed the dumping of high-level nuclear waste, it did not prohibit the dumping of nuclear waste in general: low-level waste disposal was still permitted with a permit. Dumping continued until 1993, when a Russian vessel was documented pumping liquid nuclear waste into the Sea of Japan, sparking international outrage.

This sparked a resolution at the reconvening 1993 London Dumping Convention which was approved by all the member countries, outlawing any nuclear dumping by means of ocean disposal. Between the 47 years, approximately 63 PBq (63 petabecquerels, or 63 quadrillion becquerels, or 6.3×1016 Bq) of nuclear waste has been disposed of in the oceans, nearly 99% of it being beta/gamma radiation emitting material. 1993 being merely 28 years ago, it is startling how only recently have we started to realize that disposing such waste into the ocean wasn’t perhaps the best solution.

The environmental impact

So how exactly did the dumping effect the oceans? The consensus is mixed: some believe that the ocean is fully capable of diluting the radioactive waste, whereas others believe that the waste will tend to linger in the general vicinity of the dumping area. Several studies and expeditions have been conducted to measure the extent of any effects in areas where dumping had historically taken place, including the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic Oceans, in an attempt to understand the impact of such activities.

[…]

What the present looks like

Currently, nuclear waste is stored on land, and there are stricter and more stringent precautions towards the handling of such waste than there was in the 20th century. The majority of nuclear waste produced is low-level to intermediate-level waste (approximately 97%), with a fraction of it being high-level waste: thus, such waste can be left in storage until it has decayed into a safer state for regular trash disposal.

[…]

Several technologies, including vitrification (the process of combining nuclear waste with glass, thus creating a more manageable solid), seem promising and it is imperative that we develop a solution to dispose of the waste, preferably not involving our oceans.

*In case you were wondering, no, shooting our nuclear waste into space simply isn’t feasible. Launching rockets is incredibly expensive, and rockets have a limited payload capacity. Furthermore, rocket failure would result in a catastrophic spewing of radioactive material into the air, which is rather bad.

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , | 6 Comments