九州電力の川内原発1号機（鹿児島県薩摩川内市）が来年3月に運転を停止するのが確実となったことが14日、分かった。テロ対策施設「特定重大事故等対処施設」の建設が遅れ、完成が期限に間に合わないためで、特重施設の完成遅れによる原発の稼働停止は全国初となる。川内2号機も来年5月に停止し、全国で2例目になるのは確実。
原子力規制委員会は今月12日、特重施設が期限日の約1週間前までに完成していない原発については、電力会社に運転停止命令を出す方針を決めた。九電関係者は「特重施設の完成が期限に間に合わず、稼働を停止するのは確実だ」と明らかにした。
By Thierry Ribault
This article is a contribution to the political economy of consent based on the analysis of speeches, declarations, initiatives, and policies implemented in the name of resilience in the context of the Fukushima nuclear disaster. It argues that, in practice as much as in theory, resilience fuels peoples’ submission to an existing reality—in the case of Fukushima, the submission to radioactive contamination—in an attempt to deny this reality as well as its consequences. The political economy of consent to the nuclear, of which resilience is one of the technologies, can be grasped at four interrelated analytical levels adapted to understanding how resilience is encoded in key texts and programs in the wake of the Fukushima Daiichi accident. The first level is technological: consent through and to the nuclear technology. The second level is sociometabolic: consent to nuisance. The third level is political: consent to participation. The fourth level is epistemological: consent to ignorance. A fifth cognitivo-experimental transversal level can also be identified: consent to experimentation, learning and training. We first analyze two key symptoms of the despotism of resilience: its incantatory feature and the way it supports mutilated life within a contaminated area and turns disaster into a cure. Then, we show how, in the reenchanted world of resilience, loss opens doors, that is, it paves the way to new “forms of life”: first through ignorance-based disempowerment; second through submission to protection. Finally, we examine the ideological mechanisms of resilience and how it fosters a government through the fear of fear. We approach resilience as a technology of consent mobilizing emotionalism and conditioning on one side, contingency and equivalence on the other.
Read article.
Man behind hit TV series among those criticising people taking inappropriate selfies
The writer of the acclaimed TV series Chernobyl has called for visitors to the site of the nuclear disaster to behave “with respect”, after a number of photographs emerged on social media apparently showing tourists taking inappropriate or lewd selfies.
Visitor numbers to the site of the former Soviet-era power plant in Ukraine have soared since the five-part miniseries began airing on HBO and Sky Atlantic in May, with some tour companies reporting a 40% increase in bookings.
But the behaviour of some visitors has been met with criticism, with photographs emerging of tourists beaming or posing provocatively in front of the ruins. In one image, which has circulated widely on social media, a woman unzips a hazmat suit to reveal a G-string. Several of the images have since been deleted.
[…]
An estimated 116,000 people who lived in the town of Pripyat and within a 30km (18.6-mile) radius of the site were evacuated in the weeks following the disaster, though the effects of radiation exposure for the broader population of Ukraine and Europe is still a concern. An exclusion zone of more than 2,600 sq km remains sealed off.
Visitors to the zone do not need to wear hazmat suits but are warned not to touch anything. They pass through military passport checks to enter and are scanned for radiation levels.
A tour guide at the site, Viktoria Brozhko, attributed the recent rise in the number of visitors to the success of the drama. “Many people come here. They ask a lot of questions about the TV show, about all the events. People are getting more and more curious,” she told Reuters.
[…]
An Israeli artist who was offended at some visitors’ use of the Holocaust memorial in Berlin for tasteless photo-ops – including striking yoga poses, juggling or jumping between its concrete slabs – has launched an art project in which their photographs are combined with real, distressing images taken from the concentration camps.
Chernobyl, starring Jared Harris, Stellan Skarsgård and Emily Watson, and directed by Johan Renck, follows the immediate aftermath of the nuclear reactor explosion at the power plant in the town of Pripyat, and the political repercussions of the toll it took on the people, animals and environment in the region.
Read more at Chernobyl writer urges Instagram tourists to ‘respect’ nuclear site
（ＣＮＮ） 世界最悪の原発事故が発生し、廃墟と化したチェルノブイリ。あれから３０年たった今、テレビドラマになったことがきっかけで、世界から観光客が押し寄せている。
打ち捨てられ、朽ちて行く原発の街の光景は、数年前から観光客を引き付けるようになっていた。しかし地元の観光業者によると、米ＨＢＯのテレビドラマ「チェルノブイリ」が始まったことで、同地を訪れる観光客が急増したという。
(略）
チェルノブイリはウクライナの首都キエフから約１１０キロ北部の都市プリピャチ近郊にある。世界一汚染された街として、案内できるのは資格を持ったガイドに限られる。
ガイド付きツアーでは、原発跡地を中心とする４０００平方キロあまりの「立入禁止区域」を訪れる。２０年前からチェルノブイリツアーを営むソロイーストの担当者は、「予約が３５％増えた」と打ち明けた。「テレビ番組を見て予約を思い立った人が大半を占める」という。
最も人気があるのは１人あたり約９９ドルの日帰り団体ツアー。２０１１年以来、同地の大部分が観光客に解放されたが、「機械の墓場」と呼ばれる場所などは、今も立ち入ることはできない。
それでも打ち捨てられたプリピャチの街や、原子炉の残骸を覆う巨大な石棺を３００メートル離れた場所から眺められる展望台などを訪れることはできる。
この原子炉跡地や、プリピャチの遊園地の観覧車は、観光客に最も人気があるという。「チェルノブイリ」の放映が始まって以来、ソロイーストの週末のツアーに参加した観光客は１００～２００人に上る。放射線を不安に思う人も多いものの、「観光客が浴びる放射線の量は、大陸を横断する飛行機に乗るよりも少ない」とツアー業者は強調している。
By Victor Gilinsky, Henry Sokolski, June 4, 2019
In its effort to revive a moribund US nuclear industry, the Trump administration has put itself in the hands of our national laboratories. The laboratories have used the opportunity to reach for the public purse to pursue their nuclear dream, the same one that they have had since the beginning of the nuclear age, and that now has nothing to do with the country’s energy needs. The starting point on their wish list is a multibillion-dollar “Versatile Test Reactor” at the Idaho national laboratory, to test fuel for a new generation of advanced “fast” plutonium-fueled reactors.
From the beginning, the nuclear power technologists have really had one idea that gripped their imagination: that it is possible to build a plutonium-fueled fast reactor (“fast” because the neutrons released in the fission reaction are not slowed by a moderator) that produces more plutonium than it consumes. This allows continually refueling the reactor and using the excess plutonium to start more such reactors (hence the name “breeder reactors”).
It sounds like getting something for nothing, but in reality, it means using all the relatively cheap natural uranium as fuel instead of only the less than 1 percent that is uranium-235, as is done in the current generation of power reactors […]
In the 1960s the US Atomic Energy Commission saw the fast breeder reactor as the answer to the country’s long-term energy needs. It organized itself to produce prototype breeder reactors that industry would then replicate commercially. Breeder cores needed lots of plutonium as an initial charge. This had to come from reprocessing of spent fuel of existing reactors, so reprocessing was an essential feature of the shift to a fast breeder future. “Atomic” commissions in countries around the world followed this example, all with experts absolutely sure fast breeders would soon take over electricity generation.
As we know, it didn’t happen. The fundamental flaw in the argument was that uranium wasn’t scarce at all, there’s lots of it. Also, the breeder and reprocessing technologies turned out to be much more challenging and expensive than expected. Altogether, they didn’t make economic sense.
Another negative element entered the equation in the late 1970s. In their excitement over the fast breeder, the nuclear community ignored the consequences of feeding plutonium, a fuel but also a nuclear explosive, into commercial channels throughout the country, and ultimately the world. In 1976, to the dismay of fast-breeder enthusiasts, President Gerald Ford announced that US non-proliferation objectives would take precedence and put the technology on the shelf. He added that we could develop nuclear energy perfectly well without it. Jimmy Carter continued these restrictive policies with respect to plutonium.
None of this, however, changed the fast breeder’s Holy Grail status within the nuclear engineering community. That community got another chance during the George W. Bush administration, under a program called Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, or GNEP. This time, instead of arguing uranium resource constraints, an economic non-starter, they focused on the nuclear waste issue and claimed fast reactors (now dubbed as “burners” rather than breeders) had special advantages in dealing with waste.
GNEP proposed to “burn” the (mildly radioactive) longest-lasting waste, by incorporating these elements into the plutonium fuel and consuming them along with the plutonium. The trouble was, making such fuel to commercial standards remained an unsolved problem, and the fast breeder prototype, slated for the Nevada nuclear lab, never got off the ground. In any case, with the advent of the Obama administration, the GNEP program was disbanded, and the Energy Department’s fast reactor program dropped out of sight.
It is now returning for the third time in the guise of the Versatile Test Reactor, which itself is derived from a fast breeder reactor design. Just like the old Atomic Energy Commission did half a century ago, the Energy Department now tells us plutonium-fueled fast reactors are in our energy future, never mind economics or the dangers of flooding the world with plutonium fuel. Under the heading of “Putting America First,” the Energy Department tells us building fast reactors is essential for “protecting our interests,” apparently because the Russians and the Chinese, unconstrained by economics, would be building them, and we would fall behind. It is thus “imperative” to build the several-billion-dollar VTR as a first step.
The first surge of interest in fast breeders the 1960s had a certain rational basis in resource economics, even though it got the basic facts wrong about the scarcity of uranium. The second surge, during the George W. Bush administration, however poorly conceived and opportunistic, was an effort to take advantage of a real public concern about disposal of nuclear waste. The current third push, using the Versatile Test Reactor as the thin end of a larger wedge of government support for fast breeder reactors, is based far less on economics or concern about waste than purely on patriotic slogans. We don’t need it. Congress should say, “No.”
by Harvey Wasserman
10 June 19
A huge proposed bailout of two Chernobyl-in-progress Ohio nukes (plus two old coal burners) would put $20 million directly into the pockets of seven utility executives. Their bankrupt company last year spent $3 million “lobbying” the legislature.
Akron’s bankrupt FirstEnergy (FE) owns the Perry nuke, east of Cleveland, which in 1986 became the first US reactor damaged by an earthquake. Critical pipes and concrete were cracked, as were nearby roads and bridges. A top-level state study showed soon thereafter that evacuation amidst a major accident would be impossible.
FE’s uninsured Davis-Besse nuke, near Toledo, is a 42-year-old Three Mile Island clone. In 2002, boric acid ate through its head, threatening a Chernobyl-scale accident irradiating Toledo, Cleveland, and the Great Lakes. At FE’s request, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has exempted Davis-Besse from vital regulations for flooding, fire protection, earthquake vulnerability, and security. Its radiation shield building is literally crumbling.
In 2003, when nearby power lines sagged onto tree limbs, FirstEnergy blacked out some 50 million people throughout the northeast and well into Canada.
By then, FE had scammed Ohio for some $9 billion in “stranded cost” bailouts. The utility said “open market competition” would lower rates … after it pocketed the public’s money.
Now FE says its subsidized nukes can’t compete with gas and wind power. It wants $190 million/year or more from all Ohio ratepayers, even though most get zero nuke electricity.
FE first said the money was for “clean air” and “zero emission reactors.” But all nukes emit heat, chemicals, radiation, Carbon 14, and more. Their cooling towers kill birds, their waste hot water kills marine life, their cores (at about 300 degrees Centigrade) heat the planet.
The bailout bill, called HB6, attacks renewable and efficiency programs that have saved Ohio ratepayers billions of dollars and created thousands of jobs. A single sentence in the Ohio Code is blocking some $4 billion in turbine development.
The breezy “North Coast” region along Lake Erie is crisscrossed with transmission lines and good sites near urban consumers. Farmers throughout the flat, fertile agricultural land desperately want the income turbine leases could provide. The new projects would create thousands of construction and maintenance jobs. They would feed Ohio’s manufacturing base, which produces a wide range of wind and solar components. By lowering electric rates, they would restore a competitive position long lost to high electric rates. Indiana, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania all have at least double Ohio’s installed wind capacity. Texas has twenty times more. By 2022, Germany will be totally nuke-free.
Ohio has just been shaken by findings that significant radiation has leaked from a dead uranium plant in southern Ohio, contaminating schools and terrifying local residents.
Like that old “stranded cost” scam, FE’s new bailouts would suck desperately needed capital from Ohio’s faltering industrial base. The reactors are obsolete. The workforce is aging. The nukes will shut anyway … if they don’t blow up first.
[…]
長崎大原爆後障害医療研究所 原爆症と被ばく線量の関連解析
長崎大原爆後障害医療研究所は、長崎原爆の投下直後に約5800人の被爆者の健康状態を調査した「原子爆弾災害調査票」をデータベース化した。データを解析した結果、被ばく線量が高い人ほど、脱毛や嘔吐（おうと）、発熱など放射線による急性症状の種類が増える傾向にあることを確認した。
（略）
横田氏は「今後は急性症状と後年のがん発生との関連を調べ、薬が不足していた当時の治療記録も歴史的資料としてまとめたい」とし、歴史的・医学的に貴重な資料である調査票の研究活用を進める考えだ。
調査票は、1945年10月下旬～11月上旬を中心に、長崎医科大（現長崎大医学部）の第一外科教授だった故・調来助（しらべらいすけ）氏が中心となり、医師や医学生約100人が被爆者の氏名、性別、被爆状況、症状などを聞き取った。長崎大は2015年、日米共同機関の放射線影響研究所から原本の移管を受け、18年度にかけて全てをデータ化した。
サンプル数は爆心地から5キロ以内で被爆した1～86歳の男女5795人分。比較調査に適した3566人分を抽出して解析した。全身の推定被ばく線量は遮蔽（しゃへい）物がない屋外の場合、爆心地から1キロで約8シーベルト、1.5キロで約900ミリシーベルト、2キロで約130ミリシーベルト。木造家屋内はそれぞれ半分の線量だった。
解析では、線量と、出血、下痢など16種類の急性症状の発生率の関係を調べた。発熱の発生率は、推定被ばく線量100～199ミリシーベルトで35％、2～4.9シーベルトになると50％になり、5シーベルト以上で69％に上昇した。4種類以上の症状の発生率は100～199ミリシーベルトで34％、2～4.9シーベルトで68％、5シーベルト以上で77％に達した。
By Annette Cary
RICHLAND, WA
Nonoka Koga was a little shocked when she arrived as an international exchange student at Richland High, home of the Bombers.
There on the gym floor was a big green “R” over a mushroom cloud from an atomic bomb.
The school logo seemed to be everywhere, Koga said.
She is from Fukuoka, Japan, not far from Nagasaki. To her, the mushroom cloud is a reminder of those who lost their lives in Nagasaki and Hiroshima, Japan, where the U.S. dropped two atomic bombs during World War II.
They died “to ensure the peace we have today,” she said.
But in Richland the mushroom cloud is a point of pride for many students and alumni.
It is a reminder of those who worked long hours near Richland in the barren, dust-blown shrub steppe on a secret mission to produce the plutonium for the atomic weapon dropped on Nagasaki, helping to end the war.
“Proud of the cloud” is a familiar chant.
If Koga had spent the year in Japan rather than Richland, she would have participated with other students in an annual peace day to learn about and reflect on the devastation and terror of the atomic bombing of Japan.
She kept expecting that there would be a school assembly to address such a serious subject, she told the Herald.
It didn’t come and she didn’t ask about the mushroom cloud.
She was not fluent enough in English when she arrived to have a serious discussion. She was afraid that she would be bullied or teased if she spoke up.
Koga didn’t discuss her feelings about the mushroom cloud until the atomic bombing came up in her U.S. history class. It prompted her to discuss her perspective with Shawn Murphy, a photography class teacher who had mentored and encouraged her.
With his help she came up with a script and the courage to share her thoughts with her classmates during a recent broadcast on AtomicTV — the school’s morning announcement program.
She’d learned about her classmate’s culture and history over the school year. Now she wanted to share some of her own.
Her grandparents lived about 30 miles from Kokura, where the bomb with Hanford plutonium was planned to be dropped.
But as the plane carrying the “Fat Man” bomb flew over Kokura the cloud cover was heavy and the decision was made to instead bomb the backup site, Nagasaki.
“I am here today because of a cloudy day,” she told her peers in the video.
Her grandparents were safe, but 80,000 civilians — children, women and men — were killed unjustly in Nagasaki, she said.
“Should we have pride in killing innocent people?” she asked in the video. That cloud rising from the ground is made up of what it destroyed, the city and the people, she said.
She heard there were some complaints after the video was shown. But many people, students and teachers, told her they were proud of her.
“We’re just so proud she would stand up and be bold enough to say something that people disagree with,” said Sarah Landon of her host family.
On Friday Koga will walk during graduation with the other Bombers of the Richland High class of 2019.
[…]
Read more and watch video
.
福島県富岡町は７日の町議会全員協議会で、東京電力福島第１原発事故に伴う帰還困難区域のうち、本年度末のＪＲ常磐線全線再開に合わせて先行解除する避難指示の範囲を、夜ノ森駅周辺の鉄道区域と駅に至る県道や町道約１．１キロに変更する方針を示した。
これまで町は先行解除範囲を鉄道区域と町道の６００メートルとしていた。道幅が狭いことなどから今回、安全性や利便性に配慮してルートを見直した。約３０台が駐車可能な駅前駐車場も利用できるようにする。
夜ノ森駅を含む常磐線富岡－浪江（浪江町）間は原発事故後に不通となり、ＪＲ東日本は本年度末までの全線再開を計画する。駅は帰還困難区域内にあり、居住可能エリアを設ける特定復興再生拠点区域（復興拠点）として先行して国による除染が進む。駅周辺には東西自由通路と駅前広場が整備され、自由通路に橋上駅が設置される。
全協ではほかに、原発事故に伴い現在は利用していない富岡一、二小と富岡二中の建物を解体する方針を町教委が明らかにした。
[…]
政府は現在のエネルギー情勢をまとめた「エネルギー白書」を閣議決定しました。日本では再生可能エネルギーの比率を高めるのは難しいとしています。
政府は再生可能エネルギーの比率を2030年には2割を超え、22％から24％にして主力電源化することを掲げています。しかしエネルギー白書では、日本は単位面積あたりの電力の需要が他の国に比べて大きいため、再生可能エネルギーの比率を高めることは難しいとしています。同時にCO2削減の観点から原発再稼働の進展が重要としています。経済界からも政府に対して原発を2030年に30基動かすことを目標にすべきだという意見書が出されています。
A nuclear power plant in Byron, Illinois. Taken by photographer Joseph Pobereskin (http://pobereskin.com).
