東京電力福島第一原発事故後の福島を伝える映画や映像を集めた「福島映像祭２０１６」が十七～二十三日、中野区の映画館「ポレポレ東中野」で開かれる。事故から五年半が過ぎ、避難指示が次々に解除される中、福島の今を見つめる。
今年制作された四作品の他、市民による記録やテレビ番組を上映。映画監督と福島県飯舘村の酪農家のトークセッションなどもある。主催するＮＰＯ法人アワー・プラネット・ティービー代表の白石草（はじめ）さんは「避難解除や帰還の問題を抱える福島は、刻々と状況が変化している。今も続く事故の影響を見てほしい」と話す。
豊田直巳監督の「奪われた村 避難５年目の飯舘村民」は、原発事故が村から何を奪ったのかを村人の証言を中心に映し出す。古居みずえ監督の「飯舘村の母ちゃんたち 土とともに」は仮設住宅で支え合いながら暮らす、へこたれない二人の女性の日常を描く。
一回券は一般千五百円、六十歳以上千二百円、大学・専門学校生・障害者千円、高校生以下七百円。三回券は三千六百円。問い合わせはポレポレ東中野＝電０３（３３７１）００８８＝へ。 （片山夏子）
原文はこちら。
Britain’s plan to build its first nuclear plant in two decades finally got a green light following the uncertainty cast by Brexit. But it comes with wariness over foreign control of a critical infrastructure and skepticism about its effectiveness in reducing carbon emissions – even as supporters tout the benefits of the low-carbon source of energy.
The project, known as Hinkley Point C, will be funded by the China General Nuclear Power Corporation, a state-backed Chinese investor, and built by EDF, a French utility company that is largely state-owned. According to Bloomberg, the price tag of the project is expected to reach $23.6 billion. The plant is set to generate electricity for an area twice the size of London and reduce emissions by 9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year, helping the UK to meet its climate targets.
[…]
But critics are wary of placing a critical infrastructure – especially a nuclear power plant – in the hands of foreign companies, especially with Chinese companies that could be vulnerable to alleged state-sponsored hackers. The cost of the plant, which may potentially be the most expensive in Britain’s history, also has some worried. Others are concerned about nuclear waste disposal, as revealed by a recent BBC investigation of improperly stored radioactive material in a rundown nuclear site. The cost and associated hazards, some argue, are not worth it when there are cheaper and safer alternatives such as renewable energy.
[…]
“If you’re thinking about climate change as an urgent threat, something to deal with as soon as possible, then nuclear power will not be a good strategy,” M.V. Ramana, an associate research scholar at the Princeton Nuclear Futures Laboratory, tells The Christian Science Monitor in a phone interview. “If you’re serious about mitigating climate change you have to evolve a strategy that is economic and realistic.”Dr. Ramana recommends developing renewable energy such as solar and wind, storage technology, improving efficiency standards, and increasing flexibility of consumer energy usage instead as more effective solutions.
[…]
Read more.
TEPCO has begun decommissioning the outer protective wall which was erected around the Fukushima No.1 reactor building in 2011 following the massive earthquake and tsunami that sent the power station into meltdown.Industrial cranes started the decommissioning of the exterior walls of the cover, which was installed around Fukushima’s reactor building on Tuesday, by removing the first 20-ton panel which measured 23 by 17 meters.
This is the first time that the burned reactor has been exposed to the world in almost five years, after the plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) went on to construct the cover in October 2011 as a temporary measure following a powerful earthquake and tsunami in March 2011.
[…]
he utility company, according to Asahi news, hopes to dismantle the remaining 17 panels of the protective cover by the end of the year to assess the state of the reactor’s interiors and to remove the 392 fuel assemblies from the spent fuel pool in addition to melted nuclear fuel.
Read more and watch the video at TEPCO dismantles safety wall around crippled Fukushima reactor building (VIDEO)
九州電力の瓜生道明社長は９日、鹿児島県の三反園訓知事から再要請を受けた川内原発の即時停止について、応じない意向を県側に改めて回答した。知事から求められた追加の安全対策として特別点検の前倒しや避難車両の追加配備を行う考えを伝え、県側の理解を求めた。
三反園知事は瓜生社長に対し、「安全対策については非常に感謝している」と語った。会談終了後、知事は記者団に「また要請しても結論は同じ」と述べ、即時停止は求めずに、特別点検の実施状況を見守る意向を示した。
[…]It appears that he has been losing the support of the local political community although he has denied this has anything to do with his decision not to seek re-election.
The fact is, while the ruling Liberal Democratic Party was dragging its feet on endorsing Izumida, the local associations of mayors and municipalities took the unprecedented action of issuing a document criticizing the prefectural government.
The document takes issue with Izumida’s “over-the-top words and actions” and “refusal to bend his opinion.”
In a nutshell, Izumida makes it difficult for the prefectural government to work with the local municipalities as well as neighboring prefectures. And members of the prefectural assembly call him an “eccentric.”
Izumida’s achievement is that he has consistently opposed the restart of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant operated by Tokyo Electric Power Co.
He told TEPCO that the causes of the 2011 disaster at the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant must be verified before the utility can even begin to think of restarting the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa reactors. This totally stands to reason.
It has also come to light that TEPCO’s former president had instructed employees not to use the term “meltdowns” in connection with the Fukushima disaster.
Izumida probably would not have been able to do what he has done, were he not as forceful in his ways as to be seen as an eccentric.
When I think about all this, I feel it’s a shame that Izumida is bowing out.
[…]
Read more.
IITATE, Japan—Many residents of Fukushima prefecture are still angry about the nuclear disaster five years ago that contaminated towns, farm fields and forests. But as the cleanup continues, local governments and some business owners here are channeling their frustration into something positive: clean-energy development.
Fukushima prefecture, about 150 miles (240 kilometers) north of Tokyo and roughly the size of Connecticut, was the site of the devastating meltdown of the Daiichi nuclear-power plant following an earthquake and tsunami in March 2011. Since then, most of Japan’s 50-plus nuclear plants, which were shut down after the accident for a safety review, have remained off line.
Determined to move away from nuclear energy permanently, local governments in Fukushima, as well as some local entrepreneurs, have taken advantage of national subsidies and embraced solar and wind power. Even as Japan’s overall move toward renewables appears to be stalling amid resistance from utilities and cheap fossil-fuel imports, the prefecture has made progress on its goal of generating 100% of the power its residents use from green sources by 2040.
New solar, wind and geothermal power generators, combined with Fukushima’s already abundant supply of hydropower, have boosted the share of renewable energy in the prefecture’s total power supply to more than one-quarter from one-fifth in 2009. By comparison, renewables made up just 14% of Japan’s overall energy production in the year ended in March.
Fukushima wants a “zero nuclear” power supply, says government spokesman Norihiro Nagao.
Among the business owners who have jumped into the fray is Minoru Kobayashi, 64, who ran a cattle farm about 25 miles inland from the Daiichi plant before the accident. Radioactive contamination forced him and his family to evacuate, along with their cattle, and the government tore down the family’s home and everything else within a 20-meter radius of the house.
Left with fields that couldn’t be used for farming, Mr. Kobayashi, along with a group of local farmers and investors, built four 50-kilowatt solar arrays on their land and plan to build 12 more by the end of next year. The group is selling power to the local utility at prices set by the government and expects to turn a profit by the end of this year. (The company signed power contracts with the local utility when prices were between 27 and 32 yen (26 to 31 cents) a kilowatt-hour. The current rate is 24 yen a kilowatt-hour.)
[…]
Read more.
福島県は１４日、東京電力福島第一原発事故当時１８歳以下だった約３８万人を対象にした甲状腺検査で、４～６月に新たに４人ががんと診断され、計１３５人になったと発表した。県の検討委員会は「これまでのところ被曝（ひばく）の影響は考えにくい」としている。
甲状腺検査は、２０１１年秋から１３年度までの１巡目（先行検査）、１４～１５年度の２巡目（本格検査）に加え、今年度から３巡目（本格検査の２回目）が始まっている。
６月末現在で、がんかその疑いがあるとされたのは１７５人。うち１１６人は１巡目で、５９人は２巡目で分かった。１巡目では１０２人が手術を受け１０１人ががんと確定、２巡目では３４人が手術を受け全員ががんと確定した。今年６月の発表では、事故当時５歳だった１人ががんと診断されたが、新たにがんと診断された４人に５歳以下はいなかった。
[…]
もっと読む。
[…]
この検査のあり方をめぐっては、先月、県小児科医会が「検査の縮小も含めた見直し」を県に求めましたが、甲状腺がん患者の家族会が「検査の継続と拡大」を訴えていました。
１４日に開かれた検討委員会では、「がん患者家族の立場に寄り添うべき」「できるだけ正確なデータを取るべき」など、当面は検査の規模を縮小すべきではないとの意見が大半を占めました。検査のあり方については今後も議論されます。
もっと読み、動画を観る。
日本は福島原発事故以後、2年近くにわたってすべての原発を稼働停止させたが、節電などの効果により炭素排出量は増加しなかった、という調査結果を米国エネルギー省が発表した。
TEXT BY JOHN TIMMER
TRANSLATION BY MAYUMI HIRAI/GALILEO福島第一原子力発電所でのメルトダウン発生後、日本ではすべての原発の稼働が順次停止された。ほかの原発を検査し、より厳格な安全基準を設定するた めだ。2015年8月から一部の原発が稼働を再開したが、日本はそれまで、2013年9月以来、2年近くにわたってすべての原発を稼働停止させていた。
日本が事故前までその電気の4分の1以上を原子力に依存してきたことを考えれば、原発をすべて停止したことで炭素放出量は劇的に増加したと予想されるだろう。しかし、そうはならなかった。
米国エネルギー省エネルギー部（EIA）がこのほど発表した調査結果によると、日本では石炭の使用量は増加したものの、その増加率は10パーセントを超えていない。徹底した節電により、日本の電気の総使用量は、それまでの水準を下回った。
(略）
石油使用量は増加しているが、予想されたほどではない。石炭の使用量の増加は8パーセント、液化天然ガスは9パーセントだ。これらによって、原発事 故前に始まっていた「石油使用量の拡大」は減速された（なお、EIAの資料は、2011〜14年の間に液化天然ガスの価格は37パーセント、石炭の価格は 19パーセント下がったにもかかわらず、日本の電気料金は2パーセントしか下がっていないとも指摘している）。
水力発電を除いた再生可能エネルギーによる発電は、事故時と比べて2倍以上に増えている。水力発電所と合わせると、その発電量は石油を超えている。
これらすべてが最終的に示すのは、炭素排出量にそれほどの変化はなく、日本の排出量が最大となった2007年を超えてはいないということだ。今後各原発が稼働を再開したら、日本の排出量は大幅に減少し始めると考えられるため（原発と排出量の関係には異論もある）、再生可能エネルギーの拡大と全体的な節電が今後も続けば、日本の排出量の減少は加速するに違いない。
On November 10, 2011, a hundred or so residents of Andrews, Texas, gathered at a large hole in the ground to celebrate the grand opening of America’s newest nuclear waste dump.
Assembled amongst the locals were political and business luminaries from Dallas, Austin, and Washington D.C.. For the ribbon cutting, hedge trimmer-sized scissors were passed out to the various men in suits responsible for making Andrews County a repository for the nation’s radioactive trash. Among them were the senior managers of Waste Control Specialists (WCS), the company that owns the site, Harold Simmons, the conservative Dallas billionaire who owned that company; and Bob Zap, the mayor of Andrews at the time.
The inauguration of the low-level radioactive waste facility, Texas’ first, ended with a barbecue.
Most communities would not find the prospect of housing nuclear refuse cause for celebration. And yet, two years earlier, the town had narrowly voted to fund the construction of the disposal site with a $75-million bond.
Despite the enduring opposition from a handful of locals and the state Sierra club, most of Andrews’ 15,000 residents were eager to celebrate their accomplishment. And it was an accomplishment.
[…]
A Brief History of How Not To Dispose of Nuclear Waste
Though the term “nuclear waste” conjures up images of undifferentiated, glow-in-the-dark goo, it refers to a wide variety of irradiated refuse. But, in broad strokes, civilian nuclear waste comes in two basic flavors: high-level and low-level.
High-level is largely made up of spent fuel rods, pulled hot and dangerous from cooling pools in nuclear power plants across the country. This is the stuff that generates the power at nuclear power plants and, once removed, it will remain radioactive, for all intents and purpose, forever. The federal government intends to one day bury these rods deep in the ground somewhere. More on that plan later.
Low-level waste, on the other hand, is pretty much everything else that’s too radioactive to pass along to your neighborhood garbage collector. This includes the metal filters, wires, gauges, tools, and residues from nuclear power plants; the gloves, booties, and goggles worn by plant technicians; the syringes, swabs, and medical equipment from PET scans and oncology wards; and the fluids, vials, and animal carcasses from laboratory experiments.
This hodgepodge low-level waste can be further divided into classes that roughly correspond to the threat they pose to public health. The radioactivity of Class A waste fades to safe levels within one hundred years. Class C garbage can remain dangerous for half a millennium.
[…]
A Civil War Over Nuclear Waste
One could hardly blame South Carolina.
A state’s reluctance to host a nuclear waste depository is more than your run-of-the-mill NIMBY-ism. One of the nation’s founding principles, reflected in the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, is that the country is a free-trade area. Nevada cannot place tariffs on Colorado shoes to protect its own cobbler industry. In 1977, the Supreme Court ruled that what is true of shoes must be true of nuclear waste. As soon as a state opens up a radioactive waste landfill within its borders, it risks becoming a nuclear dumping ground for the entire country.
But in response to the country’s main radioactive waste site shutting its doors, Congress provided states with a workaround. Under a new law passed in the final days of 1980, states could place some restrictions on nuclear waste delivery as long as they joined regional waste management “compacts.”
Under the new system, if Illinois and Kentucky agreed upon a shared disposal site, they could form a compact, thus reserving the facility solely for nuclear waste generated between the two states. States outside of the compact system would be forced to deal with their own waste.
The compact system was seen as a way to facilitate mutually beneficial arrangements amongst the states. Instead, it just relocated the same old argument over where to locate landfills. As one hazardous waste treatment expert characterized the situation, “what we have is a Lebanon of hazardous waste in which everybody is fighting everybody else.”
[…]
Radioactive Waste as Economic Development
Even in the rarefied world of radioactive disposal facilities, the Andrews site occupies an unusual niche.
Today, there are four low-level waste landfills operating around the country. Two, in South Carolina and in Washington, can only accept waste from their respective compacts. A third, in Utah, which began operating in the early 1990s, only accepts Class A refuse.
That makes the Andrews facility the only landfill that can receive all classes of low-level radioactive waste from any state in the continental United States.
[…]
In the meantime, nuclear power plants have been left holding the radioactive bag.
Absent a long-term solution, these plants are storing their own spent fuel. This means that virtually every nuclear power plant in the country is currently serving as a de facto nuclear waste storage facility.
“If you look at a map of nuclear power plants, basically each of those is also a nuclear waste repository,” says Barry Rabe. “Most of them are in metropolitan areas.”
[…]
Eastern New Mexico is no stranger to nuclear waste. To the south of Hobbs, the British nuclear fuel company, Urenco, runs a uranium enrichment facility. To the west, International Isotopes Inc. is hoping to establish a factory for depleted uranium processing. On the drive from Hobbs to Carlsbad, you pass the turnoff to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant.
Read more at The Towns That Say “Yes in my Backyard!” to Nuclear Waste
A nuclear power plant in Byron, Illinois. Taken by photographer Joseph Pobereskin (http://pobereskin.com).
