Massive Nuclear Cleanup Hobbled by Funding Shortfall via The Wall Street Journal

By JOHN R. EMSHWILLER And GARY FIELDS

LIVERMORE, Calif.—About 45 miles southeast of San Francisco, in an 800-acre mini-city built to create atomic bombs, there’s a contaminated building slated for eventual demolition.

Mark Costella, a facilities manager at the Energy Department’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, would prefer to tear down the structure, but doesn’t have the tens of millions of dollars needed. Instead, he’s spending $500,000 to fix the roof.

These are the kinds of contradictions at the heart of the complicated, expensive and struggling effort to clean up America’s 70-year-old nuclear-weapons program.

The Energy Department’s cleanup operation is wrestling with reduced budgets, tens of billions of dollars in ballooning cost estimates and 2,700 structures on its to-do list. Officials said more than 350 additional unneeded facilities controlled by other programs in the Energy Department are likely eligible for transfer to the cleanup operation. But that office said its funds are limited and it isn’t accepting any more projects for now, no matter their significance.
[…]
Congress and government watchdogs have started raising alarms about the stockpile of contaminated buildings, warning that some of the facilities pose a health risk to the public and that the cost of dealing with them will only increase the longer they remain standing. Provisions directing the administration to address the issue were included in Congress’s 2016 defense bill, vetoed by President Barack Obama earlier this month.

The cleanup work, which includes a mixture of radioactive and chemical wastes, “is the largest environmental remediation ever undertaken by mankind and the most technically challenging,” said Gregory Friedman, who earlier this month retired as the Energy Department’s Inspector General, in an interview.

One reason for the Energy Department’s struggles is a budgetary tug of war within the agency. One part of the department maintains the U.S.’s atomic arsenal, and another is in charge of cleaning up the contamination from nuclear work. Funds for both come from the same pot, and in a shift from the 1990s, an increasing portion is going toward ensuring the readiness of the weapons arsenal, an Obama administration priority.

The nuclear-weapons budget grew 5% to $8.2 billion in the latest fiscal year—up 23% in the past decade—while the budget for cleanup was essentially flat at $5.9 billion—and down 19% since 2005.
[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Massive Nuclear Cleanup Hobbled by Funding Shortfall via The Wall Street Journal

Germany’s planned nuclear switch-off drives energy innovation via The Guardian

Hinkley Point will be the first nuclear power plant to be built in Europe since the meltdown of Japan’s Fukushima reactor in 2011. But while the British government sees nuclear energy as a safe and reliable source of power, Germany is going in a different direction.

As a result of the Fukushima, Chancellor Angela Merkel pledged to switch off all nuclear power by 2022 and fill the gap with renewables – a process known as the energiewende (energy transition).

Germany’s push for renewables grew out of the anti-nuclear protests of the 1980s and currently more than a quarter (26%) of its electricity comes from wind, solar and other renewable sources, such as biomass, although 44% is from coal. The country’s government wants to increase the share of renewables in electricity to 40% to 45% by 2025.

No other country of Germany’s size has attempted such a radical shift in its power supply in such a short space of time. Described by Merkel as a herculean task, the transition is Germany’s most ambitious economic project since die Wende – the phrase used to describe the fall of the Berlin wall and subsequent reunification of east and west – with an estimated cost of €1tn (£742bn) over the next two decades.

However, Reinhard Bütikofer, the Green party’s spokesman for industry in the European parliament, said the really “mind-blowing” energy transition is happening in the UK, where the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant in Somerset will cost electricity customers at least £4.4bn in subsidies. “They are cutting down on solar, PV [photovoltaics], purportedly for cost reasons, while on the other hand they pledge to guarantee the nuclear industry and energy price twice the market price for the next 30 years. That’s crazy.”

The energiewende is not uncontroversial, not least due to the rising cost of subsidies paid by ordinary bill payers, which has triggered complaints that poor households are subsidising affluent dentists to put solar panels on their roofs. But the transition is not opposed by Germany’s main business lobby, the BDI, despite lingering concerns about what the transition means for the country’s manufacturing base at a time when confidence in the Made in Germany brand has been knocked by the Volkswagen scandal.

“There is broad consensus in society on the political targets – to reduce CO2 and increase energy efficiency and the share of renewables,” said Carsten Rolle, the BDI’s head of energy and climate policy. “We see the main question in managing the energiewende.”
[…]

Read more.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Germany’s planned nuclear switch-off drives energy innovation via The Guardian

男子90倍以上の甲状腺がん発生を見ぬふりの環境省-知見はいつまで積み重ねるのか? via Yahoo News

(抜粋)

「十分な統計資料」

一つは国際環境疫学会の学会誌「Epidemiology」(疫学)に掲載された岡山大学の津田敏秀、時信亜希子、時信亜希子、山本英二、鈴木越治による分析だ(*1)

こ れは、日本全国の年間発生率(1975~2008年の国立がんセンタ-のデータ)と比較して、福島県が東京電力の原発事故後に18歳以下を対象に行った甲 状腺検査(2014年12月31日まで)で、一巡目で最高50倍、途上の2巡目ですらすでに12倍の発生率比を示した地域があるというものだ。「福島県に おける小児および青少年においては、甲状腺がんの過剰発生が超音波診断によりすでに検出されている」と結論づけている。

もう一つは、イギリスの医療雑誌「BMJ」に掲載された、英仏米の原子力産業労働者における低線量の長期被曝の調査で、日本の厚生労働省も研究費を出している(*2)

この調査では、結腸への累積の被曝線量が平均20.9mGyの約30万人の労働者のがんによる死亡で調べた結果として、がん罹患率と線量は 比例して増加することが示された。「今回の我々のデータは、約20mGyの累積被曝線量の人々におけるがん死リスクを比較的正確に推計するための十分な統 計資料となった」としている。

甲状腺がん発生を見ず、「推計線量」で先延ばし

ところが、日本政府は、未だに事故直後の初期被曝の推計線量が低いことを理由に、健康への影響を論じることを避け、結論を先延ばしている。その結果、あたかも「影響がない」かのように、年間の空間線量20mSv以下の地域への帰還が推し進められている。

実際は、子ども達にすでに1巡目で113人(*3)、その「多発」がスクリーニング効果を理由とするものであればもう発見されないはずの2巡目ですでに25人(*4)、計138人の甲状腺がんまたは疑いが見つかっている。

昨年11月に、男子90倍、女子52倍とされた時点(下図)からさらに増加しており、事態は進行しているとみるべきだ。疫学とは政策決定者が予防的措置を講じるための学問である。

(略)

一方で、国立がん研究センターによる、筆者が引用した男子90倍の数字に首をかしげて、手元に用意した昨年12月に環境省の「東京電力福島第一原子力発電所事故に伴う住民の健康管理のあり方に関する専門家会議」の「中間取りまとめ」をめくって、29頁にある「 成人に対する検診として甲状腺超音波検査を行うと、 罹患率の 10~50 倍程度の甲状腺がんが発見されること」との箇所を指さし、「10~50倍でしょ。うん」とつぶやいた。

この「10~50倍」とはスクリーニング効果のことであり、男女ともにそれを超えるデータが昨年11月に出ていたことになる。

しかも、この時に「中間取りまとめ」で使われたスクリーニング効果は、筆者も見落としていたが、「成人に対する検診」である。甲状腺がんの 罹患率は年齢差があり、成人に多く子どもに少ないことが特徴だ。この「専門家会議」は「成人に対する検診」を子どもに対する検診における「スクリーニング 効果」の根拠に使っていた。しかも、「10~50倍」の注釈には「事務局で算出したもの」となっていた。つまり環境省の算出だ。

丸川大臣は「知見が積み重ねられていくことがまだ必要」というが、いったい「いつまで」必要なのか。折しも、福島第一原発事故後の作業(2012年10月から2013年12月)を含めた累積被爆線量が19.8mSvとなった作業員の労災が認定されたばかりであり(*5)、約20mSvで放射線被曝の増加とがん発生が比例するとの国際的なデータとも符号する。検証すべき時期なのである。ま

全文は男子90倍以上の甲状腺がん発生を見ぬふりの環境省-知見はいつまで積み重ねるのか?

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on 男子90倍以上の甲状腺がん発生を見ぬふりの環境省-知見はいつまで積み重ねるのか? via Yahoo News

日本原燃、保安規定外の場所に放射性廃棄物 via 産経ニュース

日本原燃が、青森県六ケ所村のウラン濃縮工場で出た低レベル放射性廃棄物を、保安規定で定めたのとは別の場所に日常的に一時保管していたことが2日、原燃への取材で分かった。原子力規制庁が8月、定例の保安検査で見つけ、不適切だと指摘した。

一時保管場所は濃縮工場の建物内で、原燃は外部への放射性物質の流出はないとしている。

原燃によると、一時保管していたのは、原料のウランなどが入っていた容器を洗浄した際に発生した泥状の廃棄物。保安規定は「廃棄物室」と呼ばれる場所で保管するよう定めているが、原燃は廃棄物が一定量たまるまで、作業現場に近い別の部屋に仮置きしていた。

続きは日本原燃、保安規定外の場所に放射性廃棄物

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on 日本原燃、保安規定外の場所に放射性廃棄物 via 産経ニュース

Radioactive Legacy, Part 2: Danger in the mines via Rapid City Journal

[…]

The mining industry temporarily boosted the local economy, lined the pockets of faraway executives and helped keep the federal government stocked with uranium, the key ingredient in the country’s Cold War buildup of nuclear weapons.

But throughout Edgemont’s mining era, there was little to no government regulation. After the industry’s collapse, Edgemont and its economy were left to shrivel in the shadow of the defunct mill and its giant radioactive waste piles, while open-pit mines remain abandoned north of town.

Now, as regulatory agencies consider approving a proposed new method known as “in situ” to mine uranium near Edgemont, there aren’t many people left to tell the story of the first boom. But the tales that do get told reveal the serious risks, and sometimes real consequences, faced by many.

[…]

Life in the mill

When haulers like Spencer brought ore into Edgemont, they dumped it at the mill for processing.

On the mill’s fifth anniversary in 1961, mill workers numbered 76 and the mill’s total annual payroll was $338,000. That equates to average pay of $4,448 annually, which would be about $35,500 in inflation-adjusted 2015 dollars.

Many of the mill workers were ranchers who viewed the extra income as a way to stay on the land.

John McKnight, who suffered a chemical inhalation incident at the mill in the 1960s, was blunt about his reason for taking a mill job.

“Starvation out here on the ranch,” he said.

The mill was alongside a north-south set of railroad tracks on the east side of Edgemont, next to Cottonwood Creek less than a mile south of its confluence with the Cheyenne River. The 213-acre campus included a collection of high, steel-covered, industrial-looking buildings, plus ever-growing waste piles and ponds.

[…]

Up to 400 tons of ore per day was processed. The ore was crushed and ground into sand and mixed with water to make a slurry, and then treated with sulfuric acid to dissolve the uranium.

Next, the slurry underwent a separation process to remove the waste sand, called “sand tailings,” which was discharged to outdoor piles that continued to grow to 40 or 50 feet in height throughout the life of the mill. There was apparently no plan to bury or otherwise dispose of the tailings, and a lack of regulation relieved the company from what would turn out to be — years later for the federal government and for a different company — a significant expense.

After the sandy tailings were separated, the remaining slime was sent through a “resin-in-pulp” process which, as described in a late 1950s newspaper article, contained chemical resin beads with “an affinity for uranium ions.” The beads attracted the uranium, and also vanadium, like water softener beads attract minerals. The remaining waste slime after the uranium extraction was called “slime tailings” and was sent to holding ponds.

Finally, the uranium was stripped from the resin beads, precipitated, filtered and dried to form triuranium octoxide (U3O8). Before the drying, the yellowish product came out of a press in cake form and was called yellowcake. Before packaging, the yellowcake was broken down into a fine powder.

[…]

By the late 1960s and early ’70s, the U.S. government had more uranium than it needed and ended its guaranteed purchases. After that decision, uranium demand from the private nuclear-power industry was not enough to sustain the mines and mills that dotted the West. Meanwhile, environmentalism was flowering among the social movements of the ’60s and ’70s, and Americans were growing concerned about the piles of radioactive sand tailings at mill sites.
[…]

Concern for the health of mine workers and mill workers was slower to coalesce. It wasn’t until 1990 that Congress passed and President George H.W. Bush signed legislation — the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act — that created a fund to reimburse uranium-industry workers who suffered increased cancer risks from long-term radiation exposure, or other problems including respiratory ailments associated with mining and milling dust.

That fund still exists, and individual applicants can receive up to $100,000. About $2 billion has been awarded nationwide, including $5.175 million to 59 people with South Dakota addresses.

During a debate over amendments to the law in the late 1990s that expanded eligibility to states including South Dakota, a Sturgis woman, Sharon Kane, wrote a letter to then-U.S. Sen. Tom Daschle, D-S.D., which was entered into the Congressional Record. Kane said her late husband, Joe, worked at the Edgemont uranium mill from 1959 to 1970. He suffered upper respiratory problems that the Kanes blamed on his mill job before he died of bone-marrow cancer at age 53 in 1990.

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Radioactive Legacy, Part 2: Danger in the mines via Rapid City Journal

Radioactive Legacy, Part 1 of a Journal special report: A yellowcake gold rush via Rapid City Journal

Four million tons of radioactive waste are buried under a grassy field three miles southeast of Edgemont in far southwestern South Dakota.

North of Edgemont, two massive abandoned mines, the biggest measuring about a mile across, scar the range land.

They are the byproducts of a uranium mining boom, and because the waste is nine feet underground and the mines are too far from the roads to be seen, they’re largely forgotten. So, too, are the other ill effects of the uranium mining rush that took place a half-century ago.

Locals may remember the jobs, and the bustling processing plant. They perhaps never knew about the out-of-state tycoons who pulled millions in profits from the ground, and then left a big mess behind. And they tend to forget or overlook the abandoned mill waste, the workers sickened by dust and radiation, and the abandoned mines and possible environmental contamination.

Now those old buried memories are being stirred by two very different yet confluent developments: a proposal for a new method of uranium mining in the same area; and new federal studies of the environmental damage caused by the old mines.

Together, they form the latest chapters in a story that continues to unfold some six decades after it began amid the clamor and chaos of a yellowcake gold rush.

[…]

The rush began in 1951 and the boom lasted about 20 years. During those two decades, the town came to be dominated by a massive, Chicago-based holding company known as the Susquehanna Corporation and two of its subsidiaries, Mines Development and Susquehanna-Western.

The marriage between Susquehanna and Edgemont brought the town a temporary economic boost, but the divorce left it suffering economic, human health and environmental effects that still fester all these decades later.

It all began with atomic bombs, a discovery in a canyon wall, and a meeting between a young entrepreneur and a cunning financier.

Bombs and a bonanza

The Atomic Age exploded into being when the United States dropped its A-bombs on Japan in 1945.

[…]

Years later, a Denver Post profile of the babyfaced Gray did not specifically identify those firms but quoted Gray telling a similar story.

“I had been turned down four times by big companies, but I figured I’d give it one more try,” he told the Post.

That try was expended on J. Patrick Lannan, a Chicago financier in his early 50s. Lannan had amassed a fortune from investments in multiple companies and was an associate of the Kennedy family. After his death decades later, a pair of Chicago Tribune writers opined that Lannan made latter-day corporate raiders “look like Boy Scouts.”

In other words, Lannan knew a hot deal when he saw one, and this had all the makings. The ore was piling up at Edgemont and awaiting processing at the partially constructed mill, and the federal government stood ready to buy all the extracted uranium.

Lannan and Gray reached an agreement. The full terms did not emerge publicly, but it was soon reported that a holding company of which Lannan was a major stockholder, Chicago North Shore System Inc., took over Gray’s Mines Development for $2.5 million and retained Gray to run it from an office in Denver.

To the relief of observers in Edgemont, the deal allowed construction of the mill to restart after a 5-day stoppage. But it also meant Edgemont’s uranium industry would be dominated from the start by a Chicago-based holding company and its subsidiaries.

Within five months of the deal, Chicago North Shore’s name was changed to The Susquehanna Corporation; within two years, Lannan orchestrated a shareholder revolt and installed himself as Susquehanna’s president and CEO.

[…]

Gray predicted that the future of uranium lay in selling it to power producers. He cited Atomic Energy Commission statistics that projected U.S. electric power requirements would double by 1980 and half of the new demand would be met by atomic power plants.

In reality, 1980 found nuclear power accounting for only 11 percent of the country’s electrical generation.

As the 1980s dawned, Gray had long since been pushed out of Susquehanna Corp. by more of Lannan’s maneuvering. The country’s nuclear-power industry was reeling from the Three Mile Island disaster in 1979. Edgemont was saddled with a shuttered mill and its associated waste piles and abandoned mines. And people in uranium towns throughout the West were taking stock of their health amid growing concerns about their exposure to radiation and lung-damaging mining and milling dust.

Read more at Radioactive Legacy, Part 1 of a Journal special report: A yellowcake gold rush

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Radioactive Legacy, Part 1 of a Journal special report: A yellowcake gold rush via Rapid City Journal

高知でビキニ事件の健康相談会 元漁船乗組員ら対象にvia 47NEWS

1954年の太平洋ビキニ環礁での米国による水爆実験の際、周辺海域にいた漁船の元乗組員らを対象にした健康相談会が1日、高知県土佐清水市で開かれた。県が主催し、同県室戸市での3月の相談会に続き2回目。
 午前中に環境科学技術研究所(青森県六ケ所村)の田中公夫相談役ら専門家3人が放射線被ばくについて講演。田中相談役は、元乗組員の血液検査で染色体に通常と異なる結合などの異常が多くみられたと報告した。
[…]
田中相談役は「乗っていた船の汚染状況と本人の体調を照らし合わせていくことが重要」と語った。

もっと読む。

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on 高知でビキニ事件の健康相談会 元漁船乗組員ら対象にvia 47NEWS

伊方原発:再稼働反対集会 愛媛知事同意に抗議、デモも via 毎日新聞

松山市の市民団体「伊方原発をとめる会」は1日、市内で四国電力伊方原発3号機(愛媛県伊方町)の再稼働に反対する集会を開き、10月に再稼働に同意した中村時広知事に抗議の声を上げた。

 市中心部の城山公園であった集会には数千人が参加。全国から集まった人たちが、トラックの荷台を利用した特設ステージに立ち、「原発事故があった福島県ではいまだにたくさんの人が避難生活を続けている」「原発は人間の力ではコントロールできない」などと声を振り絞った。

 菅直人元首相も登壇。「事故が起きて放射性物質が瀬戸内海に漏れたら簡単には元に戻せない」と警告した。

 参加者らは「再稼働反対」「ミカンを守れ」などと叫びながら松山市内をデモ行進。[…]

もっと読む。

Posted in *日本語 | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on 伊方原発:再稼働反対集会 愛媛知事同意に抗議、デモも via 毎日新聞

Cancer and Fukushima: Who to trust? via The Japan Times

South Korean director Kim Ki-duk is a noted provocateur. His latest movie, “Stop,” is about a Japanese couple who were living near the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear power plant when it suffered a meltdown in March 2011.

They evacuate to Tokyo, where the wife is pestered by an underground cult that insists she abort her presumably irradiated fetus, and she becomes convinced she should. Her husband is equally convinced there is nothing wrong with the baby and ties his wife up to prevent her from doing anything. Kim’s point seems to be that whichever position you take on the nuclear accident, it will invariably drive you insane.

But these positions do divide families. In an interview that appeared Oct. 20 on Norikoe Net TV, writer Minori Kitahara remarks to filmmaker Hitomi Kamanaka that there are no men in her latest documentary, “Little Voices from Fukushima,” which centers on a group of mothers trying to gain more information about the effects of radiation on their children’s health, because the authorities give them none. Kamanaka says these women’s husbands refused to appear on camera “even though they support what their wives are doing.”

There are even more mothers involved in the movement whose spouses forbade them to participate in the filming. Because of their jobs, these men gravitate toward the establishment stance, which in this case holds that there is no solid evidence showing that the radioactivity released by the Fukushima accident has had a harmful effect on area residents, including children. Public health in Fukushima is, according to Kamanaka, a gender-identified issue. “The nuclear industry is very much a man’s world,” she says.

The male-dominated media augments the confusion by throwing out stories related to radiation in Fukushima filled with unexplained statistics: three Fukushima hospitals ran tests on 2,700 children and discovered no radioactive cesium in their bodies; the International Atomic Energy Agency says an increase in the incidence of thyroid cancer in Fukushima is “unlikely.” Then Toshihide Tsuda, a professor at Okayama University, contradicts the purport of these stories by publishing a study in the journal of the International Society of Environmental Epidemiology that found thyroid cancer incidence rates of Fukushima residents “under the age of 19″ was 20 to 50 times the national level. News items that mention the study also point out that Tsuda’s conclusions are questioned by experts who call them “premature” or indicative of a “screening surge,” meaning that since so many people were tested more cancers than normal were bound to be found and these cancers may not have been caused by radiation.

[…]

What’s missing is the qualitative dimension. Katsuya Kodama, a medical researcher whose specialty is the effects of radiation on cells, pointed out during a recent discussion on the Internet news channel DemocraTV that DNA strands are always being damaged and repair themselves as a matter of course. Radiation above a certain level, however, can cause more permanent damage, which may lead to cancerous cell growth.

[…]

He isn’t saying that radioactivity isn’t dangerous or that people living in the area shouldn’t be screened; he’s saying the matter should be explained medically and not just statistically. Strangely enough, his research, like Tsuda’s, has been rejected by the establishment. When he presented his findings to the Nuclear Regulation Authority, they told him they were afraid people would “misunderstand.” In accordance with the official line regarding the possible health crisis in Fukushima, it’s better not to talk about it at all.

Read more at Cancer and Fukushima: Who to trust?

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Cancer and Fukushima: Who to trust? via The Japan Times

“Hot spot” near nuclear waste has St. Louis residents on edge via CBS

There is growing fear in a suburban St. Louis community over a potential threat buried in the ground. A local landfill contains nuclear waste and just three football fields away, a “hot spot” has been burning underground in a second landfill.

Federal officials insist the so-called “smoldering event” is contained, and not advancing towards the waste. But nearby residents have lived with both the burn and the waste for years, and they say they are fed up, reports CBS News correspondent Vinita Nair.

Hundreds of people demanded answers Monday night from federal officials.

“You can’t 100 percent guarantee that we’re okay,” said one resident.

“We don’t go outside, we don’t open our windows,” said another.

St. Louis’ nuclear legacy dates to World War II, when uranium was processed here for America’s first nuclear weapons. One landfill – named a Superfund cleanup site in 1990 — houses illegally disposed nuclear residue from the Cold War era. The other, about 1,000 feet from the radioactive material, has a slow burn that has been smoldering for five years.

No one knows for sure what will happen if the fire comes into contact with it. The sites where the leftover waste was stored have been cleaned, but some low-level radiation has moved into neighborhoods.

“I don’t know why they ignored it for so long, I really don’t,” said Dawn Chapman, who lives less than two miles away from the landfills. Chapman helped start a citizen activist group to educate her neighbors.

“I cannot believe that somebody and anybody in their right mind would think that you can leave the world’s oldest nuclear weapon’s waste sitting on the surface of a landfill for over 40 years and there not be a consequence to that,” Chapman said.

Continue reading at “Hot spot” near nuclear waste has St. Louis residents on edge

Posted in *English | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on “Hot spot” near nuclear waste has St. Louis residents on edge via CBS