MySpace

FAIR USE NOTICE: This blog may contain copyrighted material. Such material is made available for educational purposes, to advance understanding of human rights, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law. This material is distributed without profit.

Feel free to repost but be polite and include a link back to my page, and please take the time to take the requested actions, respond to articles with comments and letters to the editor at the source links provided in order to do your part in reversing this dangerous trend toward nuclear dependence leading to death and destruction for generations to come.

del.icio.us I am nonuke.org on del.icio.us
del.icio.us Add me to your network

AddThis Feed Button

AddThis Feed Button

AddThis Social Bookmark Button


NoNuke.org



Last Updated: 10/25/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Female
Status: Single
Age: 98
Sign: Capricorn

City: TAMPA
State: FLORIDA
Country: US
Signup Date: 12/22/2006

My Subscriptions

Blog Archive
[Older      Newer]
 /  / 
October 22, 2009 - Thursday 

Category: News and Politics
TENNER FILMS 
TENNER FILMS
Home to an ambitious, interactive film & online project exploring the controversial subject of NUCLEAR POWER

Hi everyone,

My name's Vicki Lesley and I'm a filmmaker and activist based in London, England. Elaine very kindly agreed to forward on a message about a project I'm working on that I hope you'll want to check out.

'13 Short Films About Atomic Power' is an independent film/web project all about the problems and controversies of nuclear energy. So far I've produced short documentaries about uranium mining in Arizona and New Mexico, decommissioning in Scotland, an interview about British energy policy with former energy minister and political legend Tony Benn, as well as animations about atomic history and Iran, and a performance poetry piece about nuclear power and climate change.

I'd love you all to take a look at the films as well as the rest of my site, which contains tons of other nuclear power-related stuff, from news and guest blogs, to music and art.

http://www.tennerfilms.com

If you like what you see, why not join the Tenner Films Facebook group to keep in touch with the project's developments. I'm really trying to get the number of members of the FB group up as it will help me show funders that there's a real appetite for films on this subject. Nuclear energy is dangerously in the resurgence again and we all need to work together to get the issues out there in people's imaginations I think... You can check out the MYSPACE/FB group's here

http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewProfile&friendID=108851436

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6470412005

Thanks so much and I look forward to welcoming you to the Tenner Films family!

best wishes,

Vicki Lesley
April 17, 2009 - Friday 

Category: News and Politics
Solving the energy crisis and ending bailouts- for real!

April 17, 2009 at 1:00 pm by Chris Hrabovsky

04 28 50 thumb11 Solving the energy crisis and ending bailouts  for real!

For those of us growing weary of hearing about the energy crisis, coupled with the concept of more bailouts for corporations such as AIG and the rest of Wall Streets finest, we may finally have the “pick-me-up” you’ve been craving, in the form of green sustainability.

The truth is, “bailouts”, are not just limited to Wall Street thieves. Energy Companies like Progress Energy have been granted a “pre-emptive bailout”, for a boondoggle that hasn’t even been built yet. No longer do corporations have to screw up and gamble away their money in order to have the government hand them more of our hard earned cash. Now they can be given the right to reach into our wallets, to subsidize their gambling schemes before they even get started. It’s called Advanced Cost Recovery and the proposed Levy County nuclear plant is the first of more to come. Progress Energy started adding 25% to their customer’s bills this January of 2009, in part to pre-pay for their nuclear power project. They are taxing citizens for this corporation’s private gain.

13 16 1 thumb11 Solving the energy crisis and ending bailouts  for real!

But wait, where’s the “pick me up”, I referred to earlier? Like you, the only thing that makes me more weary, than hearing of another bailout, is hearing another person complain about it without offering any hope or solutions. Well, this time we have both. I have been researching this issue for some time now and have uncovered several solutions.

Let’s begin with the most ambitious. We can create Municipal Utility Companies in each and every Chartered City in Florida. Right now Florida has 34 Muni’s according to the FMEA, some producing their own power and others buying power from abroad. The most shining example of a well functioning Muni, is the Gainesville Regional Utility Company. They use some of the revenue they collect to pay for the City’s police, fire, and parks and recreation (lowering taxes instead of lining the pockets of a corporate CEO). The GRU is also the country’s first municipality to introduce the Feed In Tariff to pay for Solar Panels for their residents. This is the method Germany used to help encourage homeowners to install Photo-Voltaic (PV) panels on their homes- The homeowner gets paid 32 cents for every kilowatt produced by their solar panels and then only has to pay 12 cents for every kilowatt used in the home. This allows residents to become entrepreneurs, making a profit from sunshine (for more details visit FARE).

13 48 2 thumb11 Solving the energy crisis and ending bailouts  for real!

How then, you ask, does a city that is covered by a monopoly, like Progress Energy, TECO, or Florida Power & Light, do this? One way is to do what the City of Winter Park did. They broke free from Progress Energy, when their franchise agreement was up, and now the City of Winter Park has control over its own power. They are currently issuing bonds to help put the power lines underground. They will have the opportunity and the option to move toward wind and solar power to help meet their city’s energy needs. They could then place solar panels on the land that currently holds the large type, high tension transmission line towers. Thousands of acres of land, which is already maintained and is currently unused, can be utilized and covered by PV panels, which can deliver power directly to the grid. This will prove more efficient than a large centralized production facility because there will be less loss in the transmission of the power, as it will be spread out along the many miles of land that these towers and lines already occupy.

We are currently researching many franchise agreements between Progress Energy and various cities throughout Florida, in order to help other cities obtain their freedom from corporate monopolies. So far we have noticed a trend, of diminishing rights for city residents. For example, in Tarpon Springs’ 1961 Franchise agreement with PE, the City had the right to buy back the power grid (like in Winter Park), and in the current agreement that provision is missing. Also missing in the current agreement is the right for the city to renegotiate the 30 year contract every 10 years. Valuable information is being uncovered as we pour over the lengthy legal documents. More to come as the records requests keep pouring in. This is where you can get involved. Contact your local City Representatives and ask about your City’s Franchise Agreement, and take a look at your City’s Electric Bill. Start conversations with your neighbors about what it might be like to have your own Muni Power Company, who answers to the people, instead of out of town shareholders. Call Winter Park and Gainesville, and ask them. Also call the City of Belleair and ask about their experience trying to get the same freedom from Progress Energy. Every chartered City can do this by referendum. Do the research and start the petitions.

Another potential solution to both our energy needs and our need to be free from bailing out corporate energy producers is, the Berkeley Model. In Berkeley California, they have implemented a program for issuing Bonds that can be used to buy solar panels for a home. The city pays the upfront costs and the property owners repay the costs over 20 years through a special assessment on their property tax bills. This model allows the cost to remain with the house, so if sold or even foreclosed on, the house and the solar panels would go to the new owner, and the monthly tax increase would go along too, as well as the savings of course due to no electric bill. Again, contact your Mayor and Representatives, and demand that they study this option. This can be done in your city.

images11 Solving the energy crisis and ending bailouts  for real!

Yet another potential solution actually allows a corporation to be the savior: I call this the SunRun Model, after the SunRun solar company in San Francisco California. This is an example of a corporation paying all of the upfront costs and ongoing maintenance for solar systems on each home. The home owner, then pays a monthly fee, either for the electricity used or the fee could simply be used to pay back the loan for the systems cost (a hair splitting detail that may have to be ironed out due to Florida’s laws in regard to who is allowed to sell electricity). Even this model will help break the grip of dirty oil, coal and nuclear corporate monopolies. The way to help make this happen is for you to encourage the passage of solar friendly local ordinances, and state laws, like the Feed-in Tariff. Then call European, California-based and local Florida companies and tell them we have new markets opening due to the passage of these new incentives. Thus, new Green Jos are created (40,000 in Germany)!

We can produce clean, safe, and renewable energy locally. We can complete our energy producing projects more quickly and efficiently than their proposed nuclear plants, as well as create local green jobs in the process. And we can do it for much less money. Let us ween ourslves off of the corporations that we have entrusted with too much, for far to long. No more bailouts for corporate private profits. It’s time to bail ourselves out of the mess that greedy corporations have put us in.

Let’s create our own energy. And in doing so, we shall energize our economy, our neighborhoods, and ourselves. Let’s take back our power, literally!

http://blogs.creativeloafing.com/dailyloaf/2009/04/17/solving-energy-crisis-ending-bailouts-for-real-2/
April 3, 2009 - Friday 

Category: News and Politics
Lake Superior Radioactive Toxic Waste Barrel Dumps


Between 1957 and 1962, the Army Corps of Engineers dumped about 1,457 barrels of toxic military waste from Honeywell, Co. into Lake Superior near the City of Duluth, MN. Submarine operator Harold Maynard contends that radiation was being emitted from the submerged barrel dump he approached with his sub and Geiger counter in 1990. In this April 12, 1995 KBJR television news (Duluth, Minn.) interview, Capt. Maynard claims that a cover up of this finding of radioactive emissions has been going on ever since. Transcript available at www.nukewatch.com  
April 3, 2009 - Friday 

Category: News and Politics

Renewable energy is good for Florida




By Stephen A. Smith, Special to the Times
In Print: Saturday, April 4, 2009

Jeff Lyash, CEO of Progress Energy, is wrong in his conclusion that a policy at both the state and federal level promoting a modest requirement for renewable energy (like solar and bioenergy) is bad for Florida consumers. The facts are that growing a diverse energy market protects Florida's families from an over-reliance on energy sources that are price-volatile, such as natural gas, and prohibitively expensive, such as nuclear reactors.

Prices for natural gas have spiked unpredictably over the last few years, and the estimate to construct nuclear reactors has increased threefold since 2006. Indeed, Progress Energy's extraordinary high nuclear costs ($17 billion) have already lead to sharp rate increases for Progress customers, even before they start construction. Lyash's company will be billing customers for close to 10 years before the first electron is ever produced from its proposed nuclear reactors. Rates have increased by more than $6 per month this year and are projected to increase by more than $40 per month in 2017 to cover construction costs.

Renewable power prices are coming down. For example, biopower produced from forest and agriculture waste materials has far less capital cost and can be brought on line faster and in smaller blocks than the massive nuclear plants that tend to overshoot demand and lock in high cost for utility bill payers.

Florida has the opportunity to jump into the tremendous growth in the solar market that allows customers to take advantage of a power source that has deeply declining cost, tremendous employment opportunities to help get Florida's economy out of the ditch, and can sustainably provide true clean energy for our children and grandchildren.

The simple fact is that big power companies like Progress want to maintain big profits for their shareholders at ratepayer expense, and the best way to do that is building big, expensive plants that get into the base rate and garner a good rate of return for the company's shareholders.

Policies that promote smaller distributed renewable generation, like solar and bioenergy, will allow more players into the market, create jobs and provide more competition to the big power companies that force them to be more innovative — that's exactly what the Florida economy, workers and utility customers need now.

Stephen A. Smith is executive director of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy. To learn more visit cleanenergy.org.

http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/essays/article989323.ece
April 2, 2009 - Thursday 

Category: News and Politics
FOOLING WITH DISASTER?
Startling revelations about Three Mile Island disaster raise doubts over nuclear plant safety
A special Facing South investigation by Sue Sturgis

Carter_TMI_4-1-79.gif It was April Fool's Day, 1979 -- 30 years ago this week -- when Randall Thompson first set foot inside the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Middletown, Pa. Just four days earlier, in the early morning hours of March 28, a relatively minor problem in the plant's Unit 2 reactor sparked a series of mishaps that led to the meltdown of almost half the uranium fuel and uncontrolled releases of radiation into the air and surrounding Susquehanna River.



It was the single worst disaster ever to befall the U.S. nuclear power industry, and Thompson was hired as a health physics technician to go inside the plant and find out how dangerous the situation was. He spent 28 days monitoring radiation releases.

Today, his story about what he witnessed at Three Mile Island is being brought to the public in detail for the first time -- and his version of what happened during that time, supported by a growing body of other scientific evidence, contradicts the official U.S. government story that the Three Mile Island accident posed no threat to the public.

"What happened at TMI was a whole lot worse than what has been reported," Randall Thompson told Facing South. "Hundreds of times worse."

Thompson and his wife, Joy, a nuclear health physicist who also worked at TMI in the disaster's aftermath, claim that what they witnessed there was a public health tragedy. The Thompsons also warn that the government's failure to acknowledge the full scope of the disaster is leading officials to underestimate the risks posed by a new generation of nuclear power plants.

While new reactor construction ground to a halt after the 1979 incident, state leaders and energy executives today are pushing for a nuclear energy revival that's centered in the South, where 12 of the 17 facilities seeking new reactors are located.

Fundamental to the industry's case for expansion is the claim that history proves nuclear power is clean and safe -- a claim on which the Thompsons and others, bolstered by startling new evidence, are casting doubt.

An unlikely critic

randall_thompson_fire.jpg
Randall Thompson could never be accused of being a knee-jerk anti-nuclear alarmist. A veteran of the U.S. Navy's nuclear submarine program, he is a self-described "nuclear geek" who after finishing military service jumped at the chance to work for commercial nuclear power companies.

He worked for a time at the Peach Bottom nuclear plant south of Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania's York County, but quit the industry six months before the TMI disaster over concerns that nuclear companies were cutting corners for higher profits, with potentially dangerous results. Instead, he began publishing a skateboarding magazine with his wife Joy.

But the moment the Thompsons heard about the TMI incident, they wanted to get inside the plant and see what was happening first-hand. That didn't prove difficult: Plant operator Metropolitan Edison's in-house health physics staff fled after the incident began, so responsibility for monitoring radioactive emissions went to a private contractor called Rad Services.

The company immediately hired Randall Thompson to serve as the health physics technician in charge of monitoring radioactive emissions, while Joy Thompson got a job monitoring radiation doses to TMI workers.

"I had other health physicists from around the country calling me saying, 'Don't let it melt without me!" Randall Thompson recalls. "It was exciting. Our attitude was, 'Sure I may get some cancer, but I can find out some cool stuff.'"

What the Thompsons say they found out during their time inside TMI suggests radiation releases from the plant were hundreds if not thousands of times higher than the government and industry have acknowledged -- high enough to cause the acute health effects documented in people living near the plant but that have been dismissed by the industry and the government as impossible given official radiation dose estimates.

The Thompsons tried to draw attention to their findings and provide health information for people living near the plant, but what they say happened next reads like a John Grisham thriller.

They tell of how a stranger approached Randall Thompson in a grocery store parking lot in late April 1979 and warned him his life was at risk, leading the family to flee Pennsylvania. How they ended up in New Mexico working on a book about their experiences with the help of Joy's brother Charles Busey, another nuclear Navy vet and a former worker at the Hatch nuclear power plant in Georgia. How one evening while driving home from the store Busey and Randall Thompson were run off the road, injuring Thompson and killing Busey. How a copy of the book manuscript they were working on was missing from the car's trunk after the accident. These allegations were detailed in several newspaper accounts back in 1981.

Eventually, after a decade of having their lives ruled by TMI, the Thompsons decided to move on. Randall Thompson went to college to study computer science. Joy Thompson returned to publishing and writing.

Today they live quietly in the mountains of North Carolina where, inspired by time spent seeking refuge with a traveling circus, they have forged a new career for themselves as clowns -- or what they like to call "professional fools." As Joy Thompson wrote in the fall 2001 issue of Parabola, a journal of myth, the role of the fool is to help people "perceive the foolishness in even ... the most powerful institutions," noting the medieval court jester's role of telling the King what others dare not.

That conviction has led the Thompsons to tell their story today.

"They haven't told the truth yet about what happened at Three Mile Island," says Randall Thompson. "A lot of people have died because of this accident. A lot."

Anomalies abound

That a lot of people died because of what happened at Three Mile Island, as the Thompsons claim, is definitely not part of the official story. In fact, the commercial nuclear power industry and the government insist that despite the meltdown of almost half of the uranium fuel at TMI, there were only minimal releases of radiation to the environment that harmed no one.

For example, the Nuclear Energy Institute, the lobbying group for the U.S. nuclear industry, declares on its website that there have been "no public health or safety consequences from the TMI-2 accident." The government's position is the same, reflected in a fact sheet distributed today by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the federal agency charged with overseeing the U.S. nuclear power industry: TMI, it says, "led to no deaths or injuries to plant workers or members of the nearby community." [The watchdog group Three Mile Island Alert offers their take on the NRC factsheet here.]

Those upbeat claims are based on the findings of the Kemeny Commission, a panel assembled by President Jimmy Carter in April 1979 to investigate the TMI disaster. Using release figures presented by Metropolitan Edison and the NRC, the commission calculated that in the month following the disaster there were releases of up to 13 million curies of so-called "noble gases" -- considered relatively harmless -- but only 13 to 17 curies of iodine-131, a radioactive form of the element that at even moderate exposures causes thyroid cancer. (A curie is a measure of radioactivity, with 1 curie equal to the activity of one gram of radium. For help understanding these and other terms, see the glossary at the end of this piece.)

But the official story that there were no health impacts from the disaster doesn't jibe with the experiences of people living near TMI. On the contrary, their stories suggest that area residents actually suffered exposure to levels of radiation high enough to cause acute effects -- far more than the industry and the government has acknowledged.

Some of their disturbing experiences were collected in the book Three Mile Island: The People's Testament, which is based on interviews with 250 area residents done between 1979 and 1988 by Katagiri Mitsuru and Aileen M. Smith.

It includes the story of Jean Trimmer, a farmer who lived in Lisburn, Pa. about 10 miles west of TMI. On the evening of March 30, 1979, Trimmer stepped outside on her front porch to fetch her cat when she was hit with a blast of heat and rain. Soon after, her skin became red and itchy as if badly sunburned, a condition known as erythema. About three weeks later, her hair turned white and began falling out. Not long after, she reported, her left kidney "just dried up and disappeared" -- an occurrence so strange that her case was presented to a symposium of doctors at the nearby Hershey Medical Center. All of those symptoms are consistent with high-dose radiation exposure.

There was also Bill Peters, an auto-body shop owner and a former justice of the peace who lived just a few miles west of the plant in Etters, Pa. The day after the disaster, he and his son -- who like most area residents were unaware of what was unfolding nearby -- were working in their garage with the doors open when they developed what they first thought was a bad sunburn. They also experienced burning in their throats and tasted what seemed to be metal in the air. That same metallic taste was reported by many local residents and is another symptom of radiation exposure, commonly reported in cancer patients receiving radiation therapy.

Peters soon developed diarrhea and nausea, blisters on his lips and inside his nose, and a burning feeling in his chest. Not long after, he had surgery for a damaged heart valve. When his family evacuated the area a few days later, they left their four-year-old German shepherd in their garage with 200 pounds of dog chow, 50 gallons of water and a mattress. When they returned a week later, they found the dog dead on the mattress, his eyes burnt completely white. His food was untouched, and he had vomited water all over the garage. They also found four of their five cats dead -- their eyes also burnt white -- and one alive but blinded. Peters later found scores of wild bird carcasses scattered over their property.

Similar stories surfaced in The People of Three Mile Island, a book by documentary photographer Robert Del Tredici. He found local farmers whose cattle and goats died, suffered miscarriages and gave birth to deformed young after the incident; whose chickens developed respiratory problems and died; and whose fruit trees abruptly lost all their leaves. Local residents also collected evidence of deformed plants, some of which were examined by James Gunckel, a botanist and radiation expert with Brookhaven National Laboratory and Rutgers University.

"There were a number of anomalies entirely comparable to those induced by ionizing radiation -- stem fasciations, growth stimulation, induction of extra vegetative buds and stem tumors," he swore in a 1984 affidavit.

Scientists say these kinds of anomalies simply aren't explained by official radiation release estimates.

Evidence of harm

wing_tmi_cancer_map.gif
The evidence that people, animals and plants near TMI were exposed to high levels of radiation in the 1979 disaster is not merely anecdotal. While government studies of the disaster as well as a number of independent researchers assert the incident caused no harm, other surveys and studies have also documented health effects that point to a high likelihood of significant radiation exposures.

In 1984, for example, psychologist Marjorie Aamodt and her engineer husband, Norman -- owners of an organic dairy farm east of Three Mile Island who got involved in a lawsuit seeking to stop TMI from restarting its Unit 1 reactor -- surveyed residents in three hilltop neighborhoods near the plant. Dozens of neighbors reported a metallic taste, nausea, vomiting and hair loss as well as illnesses including cancers, skin and reproductive problems, and collapsed organs -- all associated with radiation exposure. Among the 450 people surveyed, there were 19 cancer deaths reported between 1980 and 1984 -- more than seven times what would be expected statistically.

That survey came to the attention of the industry-financed TMI Public Health Fund, created in 1981 as part of a settlement for economic losses from the disaster. The fund's scientific advisors verified the Aamodts' calculations and launched a more comprehensive study of TMI-related cancer deaths led by a team of scientists from Columbia University. The researchers found an association between estimated radiation doses received by area residents and instances of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, lung cancer, leukemia and all cancers combined. Crucially, however, the researchers decided there wasn't "convincing evidence" that TMI radiation releases were linked to the increase in cancers in the area because of the "low estimates of radiation exposure." The paper did not consider what conclusions could be drawn if those "low estimates" turned out to be wrong.

By the time the Columbia research was published in the early 1990s, a class-action lawsuit was underway involving about 2,000 plaintiffs claiming that the radiation emissions were much larger than admitted by the government and industry. (The federal courts eventually rejected that suit, though hundreds of out-of-court settlements totaling millions of dollars have been reached with victims, including the parents of children born with birth defects.)

Consulting for the plaintiffs' attorneys, the Aamodts contacted Dr. Steven Wing, an epidemiologist at the University of North Carolina School of Public Health in Chapel Hill to provide support for the plaintiffs. Dr. Wing was reluctant to get involved because -- as he wrote in a 2003 paper about his experience -- "allegations of high radiation doses at TMI were considered by mainstream radiation scientists to be a product of radiation phobia or efforts to extort money from a blameless industry." But impressed with the Aamodts' compelling if imperfect evidence, Wing agreed to look at whether there were connections between radiation exposure from TMI and cancer rates.

Wing reanalyzed the Columbia scientists' data, looking at cancer rates before the TMI disaster to control for other possible risk factors in the 10-mile area. His peer-reviewed results, published in 1997, found positive relationships between accident dose estimates and rates of leukemia, lung cancer and all cancers. Where the Columbia study found a 30 percent average increase in lung cancer risk among one group of residents, for example, Wing found an 85 percent increase. And while the Columbia researchers found little or no increase in adult leukemias and a statistically unreliable increase in childhood cases, Wing found that people downwind during the most intense releases were eight to 10 times more likely on average than their neighbors to develop leukemia.

Dr. Wing reflected on his findings at a symposium in Harrisburg marking the 30-year anniversary of the Three Mile Island disaster last week.

"I believe this is very good evidence that releases were thousands of times greater than the story we've been told," he said. "As we think about the current plans to open more nuclear reactors, when we hear -- which we hear often -- that no one was harmed at Three Mile Island, we really should question that."

Documenting discrepancies

Randall and Joy Thompson couldn't agree more. If anything, they think Dr. Wing's findings understate the impact of Three Mile Island because they're based on low-ball estimates of radiation releases.

"Given what he was allowed to know or could figure out, he did a slam-bang job of it," Joyce Thompson says.

In 1995, the Thompsons -- with the help of another health physics expert who was also hired to monitor radiation after the TMI disaster, David Bear (formerly Bloombaum) - prepared a report analyzing the Kemeny Commission findings. Their research, which hasn't been covered by any major media, documents a series of inconsistencies and omissions in the government's account.

For example, the official story is that the TMI incident released only 13 to 17 curies of dangerous iodine into the outside environment, a tiny fraction of the 13 million curies of less dangerous radioactive gases officials say were released, primarily xenon. Such a number would seem small compared with, for example, the 1986 nuclear accident at Chernobyl, which released anywhere from 13 million to 40 million curies of iodine and is linked to 50,000 cases of thyroid cancer, according to World Health Organization estimates.

But the Thompsons and Bear point out that the commission's own Technical Assessment Task Force, in a separate volume, had concluded that iodine accounted for 8 to 12 percent of the total radioactive gases leaked from Three Mile Island. Conservatively assuming the 13 million curie figure was the total amount of radioactive gases released rather than just the xenon portion, and then using the Task Force's own 8 to 12 percent estimate of the proportion that was iodine, they point out that "the actual figure for Iodine release would be over 1 million curies" -- a much more substantial public health threat.

In another instance, the Kemeny Commission claimed that there were 7.5 million curies of iodine present in TMI's primary loop, the contained system that delivers cooling water to the reactor. But a laboratory analysis done on March 30 found a higher concentration of iodine in the reactor water, which would put the total amount of iodine present -- and which could potentially leak into the environment -- at 7.65 million curies.

"Thus, while the apparent difference between 7.5 and 7.65 seems inconsiderable at first glance," the Thompson/Bear report states, "this convenient rounding off served to 'lose' a hundred and fifty thousand curies of radioactive Iodine."

They also offer evidence of atmospheric releases of dangerously long-lived radioactive particles such as cesium and strontium -- releases denied by the Kemeny Commission but indicated in the Thompsons' own post-disaster monitoring and detailed in the report -- and show that there were pathways for the radiation to escape into the environment. They demonstrate that the plant's radiation filtration system was totally inadequate to handle the large amounts of radiation released from the melted fuel and suggest that the commission may have arbitrarily set release estimates at levels low enough to make the filtration appear adequate.

Shockingly, they also report that when readings from the dosimeters used to monitor radiation doses to workers and the public were logged, doses of beta radiation -- one of three basic types along with alpha and gamma -- were simply not recorded, which Joy Thompson knew since she did the recording. But Thompson's monitoring equipment also indicated that beta radiation represented about 90 percent of the radiation to which TMI's neighbors were exposed in April 1979, which means an enormous part of the disaster's public health risk may have been wiped from the record.

Finally, in a separate analysis the Thompsons point to discrepancies in government and industry accounts of the disaster that suggest the TMI Unit 2 suffered a scram failure -- that is, a breakdown of the emergency shutoff system. That would mean the nuclear reaction spiraled out of control and therefore posed a much greater danger than the official story allows.

The Thompsons aren't the only ones who have produced evidence that the radiation releases from TMI were much higher than the official estimates. Arnie Gundersen -- a nuclear engineer and former nuclear industry executive turned whistle-blower -- has done his own analysis, which he shared for the first time at a symposium in Harrisburg last week.

"I think the numbers on the NRC's website are off by a factor of 100 to 1,000," he said.

Exactly how much radiation was released is impossible to say, since onsite monitors immediately went off the scale after the explosion. But Gundersen points to an inside report by an NRC manager who himself estimated the release of about 36 million curies -- almost three times as much as the NRC's official estimate. Gundersen also notes that industry itself has acknowledged there was a total of 10 billion curies of radiation inside the reactor containment. Using the common estimate that a tenth of it escaped, that means as much as a billion curies could have been released to the environment.

gundersen_pressure_spike_slide.jpgGundersen also offered compelling evidence based on pressure monitoring data from the plant that shortly before 2 p.m. on March 28, 1979 there was a hydrogen explosion inside the TMI containment building that could have released significant amounts of radiation to the environment. The NRC and industry to this day deny there was an explosion, instead referring to what happened as a "hydrogen burn." But Gundersen noted that affidavits from four reactor operators confirm that the plant manager was aware of a dramatic pressure spike after which the internal pressure dropped to outside pressure; he also noted that the control room shook and doors were blown off hinges. In addition, Gundersen reported that while Metropolitan Edison would have known about the pressure spike immediately from monitoring equipment, it didn't notify the NRC about what had happened until two days later.

Gundersen maintains under the NRC's own rules an evacuation should have been ordered on the disaster's first day, when calculated radiation exposures in the town of Goldsboro, Pa. were as high as 10 rems an hour compared to an average cumulative annual background dose of about 0.125 rems. No evacuation order was ever issued, though Gov. Dick Thornburgh did issue an evacuation advisory on March 30 for pregnant women and preschool children within 5 miles of the plant. The government also did not distribute potassium iodide to the public, which would have protected people from the health-damaging effects of radioactive iodine.

Lessons for the future?


When asked by Facing South to respond to these allegations, a spokeswoman for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission did not address them directly, instead stating that it continues to stand by the Kemeny Commission report. The NRC further insists that the radiation releases from Three Mile Island had only "negligible effects" on the physical health of humans and the environment, citing other reports from federal agencies [For a PDF of the NRC's response to Facing South, see here.]

But Gundersen and the Thompsons argue such claims don't address new findings at odds with the government's account.

"I believe [the] data shows releases from TMI were significantly greater than reported by the federal government," Gundersen says.

They also say their findings that releases were potentially much larger have important ramifications for current plans to expand the nuclear power industry.

With more than $18 billion in federal subsidies at stake, 17 companies are seeking federal licenses to build a total of 26 nuclear reactors across the country, the first applications since the 1979 disaster. The Atlanta-based Southern Co. plans to begin site work this summer for two new reactors at the Vogtle site in Georgia, where state lawmakers recently approved legislation forcing ratepayers to foot the bill for those facilities up front. Florida and South Carolina residents have also begun paying new utility charges to finance planned reactors, USA Today reports. Plans are in the works as well for new reactors in Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Texas.

Harold Denton, a retired NRC official who worked in Three Mile Island during the crisis, recently told Greenwire that changes made after the 1979 disaster "significantly reduced the overall risks of a future serious accident." But the Thompsons and Gundersen point out that the standards the NRC is applying to the new generation of nuclear plants are influenced by assumptions about what happened at Three Mile Island. They say the NRC's low estimates of radiation exposure have resulted in inadequate requirements for safety and containment protocols as well as the size of the evacuation zones around nuclear plants.

Other nuclear watchdogs have also raised concerns that the NRC's standards for protection against severe accidents like TMI remain inadequate. In a December 2007 report titled "Nuclear Power in a Warming World," the Union of Concerned Scientists notes that the worst accident the current generation of reactors was designed to withstand involves only partial melting of the reactor core but no breach of containment. And the NRC requires operators of plants found to be vulnerable to severe accidents to fix the problem "only if a cost-benefit analysis shows that the financial benefit of a safety backfit - determined by assigning a dollar value to the number of projected cancer deaths that would result from a severe accident - outweighs the cost of fixing the problem," the report states.

Given their personal experiences, the Thompsons warn that we may be fooling ourselves into believing nuclear power is safer than evidence and history suggest.

"Once you realize how deep and broad the realignment of facts about TMI has been, it becomes really pretty amazing," Randall Thompson says. "I guess that's what it takes to protect this industry."

(Images from top: Photo of President Jimmy Carter leaving Three Mile Island for Middletown, Pa. on April 1, 1979 from the National Archives and Records Administration; photo of Randall Thompson swallowing fire by William Mosher; map showing increases in cancer rates in the TMI area after the disaster courtesy of Dr. Steve Wing; graph showing dramatic spike in pressure inside the TMI containment on March 28, 1979 courtesy of Arnie Gundersen.)


* * *

NUKE-SPEAK: Glossary of terms used in this story

Cesium - an element occurring naturally in rocks, soil and dust. The breakdown of uranium fuel in nuclear reactors produces radioactive forms including cesium-134 and cesium-137, exposure to which can cause nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, bleeding and death.

Curie - a measure of radioactivity, with 1 curie equal to the activity of one gram of radium.

Erythema - redness of the skin due to capillary congestion, it can be caused by radiation exposure.

Iodine-131 - a radioactive element produced in nuclear reactors. Absorbed into the body, it accumulates in the thyroid gland, which controls metabolism, and can cause cancer and other diseases.

Kemeny Commission - a panel created in April 1979 by President Jimmy Carter to investigate the Three Mile Island disaster. It was chaired by John G. Kemeny, president of Dartmouth College, and released its final report on Oct. 31, 1979.

Noble gases - a group of chemical elements that occur in nature in a number of isotopes, some of which are unstable and emit radiation.

Nuclear fission - the splitting of an atom accompanied by the release of energy. In a nuclear reactor, the fission energy is converted to heat used to generate electricity via steam turbines.

Nuclear meltdown - a severe nuclear reactor problem that occurs when there is a loss of control over the reactor core, causing the radioactive fuel to melt and release highly radioactive and other toxic elements.

Nuclear reactor core - the part of a nuclear reactor containing the nuclear fuel; it is where nuclear reactions take place.

Radiation, ionizing - subatomic particles or electromagnetic waves energetic enough to detach electrons from atoms or molecules. It includes alpha particles, beta particles and gamma rays.

Radiation poisoning or sickness - damage to organ tissue due to excessive exposure to ionizing radiation. Acute symptoms include erythema, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hair loss and internal bleeding.

Radium - an extremely radioactive chemical element that was at one time used in self-luminous paints for watch dials, leading to radiation-related illnesses in dial painters.

Rem --  an acronym that stands for "roentgen equivalent in man," this is a unit for measuring absorbed doses of radiation equivalent to one roentgen of X-rays or gamma rays.

Roentgen -- a unit of measurement for ionizing radiation.

Scram - an emergency shutdown of a nuclear reactor, also referred to as a "trip," achieved by inserting neutron-absorbing control rods into the reactor core.

Strontium - a highly reactive chemical element whose radioactive isotope, strontium-90, is produced by nuclear fission. It takes the place of calcium in bones and can lead to bone disorders including cancer.

Three Mile Island Units 1 and 2 - the two reactors at the commercial nuclear power plant located south of Harrisburg, Pa. on an island in the Susquehanna River. TMI-2 suffered a partial meltdown on March 28, 1979 and is no longer in operation. Originally built by General Public Utilities Corp. and operated by Metropolitan Edison, TMI-1 is now operated by Chicago-based Exelon while Unit 2 is owned by Met-Ed.

Uranium - a radioactive element used by fuel in nuclear reactors.
http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/04/post-4.html
March 31, 2009 - Tuesday 

Category: News and Politics

Three Mile Island: Exposing the Government's Cover Up of Our Most Infamous Nuclear Accident....

By Harvey Wasserman, AlterNet. Posted March 30, 2009.

We mourn the deaths that accompanied the biggest string of lies ever told in US industrial history.


People died -- and are still dying -- at Three Mile Island. 


As the world marked the thirtieth anniversary of America's most infamous industrial accident this week, we mourn the deaths that accompanied the biggest string of lies ever told in US industrial history. 


As news of the accident poured into the global media, the public was assured there were no radiation releases. 


That quickly proved to be false. 


The public was then told the releases were controlled and done purposely to alleviate pressure on the core. 


Both those assertions were false. 


The public was told the releases were "insignificant." 


But stack monitors were saturated and unusable, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission later told Congress it did not know -- and still does not know -- how much radiation was released at Three Mile Island, or where it went. 


Using unsubstantiated estimates of how much radiation was released, the government issued average doses allegedly received by people in the region, which it assured the public were safe. But the estimates were utterly meaningless, among other things ignoring the likelihood that high doses of concentrated fallout could come down heavily on specific areas. 


Official estimates said a uniform dose to all persons in the region was equivalent to a single chest x-ray. But pregnant women are no longer x-rayed because it has long been known a single dose can do catastrophic damage to an embryo or fetus in utero. 


The public was told there was no melting of fuel inside the core. 


But robotic cameras later showed a very substantial portion of the fuel did melt. 
The public was told there was no danger of an explosion. 


But there was, as there had been at Michigan's Fermi reactor in 1966. In 1986, Chernobyl Unit Four did explode. 


The public was told there was no need to evacuate anyone from the area. 
But Pennsylvania Governor Richard Thornburgh then evacuated pregnant women and small children. Unfortunately, many were sent to nearby Hershey, which was showered with fallout. 


In fact, the entire region should have been immediately evacuated. It is standard wisdom in the health physics community that -- due in part to the extreme vulnerability of human embryos, fetuses and small children, as well as the weaknesses of old age -- there is no safe dose of radiation, and none will ever be found. 


The public was assured the government would follow up with meticulous studies of the health impacts of the accident. 


In fact, the state of Pennsylvania hid the health impacts, including deletion of cancers from the public record, abolition of the state's tumor registry, misrepresentation of the impacts it could not hide (including an apparent tripling of the infant death rate in nearby Harrisburg) and much more. 


The federal government did nothing to track the health histories of the region's residents. 


In fact, the most reliable studies were conducted by local residents like Jane Lee and Mary Osborne, who went door-to-door in neighborhoods where the fallout was thought to be worst. Their surveys showed very substantial plagues of cancer, leukemia, birth defects, respiratory problems, hair loss, rashes, lesions and much more. 


A study by Columbia University claimed there were no significant health impacts, but its data by some interpretations points in the opposite direction. Investigations by epidemiologist Dr. Stephen Wing of the University of North Carolina, and others, led Wing to warn that the official studies on the health impacts of the accident suffered from "logical and methodological problems." Studies by Wing and by Arnie Gundersen, a former nuclear industry official, being announced this week at Harrisburg, significantly challenge official pronouncements on both radiation releases and health impacts. 


Gundersen, a leading technical expert on nuclear engineering, says: "When I correctly interpreted the containment pressure spike and the doses measured in the environment after the TMI accident, I proved that TMI's releases were about one hundred times higher than the industry and the NRC claim, in part because the containment leaked. This new data supports the epidemiology of Dr. Steve Wing and proves that there really were injuries from the accident. New reactor designs are also effected, as the NRC is using its low assumed release rates to justify decreases in emergency planning and containment design." 


Data unearthed by radiologist Dr. Ernest Sternglass of the University of Pittsburgh, and statisticians Jay Gould (now deceased) and Joe Mangano of New York have led to strong assertions of major public health impacts. On-going work by Sternglass and Mangano clearly indicates that "normal" reactor radiation releases of far less magnitude that those at TMI continue to have catastrophic impacts on local populations. 


Anecdotal evidence among the local human population has been devastating. Large numbers of central Pennsylvanians suffered skin sores and lesions that erupted while they were out of doors as the fallout rained down on them. Many quickly developed large, visible tumors, breathing problems, and a metallic taste in their mouths that matched that experienced by some of the men who dropped the bomb on Hiroshima, and who were exposed to nuclear tests in the south Pacific and Nevada. 


A series of interviews conducted by Robbie Leppzer and compiled in a "a two-hour public radio documentary, "Voices from Three Mile Island" give some indication of the horrors experienced by the people of central Pennsylvania. 
They are further underscored by harrowing broadcasts from then-CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite warning that "the world has never known a day quite like today. It faced the considerable uncertainties and dangers of the worst nuclear power plant accident of the atomic age. And the horror tonight is that it could get much worse." 


In March of 1980, I went into the region and compiled a range of interviews clearly indicating widespread health damage done by radiation from the accident. The survey led to the book Killing Our Own, co-authored with Norman Solomon, Robert Alvarez and Eleanor Walters which correlated the damage done at TMI with that suffered during nuclear bomb tests, atomic weapons production, mis-use of medical x-rays, the painting of radium watch dials, uranium mining and milling, radioactive fuel production, failed attempts at waste disposal, and more. 


My research at TMI also uncovered a plague of death and disease among the area's wild animals and farm livestock. Entire bee hives expired immediately after the accident, along with a disappearance of birds, many of whom were found scattered dead on the ground. A rash of malformed pets were born and stillborn, including kittens that could not walk and a dog with no eyes.

Reproductive rates among the region's cows and horses plummeted. 


Much of this was documented by a three-person investigative team from the Baltimore News-American, which made it clear that the problems could only have been caused by radiation. Statistics from Pennsylvania's Department of Agriculture confirmed the plague, but the state denied its existence, and said that if it did exist, it could not have been caused by TMI. 


In the mid-1980s the citizens of the three counties surrounding Three Mile Island voted by a margin of 3:1 to permanently retired TMI Unit One, which had been shut when Unit Two melted. The Reagan Administration trashed the vote and re-opened the reactor, which still operates. Its owners now seek a license renewal. 


Some 2400 area residents have long-since filed a class action lawsuit demanding compensation for the plague of death and disease visited upon their families. In the past quarter-century they have been denied access to the federal court system, which claims there was not enough radiation released to do such harm. TMI's owners did quietly pay out millions in damages to area residents whose children were born with genetic damage, among other things. The payments came in exchange for silence among those receiving them. 


But for all the global attention focused on the accident and its health effects, there has never been a binding public trial to test the assertion by thousands of conservative central Pennsylvanians that radiation from TMI destroyed their lives. 


So while the nuclear power industry continues to assert that "no one died at Three Mile Island," it refuses to allow an open judicial hearing on the hundreds of cases still pending. 


As the pushers of the "nuclear renaissance" demand massive tax- and rate-payer subsidies to build yet another generation of reactors, they cynically stonewall the obvious death toll that continues to mount at the site of an accident that happened thirty years ago. The "see no evil" mantra continues to define all official approaches to the victims of this horrific disaster. 


Ironically, like Chernobyl, Three Mile Island Unit Two was a state-of-the-art reactor. Its official opening came on December 28, 1978, and it melted exactly three months later. Had it operated longer, the accumulated radiation spewing from its core almost certainly would have been far greater. 


Every reactor now operating in the US is much older -- nearly all fully three decades older -- than TMI-2 when it melted. Their potential fallout that could dwarf what came down in 1979. 


But the Big Lie remains officially in tact. Expect to hear all week that TMI was "a success story" because "no one was killed." 


But in mere moments that brand new reactor morphed from a $900 million asset to a multi-billion-dollar liability. It could happen to any atomic power plant, now, tomorrow and into the future. 


Meanwhile, the death toll from America's worst industrial catastrophe continues to rise. More than ever, it is shrouded in official lies and desecrated by a reactor-pushing "renaissance" hell-bent on repeating the nightmare on an even larger scale...

 

See more stories tagged with: nukes, nuclear power, three mile island, nuclear accident


Harvey Wasserman has been writing about atomic energy and the green alternatives since 1973. His 1982 assertion to Bryant Gumbel on NBC's TODAY Show that people were killed at TMI sparked a national mailing from the reactor industry demanding a retraction. NBC was later bought by General Electric, still a major force pushing atomic power. This article originally appeared at http://freepress.org.


http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/134174/three_mile_island%3A_exposing_the_government%27s_cover_up_of_our_most_infamous_nuclear_accident/?page=entire

 

March 30, 2009 - Monday 

Category: News and Politics
Chernobyl Today: A Creepy Story told in Pictures
In the zone of alienation in northern Ukraine, Kiev Oblast, near the border with Belarus.  Its population had been around 50,000 prior to the accident. Today, the only residents are deer and wolves along with a solitary guard.
Prypiat used to be proud for being home to the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant workers.
But something happened on 26 April 1986…
It took three days before all permanent residents of Chernobyl and the Zone of alienation were evacuated due to unsafe levels of radioactivity.
Let the story be told by these magical pictures taken ~20 years later after the accident.
All the texts put in the quotation-marks are mostly the quotations of comments made by the authors of the photos.

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
“The sign on the road to Pripyat, the town where the workers of the nuclear plant lived.”

The bridge of death



(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)
“After the explosion at Reactor 4 the people of Pripyat flocked on the railway bridge just outside the city to get a good view of the reactor and see what had happened.
Initially, everyone was told that radiation level was minimal and that they were safe. Little did they know that much of the radiation had been blown onto this bridge in a huge spike.”
They saw a beautiful rainbow coloured flames of the burning graphite nuclear core, whose flames were higher than the smoke stack itself. All of them are dead now - they were exposed to levels of over 500 roentgens, which is a fatal dose.
P.S.: note that the photo above is made from 2 different photos (top photo of the reactor and bottom photo of the bridge in Pripyat joined together)

Schools



(Image credits:misterbisson via:villageofjoy.com)
“Deserted secondary school near Chernobyl, Illinsty, Ukraine. Dec 1995 0.96.07.01.19”

(Image credits:left: Vivo (Ben) and right: Anosmia via:villageofjoy.com)
Left: “One of the five schools of Pripyat, each teaching about 1000 children. The schools have remained relatively intact considering the problems with looters eight years ago. I guess books don’t hold much value to the poor. “
Right:”At a 20th anniversary Chernobyl exhibit on Capitol Hill.”

(Image credits:zbruch via:villageofjoy.com)
“Children will never run here again.”

(Image credits:oinkylicious via:villageofjoy.com)

(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)
“Gym class”

Kindergarten



(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
On the left: “Stairs on the creche/kindergarten near the center of Pripyat.”; on the right: “Broken doll on top of a corner cupboard in one of the rooms in the creche/kindergarten in the center of Pripyat.”

(Image credits:hanszinsli via:villageofjoy.com)
“Nursery in the creche/kindergarten”.


(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
”Child’s big toy car in one of the rooms of the creche/kindergarten”. Notice the number plate of the car – 1984. It must be manufactured 2 years before the accident.

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
The note says “Rabbit”. I love those old-school soviet style drawings.

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
“Hay stuffed toy”.

(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)

Pripyat funfair



(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)
“Pripyat funfair was due to be opened on May 1st. The Chernobyl disaster happened April 26th.
No one ever managed to ride the ferries wheel. It remains one of the most irradiated parts of Pripyat since the disaster, making it still dangerous today, 22 years on.”

(Image credits:hanszinsli via:villageofjoy.com)
“Bumper car ride in the amusement park in central Pripyat, it was to be opened on the May 1st celebrations of 1986, five days after the accident”

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
“Ferris wheel control or ticket booth in the amusement park .. I’m sure the plush teddy bear was placed there later by someone looking for an emotional photo, but it’s interesting also to document the later attempts of using the accident to achieve certain media goals.”

Hospital



(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)
“Hospital corridor”.

(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)
“Found just outside the surgery in the hospital. This hospital received many of Reactor 4’s first victims for treatment immediately after the explosion. The hospital itself however was already exposed to huge amounts of radiation.
Every rescue worker who attended the initial explosion was killed by radiation poisoning.”

(Image credits:abandonia via:villageofjoy.com)

(Image credits:abandonia via:villageofjoy.com)

(Image credits:abandonia via:villageofjoy.com)

Swimming Pool


Olympic athletes must have been training here for the 70’s/80’s. The pool is really huge - this place must’ve been the best around.

(Image credits:oinkylicious via:villageofjoy.com)

(Image credits:oinkylicious via:villageofjoy.com)

Other buildings



(Image credits:rusocer via:villageofjoy.com)
“Pripyat, ghost city abandoned after chernobyl catastrophe, has grown to a forest. nature takes over and invades and collapses human creations the views remind some apocalipthic films like I am a Legend; Views from highst building in town, a former Hotel“.

(Image credits:Stuck in Customs via:villageofjoy.com)
“Radiated Apartment Building”.

(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)
The Government have left us - “From what I saw inside, I’d presume this was the local government building. There was a political event scheduled for a few days after the explosion and there are many pamphlets and banners still inside. “

(Image credits:Vivo (Ben) via:villageofjoy.com)
“These extremely well preserved posters are the last evidence of what the city’s inhabitants were like. I’m unsure of the details but I believe these men were politicians”.

(Image credits:Stuck in Customs via:villageofjoy.com)
We can see hammer and sickle on the roof.

(Image credits:Carpetblogger via:villageofjoy.com)

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
Left: “Dismantled sofa-bed in one of the apartments in the 16 story residential apartment”
Right: “Elevator call button in the 16 story residential apartment building facing the central square of Pripyat.”

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
“Electrical junction box in the 16 story residential apartment building”

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
Left: “Sofa under an open back window in one of the apartments in the 16 story residential apartment building”
Right: “Broken ceiling light fixture in one of the apartments in the 16 story residential apartment”

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
“Newspaper used as a backing to glue the wallpaper in one of the apartments in the 16 story residential apartment building facing the central square of Pripyat.”
Newspapers title: “Pravda” (Truth) - the official propaganda newspaper of the Soviet Union
Newspapers date: “Wednesday, 25th of May 1983”
Articles title on the left: “Africa fights and builds”
Other title at the bottom: “Land owners”

(Image credits:Pedro Moura Pinheiro via:villageofjoy.com)
Translations from the top to bottom:
“Store #1”
“Rainbow”
“Happy to provide service from 11 to 20 (?)
Lunch from 14 to 15”
“Saturday from 9 to 17
Lunch from 13 to 14”

(Image credits:rusocer via:villageofjoy.com)
“400m away from the reactor (max allowed)” “2.0 rt being off-scale of the reader-device. average radiation level of a non contaminated area: 0.010 rt/m2″

(Image credits:Stuck in Customs via:villageofjoy.com)
Two more reactors, no. 5 and 6, capable of producing 1 GW each, were under construction at the time of the disaster.

Living creatures



(Image credits:rusocer via:villageofjoy.com)
“These whikeers-fish survived and devolped countermeasures against the deadly radiation levels of the contaminated water in the rivers surrounding Chernobyl. we didnt there to have a splash with them but we fed them big chunks of bread that were guzzled in the blink of an eye !! “.
http://villageofjoy.com/chernobyl-today-a-creepy-story-told-in-pictures/
March 30, 2009 - Monday 

Category: News and Politics
Join a grassroots / national discussion on WHAT AFTER YUCCA?

Each day there is news on radioactive waste -- Secretary Chu has declared that Yucca is not going forward -- Obama cut the money for actual shovels and construction -- but left money for licensing which continues (?) -- so assuming that Yucca will come off the table -- what is next?

What do we hear?
What do we fear?
What can we hope for?
How do we hang together nationwide as impacted communities so we are not played against each other?
What are our technical allies saying?
What are we saying?
How do we make sure that the failed Yucca site is, actually dead?

These are just a few of the questions surfacing as this tectonic shift in waste policy (that so many of us have worked hard to win) appears to be nearing!
Here are two opportunities for us to connect with each other -- it would be great if most people could do both -- but we are not wiring it up that way -- so feel free to do either or both. We need each other and now is a good time to communicate -- hopefully we can emerge together able to support each other and stand strong!

FRIDAY APRIL 3 -- noon -- conference call. REPLY to Mary Olson -- nirs@main.nc.us if you want to join the call. I am not going to post the number out on lists -- there have been a number of calls recently where a whole lot more lines "hung up" than ever introduced themselves -- we would just as soon not include the industry!

DO respond if you are interested -- and if you have forgotten to do so and it is Friday, call the NIRS home office 301-279-6477 to get the number (I only have one line).

FRIDAY APRIL 24 -- round table in DC + possible remote interface -- 10 am -- 4 pm [with option to attend only 2 -- 4 pm] in the office of Nuclear Information and Resource Service 6930 Carroll Ave Suite 340 Takoma Park, MD. Several people expressed concern that they do not have time for an all day meeting. Many people will not be able to travel. There is an effort underway to try video conferencing. One idea is that those who want to really engage with the kind of discussion that just does not fit neatly in an hour-long agenda show up in the morning. We can plough some of the terrain and report to others who join in / call-in at 2:00 -- 4:00. @ 4:00 we adjourn for beers -- sorry for the folks who are remote!

Please respond if you would like to help build these agendas (10 -- 2 and 2 -- 4)... to Mary Olson (nirs@main.nc.us) or Kevin Kamps (kevin@beyondnuclear.org)

Please also respond if you want to attend in person, or by phone or video (video is still a maybe)...

The NIRS office is 2 blocks from the Takoma Metro stop. We do not have travel money to offer, but there is limited grassroots housing if you contact Mary Olson at least a week in advance -- please call my cell 828-242-5621...as I will be traveling myself for 10 days prior to this meeting...

HOPE YOU WILL JOIN IN! FEEL FREE TO SHARE THIS MESSAGE WITH OTHERS WHO MAY BE INTERESTED. Please do have people be in touch directly for the call-in number.

THANK YOU

Mary Olson
NIRS Southeast Regional Coordinator
Nuclear Information & Resource Service
PO Box 7586  Asheville, NC 28802
nirs@main.nc.us   www.nirs.org
828-675-1792
new cell -- 828-242-5621  (no signal at my office)

Nuclear Information & Resource Service
6930 Carroll Avenue, Suite 340,
Takoma Park, MD 20912
tel: 301-270-NIRS (301-270-6477);
fax: 301-270-4291
nirsnet@nirs.org      www.nirs.org
March 30, 2009 - Monday 

Category: News and Politics


US Eyes Nuclear Rebirth After Three Mile Island


WASHINGTON - Thirty years after the accident at Three Mile Island shattered Americans' trust in nuclear power, lawmakers are touting a nuclear rebirth as a safe, green way to wean the United States off foreign oil.



[The cooling towers of Three Mile Island's Unit 1 Nuclear Power Plant are seen reflected in a parking lot puddle in Middletown, Pa., Tuesday, March 17, 2009. Three Mile Island's Unit 2 nuclear power plant was the scene of the nations worst commercial nuclear accident on March 28, 1979. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)]
The cooling towers of Three Mile Island's Unit 1 Nuclear Power Plant are seen reflected in a parking lot puddle in Middletown, Pa., Tuesday, March 17, 2009. Three Mile Island's Unit 2 nuclear power plant was the scene of the nations worst commercial nuclear accident on March 28, 1979. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)


"We have the enormously powerful opportunity for a nuclear renaissance in our country. We need to pursue that aggressively and effectively to meet all of our energy and environmental goals," Senator David Vitter told a hearing of the Senate subcommittee on clean air and nuclear safety this week.

No new reactors have been opened in the United States since the accident at Three Mile Island in central Pennsylvania, which began to unfold in the early hours of March 28, 1979 when cooling water started seeping through an open valve in a reactor.


The technical glitch was compounded by human error, eventually leading to a partial meltdown of the reactor's core, making Three Mile Island the worst accident in US nuclear power industry.


No one died in the accident and official reports commissioned by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and US government agencies concluded that the escaping radiation had little impact on public health -- arguments that are still put forward today as calls crescendo for a nuclear renaissance.


"We cannot run this machine called America without a nuclear component," said Senator James Inhofe, echoing a call made by Energy Secretary Steven Chu for nuclear power to be part of the US energy mix, along with clean technologies, to break the US addiction to foreign oil and fight climate change.


According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, for nuclear power to even maintain its current 20-percent share of US power generation, three reactors would have to be built every two years starting in 2016.


Seventeen industry groups have applied for licenses for more than 30 nuclear power plants, NEI said.


Federal government loans are crucial to building those plants, which cost around six to eight billion dollars (4.4 to six billion euros) each.


But the administration of President Barack Obama stripped 50 billion dollars of loan guarantees for the nuclear industry from the stimulus package in February, leaving just 18.5 billion dollars available.


"It's a pretty shaky renaissance if no one is willing to pay for it," said Peter Bradford, a commissioner for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the time of Three Mile Island and now a university professor and board member of the Union of Concerned Scientists.


Bradford drew historical parallels between the burgeoning nuclear industry of the 1970s and the proposed renaissance of the 2000s to highlight why he questions lawmakers' gung-ho drive for a nuclear revival.


Just prior to Three Mile Island, the price of oil reached 40 dollars a barrel, which would be the equivalent of 115 dollars a barrel in today's money, he said.
At the time, the cost of building a nuclear power plant was rising steadily and eventually surpassed the cost of other energy sources, he said.


"Congress felt that we had to build more nuclear plants anyway because that was the only way to reduce our oil dependence," Bradford said.


"We didn't build a lot more nuclear plants and we did get dependence down," largely thanks to larger than expected reserves of natural gas and improved energy efficiency, he said.


"I'm very skeptical of the wisdom of designating nuclear power as a key part of the response to climate change and then lavishing millions of dollars on the industry ... especially given the other demands on the federal budget."


Steve Wing, a professor at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill school of public health, said it would be irresponsible to increase nuclear power capacity without addressing the issue of how to dispose of nuclear waste.


Obama's budget ruled out a proposed national repository at Nevada's Yucca Mountain, but, Wing argued, the United States would have faced "a tremendous problem with the transportation of waste across thousands of miles of public roads and railroads if it had opened."


Wing also questioned the official line that the accident at Three Mile Island had a negligible impact on the health of nearby residents.


A study led by Wing, which hypothesized that radioactive plumes from the accident would have been carried by the wind to nearby communities, found that the rates of lung cancer and leukemia in downwind areas were up to 30 times higher than in upwind areas.


"I have problems with a nuclear renaissance," Wing said.


"There are better alternatives."

March 30, 2009 - Monday 

Category: News and Politics

Video: TMI and Community Health






Accident Dose Assessments 


..
 
Nuclear engineer and long-time industry executive, Arnie Gundersen gives a talk on his calculations of the amount of radiation released during the accident at Three Mile Island.  Mr. Gundersen's calculations differ from those of the NRC's and official industry estimates.
 

TMI & Health Effects


Part 1:
..
 
Part 2:
..
 
Dr. Steven Wing's talk is about the long-term health effects to human, animal, and plant life in the aftermath of the accident at Three Mile Island.
 
Arnie Gundersen was a senior executive in the nuclear industry with over twenty years experience.  Mr. Gundersen holds Bachelors and Masters degrees in Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.  In 1990 he came forward as a whistleblower and was fired that same year.  Over the next several years, his case got a great deal of attention, and he testified before Congress during hearings on ways to protect whistleblowers.  Mr. Gundersen is now a prominent nuclear safety expert witness.
Steven Wing teaches epidemiology at the University of Northo Carolina-Chapel Hill and conducts research on occupational and environmental health.  Since 1988 he has collaborated on epidemiological studies of radiation exposures to workers at U.S. nuclear weapons plants.  His 1997 and 2003 articles published in Environmental Health Perspectives describe impacts of radiation from the 1979 nuclear accident at Three Mile Island on cancer rates near the plant.  His recent studies examine impacts of industrial animal production and environmental injustice.
These talks were recorded live at the Pennsylvania State Capitol on March 26, 2009.
http://www.tmia.com/march26