What does a Banana have in common with a Nuke plant?
Nothing.
Ones waste will need to be cooled, guarded & bureaucrated for 500,000 years.
The other you feed to your children.
Questions? Watch this video below.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
What does a Banana have in common with a Nuke plant?
What does a Banana have in common with a Nuke plant?
Nothing.
Ones waste will need to be cooled, guarded & bureaucrated for 500,000 years.
The other you feed to your children.
Questions? Watch this video below.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Many problems at SONGS and in our community
There is a very serious problem going on at San Onofre Nuclear Waste Generating Station but all we hear from SCE & NRC is the same old story they always say "everything is safe, very little if any radioactivity was released,"you will be fine continue to shop". But the fact is the only people monarchy the release of radioactivity is SCE and they will not release the information to the public. So we the citizens of San Clemente have no idea how much was released & for how long. All of these things affect the quality of life for those of us in our beautiful seaside community-health and property values.
What we the citizens of San Clemente want to know is, where is the monitoring system in real time so we know what was released and for how long. SCE knows but will not release the information, at Residents Organized for a Safe Environment (ROSE) & San Onofre Safety (SOS) & Nuclear Free California (NFC) where is the monitoring system that the citizens deserve after living next to SONGS periodically releasing highly radioactive materials on an ongoing basis all of these years? Why hasn't the city of San Clemente, Orange County government and the state of California seen fit to monitor the ongoing release of radioactivity from this plant? Why isn't there an epidemiology study to find out what the effect of these many releases over the years done to our community? Are the city officials & county government officials an the state of California and the NRC not aware of the recent study around France's nuclear power plants found a alarmingly high rate of childhood leukemia within a 25 mile radius?
Finally it is time for a change, it is time for the STATES to QUESTION the AUTHORITY of the NRC and its supremacy of all things nuclear. It is not 1950 any longer the states and the citizens themselves are now much better informed about the effects of living with radiation, asked the people of Chernobyl and Fukushima Japan.
http://residentsorganizedforasafeenvironment.wordpress.com/
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
NRC it is time for States to Question your Authority
(http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/library/treaties/atomic-energy-act/trty_atomic-energy-act_1954-08-30.htm), I would not only encourage you to do so I would ask you and your colleagues to reconsider the whole concept of giving the federal government all control and say so as to the use of nuclear energy as relates to the safety and power needs of California.
In the 1950s, nuclear was very new and not even understood correctly or completely by the experts. This is why the federal government took complete control of the entire industry. To control & produce materials needed to make weapons, to that end they sold the American public on nuclear energy as a future source of power. “Too cheap to meter “was the slogan. This has proven to be totally untrue. Now over 60 years later after much has been learned not only by the federal government but by the states who had to endure the constant radiation problems that persists at nuclear power plants that endanger the public welfare, producing on average 250 pounds per day per reactor. In America we have 5,000,000 pounds of highly toxic nuclear waste setting at our power plants. Which are licensed as “Power Plants not highly Toxic Nuclear Waste Dumps”. more residentsorganizedforasafeenvironment.wordpress.com
New Risks for Nuclear Plants Reactors in Central, Eastern U.S. Face Greater Earthquake Threat, Study Finds
By REBECCA SMITH
Nuclear reactors in the central and eastern U.S. face previously unrecognized threats from big earthquakes, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said Tuesday. Experts said upgrading the plants to withstand more substantial earth movements would be costly and could force some to close.
Threat by Land and Sea
Dozens of nuclear reactors operate in earthquake-prone regions around the world. Among them, least 34 are in high-hazard areas; 17 of those are within a mile of a coastline.
The NRC said it would require nuclear-plant operators to conduct new seismic studies for all 96 reactors in eastern and central states to determine if the plants could withstand the shaking predicted by the government's new seismic model.
Updating the U.S. survey of past seismic activity became urgent after a 9.0-magnitude earthquake and tsunami devastated northeastern Japan last March. The event overwhelmed the defenses of reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi site, causing widespread damage and radioactive releases. The earthquake exceeded the level for which the reactors had been designed, calling into question earlier seismic assessments.
The NRC plans to give nuclear-plant operators four years to re-evaluate risks by running complex calculations for all structures, systems and components. By law, nuclear plants must be able to withstand earthquakes "without functional impairment of those features necessary to shut down the reactor, maintain the station in safe condition and prevent undue risk to the health and safety of the public."
The seismic study "is an important piece of work but it doesn't tell us what needs to be done," said Alex Marion, vice president for nuclear operations at the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade organization. "The model will need to be applied to specific sites and that will take awhile."
Critics said regulators are moving too slowly. "The NRC does not need a new model—it needs a spine," said Dave Lochbaum, director of nuclear safety for the Union of Concerned Scientists in Chattanooga, Tenn. The NRC already has sufficient evidence to require immediate upgrades to dozens of plants, he said, adding that further delay amounts to a "bureaucratic stall tactic."
The NRC has said it needs more information before requiring upgrades. NRC spokesman Scott Burnell said it was possible "that operators will do the analyses and say, 'Our existing safety margin covers it, so no upgrades are needed.' We just don't know yet."
Any required retrofits could be expensive. "To go back into some of these older plants and deal with seismic issues might end up costing more than the plants are worth," said Stephen Maloney, a partner at Azoulas Risk Advisors in Boston, a consulting firm that works with the nuclear industry. That could force such plants to close.
The Tennessee Valley Authority's Watts Bar Nuclear Plant in Spring City, Tenn.
The seismic model could influence new seismic maps the U.S. Geological Survey is expected to issue next year, and could affect building codes and insurance rates.
The new model was jointly developed by the NRC, the U.S. Department of Energy and an industry-funded research group, the Electric Power Research Institute. The model incorporates information on about a thousand earthquakes that previously weren't cataloged. Those were determined through written records, geologic data, carbon dating and other methods. The research brings the total to nearly 3,300 quakes in the region since 1568.
The model shows increased hazards at many locations. For example, it indicates that the single worst earthquake likely to happen in a 10,000-year period in Chattanooga, Tenn., would be nearly twice as damaging to structures as previously calculated. Scientists found similar hazards at six other locations where they did spot checks: Houston; Manchester, N.H.; Jackson, Miss.; Topeka, Kan.; central Illinois; and Savannah, Ga.
Atlanta-based Southern Co. hopes to build two reactors in central Georgia, about 100 miles from Savannah. The company took the latest seismic information into account and believes the reactors will meet the standard of the new model, said B.L. "Pete" Ivey, a vice president. But Southern will need to run calculations for its existing reactors to see if they meet the standard, he said.
Because regulators worry about "low probability/high consequence" events like the one in Japan, much seismic research now is focused on the central and eastern U.S., an area once seen as less active geologically than the West. There are 96 reactors in the region, compared with just eight in the West.
Scientists, using computers, satellites and field data, now know there have been many huge earthquakes in the central and eastern regions of the country. And shock waves travel far in the East because the Earth's crust is more rigid there than in the West.
Write to Rebecca Smith at rebecca.smith@wsj.com
San Onofre Nuclear Reactor Shut Down After Leak
Radioactive water spills into containment dome, yet there is no danger
to the public, officials say.
http://sanclemente.patch.com/
Someday we will hear the sirens go off, and it won't be another false alarm. In fact, I sit here wondering if this may actually develop into the dreaded nuclear nightmare. Is this our Fukushima? If not, it is only a matter of time. We must understand that the protective measures that were once in place no longer exist. It is up to you and me, the people standing in harms way, to demand a shutdown of these unnecessary reactors that threaten the livelihood and well being of more than 8 million people, all for 7% of our energy.
Let's make them prove they are safe to operate and that they have addressed the lessons learned from Fukushima before we allow them to continue on the reckless path they are on. How many more warnings will we get? Do we really need a total meltdown in America in order to accept the reality that nuclear power is extremely dangerous? Are we the ones that are going to have to be sacrificed as the example that Americans can no longer ignore?
Unfortunately, I am beginning to believe that we won't take any serious steps to avoid a Fukushima-like event until it happens in our country. With all the warning signs, no one will be surprised when it does take place here. It is only a matter of time. San Onofre, with a safety record ten times worse than the industry norm, sitting next to a fault line exceeding the design basis for this nuclear power plant that is reaching its intended 40 year lifespan in 2013, is a very likely candidate for failure.
That is why we are planning an event to remember Fukushima on the upcoming anniversary. People need to remember the lessons that the Japanese are still enduring. The no-go zone in Japan is a 12.5 mile radius and it is estimated that it will take 40 years before it might be safe to return (if ever). The cost of cleanup is already in excess of $120 Billion.
Can you imagine that happening here? No use of the main freeway between LA and San Diego, a major military base rendered useless, thousands of homes and businesses that can't be insured against such a disaster, all the people left homeless and with very few possessions, for who knows how long. The financial disaster alone would be staggering, let alone the deaths and disease and environmental degradation that are more difficult to substantiate or quantify.
Just yesterday, I participated in a webinar with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission who wanted some public feedback on the proposition that we store highly radioactive waste on site for another two or three hundred years. What are these people charged with the public's safety thinking about other than what is best for the industry?
Let's move away from this outdated dangerous technology and replace it with safe and sustainable options that will lead us to a brighter future. We can live without it as seen in this very moment when no power is coming from San Onofre. It won't be nearly as bad as they make it out to be.
Please join the people's movement to shut down our nuclear power plant before it is too late. Go to http://sanonofresafety.org/, or send an email to gary@sanclementegreen.org to get involved, to do your part, because those that you think you can count on are not on your side. Stand with us. Go with the precautionary principle. There is too much at stake for too little in return. No Fukushimas here. We know better and so do you.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
San Onofre: An Accident Waiting To Happen
Watch Nuclear Aftershocks on PBS. See more from FRONTLINE.
Travel to three continents to explore the debate about nuclear power: Is it safe?
What are the alternatives? And could a Fukushima-style disaster happen in the U.S.?
One man's fear monger is another mans change agent...
A must watch video!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)