BEYOND NUCLEAR PUBLICATIONS

Search
JOIN OUR NETWORK

     

     

DonateNow

 

 

International

Beyond Nuclear, while U.S. based, recognizes that the issue of nuclear power, particularly in relation to climate change and reactor expansion, has become an international issue. Multi-national corporations, often with foreign ownership, have taken over every facet of the nuclear fuel chain, from uranium mining to waste disposition. Beyond Nuclear is currently engaged in supportive efforts in a number of different countries.

.................................................................................................................................................................................................................

Monday
Nov122012

Tepco neglected safety upgrades at Fukushima Daiichi to avoid controversy

The New York Times has reported that the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) has admitted it neglected to make needed safety upgrades at its now-destroyed Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, in order to avoid anti-nuclear protests, lawsuits, and calls for shutting down the reactors.

The article reports:

In the report, Tepco said that before the accident it had been afraid to consider the risk of such a large tsunami, fearing admissions of risk could result in public pressure to shut plants down.

“There were concerns that if new countermeasures against severe accidents were installed, concern would spread in host communities that the current plants had safety problems,” the report said.

The article also reports that Tepco's own engineers had warned about tsunami risks even worse than those that hit Fukushima Daiichi on March 11, 2011.

CNN also reported on this story.

Monday
Nov122012

Nuclear Regulation Authority director says no more reactor restarts till 2013

As reported by The Japan Daily Press, Shunichi Tanaka, the chair of Japan’s newly formed Nuclear Regulation Authority, has said that no further atomic reactor restarts will be allowed in Japan until mandatory safety and security regulations are finalized in mid 2013. Tanaka is also ordering seismic studies at Oi, where two atomic reactors were allowed to restart in June 2012 after a hasty rubberstamped approval by NISA (Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency) shortly before the discredited agency was dissolved.

Monday
Nov122012

SOUTEIGAI: BEYOND IMAGINATION

Image: A poster celebrating the nuclear power plant workers who knowingly exposed themselves to radiation to try to bring the catastrophe under control (Jonathan Aubry; Flickr.com/ CC BY-NC 2.0)'Souteigai' or 'beyond imagination', said the Japanese government spokesman when the tsunami waves rolled across a 300-kilometre-long strip of coastline. 'Souteigai' was also the word used in self-justification by nuclear plant owner TEPCO in reference to the meltdown at Fukushima. And 'Souteigai' was the thought on people's minds as they were forced to watch the black water rolling over houses and people and flattening everything – and on the minds of the 80,000 evacuees who lost their homes because of Fukushima.

The English language version of this radio documentary is posted at the Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

Monday
Nov122012

Japan's nuclear emergency zone study shows worldwide deficiencies

SimplyInfo has reported that from Japan to the U.S. and Germany, nuclear evacuation zones are inadequate to deal with real world risks shown by what happened -- and is still happening -- at and around the destroyed Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, even out to great distances. The article reported:

The US plans show an evacuation zone of about 10 miles (16km), half of what Japan has now moved to. The US has also quietly instituted changes in late 2011 to scale back evacuation plans based on some pre-Fukushima calculations now proven by Fukushima to be unrealistic. The NRC revisions to evacuation zones include a number of ideas we know to be not accurate:

Accidents will develop more slowly than thought

Fukushima was drastically faster than the NRC assumes. 15 hours, not multiple days.

Buildings designed to contain radiation leaks will hold.

Fukushima proved this is not the case as 4 of the reactors failed and now leak radiation in considerable amounts over a year and a half after the disaster.

Emergency plans will work.

Fukushima left local government lost with no information to act with, prefecture and national government was in chaos and did not make needed information such as radiation and plume data public so people could react appropriately. There were not enough resources to get people out, evacuate hospitals or distribute protective iodine.

Responders will do their jobs.

In Fukushima private fire department staff refused to be deployed, Tokyo Fire Department insisted on detailed information before they would agree to risk firefighters' safety and even the SDF fled the area multiple times as those on the ground determined conditions to be too dangerous to stay at that time.

Ninety percent of those told to stay put will obey.

Many in Fukushima fled of their own motivation if they were able to obtain enough information and had the ability. Expecting 90% of people within 10 miles of a nuclear disaster to stay put defies human nature and common sense. Those with the ability will try to leave if they can. Sheltering in place also poses considerable risks beyond radiation exposure. The practice requires sealing up a house and turning off any air conditioning or forced air heating. In certain parts of the US and around the world this could quickly prove deadly during certain times of the year due to extreme temperatures. The NRC and other safety authorities around the world ignore this risk.

Monday
Nov122012

4 out of 6 experts on nuclear safety panel got grants from utilities

The Kyodo News reported on Nov. 3rd:

Four out of the six members of a government team drafting new safety standards for nuclear reactors have received between around 3 million yen and 27 million yen each in grants, donations and compensation from utilities in the past three to four years, according to data disclosed by the Nuclear Regulation Authority on Friday.

The regulatory body’s secretariat said the members “have been selected in line with rules, and there should be no problem.” Critics, however, say the members’ judgments might be swayed by the wishes of donors, exposing safety regulations to the risk of being watered down.

The NRA requires experts involved in drafting safety standards for nuclear power plants and other matters to disclose remuneration and donations, but has no provision for disqualifying them in light of such information.