A call for Action: toward a nuclear free world #mustshare


Introduction:

The AEPF9 Final Declaration calls the ASEM governments to build a nuclear free world. On “Sustainable Energy Production and Use”, the 5th  “Key Recommendation” states:  “Commit to progressing, with urgency, to a nuclear power free world. This will require decommissioning existing nuclear power stations, stopping the development of planned power stations and taking forward alternatives.”

During Vientiane AEPF9, an “AEPF No-Nuke Circle” was launched to act on this issue. Workshop participants came from nine Asian and European countries. Representatives of networks from other countries supported this initiative, even if they could not be present at the workshop because of simultaneously held meetings.

The following statement – the « Call for Action » – explains why we engage ourselves in the fight for a nuclear free word.

This statement can be endorsed by organizations, networks and individuals.

For endorsement, please write to: prousset68@gmail.com

—————————————-

At a time when the some of the advanced industrialized countries of North America, Europe and Japan have decided to phase out completely their nuclear energy programmes or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy for electricity production, the main markets for North American, European, Russian and Japanese suppliers of nuclear equipment are in Asia. China and India are the two countries with the most ambitious plans for expanding nuclear power generation. Many other countries are reconsidering or abandoning their plans to start nuclear power production.

To bring about an end to nuclear energy programmes in Asia and Europe more than ever do we need a coordinated campaign among civil society activists and groups not only in the different countries of Asia but also similar alliances with civil society counterparts in Europe where popular disillusionment and opposition to nuclear energy has sometimes been successful in making governments change their nuclear power policies.

The AEPF therefore is an ideal venue for developing such a coordinated campaign. What follows is a statement of basic arguments for opposing nuclear energy in favour of environmentally appropriate use of renewable energy sources.

Our Stand

The promise’’ of nuclear energy in the 1950s which led to the development of civilian nuclear programmes for electricity generation in numerous countries around the world has been completely belied. Indeed, in the eyes of one expert Amory Lovins, the performance worldwide of civilian nuclear energy programmes has revealed it to be perhaps the single greatest failure of the industrial age! After over 60 years of experience the case against nuclear energy especially given its safety record is now overwhelming. The main arguments can be summed up under six basic categories – too little, too late, too secretive, too centralised, too expensive, too dangerous.

 

Too Little

Nuclear energy constitutes an ever declining proportion of world electricity generation whether measured in terms of capacity or output. It now accounts for less than 12% of world output. Of the world’s 430 odd existing reactors, even as some old reactors are having their life spans dangerously extended, considerably more reactors will be shut down over the next two decades than will be built. The proportion of electricity generated by nuclear power will go down even further. In 2009 the installed capacity in energy generation with “new” renewable sources (excluding large hydropower) worldwide surpassed nuclear power capacity for the first time. Since then the gap has got increasingly wider. Nuclear power is not the energy of the future! The claims made of a nuclear renaissance are false.

Too Late

The most recent and popular argument being made to promote the nuclear power industry is that it is a clean energy source and crucial for addressing the problem of global warming. However, nuclear power is not and cannot be clean given the long lasting and highly dangerous radioactive wastes it generates for which there is no long term safe storage process and for which short term storage processes cannot but carry some level of risk of unforeseeable and possible leakages  due to circumstances/events/developments beyond control.

While it is true that nuclear reactors do not directly generate carbon emissions, the whole “nuclear fuel cycle”—from uranium mining to fuel fabrication to building, running and maintaining reactors, and managing and storing/reprocessing their  wastes — produces a substantial amount of carbon dioxide. Therefore the eventual saving or carbon abatement from nuclear power is much less than from most renewable sources although it is more than from fossil fuel burning. However, even such a saving does not make it worthwhile to go in for nuclear power plants since the opportunity costs are so huge and the period of construction (usually 10 to 13 years)  is so long that if the same amount of money was spent for establishing renewable energy sources, the amount of carbon emissions saved would not only be much greater but – and this is very important – the savings would take place much more quickly. Some expert studies conclude that for nuclear energy to make a significant dent in carbon emissions we would need to build close to one plant every fortnight for the next ten years!

Too Secretive

Given both its inherent dual-use character, i.e., its military potential in terms of generating fissile materials for bomb-making and the risks of leakages at various points in the construction and running of plants and in waste disposal, all civilian nuclear programmes are unavoidably far more secretive than is the case in other industries. All industries are subject to what organisation theorist Charles Perrow calls “normal accidents”. The nuclear industry is no exception. Full transparency about such events would undoubtedly raise great concerns and opposition among the population at large and be highly detrimental to the credibility of all those involved in preserving the nuclear programme – suppliers, operators, governments. The very nature of the industry demands that it must institutionalise deeply undemocratic mechanisms of non-transparency and non-accountability with respect to the wider public.

Too Centralised

Nuclear power only makes some sense if its role is connected to a highly centralised system of electricity generation and distribution and use which also means significant distribution and transmission losses, i.e accepted inefficiencies. For most developing and developed countries the only sensible approach is to develop a strongly decentralised system of energy production and use alongside existing grid systems since such a decentralised approach is both cheaper and far more compatible with the use of renewable energy sources and local surpluses in electricity generation can be fed into a network of local and regional grids and even into the national grid. Thus, renewable energies are creating many more jobs than nuclear.

Too Expensive

The full costs of nuclear power generation and distribution from the beginning of the fuel cycle to the end of waste disposal and storage are never properly calculated. Indeed, governments from France to Japan to others have always provided open or hidden subsidies of one kind or the other. Among the costs usually excluded in part or full from “levellised costs” or the cost per kilowatt hour produced by nuclear power plants, are the following: a) the cost of decommissioning the plant when its life span is over which is maybe one-third to one-half of the cost of construction itself. b) Not adding the costs, howsoever discounted over a prolonged period, of waste management and storage. c) The ‘real’ financing cost including interest payments made on borrowed capital and other charges associated with long construction periods. d) Costs are fast rising with new security requirements – and if they were not, it would mean that security is traded off against profits. c) The cost of insurance against accidents (including huge premium costs) if liability is absolute (as it should be) and of creating contingency funds for accidents causing economic, ecological and health damage.

Yet despite the partial or total exclusion of these elements, the costs stated by industry and publicised by the media are everywhere still higher than all other forms of energy production by fossil fuels and with most renewables. Even the most expensive of alternative energy sources today, namely solar energy, is already lower than the levellised costs of nuclear power in many scenarios and steady technical and scientific improvements are making solar energy progressively cheaper over time compared to nuclear power. The opportunity costs of nuclear energy are prohibitively uneconomical. This is the single most important reason why the private sector will not go in for nuclear power without assured subsidies and liability caps guaranteed by governments.

Too Dangerous

There are five kinds of dangers actual or potential.

1)      The release of ionising radiation and dangerous isotopes bound up with each step of the nuclear fuel cycle, endangering people in various countries from uranium mining to waste storage. These are invisible poisons, which produce cancers and genetic damage and against which there is no defence or cure.

2)      There is the insoluble problem of waste disposal. Present problems and dangers of waste disposal are partly rationalised by the pro-nuclear lobby as the other side of the coin of present benefits and services. But for future generations there are only the problems and dangers and no presumed benefits and services. Nuclear power is poisoning the earth.

3)      Accidents are normal in all industries. Consequences small or big always follow. But nuclear power is the sole mode of energy generation in the world, which is vulnerable to catastrophic accidents with enormous and unacceptable consequences. The health and environmental effects of nuclear accidents are of such a nature that they must be deemed unacceptable, although the scale of incidence can vary from small to big. Even if as claimed the probability of a major accident is low it is never zero and no one can give a precise measure of how low. But the consequences of a major accident are beyond measure and simply incalculable. Even absolute liability only means that the culprits behind the accidents will lose money while the actual victims of such accidents are innocent others who have to pay with their health and lives!

4)      Nuclear plants are potential targets for conventional assaults by state or non-state actors, and vulnerable to sabotage with huge consequences.

5)      The actual or potential military-related dual-use possibilities of civilian programmes means that if the world is serious about wanting to move towards complete disarmament of nuclear weapons then this must require the complete elimination of all civilian nuclear power programmes as well. As long as civilian nuclear power programmes exist, the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation exists.

The countries of Asia and Europe must give up on all or any civilian nuclear power programmes. Where such plants and fuel cycle activities exist, they should be phased out as quickly as possible never to be revived. Nuclear plants can be reconverted wherever possible into other environmentally friendly facilities for productive and employment generating activities.

AEPF initiative on nuclear industry will be articulated with ongoing campaigns for nuclear disarmament and for an overall socially and environmentally appropriate policy on energy.

AEPF “No-Nuke” Circle

For endorsement by organizations, networks and individuals, please write to: prousset68@gmail.com

#India- has lost it-New #nuclear plants may be located in heart of city #joke


New nuclear plants may be located in heart of city
Amid a raging debate on atomic energy, scientists are busy designing nuclear reactors that can be located in the heart of the city.

24 Oct, 2012, 04.09PM IST, PTI

New nuclear plants may be located in heart of city

NEW DELHI: Amid a raging debate on atomic energy, scientists are busy designingnuclear reactors that can be located in the heart of the city and construction on which may begin within the next five years.

The much-delayed 300 MW Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR), which has been on the design table for nearly a decade, has several in-built safety features that would allow the power plant to be located even in densely populated areas.

“The AHWR has a number of in-built safety features that would require very little exclusion zone and can be built right in the heart of the city,” Shiv Abhilash Bhardwaj, Director (Technical), Nuclear Power Corporation of India Limited (NPCIL) said here.

He said the construction of the AHWR was expected to start during the 12th Plan period.

The safety features in its design would enable meeting next generation safety requirements such as three days grace period for operator response, elimination of the need for exclusion zone beyond the plant boundary, hundred year design life and high level of fault tolerance, officials said.

The AHWR also has high level of fault tolerance and provides for a much greater immunity even from insider threat.

A site for building the AHWR, designed by a team of nuclear scientists led by former Atomic Energy Commission Chairman Anil Kakodkar and incumbent Ratan Kumar Sinha, is yet to be finalised. The AHWR uses thorium as fuel.

The AHWR is also expected to ease the land acquisition worries of the nuclear establishment as the reactor may not require any exclusion zone beyond the plant boundary.

In conventional nuclear plants, the exclusion zone extends to 1.6 km radius from the reactor, which is followed by a sterilised zone which extends upto five km from the reactor and an emergency planning zone which is the area in a radius of 16 km from the reactor.

The exclusion zone is directly under control of the nuclear power plant administration, the sterilised zone is a low population zone, where the growth of population is limited by administrative control.

The outer-most zone defines the minimum distance to a high population centre.

Land acquisition for nuclear reactors has run into protests in Haryana, Maharashtra and West Bengal and the AHWR may allow the nuclear establishment some flexibility in handling the vexed issue.

A typical nuclear power plant requires acquisition of 600 acres of land, most of which forms the exclusion zone.

 

 

Al Jazeera: Report says EU nuclear reactors need $ 32 BILLION to prevent disaster!


 

Report says EU nuclear reactors need repair

A leaked report on Europe’s nuclear reactors found that up to $32bn needs to be invested to prevent disaster.
Last Modified: 03 Oct 2012 09:23

Almost all of Europe’s nuclear reactors are in need of an urgent overhaul that could cost as much as $32bn, according to a leaked draft-report by the European Commission.

The Commission is expected on Thursday to finalise its stress test report, which was designed to ensure that a disaster similar to the one at Japan‘s Fukushima could not happen again.

The report will be debated by EU ministers later this month..

After that, the Commission intends in 2013 to propose new laws, including on insurance and liability to “improve the situation of potential victims in the event of a nuclear accident”, the draft obtained by Reuters news agency said.

Of the 134 EU nuclear reactors grouped across 68 sites, 111 have more than 100,000 inhabitants living within 30 km.

Safety regimes vary greatly and the amount that needs to be spent to improve them is estimated at $13-32bn across all the reactors, the draft says.

France‘s nuclear watchdog has already said the country, which relies on nuclear power for about 75 per cent of its electricity, needs to invest billions of euros.

The lesson of Fukushima was that two natural disasters could strike at the same time and knock out the electrical supply system of a plant completely, so it could not be cooled down.

The stress tests found that four reactors, in two different countries, had less than one hour available to restore safety functions if electrical power was lost.

By contrast, four countries operate additional safety systems fully independent from the normal safety measures and
located in areas well-protected against external events. A fifth country is considering that option.

The main finding, the draft says, is that there are “continuing differences” between member states’ safety regimes.

It also says provisions to ensure the independence of national regulators are “minimal”.

Imad Khadduri, a nuclear analyst, told Al Jazeera that this report reflects “what is now an issue in Japan, which is the complacency of the nuclear industry, and the following up with modifications and updates on safety issues.”

“European power reactors should take much more strident efforts in fixing and implementing the safety issues.

Khadduri went on to say that if the public “is going to be alarmed by the $30bn cost of it all, they should be more worried about how much it could cost to decommission reactors, which is incredibly costly.”

Voluntary exercises

The stress tests are a voluntary exercise to establish whether nuclear plants can withstand natural disasters, aircraft crashes and management failures, as well as whether adequate systems are in place to deal with power disruptions.

All 14 member states that operate nuclear plants took part, however, as did Lithuania, which is decommissioning its nuclear units.

From outside the 27-member bloc, Switzerland and Ukraine joined in the exercise.

The tests were meant to have been completed around the middle of the year, but countries were given extra time to assess more reactors.

Non-governmental organisations are among those who have criticised the process as not going far enough and having no powers to force the shut-down of a nuclear plant.

“The stress tests only give a limited view,” said Roger Spautz, energy campaigner at Greenpeace, which believes nuclear power should be phased out.

He cited independent research earlier this year which said some European reactors needed to be shut down immediately, as well as the example of Belgium, where the Doel 3 and Tihange 2 reactors have been halted because of suspected cracks.

The draft report says the stress tests are not a one-off exercise and will be followed up. Existing legislation also needs to be enforced, it said.

The deadline for passing the existing nuclear safety directive into national law was July 2011. The Commission started infringement proceedings against 12 member states that missed it.

To date, two have still not complied but the report did not specified which ones.

The Commission does not comment on leaked drafts.

But on Monday, the EU energy spokeswoman said the recommendations were being finalised and would not be “very,
very detailed”.

In France, the nuclear watchdog and operator EDF said they would not comment before seeing the official report.

 

 

Sayonara nuclear power


Editorial- The Hindu , sEPT 22, 2012

The much needed big push towards low-cost,, highly-efficient, cutting-edge renewable energy technologies was lacking till recently. Even the compulsion to cut down carbon dioxide emission levels by 2020 failed to overcome the inertia. But the landscape has squarely and dramatically changed following the 9 magnitude earthquake and killer tsunami waves that resulted in the catastrophic accident in the Fukushima nuclear reactor units in Japan. In what may appear as well co-ordinated announcements made very recently, Japan and France, both major nuclear power champions, have announced their departure from nuclear energy dependence. If March 11, 2011 has gone down in history as a dark day for Japan, the government’s September 14 decision to end its reliance on nuclear power by 2040 by closing down all 50 reactors will forever be remembered as a defining moment. This will, in all probability, mark the beginning of a renewable energy technology revolution. If after World War II, the Japanese people transformed their nation into one of the world’s most industrially developed ones, the possibility of the country producing an encore with alternative energy technology developments cannot be ruled out.

Japan is not alone. The Fukushima shiver has had its reverberations in France as well. By 2025, France will cut its reliance on nuclear energy by 25 per cent from the current level of 75 per cent by shutting down 24 reactors. Six months after the Fukushima catastrophe and following Germany’s decision to get out of nuclear energy by 2022, Siemens had made public its decision to exit nuclear power business. The engineering giant intends to shift its focus to alternative energies. By 2020 Germany intends to derive 35 per cent of its energy needs from renewable sources. While critics decry Japan’s plan to wait another three decades before switching off its last nuclear plant, the decision is not without basis. Some 30 per cent of the country’s power requirement is met by these plants. Decommissioning operating plants that have not completed their lifetime will mean economical suicide. This period also gives Japan the time to develop and scale up revolutionary technologies that are better adapted to harness power from even very low wind speed, and low-intensity sunlight for the better part of the year in countries situated in higher latitudes. The focus will also be on developing technologies for harnessing wave energy. To begin with, the cost of production using these alternative technologies may be higher than even nuclear. But costs are bound to fall over time and wider acceptance is inevitable.

Keywords: renewable energy technologies, nuclear power, alternative energy, Fukushima catastrophe, Kudankulam

Pakistan adheres to nuclear non-proliferation: Malik


Islamabad, July 12 : Pakistan strictly adheres to the policy of nuclear non-proliferation, Rehman Malik, advisor to the prime minister on interior affairs, said.

The country’s nuclear programme is in the safe hands and no one has access to its nuclear assets, Malik said Thursday at a conference that deliberated the subject.

“Some powers have wrong conception” about its nuclear programme, he said, adding Pakistan is capable to defend itself.

He urged the world community to “end discrimination against Pakistan” and accept the country’s role in international affairs, the Online news agency reported.

Malik said Pakistan has sacrificed more than any other country in combating terrorism. He said 39,000 people died in terror related violence in the country. (IANS)

Why Koodankulam reactors are Killers of Indians and Fisheries


From- dianuke.org

Just  as a highly irritated snake  kills a man, nuclear plants silently  kill  mankind and nature for providing illegal money to the greedy contractors, officials and politicians ?

Nuclear Plants are just silent killers of man and Nature. In nature the Uranium ore contains 99.3% of  Uranium-238 and the remaining 0.7% is Uranium-235 and they are almost harmless in nature.  But greedy business people dig the Uranium ore and convert  the least harmful Uranium-235  into the fuel form of Uranium-235  by purifying it to make it a fuel by enriching it from 0.7% to about 4%.   It is packed into pellets  which are put into Fuel rods and inserted into the core of the nuclear reactor for producing both electricity and  Radioactive material for making the killer nuclear  bombs.   In the reactor  when the nuclear atom is given a blow  by a neutron, enormous intense heat and other poisonous Radio-active atoms like Xenon, Barium, Cesium, Strontium and  Plutonium and a few neutrons  are produced.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fission

These radioactive substances are discharged into the air and water by several ways and   they enter into the environment consisting of air, water and soil and foods like vegetables, fishes, prawns and they ultimately get into human beings and produce cancers and birth defects in generations of people for many decades to come.

http://library.thinkquest.org/17940/texts/fission/fission.htmlhttp://sites.google.com/site/shivajirao32/nuclearsafety-2

These poisonous radioactive substances  destroy natural and human life and culture and convert lands upto hundreds of kilometers into permanent nuclear burial grounds for ever.

1) AS A THREATENED COBRA KILLS A MAN, PURIFIED URANIUM IN REACTORS POISON MANKIND AND NATURE:

How the harmless Uranium ore materials in nature are converted by man  into destructive and killer materials can be understood by the following simple example. For instance king cobras live in nature in anthills in forests and lead their normal life peacefully by catching their prey for food during nights.   But greedy who want to extract their venom people go and poke their iron rods into their abodes and disturb the Cobras when they become angry and bite the trespassers to inflict death over them by their poisons.   Similarly, the selfish business people are mining the harmless Uranium and converting it into harmful  Enriched Uranium and then using it to produce electricity by means of the Nuclear plants and in the process they are producing Radioactive pollutants that poison man and nature as radioactivity gets into the environment.  In course of time if an accident occurs in the Nuclear plant due to several reasons like in Fukushima or Chernobyl, the poisonous pollutants are thrown into the atmosphere and they kill thousands of people slowly and inflict cancer to millions of people living downstream upto hundreds of Kilometers as in case of Fukushima and Chernobyl accidents.

2) NUCLEAR EXPERTS MISLEAD ON ABSOLUTE SAFETY OF NUCLEAR PLANTS:

The Nuclear plant operators are misleading the public by stating that Nuclear power is safe and cheap just like the medical representatives of various pharmaceutical companies praise before the doctors about the virtues of their medical tablets and tonics as part of their sale promotion activity the nuclear authorities are praising the nuclear plants as safe and cheap energy producers which is a social crime.  This misinformation is dangerous to public health and welfare because in European states almost all people agree that safety of Nuclear power is a Myth as accepted by Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany. She had consulted the genuine experts on nuclear plants and realized that nuclear safety is a myth and ordered for gradual closure of all the nuclear plants in Germany.  If Indian Prime Minister and Union Cabinet Ministers including the Chief Ministers of the states want to know the truth about the safety of the nuclear power plants they must go and visit advanced countries like Germany and Japan and discuss the issue with foreign experts so that they can refrain from promoting nuclear plants as is done by the peoples leader like Mamata Banerjee, Chief Minister of West Bengal.   For more scientific details see the above web sites on this topic prepared by independent experts.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20110530/coalition-agrees-nuclear-free-germany-by-2022-110530/

 

i)  Center and State Government Nuclear experts are recklessly propagating that  nuclear reactors are absolutely safe because firstly they are not at all experts as per Section 45 and 51 of Indian Evidence Act and they cannot understand nuclear safety  as envisaged by the standards specified by International Atomic Energy Agency.

Websites: http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=krishnaareti

                  http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/Pub1273_web.pdf

ii)  The Government appointed experts have never studied how Fukushima reactors exploded only due to a series of human failures as had happened even in the case of Bhopal disaster.  The experts never studied  the case of Bhopal disaster to realize that human errors cause disasters for several reasons.   The experts never studied even the 1985 reports on Environmental Impact Assessment  report published by the British Government for 1100MW nuclear power plant at Sizewell including the risk analysis, disaster scenario depicting the travel of radioactive pollutants upto 160km from the reactor, the emergency evacuation procedures, rehabilitation of the victims  and the cost benefit analysis.  They have never studied even the causes and effects of nuclear reactor explosions in Three Mile Island in USA in 1979,  the Chernobyl disaster in Russia in 1986 and  Fukushima explosion in Japan in March 2011 and the damaging effects on public health and ecological systems and the enormous costs of compensation amounting to 4 lakh crores of rupees leading those countries to virtual economic bankruptcy.

http://www.whatisnuclear.com/articles/nucreactor.html

3) SAFE LIGNITE COAL TO BE USED FOR ELECTRICITY PRODUCTION IS DIVERTED FROM TAMILNADU TO UTTARA PRADESH AND THRUST IMPORTED AND RISKY REACTORS OVER THE HEADS OF TAMILIANS:

  While it was the duty of the  experts to identify several alternate methods of producing the same amount of electricity in place of the proposed hazardous reactors they have omitted describing such alternatives by utilizing the cheaper, safe and socially acceptable solar power, wind power, natural gas and lignite coal which are available in plenty in India itself.  The experts failed to point out to the state and central Governments that their plan to divert lignite coal from Neyveli of Tamilnadu to a far-off sate like  Uttara Pradesh in North India to generate same electrical power amounts to denying the supply of electricity by using their own local resource instead of dumping on the heads of the people the most costliest and deadliest large reactors to be imported all the way of from the far off country like Russia.  Such an action amounts to denying the right to life, right to health and right to livelihood of lakhs of people of Tamilnadu.

i) Since the Tamilnadu expert committee consists of 2 mechanical engineers, one commerce Post Graduate and one Physicist,  they do not have the necessary  academic background to grasp the fundamentals of the different kinds of radioactive substances in the natural background and their damaging impacts on the mode of braking the single strand and double strands of the helix in the DNA located in the Chromosomes present in the nucleus of the different kinds of cells present in different organs of humanbeings, animal population, marine fishery organisms and the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.  They may not be in a position to grasp the food chains and food webs in nature through which the different kinds of radiation may enter the fisheries and other food.   The biological magnification of some of these  radioactive particles with both short and long half life spans are bound to cause  prolonged damaging effects on normal cells and sperm cells which may  result in the birth of mutilated and unnatural offspring.

ii) Consequently the state nuclear experts are disabled to grasp that any increase in radiation above natural background radiation is bound to  damage  the life systems by causing sickness including cancer and loss of immunity that are conducive for promotion of the incidence of several  exotic diseases and new forms of  ill-health in the organisms.   Some of these experts blindly believe that as compared with the background level of radiation, their nuclear plants at Kudankulam containing one or more large sized reactors are going to contribute radioactive pollution to the Environment which will be negligible as compared with the background levels.  These experts are blind to the real facts that a nuclear reactor discharges enormous amounts of radioactivity into the atmosphere and into the natural water courses like lakes and oceans on a very large scale as can be seen by the data published by several honest nuclear plant operators in other countries.  See Website:

http://www.dianuke.org/nuclear-safety-experts-shivaji-rao/  

http://bhujangam.blogspot.in/2011/08/probable-nuclear-reactor-1100-mw.html     

iii) The Indian experts also bluff the public by designating the nuclear accidents as excursions and nuclear plant locations which will be nuclear burial grounds as nuclear parks.  They also do not know that nuclear reactors are responsible for several small scale, medium scale and large scale accidents running into hundreds of accidents per year as can be seen from the following website:http://www.ib.cnea.gov.ar/~protrad/biblioteca/3Accidentes.pdf (Item No.812, Page-115)

http://www.tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2011/10/why-nuclear-accidents-are-difficult-to.html

During all these accidents high levels of radioactivity will be discharged into the Environment but  the plant owners never present the true facts to the public and hence the people only know these facts by the increased levels of cancer and birth defects among the population living in the vicinity of the nuclear plants in Rajasthan, Uttara Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra and Tamilnadu as assessed by the independent medical practitioners located  in their respective areas.  Thus nuclear plants are just silent killers of mankind and nature.

4) SAFETY OF REACTORS:  In order to avoid the core melt-down, experts have provided a series of safety devices.  One major line of defence is emergency core cooling system (ECCS) which provides an instantaneous water supply that keeps the core from melting.  Another lineof defence is the concrete containment that surrounds the core and the pressure vessel so that even during a loss of coolant accident, no radioactivity will escape into the outside environment.  Such engineering safety measures also fail sometimes.  If the main pipe in the primary cooling breaks, immediately the control rods eliminate the nuclear fission process, halting the activity.  But the radioactivity  in the  already disintegrating fission products cannot be arrested.  In a 650MW plant, the heat formation by the radioactive disintegration process amounts to roughly 200MW three seconds after the reactor is switched off, 100 MW after one minute, 30MW after one hour and 12MW after 24 hours.

Under normal operating conditions, the reactor has an external fuel casing temperature of about 350oC, while the interior fuel rods remain at 2220oC.  If the cooling liquid is lost, the outer surface  of the rods heats up rapidly within 10 to 15 seconds, the fuel casing will begin to break down and within a minute, the casing will melt.

http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2011/09/why-indian-nuclear-plants-are-bound-to.html  

Unless the emergency cooling system comes into operation within a minute, the fuel (approximately 100 tonnes) and the supporting structure will all begin to melt, leading to a major accident.  At this stage even if the emergency cooling system works, it will make the situation worse.  The molten metals react with the cooling water to produce steam and hydrogen and heat from the fission products adds to this, thus  sinking the melten core to the ground.  In a 200MW nuclear reactor radio-fission products accumulated after one year would be equivalent to the amount released by approximately 1000 atom bombs of the Hiroshima variety.  Since the reactor pressure vessel contains the core, any loss in the pressure vessel in excess of the supply from ECCS leads to the escape of the coolant, thereby exposing the core that gets overheated within seconds.   The failure of the vessel can inflict serious damage to the core and also break the containment.

5)  EMERGENCY COOLANT FAILS: According to the advocates of nuclear power when the primary coolant comes out of the major pipe break in the coolant water loop, the control rods are immediately driven into the core to stop the fission reaction and the ECC system releases the cool water from the accumulators intended to cope with such emergencies.  But the environmental experts and opponents of nuclear power emphasise that by the time the emergency coolant water gets in the core, the temperature in the core would become so high that the water turns into high pressure steam, either obstructing the entry of more coolant or forcing it to exit through the breakage in the pipes  so that the reactor core gets overheated to cause a major disaster.  When the Aerojet Nuclear Company conducted tests of ECC system at the National Reactor Testing Station in Idaho, USA, mechanical failure occurred.  Subsequent tests at Oakridge National Laboratories indicated that the Zircalloyclad fuel rods may swell, rupture and obstruct the cooling channel thereby preventing the emergency cooling water from reaching the reactor core.  Fuel rod swelling commenced about 1400oF and at 1880oF the coolant channels were blocked by 50 to 100 percent and such a blockage could be catastrophic.  The combined effect of the rapid cooling during an emergency core cooling with the rapidly rising pressure in a reactor vessel could lead to its rupture, an accident that no nuclear plant is designed to cope with.  Failure of the vessel could occur due to inherent weakness in the construction of  the vessel itself or due to factors such as molten fuel coolant explosion or the gross failure of the vessel support system.  Steam generators also cause problems due to deformation of tubes  because of corrosion of support of plate materials, fatigue failures and tube pitting problems.  The feed water system piping is exposed to water-hammer, leading to the damage of valves.  These valves on their own face problems from packing, gasket leakage and erosion. http://armypubs.army.mil/eng/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/tm5_698_4.pdf

i) Places to be evacuated during accident at Kudankulam: When an accident at a nuclear plant releases enormous quantities of radioactivity into the air, water and soil environment, there will be immediate fatalities and long-term genetic damage among the exposed populations.  All the people within the zone of influence from the reactors must be evacuated.  Evacuation must be completed within 6 hours for 2 to 5km, 12 hours for 5 to 25km, 24 hours for 25 to 75km and 40 hours for over 75kms downwind from Kudankulam as per the British Accident scenario for the 1100MW, Sizewell reactor, based on a wind speed of 5m/sec rainfall of 1mm/hour and natural stability conditions of the atmosphere.  After thorough scrubbing and decontamination of lands, equipment and residences due to radioactive pollution from an accident, people may be permitted  to return to their original residence along with their cattle and other properties after three weeks upto 170kms, one year upto 140km, from 5 years upto 115km, 10 years upto 98km and 20 years upto 77kms distance from the nuclear plant.  Depending upon the weather conditions during the accident, certain places will be more affected than others.  Many villages of Ramanathapuram, Tirnelveli and Kanyakumari of Tamilnadu and Trivandrum and Quilon districts of Kerala will be affected seriously.  Killakkarai, Sattirakudi, Abiramam, Virudhnagar and Watrap of Tamilnadu and Gudalur, Thekkadi, Vengamala, Pantalam and Karunagapalli of Kerala lie within 170kms.  Sayalkudi, Nattakkadu, Sivakasi and Sattur of Tamilnadu, Edathora, Aruppokottair, Srivilliputtur and Rajapaliyam lie in between 140km and 170kms.  Karilgatti, Kalugumala and Puliyangudiof Tamilnadu, Tenmala, Kadakkal, Attingal and Kadiamkulam of Kerala lie within 115km.  Taruvaikulam, Kadambur, Tirumalapuram and Tenkasi of Tamilnadu and Palad and Attipara lie within 98kms.  Tuticorin, Kayattar and Trivandrum lie in between 98kms and 77kms, Sayarpuram Pudukkottai, tirunelveli, Ambassamudram, Mannar, Balaramapuram, Neyyattinkara, Nanguneri, Panakudi, Kolachel, Nagercoil and Cape Comorin lie within 77kms from the nuclear plant site.

http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2011/10/kudankulam-nuclear-plant-explosion.html

http://tshivajirao.blogspot.in/2012/02/kudankulam-nuclear-bomb-over-tamilnadu.html

http://www.dianuke.org/lessons-of-chernobyl-and-fukushima-nuclear-safety-is-an-oxymoron/#comment-2782

 

6)  WHY TAMILANDU NUCLEAR EXPERTS MISUNDERSTAND NUCLEAR SAFETY?:                    When radioactive atomic nuclei breaks up due to instability  or impinged by neutrons radiation is released as particulates or high energy wave radiation.  When such radiation hits on living cells the atoms in the cell get ionized.   The atomic nucleus contains in its electronic sheath negatively charged electrons equal to positively charged protons in the atomic nucleus and so an atom is electrically neutral in its outward effects.  If a negatively charged electron of Beta particle radiation bombards a neutral atom one or more electrons will be thrown out of the electoral sheath of the atom which becomes an ion that is a positively recharged atomic residue the newly formed ions have considerable electrical attractive power and so have capacity for strong chemical reaction.  If such reactions occur in air or dead matter nobody bothers but if ionization of atoms occurs in living tissue  it often causes damage resulting in cancer cells it causes severe damage like deformities, still births, enzyme defects and metabolic disorders.  It has to be assumed that even the smallest quantity of radioactivity can cause a corresponding damage in living cells.  If the radioactive particles or rays bombard a DNA molecule it causes ionization of atoms and the subsequent chemical reactions cause variations in basic arrangement of base sequels and break either a single strand or double strand of the double helix in DNA and so changes occur in the heritable information and the consequential damages on living organisms.  The strand of the helix sequences of phosphoric acid residual and Deoxyribose residues while the bases contain ,Adenine,Thymine, Guanine, and cytosinev residues.

 http://www.dianuke.org/nuclear-safety-experts-shivaji-rao/

 

 7) RADIATIONS DAMAGE THE HUMAN AND ANIMAL CELLS ALSO:                       Inside the nucleus of human cells there will be 23 pairs of chromosomes each of which is packed with DNA the genetic material to receive from the parents.  The DNA is always exposed to damaging agents like ultraviolet light, chemicals and reactive oxygen species generated by ionizing radiation.  Direct radiation like alpha or Beta (electrons) particles or X-rays which create ions that physically break one or both of the sugar phosphate backbones or break the base pairs of the DNA.  The base pairs of ATGC are held together by weak hydrogen bonds.  The bonding of these base pairs can also be damaged by ionizing radiation.  The base pairs of the DNA form sequences called nucleotides which inturn form the genes.  The genes direct the cell to make proteins which determine the cell type and regulate its working when such breaks occur the DNA repairs itself by a process called excision which occurs in 3 steps.

  1. Endonucleases cut out the damaged DNA
  2. Resysnthesis of the original DNA by DNA polymerase
  3. Ligation by which the sugar phosphate backbone is repaired

Since evaluation of species occurred in sea of radiation the DNA repair processes constantly occur.

8) WHY INDUSTRY HIDES FACTS ON RADIOACTIVE ROUTINE  RELEASES ALSO:

Everyday DNA gets 10,000 injuries due to routine chemicals.  A radioactive substance contains 1 curie when 37 billion radioactive disintegrations occur in it per cell.  Natural radioactivity of earth per gram is 1 pico curie equivalent to 1 trillionth of a cancer.  In dry air one Roentgen or Rad or Rem produces 2 billion ions per cm3.  One Rad is the radiation dosage given out by 100 ergs of energy for gram of any substance.  But since different radiations have different energy dosages their biological effectiveness is given a quality factor to identify Relative Biological effectiveness.  The RB factor is one for Beta, Gamma and X-Ray radiations.  While alpha and proton radiations have 10 times higher while neutron radiation has 4 units for slow neutron that gradually rise to 20 for fast neutron radiations.  Proton at one 10-millionth part of a gram can cause cancer as it emits alpha rays of very high radiation doses with a high factor of 3 lakh units.  If a lorry containing 25kg were to overturn in road accident the plutonium thus released could cause 250 billion cases of lung cancer.  25kg of Plutonium can be used for an atomic bomb.  Tritium with its weak Beta rays comes into waste water at 100 curies to 1000 curies per annum for a nuclear plant of 1000MW capacity.  During decay tritium atom emits an electron and is converted into stable Helium.  Tritium occurs in natural waters at 40 pico curies per liter and in public water supplies its concentration is limited to 3 million pico curies per liter.    If one strand of DNA breaks the second strand of helix as a duplicate repairs like replacing one spoiled bulb by a new one and holds the chromosome together.  Even when double strand breakages for a radiation of 100 to 500 rads exposure the repair is done in 2 to 8 hours.  But when dosage of 0.08 rads per year for a decade caused extra chromosomal damage among people of Alaska.  There will be 600 millions cells in one CC .  In Humans one percent of single strand lesions (breaks) are converted to about 50 double strand breaks in DNA for cell cycle.  Similar to the double produced by 1.52 to 2 Grays of sparsely ionizing radiation.  Although DSBs are repaired on a reliable basis, the errors in repair mechanism often cause high rate of cancer in human beings.  100 rads Gamma rays cause 300 tracks cross every nucleus of the cell based on 630KeV Gamma rays  from Ce 137 and one track for nucleus is due to 0.33 rads of Ce 137.  Background radiation causes a fraction of one track per year.  An X-ray produces 6 to 10 tracks per cell nuclei.  A Gamma ray produces one MeV( soft Gamma ray gives 100 KeV) Beta particle produces 2 MeV and Alpha particle produces 6 MeV.  1 Sv or 100 rems give one Joule per kg of energy in human tissue.  Radiation causes DNA damage in Million molecule lesions per cell per day. Human exposure to background radiation is about 2.4 mSv per year and the nuclear plants add to the public about 1 mSv  and 20 mSv for workers per year  and  this limit is based on the assumption that there is no threshold dose below which there would be no effect which means that any additional dose will cause proportional increase in damage to public health and it is based on the precautionary principle which is universally accepted. While one kg of granite or coffee produces 1000Bq, one kg of coal ash 2000  Bq, one kg 7000 Bq and 1 kg of low level radioactive waste produces one million Bq. Since the Indian Nuclear Power Corporation hides facts about routine releases of radioactivity from nuclear power plants  it becomes inevitable for Indians and others to know the  true facts from published literature in other countries dealing with nuclear power plants.  The following website present the detailed data http://www.ieer.org/sdafiles/16-1/tritium_releases.html

Consequently the common people cannot trust the experts of the Government organization about radiation exposure due to nuclear power plants and hence must anticipate that under different kinds of nuclear accidents there will be large scale radioactivity discharged into the environment at all the existing plants which are causing serious health impacts  as reported by independent scientists.  Since the nuclear plants cannot be prevented by the Indian experts to discharge radioactive pollution from the reactors the people have to make their own estimates in the matter and visualize what kinds of illnesses including cancer are waiting in the wings to harm lakhs of people in the near and distant places from Kudankulam reactors upto hundreds of kilometers downwind.

Description and Effects of Different Doses and Dose Rates

 Dose

Description / Effects

0.3 to 0.6 mSv/a

This is the typical range of dose rates from artificial sources of radiation, mostly medical.

0.2 to 0.8 mSv/a

This is the range of worldwide average annual radiation dose from ingestion of foodstuff and water.  Variations about the mean values by factors 5 to 10 are not unusual for many components of exposure from natural sources.

2.4 mSv/a (approximately)

The normal average background radiation from natural sources.  Approximately half of this exposure is from radon in air.

13 mSv/a

This is the highest known average annual dose from background radiation that occurs in the Kerala and Madras states in India where a population of over 100 000 people is exposed to this level.

20 mSv/a

This dose averaged over 5 years is the limit for regulated practices and working activities such as the nuclear industry employees and mining and mineral processing workers, who are closely monitored.

50 mSv/a

This dose is conservatively the lowest dose rate where there is any evidence of cancer being caused.  It is also the dose rate that arises from natural background levels in several places. Above this, the probability of cancer occurrence (rather than the severity) increases with dose.

1000 mSv

This dose accumulated over some time, would probably cause a fatal cancer many years later in 5 of every 100 persons exposed to it (i.e. if the normal incidence of fatal cancer were 25%, this dose would increase it to 30%).

1 000 mSv

This dose received as a short-term dose would probably cause (temporary) illness such as nausea and decreased white blood cell count, but not death.  Above this dose the severity of illness increases with dose.

Between 2 000 and 10 000 mSv

This dose over a short-term dose would cause severe radiation sickness with increasing likelihood that this would be fatal.

10 000 mSv

 This dose in a short-term dose would cause immediate illness and subsequent death within a few weeks.

 

9) DAMAGE TO LIFE FORMS IS OFTEN IRREVERSIBLE AND INEVITABLE MAKING NUCLEAR SAFETY A PIE IN THE SKY AND HENCE PEOPLE MUST OPPOSE THEM:

When  an electron passes through a biological cell the electron releases its energy along its path (called a track) by interacting with the electrons of nearby molecules.  The energy thus released is absorbed by atoms near the track causing excitation ( a push in the orbit of an electron to a higher energy level) or ionization (release of an electron from the atom) and the residue unstable atoms are known as radicalsand are chemically highly active.  X-ray and gamma rays unlike Beta particles release high speed electrons from atoms first.  Positively charged particles transfer energy to molecules in the cells electrically uncharged neutrons impact of the nuclei of hydrogen atoms namely protons.  Since the masses of the proton and neutron are similar the impact results in an elastic scattering process  as occurs in Billiards game.  The ejected protons work like charged protons.  Ionizations due to   radiation act directly on cell molecules or indirectly on water molecules causing water derived radicals which react with nearby molecules causing breakage of chemical bonds or addition of oxygen atoms by oxidation of the affected molecules.  The major effect in biological cells is at DNA breaks either in single strand or double strands and the later is important biologically.  Single strand breaks can be repaired normally because of the double stranded nature of the DNA(the two strands complement each other so that an intact strand serves as a template for repair of its damaged opposite strand) In case of double strand breaks  the repair is  more difficult and the erroneous rejoining of broken ends may occur and such misrepairs  cause mutations, chromosome abrasions or cell death.

Radiations  differ not only by their components like electrons, protons and neutrons but also by their energy.  Radiations by neutrons and alpha particles cause dense ionization along their track and are called High Linear Energy Transfer ,High LET  radiation that is energy released per unit length of the track.  Low LET radiations by X-Rays and Gamma rays produce ionizations sparsely along their track and homogeneously within the cell.  High LET radiations release energy in a small region of the cell and the localized DNA damage caused by High LET radiations is more difficult to repair than the diffuse DNA damage caused by the sparse ionizations from Low LET radiations.  The same radiation dosage produce the same total number of ionizations with the difference that Low LET radiation causes sparse ionizations whose damaging effects can be normally repaired while the High LET radiation causes dense ionization along their track causing double strand breaks which are more difficult for repair and hence are bound to cause cell deaths or mutations resulting in cancer and other forms of illness.http://www.rerf.jp/radefx/basickno_e/radcell.htm

10) CRUCIAL ROLE OF THE PUBLIC TO SAVE THEIR RIGHT TO LIFE, RIGHT TO HEALTH AND RIGHT TO LIVELIHOOD AT ANY COST:

When India became  independent Mahatma Gandhi addressed a public meeting on the occasion.  He said “by making Pandit.Jawahar Lal Nehru as the Prime Minister of India I call him an uncrowned King of India.  Like anyone of us he is a humanbeing and all of you know that to err is human.  In course of his work to uplift the nation he will plan and execute  several developmental projects during the course of administration he may commit some errors who will correct such errors.  His Minister or his administrative officers will not dare to point out his mistakes and rectify them and then who will take the responsibility to put the nations destiny on the right track”.  Since none of them people presented the meeting opened their mouths he told them point blank “ it is you, the people of this great social welfare state in the democracy who have to correct even the mistakes of a Prime Minister.  If you do not come forward to rectify such defects you are unfit as responsible citizen of the great social welfare state.  Similarly Prime Minister Mrs.Indira Gandhi also wanted all the responsible citizens to protect public interest and for the purpose amended article 51A and introduced sub clause “g”  by which she proclaimed that it is the first duty o the responsible citizen to protect the water, the air, the forests, the wild life and to develop compassion for all living creatures. “That is why it has been always said that eternal vigilance is a price that the Indian people have to pay to sustain their democracy.  Thus it is the people of India who have to fight against the anti peoples actions perpetrated by the Government at the state and Central levels to safeguard the health and welfare of the present and future generations of the people in India. Coming to the case of Kudankulam nuclear reactors the people must play an active role to stop them as they are just silent killers.

In case of Kudankulam reactors it is better that the local people and school children must collect funds by begging in Tamilnadu villages and towns and present the money to the Chief Minister and Prime Minister for abandoning the present reactors on the plea that in case these reactors experience explosions on the pattern of Fukushima rectors, the people have to pay a heavy penalty of Rs.4 lakh crores which will make the state and the country fall into the trap of economic bankruptcy.  Infact in one of the villages of Cuddapah the school children who found that their family members addicted to liquor are not only dying but also ruining their families because the state Government  has considered liquor business as their main economic source of survival.  The children wanted to pay that amount realized through liquor sales to the state Government to ban liquor sales so that the families will save their own heads of families who are  the bread winners.  In Tamilnadu the experiment can be copied and implemented to stop the reactors and thereby stop the state Government do indirectly declare a nuclear war on millions of people of South Tamilnadu.

Even in history there are many instances when a Kingdom was invaded a treacherous foreign ruler the local people used to fight against the invasion or alternatively purchase peace by paying compensation money to the invader.  Veera Pandya Kattabhraman refused to yield to the dictators of the treacherous British rulers so he was hanged in public.  Today the people of this historical Pandyan Empire have to save their lives and of their progeny against the invasion by the people in the North of Pandya Kingdom in Tamilnadu and those from the North India.  The Pandyans if they want the survival of their future generations they must resort to this  alternative course of action as followed by the children of the Cuddapah village of Andhra Pradesh.

 

French Scientists: Childhood Leukemia Spikes Near Nuclear Reactors


 

Belleville Nuclear Power Plant, France, August 27, 2011. (Photo: coralinetheblue)

1 February 2012
by: John LaForge, Truthout | News Analysis

French researchers have confirmed that childhood leukemia rates are shockingly elevated among children living near nuclear power reactors.

The “International Journal of Cancer” has published in January a scientific study establishing a clear correlation between the frequency of acute childhood leukemia and proximity to nuclear power stations.

The paper is titled, “Childhood leukemia around French nuclear power plants – the Geocap study, 2002-2007.”

This devastating report promises to do for France what a set of 2008 reports did for Germany – which recently legislated a total phase-out of all its power reactors by 2022 (sooner if the Greens get their way).
The French epidemiology – conducted by a team from the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM), the Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN) and the National Register of hematological diseases of children in Villejuif, outside Paris – demonstrates during the period from 2002-2007 in France the doubling of childhood leukemia incidence: the increase is up to 2.2 among children under age five.

The researchers note that they found no mechanistic proof of cause and effect, but could find no other environmental factor that could produce the excess cancers.

Without getting overly technical, the case-control study included the 2,753 cases of acute leukemia diagnosed in mainland France over 2002-2007, and 30,000 contemporaneous population “controls.” The children’s last addresses were geo-coded and located around France’s 19 nuclear power stations, which operate 54 separate reactors. The study used distance to the reactors and a dose-based geographic zoning (DBGZ), based on the estimated dose to bone marrow related to the reactors’ gaseous discharges.

All operating reactors routinely spew radioactive gases like xenon, krypton and the radioactive form of hydrogen known as tritium. These gases are allowed to be released under licenses issued by federal government agencies. Allowable limits on these radioactive poisons were suggested to governments and regulatory agencies by the giant utilities that own the reactors and by reactor operators themselves. This is because their reactors can’t even function without regularly releasing radioactive liquids and gases, releases required to control pressure, temperature and vibrations inside the gigantic systems. (See: “Routine Radioactive Releases from Nuclear Power Plants in the United States: What Are the Dangers?” from BeyondNuclear.org, 2009)

In Germany, results of the 2008 KiKK studies – a German acronym for Childhood Cancer in the Vicinity of Nuclear Power Plants – were published in both the International Journal of Cancer (Vol. 122) and the European Journal of Cancer (Vol. 44). These 25-year-long studies found higher incidences of cancers and a stronger association with reactor installations than all previous reports. The main findings were a 60 percent increase in solid cancers and a 117 percent increase in leukemia among young children living near all 16 large German nuclear facilities between 1980 and 2003. These shocking studies – along with persistent radioactive contamination of Germany from the Chernobyl catastrophe – are largely responsible for the depth and breadth of anti-nuclear public opinion all across Germany.

Similar leukemia spikes have been found around US reactors (European Journal of Cancer Care, Vol. 16, 2007). Researchers at the Medical University of South Carolina analyzed 17 research papers covering 136 reactor sites in the UK, Canada, France, the US, Germany, Japan and Spain. The incidence of leukemia in children under age nine
living close to the sites showed an increase of 14 to 21 percent, while death rates from the disease were raised by 5 to 24 percent, depending on their proximity to the nuclear facilities.

When the US public owns up to the dangers of nuclear power, we, too, can get around to its replacement and phase out.

Next Newer Entries

Archives

Kractivism-Gonaimate Videos

Protest to Arrest

Faking Democracy- Free Irom Sharmila Now

Faking Democracy- Repression Anti- Nuke activists

JAPA- MUSICAL ACTIVISM

Kamayaninumerouno – Youtube Channel

UID-UNIQUE ?

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,229 other followers

Top Rated

Blog Stats

  • 1,836,489 hits

Archives

March 2021
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  
%d bloggers like this: