Japan to fire top nuclear officials in wake of disaster (via 1 Real News)

This disaster happened in March. Virtually everything you can think of went wrong and now, they fire people. I’m not impressed. Once it became obvious that the people in charge were grossly incompetent, it might have been better to fire them immediately than waiting for months for what is apparently a better political climate.

James Pilant

ReutersAugust 4, 2011Japan will replace three senior bureaucrats in charge of nuclear power policy, the minister overseeing energy policy said on Thursday, five months after the world’s worst atomic crisis in 25 years erupted at Fukushima.The move comes as Prime Minister Naoto Kan calls for enhanced nuclear safety accountability and an overhaul of Japan’s energy policy, with the aim of gradually weaning it off its dependence on nuclear power as p … Read More

via 1 Real News

How to have a ‘rational’ debate over nuclear power (via Rational and Green)

There is a lot of debate on the web about nuclear power. This is a different kind of take on the issue. Our author explains how the emotional aspects of the danger of nuclear power has to be taken into consideration. I’m sure there are many who would argue that only the rational arguments should be taken into consideration.

However, the advocates of nuclear power have cast every kind of insult at their opponents ranging from tree hugger to murderer (that’s right, since using coal power can increase death from particulate matter, opposing nuclear power is murder), I think the use of the irrational on that side is already well established.

James Pilant

In any debate over nuclear power, the people calling for a “rational” discussion tend to be proponents of nuclear power. In response, those in the “anti-nuclear” camp will often adopt the “rational” vocabulary of their “pro-nuclear” counterparts, basing their arguments on issues of cost and statistical risk (and perhaps some case studies to prove the viability of renewable sources of energy). And thus, there emerges a tacit consensus between thes … Read More

via Rational and Green

Italians, not government, to decide on nukes and water privatization (via COTO Report)

The key paragraph is this one. If there is anything that demonstrates the arrogance of the Berlusconi’s government is its intent to ignore a nation wide moratorium on the use of nuclear power. I’m glad to say this is not working out so well for his government which is increasingly the subject of comedy routines as its credibility erodes.

Mr Berlusconi’s government, a powerful advocate of the atomic industry, had planned to embark on a big new building program from 2014 with the aim of producing 25 per cent of the country’s electricity needs with atomic energy by 2030. Italy has had a ban on any industry expansion since 1987, when the electorate, deeply suspicious of nuclear power after Chernobyl, voted for a moratorium. Fearful of a similar backlash in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, Mr Berlusconi has waged an unstinting battle against the plebiscite, even offering a suspension of his nuclear plans in April in an effort to ride out controversy.Please read the whole article.

James Pilant

From bad to worse as grip on nation slips further out of Berlusconi’s hands By Paola Totaro Sydney Morning Herald They say bad things come in threes and for Silvio Berlusconi, Italy’s Prime Minister, the week brought the full quota of political misfortune. On Monday Mr Berlusconi, 74, once seen as untouchable and invincible, witnessed Italy’s regional governments, including his home city of Milan, fall to a phalanx of communist mayors, some of th … Read More

via COTO Report

Coming Clean about Nuclear Power (via boltonnewyork)

I like this article. It is skeptical but willing to ask a lot of hard questions. I’m willing to give nuclear energy a chance to be part of our nation’s future plans but only if I can trust the industry. So, you can pretty sure I’m opposed to any nuclear plant development since that condition cannot be met. The industry track record is clear. I’ve been pounded with lies, half-truths and assurances that bore no resemblance to reality. Whether or not you believe that the damage caused by the various nuclear incidents justifies abandoning nuclear power, surely you can see that the industry’s credibility is gone?

Not only do we have to contend with industry PR so thin, that the smallest child can see through it, we have the problem of governments being industry captives blurting out even worse nonsense. In the United States, there has been no real changes in planning caused by Fukushima. It’s as if a car of identical make to yours disintegrated on the highway but you just go ahead driving yours.

But there’s more. Disagree with a future of nuclear energy and you get to meet up with the dogs of war, the partisans of a nuclear future. They believe several things – 1) if you are opposed to nuclear energy you are some left leaning tree hugger, 2) you just don’t understand because you’re blinded by anti nuclear propaganda, 3) you don’t grasp the critical need for nuclear power since all the other sources of energy are flawed, and (my very favorite) 4) radiation is all around us, we get it in chest x-rays, scanners in our airports, granite taken from deep in the earth has radiation in it, therefore all of these concerns about radiation are overblown.

This article is intelligent and asks some critical questions, like why is our evacuation zones in case of nuclear accident only ten miles while in Japan a much larger zone was found necessary? That’s a good question.

Let’s hope for more posts from this author.

James Pilant

San Onofre nuclear plant in southern California Image: David McNew Getty Images Ever since Japan’s battered Fukushima Daiichi reactor complex began emitting radiation in March, calls to abandon nuclear power have risen in the U.S. and Germany, among other countries. If only it were so simple. Nuclear contributes 20 percent of the U.S. power supply and a significant share in other developed countries. If we gave it up, what would replace it? Pollu … Read More

via boltonnewyork

Map comparison Visual Summary (via Not all alleged is apparent…)

I’ve loved maps since I was a little boy. Unfortunately today’s map is something of a downer, a comparison of the Cesium fallout from the two disasters.

I didn’t say it wasn’t depressing.

James Pilant

From Not all alleged is apparent ….

To conclude the series of blogposts on the topic of comparing the color-maps of Cesium fallout levels from Chernobyl with the map showing this for Fukushima’s ongoing nuclear disaster, here’s my visual summary: … Read More

via Not all alleged is apparent…

Italy’s Great Nuclear Swindle (via Aletho News)

Seldom has a politician been so up front about his contempt for the masses -

From the essay -

On April 26th, the 25th anniversary of the catastrophic Chernobyl accident, Berlusconi held a press conference with French president Nikolay Sarkozy in Rome. At this press conference Berlusconi made his radioactive intentions clear for all. “We are absolutely convinced that nuclear energy is the future for the whole world,” he said. He went on to detail how recent polls showed that the referendum to block nuclear power for decades to come could pass at this time and that by temporarily suspending Italy’s return to nuclear program the issue would be revisited when the Italian voters had been “calmed down” and returned to the realization that Nuclear Energy was the most viable and safe way to produce electricity. He went on to explain how the “leftists and ecologists” had manipulated the emotions of the Italian voters after Chernobyl and penalized the Italian people who have to pay higher electric rates than France that operates 58 nuclear power plants. Berlusconi explained that the “situation in Japan had scared the Italian voters” and that the “inevitable return to nuclear power in Italy” would not be abandoned nor would the collaborations between Enel and Eletricite de France.

You see voters have no wisdom and judgment. When they err by disagreeing with you, for instance, their failure to realize that nuclear power is “viable and safe,” that can be fixed. If you have the media, you just patiently convince them of your point of view. You don’t worry about their judgment because there is nothing that cannot be fixed by good PR.

It would be difficult to find more open contempt for the democratic process or the facts of the situation. If nuclear power is going to be safe, there is some work that is going to have to be done. If that isn’t obvious based on the last twenty years, where have you been hiding?

James Pilant

The Radioactive Dictatorship of Silvio Berlusconi By MICHAEL LEONARDI – CounterPunch – May 13, 2011 Italy’s democracy is in tatters as Silvio Berlusconi and his ruling right-wing coalition work to block a citizen’s referendum that would repeal the decision of the Berlusconi government to return to nuclear energy production on the peninsula. Italy has not produced nuclear energy since 1990 and recent polls indicate that more than 75 % of Italians … Read More

via Aletho News

Radioactive strontium detected at Fukushima plant (via )

The more kinds of radioactive material can be reasonably assumed to mean more leakage from the plant. Fortunately strontium is bad but not as bad as many other nuclear deposits.

James Pilant

Japan Broadcasting Corporation Tokyo Electric Power Company has detected high levels of radioactive strontium in soil inside the compound of the crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Strontium can cause cancer and like calcium it tends to collect in bones once humans inhale it. Up to 570 becquerels of strontium 90 per kilogram of dry soil were detected in samples from 3 locations. They were taken on April 18, about 500 meters from the N … Read More

via

Deadly Silence on Fukushima (via Udolicko’s Blog)

This post discusses the defacto censorship by the Japanese government and TEPCO, the Japanese utility that owns the plants. There are also charges that dangerous levels of plutonium exist around the plant. Since No. 4 reactor ran hotter than any of the other nuclear plants because it was using a hybrid fuel of regular uranium and plutonium, it would only stand to reason that there must be some contamination.

There are also fairly lengthy discussions of Chernobyl, independent journalism and government censorship. It’s lengthy but it has to be to provide so much information.

James Pilant

I received the following email a few days ago from a Russian nuclear physicist friend who is an expert on the kinds of gases being released at Fukushima. Here is what he wrote: “About Japan: the problem is that the reactor uses “dirty” fuel. It is a combination of plutonium and uranium (MOX). I suspect that the old fuel rods have bean spread out due to the explosion and the surrounding area is contaminated with plutonium which mean … Read More

via Udolicko’s Blog

New fire at Fukushima..pools run dry? (via Follow The Money)

It appears that Fukushima will be generating stories for some time. It seems our old favorite No. 4 reactor is trying out a new crisis on the world.

One of the more interesting parts of the story is that the Japanese government has decided that children living near the plant can have the same exposure as a nuclear plant worker. That’s right, the local children are in the same boat as nuclear workers when it comes to radiation exposure.

Time marches on and as the disaster becomes more and more boring to the public, it slips away from view. But radiation and nuclear disaster don’t depend on publicity to function.

James Pilant

From March 15 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/16/world/asia/16fuel.html?_r=1 Even as workers race to prevent the radioactive cores of the damaged nuclear reactors in Japan from melting down, concerns are growing that nearby pools holding spent fuel rods could pose an even greater danger. The pools, which sit on the top level of the reactor buildings and keep spent fuel submerged in water, have lost their cooling systems and the Japanese have been … Read More

via Follow The Money

Rio Tinto shareholders not convinced on nuclear future (via Antinuclear)

A nuclear future is inevitable? I don’t think so.

Apparently the actual owners are not so sure it’s a great idea.

The cost of a nuclear plant is staggering and other kinds are cheaper, sometimes  a lot cheaper.

James Pilant

Tom Albanese, Rio’s chiefexecutive, said uranium from the Ranger mine had been exported to Japan, although commercial confidence prevented him from confirming whether it was being used at Fukushima… ”Even before the Fukushima disaster, investors and insurers in the US, for example, could not be coaxed to back nuclear power.” – Scott Ludlam A nuclear Australia is inevitable: Rio chairman, Sydney Morning Herald, Courtney Trenwith, May 6, 2011,  A … Read More

via Antinuclear