The government has pulled the plug on its ambitious nuclear energy programme after pumping more than R9-billion into it over more than 11 years. There have been suggestions that this figure is far higher than declared and allegations that PBMR funding resulted in various slush funds. There are also suggestions that the PBMR project may continue to be funded in the US and may yet try to rear its ugly head in South Africa. What we want to know is what will happen with the PBMR “test” fuel factory established at Pelindaba and why were no environmental reports made public from the several years of pebbles experimentation that transpired in the hills of Hartbeespoortdam? And what ever became of the nuclear pebbles produced at Pelindaba that were shipped overseas for testing? – Comment from CANE

In a letter dated July 5, Public Enterprises Minister Barbara Hogan told the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM): “The minister of finance has clearly stated that there will be no further funding for the company, and I would like to reiterate that this position has not changed.

“It is clear that the remainder of the cash on hand is to be utilised solely for the winding down of the company as well as the preservation of the intellectual property.”

One objective was to design, license and build a prototype nuclear reactor plant, which, if successful, would have paved the way for building small power plants to help meet SA’s needs.

The company operates as an independent entity governed by an agreement between founding investors Eskom, the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC) and US nuclear giant Westinghouse.

It has spent R5-billion on projects since 1994, including R2.7-billion on a demonstration power plant, which was to have been built at the Western Cape’s Koeberg nuclear power station, but was later scrapped. In the process, the company wasted R268-million on the manufacture of a major component of the demonstration power plant, a 2000-ton reactor pressure vessel.

The vessel, which is due to leave the Spanish port of Santander next Sunday, will be stored at Saldanha Bay for R10000 a month as the company can no longer afford the R1.4-million it will cost to transport it to Pretoria.

Business Times was told that the company decided to have the component shipped to SA as it would have been liable for R34-million in VAT had it remained in Spain. Nuclear experts were unanimous this week that the vessel would have to be scrapped as the PBMR company changed the original design of the demonstration power plant last year to 200MW from 400MW. The vessel can function in a 400MW power plant only.

Although the part is unfinished, as the contract for its construction was cancelled last year, PBMR was forced to pay the Spanish builder R268-million for the incomplete product. The original contract price was R317-million.

Payments to companies that made parts for the demonstration power plant include:

• R503.2-million to Japan’s Mitsubishi Heavy Industries for a helium turbine for the power plant;
• R256.8-million to German company SGL Carbon for manufacturing carbon reflector blocks; and
• R256-million for graphite for the demonstration power plant.

The company also spent millions of rands manufacturing coated uranium oxide particles encapsulated in graphite fuel spheres, which were sent to Russia for testing.

However, staff say the financial cut-off did not stop the company recently giving golden handshakes of R1.8-million each to some of its general managers.

Last year, the company’s 11 executives were paid a combined R18-million in salaries and other benefits. Other big payments since 1994 include:

• R2-billion to mostly overseas consultants;
• R115.9-million for building rental;
• R707.9-million for the construction of a pilot fuel plant; and
• R172-million for overheads.

Hogan recently turned down a rescue plan proposed by the NUM that included a request for a R262-million government bail-out until March next year. In a detailed submission to Hogan, the union called on the auditor-general’s office to conduct a forensic investigation into the company’s financial affairs.

The union also called on the government to suspend the company’s board and executive officers. It said some engineers and scientists were “inappropriately qualified” for nuclear reactor engineering applications.

“The actions of certain individuals can be treated as sabotage for changing the design almost every second year. It seemed as if they did not want to see the reactor built.”

Union general secretary Frans Baleni deplored the company’s “wasteful expenditure. The closure is marked by serious allegations of corruption and unethical conduct. We would be pleased if it can be investigated thoroughly,” he said.

A nuclear expert employed at PBMR blamed the board and executives for the company’s failure. “The technology in terms of electricity production was good, but the only problem was that it was not well managed. Nothing was ever achieved by the company. It was a waste of taxpayers’ money.”

Eskom said in a short statement that it was a minority investor, and referred queries to PBMR.

PBMR’s acting chief executive Alex Tsela declined to comment, referring all questions to the company’s corporate communications department, which could not be reached for comment.

The chairman, Alistair Ruiters, could not be reached for comment either.

• - govenderp@sundaytimes.co.za

Source: http://www.timeslive.co.za/business/article555632.ece/Government-pulls-plug-on-PBMR

Closed-circuit video capture the shootout and arrest in South Africa where police obtained nuclear material that could have been used for a dirty bomb.

An international police sting at a Pretoria petrol station has netted four men involved in the sale of a highly radioactive metal suspected to be destined for use in a dirty bomb.

The high-risk operation by the Hawks’ specialised tactical unit was carried out yesterday.

Police recovered some Caesium-137 contained in a protective cover, but admitted they had yet to find a larger device, which was set to be sold on the black market for R45 million.

CCTV footage shows how undercover members of the Hawks’ organised crime unit stormed through a Sasol garage, opening fire on the suspects with semi-automatic weapons, sending terrified customers, motorists and petrol attendants fleeing.

Within moments of arresting the Mamelodi and Vanderbijlpark men, who are aged between 35 and 50, environmental officers and a field team of South African nuclear specialists sealed off the area as they gathered air samples and conducted tests on the radioactive material.

The lunchtime chaos brought an end to a lengthy police investigation involving Interpol agents around the world.

Police said they began their investigation after infiltrating a criminal organisation, which has allegedly been trying to source the highly radioactive Caesium-137.

Sources said the amount recovered, although small, could have been used in building a dirty bomb. According to the Wikipedia website, a dirty bomb combines radioactive material with conventional explosives. It is used to contaminate the area around the explosion and create terror.

A policeman said the source of the Caesium-137 was unknown and investigators were going all out to locate the larger device. “We don’t know what these suspects’ intentions were and we need to find the device quickly,” he said.

Nuclear Energy Corporation of SA spokeswoman, Chantal Janneker, confirmed the material was Caesium-137, and said there had been no contamination in the area.

Hawks spokesman, Colonel Musa Zondi, said the four were arrested as they tried to sell the stolen material which was a sample of a device which was to be sold for R45 million.

Zondi said the suspects would appear in the Pretoria Magistrate’s Court on charges of theft, possession of a radioactive device and violating the Health Department’s prohibition of handling this material in public.

* This article was originally published on page 1 of The Independent on Saturday http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=vn20100710085544493C308461

The Pretoria News reported Saturday that police had recovered a limited amount of cesium 137, which has been identified as possible dirty bomb material (see GSN, July 6). The newspaper indicated, though, that the device that once housed the material had not been found.

“At this stage we don’t know where it comes from or where the remainder of the device is, which is of grave concern to us, especially as cesium 137 can be used in dirty bombs,” a police officer said. “We don’t know what these suspects’ intentions were and we need to find the device quickly.”

GSN reported that Friday’s operation was the result of an extended investigation that included Interpol officers from various countries and targeted a criminal group that had spent months trying to sell the radioactive material, police said. It ended at a gas station, with the suspects unsuccessfully trying to flee under semiautomatic fire from the Hawks.

The Right Perspective said in its report officers are still looking for a much larger device the suspects are believed to have.

The Digital Journal reported that Caesium-137 is radioactive isotope (radioisotope) of Caesium and is toxic in even small amounts. It is soluble in water and can be difficult to detect. It is used in small amounts for radiation testing and for some medical applications.
The isotope would make an effective component of a so-called “dirty bomb,” a device which is made up of a normal explosive like TNT and a radioactive isotope. When the bomb explodes, the area it affects becomes contaminated and people coming into contact with surfaces or water containing the radioisotope could become seriously ill or even die.
Caesium-137 was released into the atmosphere during the Chernobyl nuclear power plant meltdown and was one of the three most toxic radioisotopes in the disaster. Dirty bombs are used primarily to created terror in populations, as the explosion itself is no worse than that produced by regular explosives, but the fear of radiation sickness could cause panic.

A policeman who was not named said:  “We don’t know what these suspects’ intentions were and we need to find the device quickly” according to the Digital Journal.

The suspects will appear in the Pretoria Magistrate’s Court to face charges of theft, possession of a radioactive device and violation of health regulations pertaining to nuclear material.

The Global Security Network reports that police said the incident was not World Cup related despite earlier reports that Iraq claimed its security forces had detained an al-Qaeda militant suspected of planning to detonate a “dirty bomb” at a soccer stadium.

While it was not immediately clear where the device involved in Friday’s sting had come from, a significant amount of nuclear medicine manufacturing for treatment of certain cancers is manufactured at NECSA’s Pelindaba site near the Hartbeespoortdam outside Pretoria.

In 2007 a daring breach in security occurred at Pelindaba as two separate gangs of armed men broke into NECSA’s operations room during which an official was shot. NECSA passed this incident off as “crime-related” at the time and no further information was ever made available. There has been little fuss in South Africa over the security breach at Pelindaba but international media and  nuclear watchdog organisations remain severely disturbed believing that a significant amount of Highly Enriched Uranium at Pelindaba was a likely target for the break-ins.

Sources:

http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100712_8973.php

http://www.therightperspective.org/2010/07/11/south-africans-arrested-selling-dirty-nuke/

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/294511

The story “What’s really wrong with Harties?” featured in the 7 May 2010 issue of Farmer’s Weekly, contains information worth noting – try locate it if you missed it. I received many responses, many in support and one not. Of those in support, one was the horror story of Mary-Ann van Niekerk, addressed to the editor in the 21 May 2010 issue. It was the letter of the month. Stories like these are bound to anger some people who value money and investments more than health and life.

The negative response was an official letter from the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (Necsa) that appeared in the letters column of the 18 June 2010 issue of Farmer’s Weekly. Please read it before you continue as I’ll only be dealing with the letter and not with the mountains of global data I have on the subject.

This letter shows how heavily Necsa has depended on its powerful propaganda machinery for decades, so much so that it no longer cares how misleading, inaccurate, incomplete, illogical or untruthful the information that it expects the public to swallow is. How logical is it to start the letter by stating that it’s the fate of 25% of people to die of cancer without ever being exposed to radiation and then to end the letter by saying “we are all exposed to it (radiation) all the time”?

Necsa’s statements that “Steyn attributes his friend’s death to radioactivity in the water of Hartbeespoort Dam and specifically to effluent from Pelindaba” and “implicitly assumes that there is a conspiracy involving Nesca, the Department of Water Affairs, the National Nuclear Regulator, Wits University and the University of Pretoria”, reflect how poorly my article was understood. Anyone who read it properly would see that I never wrote that. Necsa tried to read my mind, instead of what I wrote. In fact, I had never even thought about the possibility of a conspiracy, but seeing as Necsa brought it up, could it perhaps be true?

Necsa complained that I blamed it for the dam’s shocking condition and the demise of thousands of blue kurper. In fact, I devoted two long paragraphs to other pollution sources – sewerage plants, mines and Rietvlei runoff – although this doesn’t absolve Necsa from being the straw that broke the camel’s back.

By using the Crocodile River to dump its radioactive waste, Necsa is simply adding to the toxic brew of an already overloaded system, further harming the environment and endangering the health and lives of people living downstream from Pelindaba. I never laid the blame solely at its doorstep, but if the cap fits, it can wear it.

Necsa rightly calls its “current” effluent outflow of 350 000ℓ/day into the Crocodile River “a lot of water”, but in 1999, its average daily outflow was double that, due to a “calculation error”. Without disclosing the amount of the effluent’s radioactive content, it maintains that it is so “minuscule”, that “upstream and downstream” of Pelindaba, the river’s uranium content is the same.

Do you believe that? Does it make sense to use the contents of an olympic-size swimming pool to flush your toilet? It seems that calculation errors and inaccurate statistics are commonplace at Necsa and form part of its disinformation strategy. To demonstrate that the 100kg of uranium hexafluoride (UF6) that escaped from its plant in 1992 was no big deal when compared to the amount of uranium the Crocodile River carries down from upstream, it had to increase its flow.

According to Necsa, the river flows at an average of 20m3/s. Simple school arithmetic shows that there are 31 536 000 seconds in an average year. Multiplied by 20, it means that via the Crocodile River alone, 630 720 000m3 flows into Harties every year – three times its total known capacity of 212 000 000m3. This means that, without taking the Magalies River inflow into account, the Crocodile will, from bone dry, cause the dam to overflow three times every year.

A very real health threat

Necsa also downplayed the health hazard of the UF6 that escaped. By stating in the same breath that uranium is “relatively common” and only “slightly soluble”, it blatantly creates confusion with the uranium metal in the river, comparing apples to pumpkins. In contrast to metallic uranium, UF6 gas is one of the most highly soluble uranium compounds known. It’s an intermediate industrial compound used in the uranium-enrichment process and, chemically, it’s much more toxic and radioactive than uranium.

When airborne, it hydrolyses immediately upon contact with water molecules in the atmosphere to form highly toxic hydrofluoric acid (HF) and uranyl fluoride (UO2F2), which comes back to earth no matter how high your chimney stack may be. The higher you release it, the wider it spreads.

HF is a corrosive vapour that can damage exposed parts of the body and when inhaled, can severely harm and damage the lungs, while the uranium component can cause acute kidney damage and various cancers. The main long-term storage place of these compounds in the body is bone. In the past, high exposures have resulted in immediate death.

And 100kg of this gas is a huge amount. The accidental escape of under 200kg of UF6 in the US in 1944 and the fatalities it caused are still mentioned today in reference articles about the gas. Necsa states that the 1992 incident is “absolutely not to be repeated”. They don’t know that I’m aware of another undisclosed incident, when 800kg of UF6 escaped from the plant in 1998.

Necsa concludes by stating that it “dispersed without causing any harm”. How does it know? Did it look, or did it look away?

The latter is most probably true if one considers that it ignored the plight of 225 of its former employees, who – some very ill – had submitted requests for their medical records. After a delay of almost two years, Necsa offered these employees an opportunity to be evaluated by a doctor it would provide. Those employees who were examined by this doctor had their claims that their illnesses were related to radiation dismissed across the board.

Forgive me for recommending that Necsa appoint more shrewd and competent people to drive its propaganda machine, because I think its long-standing bubble has finally been popped by its letter.
Contact Abré J Steyn on 083 235 4822 or at abrejsteyn @ gmail.com.

Source: http://www.farmersweekly.co.za

More and more mainstream media are ignoring the health and economic risk – let alone the legacy – involved with nuclear power and appear to be backing an  already well-oiled propaganda machine of the nuclear industry, hell-bent on foisting dangerous technology on this country. Their published views DO NOT reflect the vast and irrefutable evidence against this heinous form of electricity generation. Here are two letters recently written to the Business Day newspaper to set the record straight which we trust the paper bothered to publish.

10 June 2010

The Editor

Business Day

Dear Sir

Two undated articles from your newspaper were recently forwarded to me. One was an otherwise reasonable article by Siseko Njobeni on the state of play in the IRP2 process, but which had a disturbing caption attached to its photograph: “There is little debate about the benefits of nuclear power … as the least carbon-generating  technology.” Apart from the constant privileging of nuclear power over other and cheaper viable technologies for electricity production that this prominent photograph suggests (and belied in the accompanying article), the very idea of “no debate” is reminiscent of Margaret Thatcher’s TINA: “There is No Alternative” – a Goebbelsian mantra, if ever there was one.

If your reporters had attended the recent Environmental Impact Assessments public meetings for the ill-starred “Nuclear-1”, they would have experienced an extremely robust and entirely hostile debate at all three sites. Indeed – with the rebirth of Earthlife Africa and the Koeberg Alert Alliance in Cape Town; the fierce resistance of the Save Bantamsklip campaign in the Overstrand; and the Thyspunt Alliance in the Kouga Municipality – one can honestly say that the Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (CANE) has come of age. It also currently enjoys the active support from the National Union of Mineworkers, the faith-based SAFCEI, and a clear mandate from the Civil Society Energy Caucus to represent its anti-nuclear interests to the IPR2 process.

More objectionable, however, both in its cynical, “embedded” tone and its uncritical content, is Sarah Wild’s “Science & Technology” column on the subject. Quoting (without making it clear) standard nuclear industry propaganda, Wild writes that “fewer than 50 people” died and guesstimates the overall cancers at 4 000 from the disaster at Chernobyl. According to the Russian newspaper Pravda of 16 December 2002, however –

A total area of 50 000 square kilometres covering 12 regions was contaminated in that awful tragedy. Over three million people, including about one million children are suffering [in 2002] from diseases of the respiratory airways, thyroid gland, etc., which rates are higher in the regions contaminated after the tragedy as compared with the whole of Ukraine. About 600 000 people participated in the clean-up … of Chernobyl: 200 000 of them were exposed to an enhanced radiation dose. These people will now need special medical aid and supervision for the rest of their lives.

Within the first ten years after the Chernobyl tragedy, about 168 000 people (out of the total number of 3.2 million … victims) died. It was later discovered that 4 300 died [immediately] as a result of the tragic consequences, about 3 000 of [these] fatalities were those who participated the clean-up. Those victims of the tragedy who remained alive registered a worsening of their health condition.

While the red herrings may be trotted out about for cars and jets and coal stations and farting cattle, the scientific facts are that the two principle by-products of nuclear fission – Cesium-137 and Strontium-90 – both have a half-life close to thirty years and therefore tend to accumulate in the environment over many decades. Even the otherwise extremely reluctant Air Specialist Study in the EIA for Nuclear-1 admits as much:

The methodology described in IAEA Safety Report No. 19 (IAEA 2001) was adopted in the estimation of inhalation and immersion dose….. The inventory of long-lived radionuclides builds up in the environment, with the result that exposures may increase as the discharge continues. [emphasis mine]

When I studied Eskom’s own Environmental Science Laboratory reports to the National Nuclear Regulator on emissions and effluents from Koeberg Nuclear Power Station,
the following amount of Strontium-90 was recorded in liquid effluents in Becquerels per year:
1994 =   53 600 000
1995 =      9 560 000
1997 =   15 100 000
2001 =      3 140 000
It follows, therefore, that there is a genuine risk from routine operations of nuclear power stations, and this was borne out in a number of peer-reviewed studies. Writing for Global Research, Ian Fairlie (2008) drew attention to the following:

Last year [2007], researchers at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston carried out a meta-analysis of 17 research papers covering 136 nuclear sites in the UK, Canada, France, the US, Germany, Japan and Spain. The incidence of leukaemia in children under 9 living close to the sites showed an increase of 14 to 21 per cent, while death rates from the disease were raised by 5 to 24 per cent, depending on their proximity to the nuclear facilities (European Journal of Cancer Care, vol 16, p 355).
…
This was upstaged by the yet more surprising KiKK studies (a German acronym for Childhood Cancer in the Vicinity of Nuclear Power Plants), whose results were published this year [i.e. in 2008] in the International Journal of Cancer (vol 122, p 721) and the European Journal of Cancer (vol 44, p 275). These found higher incidences of cancers and a stronger association with nuclear installations than all previous reports. The main findings were a 60 per cent increase in solid cancers and a 117 per cent increase in leukaemia among young children living near all 16 large German nuclear facilities between 1980 and 2003. The most striking finding was that those who developed cancer lived closer to nuclear power plants than randomly selected controls. Children living within 5 kilometres of the plants were more than twice as likely to contract cancer as those living further away, a finding that has been accepted by the German government.

I am normally convinced that Business Day conducts proper research in order to better inform its readers of investment potential in one business sector or another. I therefore think it would be equally helpful for the newspaper to engage in a more critical investigation into the dubious merits of electricity production from nuclear power stations before questioning the “viability” of its critics. We may not be financially viable (or even properly functional) as a lobbying group, but at least we do our homework.

Mike Kantey
National Chairman
Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (CANE)
www.cane.org.za
072 628 5131

Endnotes

Ian Fairlie (2008) “Reasonable Doubt: Children living near nuclear facilities face an increased risk of cancer” April 24, 2008 http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8785)

A follow-up for your self-confessed “science” writer may be made through examining Chris Busby’s 2009 study: “Very Low Dose Fetal Exposure to Chernobyl Contamination Resulted in Increases in Infant Leukemia in Europe and Raises Questions about Current Radiation Risk Models” in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Volume 6. www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph]
Chris Busby et al (2006): A survey of cancer in the vicinity of Trawsfynydd nuclear power station in north wales Report 2006/3, Green audit Aberystwyth, June

Communities adjacent to nuclear facilities in the U.S. and U.K. have increased rates of leukemia and other childhood cancers (Cragle et al. 1988; Morris and Knorr 1996; Beral et al. 1993; Pobel and Viel 1997; Cardis et al. 2007).

Arjun Makhijani (2008): The Use of Reference Man in Radiation Protection Standards and Guidance with Recommendations for Change, December (Revision 1, April 2009). Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, Takoma Park, Maryland

Kaatsch P, Spix C, Schultze-Rath R, et al. Leukemia in young children living in the vicinity of German nuclear power plants. Int J Cancer. 2008; 1220:721-726
Baker PJ, Hoel DG. Meta-analysis of standardized incidence and mortality rates of childhood leukemia in proximity to nuclear facilities. Eur J Cancer Care. 2007:16:355-363
Laurier D, Jacob S, Bernier MO, et al. Epidemiological studies of leukemia in children and young adults around nuclear facilities: A critical review. Rad Prot Dosim. 2008; 132:182- 190
———————————————-

Sent:     Tuesday, June 08, 2010
To:     busday@bdfm.co.za
Subject: What’s on my plate in a nuclear future?

Dear Editor

What’s on my plate in a nuclear future?

Koeberg emits, by their own admission, ‘permitted levels of radioactive waste’ from their site. This means that radioactive isotopes (such as Cesium-137, Strontium-90 and Iodine-131) become part of the environment in which they are emitted. When we eat the crops, or, the animals that graze on effected vegetation, we take in substances that, are not only carcinogenic to our bodies,  but, will also change the characteristics of our DNA, and, by implication the DNA of future generations. Wind dispersion allows for emissions to be spread over vast areas.

With the government’s planned ‘fleet’ of nuclear power plants to be rolled out in SA, how much of our farming land will be effected?  Which European country will import radioactive fruit, or, wine? Avian flu (a mere virus) decimated sectors of economies in the world. We could face a blanket  ban on all our export produce. So, not only will our health be adversely effected by a nuclear future, but our economy too. If I was a farmer I would definitely be toy toying.

The latter will be nothing compared to a nuclear waste accident…  even if it is  minor.  Consider that every month we transport radio active waste from Koeberg to Vaal Puts in the Karoo for ‘safe storage’. Our road accident rate is high. It is only a matter of time before a transit vehicle, carrying the waste, is involved in an accident. High level waste remains at Koeberg – over 1 million killograms of it.  Why? There is no actual plan for disposal (ps this goes for nuclear waste worldwide). And, as far as procuring material to create nuclear energy is concerned, personally, I will not be applying for a mining position on any uranium mine in the near future… call me crazy if you like. Let us not be duped into thinking that there is anything clean about nuclear energy.

Most countries in the world are actively sourcing renewable energy solutions. Countries with no wind or sun to speak of (incl Germany and Denmark) generate substantial  amounts of electricity via renewable sources. Yet, SA is committing to generating nuclear energy in spite of clean alternatives that will cost less financially.

South Africans have been given one chance in Jhb, to participate in the IRP2 process. This ends 10  June 2010 (one day before kickoff date???). This is unacceptable, particularly since Capetonians sit with the ‘permitted emissions’ in our own backyard. I recently wrote a letter to local (CT) organic producers of diary products… “I know that your products are RBST free, but, are they free of radioactive isotopes”, to which the response has been… ‘this is a valid point, we are looking into it’. What if our food producers cannot supply us with raioactive isotope free produce? National health is already strained and just how many lawsuites can our government afford to take on?

Quite frankly, I find embracing a nuclear future to be just a tad unpalatable.

Your sincerely,

Jemimah Birch

Hout Bay
083 716 1010

Like so many times before,
I recently fished Hartbeespoort Dam with my long-time friend, Mike Elliot. But this would be the last time as Mike was terminally ill with cancer. The dam was filthy and we caught nothing, so, filled with sadness, we left. Mike said, “Harties is just as sick as I am.” He died a few days later. Harties still functions, but if it deteriorates further, the fish, and Harties, will die.

Sewage pollution only the start

To find what made Harties so ill, we must look to the past. In 1970 Mike and I founded the Pretoria Spinfishing Society, the oldest national lure-fishing association. Four years later I left Pretoria, but over the next 20 years I infrequently returned to fish Harties with Mike and the boys. The dam was our headquarters and between us, we spent thousands of happy hours on it, unaware of the deadly danger in its water. Every time I returned, I saw how it was deteriorating. First water hyacinth choked the surface. Then blue-green Microcystis algae turned the dam into a massive bowl of pea-soup. Finally, great shoals of large blue kurper died en masse and washed up on the shore.

The hyacinth and algae were caused by a massive inflow of sewage, which came down the Jukskei River from Johannesburg – the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry granted exemption to the Northern Sewage Works, allowing them to “legally” violate stipulations of the Water Act. This has continued unabated ever since. Currently, two million litres of sewage – some of it raw – flows into Harties daily.

Read full article:

Why nuclear power is not the answer to Climate Change

Many licences have already been issued for exploration. The delegation, consisting of academics and experts from Australia, Cameroon, Germany, Malawi, Namibia, South Africa, the United Kingdom and Zambia, has surveyed exploration sites and has met with concerned local communities.

Uranium mining poses a direct threat to the livelihoods of local communities as well as to ecotourism. Community members were outspoken in their opposition to the planned mining.

The group of experts is part of an international conference on the impact of Uranium mining which takes place 10th-11th November in Dar es Salaam.

UK-based Professor Chris Busby, a recognised expert in the health effects of Uranium, will present new scientific evidence of its radio-toxicity and the shortcomings of existing international safety standards. He will say: “New scientific discoveries in the last few years have opened a new era in the understanding of radiation risk. These discoveries significantly impact the regulations governing the mining and processing of Uranium which threaten the health of people and animals in Tanzania.”

FEMAPO is increasing its efforts to highlight the Uranium issue with a series of meetings and consultations in cities and towns in Tanzania, and is gaining national and international support for this work.

“Uranium mining is a new development in Tanzania and one with very serious long-term consequences. Citizens of Tanzania need to be fully informed and involved as stakeholders in any decisions about the future of this industry,” said FEMAPO Director Mathias Paul Boniface.

 A media conference will be held at 13:00 Tuesday 10th November at the Rombo Greenview Hotel, Shikilango Road, Dar es Salaam.

For further information contact FEMAPO at +255 787 876 997 Pr. Busby is on +44 7989 828833.

ISSUED BY: Low Level Radiation Campaign     http://www.llrc.org/

Source: http://www.thelocal.se/20538/20090708/

MEDIA STATEMENT: 2 April 2009

Is the unabated greed associated with South Africa’s scandalous Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) nuclear experiment the real reason for Pretoria’s “disgraceful” decision to withhold a visa from the Dalai Lama, the anti-nuclear Pelindaba Working Group asked in a statement today? 

Having failed after 10 years of taxpayer funding – and now 10 times over budget – to produce a safe PBMR to generate electricity in South Africa, the PBMR Company has now teamed up with their Chinese nuclear counterparts to cause great international embarrassment merely to foist its nuclear agenda on this country rather than scrapping the project. 

The ink on this nuclear agreement is barely dry yet nuclear authorities are trying to push through amendments to the Record of Decision (RoD) on the new scaled-up PBMR nuclear fuel factory at Pelindaba seeking an “exemption” from an environmental impact study for a radioactive waste incinerator to “reprocess” spent fuel. This, in spite of there being no final design or safety approval for the PBMRs failed technology. 

It seems our nuclear industry have no scruples and will stop at nothing.  

Lengthy documents submitted to the Environment Minister on the RoD amendment yesterday provided new evidence that High-Efficiency Particulate Air filters, commonly known as HEPA filters, to be used in the fuel plant have inherent vulnerabilities that are potentially catastrophic. 

In declarations currently before a U.S. District Court in Northern California, evidence of veteran U.S. nuclear scientist Marian M. Fulk states HEPA filters won’t protect public health or workers.  

Fulk says in his declarations authorities have relied “on unduly optimistic assertions about HEPA filters” derived from an internal lab report that has never been made publicly available and is now “missing from the Administrative Record”. 

“There is a wealth of peer-reviewed, credible and publicly-available expert data on the efficiencies of and problems associated with HEPA filters. Therefore, the omission of this information and any detailed analysis of HEPA filter deficiencies…is both baffling and inexcusable,” Fulk says in his declaration under oath.

HEPA filters are all that stands between the radioactive materials inside many a nuclear installation and the surroundings outside of these facilities and is the best the world has to offer. Yet the risk inherent in the vulnerabilities of HEPA filters is potentially catastrophic, even under “best operating conditions”, says Fulk. 

They are fitted in the ventilation applications of every one of South Africa’s nuclear facilities, existing and proposed – including Koeberg and Pelindaba. 

At which point will authorities in this country say we’ve had enough secretive manipulation from the nuclear industry agenda? Or are the vested interests for some worthy of the huge risks involved, including a snub of the Tibetan spiritual leader the Tibetan government in exile blames on “intense pressure” from China? 

Issued by:Dominique Gilbert 

Coordinator

PELINDABA WORKING GROUP& member of the nationalCOALITION AGAINST NUCLEAR ENERGYTel: 012 – 205 1125Cell: 083 740 4676EMail: pelindabanonukes@gmail.com

www.cane.org.za

 PLEASE NOTE: Fulk’s declarations can be forwarded to those who are interested. In them, this is how he describes his right to a view on HEPA filters:

“I am a Chemical Physicist, retired from the University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 1984, where I served 18 years as a staff scientist in chemical physics and material sciences. At LLNL most of my work was classified, but it included the study of radioactive rainout and aerosols; their dynamics, initiation and growth. At LLNL, I studied problems associated with aerosolized particles and their capture by High Efficiency Particulate Air filters, commonly called HEPA filters. I also studied various toxic and radioactive materials including uranium and plutonium. I have worked professionally on these issues for the University of California and the Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessor agencies, including the Atomic Energy Commission, since my work at the University of Chicago where I conducted research on biological systems beginning in 1945.”

SA, China PBMR projects to cooperate By: Keith Campbell

Published: 30 Mar 09 South Africa’s Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR) company has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with its Chinese counterparts, the Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology (INET) of Tsinghua University and the Chinergy company. INET and Chinergy are also developing PBMR technology.

In other designs, the reactor has to be shut down for refuelling to take place.Copyright Creamer Media (Pty) Ltd. All rights reserved.

http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/print-version/south-africa-china-pbmr-projects-to-cooperate-2009-03-30

Dalai Lama’s South Africa conference ban causes uproar

By Chris McGreal in Johannesburg guardian.co.uk, Monday 23 March 2009 18.33 GMT Two of South Africa’s Nobel peace prize winners, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and FW de Klerk, have pulled out of a Johannesburg conference to fight racism after what they branded as Pretoria’s “disgraceful” decision to ban the Dalai Lama from attending following Chinese pressure.The Nobel peace prize committee also said it would boycott this Friday’s conference, which is dedicated to tackling racism ahead of the 2010 World Cup.The row threatens to draw in Nelson Mandela, who, with his fellow South African laureates, invited the Tibetan spiritual leader, and further embarrasses South Africa, which has been accused of squandering its moral authority since ending apartheid by blocking UN security council moves to pressure rogue governments in Burma and Zimbabwe.Tutu, who won the prize for his resistance to white rule, told Johannesburg’s Sunday Independent newspaper he will not attend the conference to discuss how to use the World Cup preparations to combat racism and xenophobia if the Tibetan spiritual leader is not present.“If His Holiness’s visa is refused, then I won’t take part in the coming 2010 World Cup-related peace conference. I will condemn [the] government’s behaviour as disgraceful, in line with our country’s abysmal record at the United Nations security council, a total betrayal of our struggle’s history,” he said.“We are shamelessly succumbing to Chinese pressure. I feel deeply distressed and ashamed.”The FW de Klerk Foundation, established by South Africa’s last white president, said it would also pull out of the conference, albeit reluctantly.“South Africa is a sovereign constitutional democracy and should not allow other countries to dictate to it regarding who it should and should not admit to its territory,” the foundation said in a statement.“Mr De Klerk has been in touch with Archbishop Tutu and identifies himself with the views that he has expressed with regard to the refusal of the South African government to grant a visa to the Dalai Lama.”The Norwegian Nobel peace prize committee also condemned the South African decision.“It is impossible for us to be part of an event where one of the main participants is not able to enter the country,” said Geir Lundestad, the committee’s secretary.The Tibetan government in exile in India today blamed “intense pressure” from China, which has become one of South Africa’s largest trading partners. The claim was apparently confirmed by the Chinese embassy in Pretoria, where the minister counsellor, Dai Bing, was quoted as telling the South African media that his government had warned that allowing the Tibetan spiritual leader to attend the conference would damage bilateral relations.But the South African government denied its decision had anything to do with Beijing. It said the Dalai Lama had been refused a visa because his presence would draw attention away from the World Cup preparations.Thabo Masebe, the spokesman for the president, Kgalema Motlanthe, said the conference organisers had not consulted the government before inviting the Tibetan leader.“We in the South African government have not invited the Dalai Lama to visit South Africa, because it would not be in the interests of South Africa,” he said. “The attention of the world is on South Africa because of it being the host country for the 2010 World Cup, and we wouldn’t want anything to distract from that.”Pretoria has shied away from the Tibetan leader before. Ten years ago, South Africa’s then president, Thabo Mbeki, said he was too busy for a one-to-one meeting with the Dalai Lama.The actors Morgan Freeman, who is to play Mandela in a new film, and Charlize Theron, a South African, are also due to attend the conference.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/23/dalai-lama-south-africa-world-cup-ban  

Cape Town – An anti-nuclear group has urged the South African government to make sure that two vessels carrying what is reportedly the biggest ever shipment of plutonium stay out of its waters.

“What we don’t want is an accident at sea where we as a country have to carry the consequences,” said Mike Kantey, chairman of the Coalition Against Nuclear Energy, on Tuesday.

The heavily armed Pacific Pintail and the Pacific Heron left Barrow-in-Furness in the north-west of England last week.

They will collect their freight – a load of MOX nuclear fuel containing what environmentalists say are 1800kg of plutonium – at Cherbourg in France, then head for Japan. The route around the Cape is one of a number of possible routes the ships – which have been barred from the Suez Canal – may use. In previous years the Pintail has used the Cape route when carrying nuclear materials.

Kantey said Cane called on the government to ensure that the vessels stayed outside South Africa’s 200 nautical mile economic exclusion zone.

‘No capacity to deal with accident’

He said South Africa did not have the capacity to deal with any accident.

“It’s no good to say it will never happen. There is precedent for a nuclear cargo going down. “It’s a risk that is unacceptable to the South African people.”

Freedom Front Plus Western Cape leader Corne Mulder said in a statement that the ships should not be allowed in South African waters. His party would ask African Union head Muammar Gaddafi to see to it that no African state’s territorial waters were made available to the ships.

“Africa has to protect its territorial integrity at all costs,” he said.

The two ships carry an on-board armed force as a measure against hijacking.  MOX, or mixed oxide, is a blend of plutonium and reprocessed uranium.

The MOX on the two ships is intended for use at reactors of three Japanese power companies.  Japan relies on nuclear power plants for nearly one-third of its power demands. SAPA
http://www.news24.com/News24/Technology/News/0,,2-13-1443_2479323,00.html
‘Risky’ nuke ship passes Cape
7 March 2009
Johannesburg – A massive shipment of plutonium mixed oxide (MOX) is meant to travel via the Cape of Good Hope on Saturday, Greenpeace Africa said in a statement.

“MOX shipments are simply not worth the risk, they are a major terror target and pose an enormous threat to the environment of all countries en route,” said Rianne Teule, nuclear campaigner for Greenpeace International in a statement on Saturday.

The ships, Pacific Pintail and the Pacific Heron, were heavily armed and protected by specially trained British forces, the statement read.

They are to enter South African waters as they make their way from France to Japan.

Poses risk

The shipment left Chebourg port with about 1.8 tonnes of MOX fuel – enough to make 225 nuclear weapons – and will travel via the Cape of Good Hope.

“This MOX transport poses immediate contamination and security risks, and is yet another example of the dangers of nuclear energy… not only is the shipment unnecessary and insecure, there is no evidence that the containers carrying the fuel are safe from accidents,” Teule said.

MOX fuel is an alternative nuclear fuel made up of a mixture of uranium and plutonium.

“This shipment is a reminder to the South African government that the health and environment risks associated with nuclear power are real, and that taking the nuclear route in power generation is not the solution to reducing climate change emissions.

“Nuclear power will provide too little, too late to address climate change and it is a dangerous distraction, sucking billions of rands in funding, away from the real solutions which could already be implemented today,” said Brad Smith, programme director for Greenpeace Africa.

In a bid to stop this shipment, Greenpeace Africa has sent a warning letter to several African environmental ministers including South Africa’s environmental affairs and tourism Minister, Marthinus Van Schalkwyk, urging them to take immediate action against the two ships.
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2481660,00.html

SA blocks nuclear cruiser
6 January 2009 
 Cape Town – The Russian navy’s nuclear-powered heavy missile cruiser, Pyotr Velikiy, has been denied entry to Cape Town harbour because the application for it to do so lacked “specific criteria”, South Africa’s National Nuclear Regulator said on Tuesday.

The NNR’s refusal was “based on non-compliance with certain aspects of the licensing requirements”, a spokesperson for the regulatory body, Gino Moonsamy, told Sapa.

The SA Navy had submitted an application to the NNR in December for the Pyotr Velikiy – Russian for Peter the Great – to visit Cape Town from January 9 to 12.

Moonsamy said the specific criteria for the refusal related to a safety certificate from the Russian regulatory authority; a liability letter that provided only for international nuclear damage; and an emergency plan that was “not comprehensive enough”.

Asked if the NNR would consider a revised application, Moonsamy said if such documentation was submitted, it would be reviewed by the regulator.

Five years ago, a Russian navy chief said the Pyotr Velikiy, launched in 1996, was unfit for service.

According to news agency reports at the time, Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov said the massive 256-metre long cruiser “was being poorly maintained”.

The Pyotr Velikiy is heavily armed, carrying both surface-to-air and surface-to-surface missiles, including 20 long-range Granit anti-ship missiles, and is described by Jane’s Navy International as an “immensely powerful” warship.

It is powered by two 300MW nuclear reactors, and has auxillary steam boilers.

The SA Navy on Tuesday said it was continuing with preparations for the visit.

“The SA Navy is continuing with all preparations for the visit while other role-players sort out the NNR’s requirements,” said navy spokesperson Lieutenant-Commander Greyling van der Berg. -SAPA
http://www.news24.com/News24/South_Africa/News/0,,2-7-1442_2449286,00.html