Excuse us while we go nuclear on this, but Alberta should not be a dumping ground for radioactive garbage from Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick. They can keep it.

The Municipal District of Big Lakes, northwest of Edmonton, is investigating whether the community could become home to a nuclear-waste facility worth up to $24 billion. Canada’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization is currently looking for a community that can safely handle the country’s nuclear waste.

The agency notes on its website that spent nuclear fuel has been safely transported internationally for 40 years. “At present, limited amounts of used nuclear fuel are transported in Canada. However, in other countries, in particular France, the United Kingdom and Sweden, shipments of used nuclear fuel take place routinely on a large scale,” it says.

Alberta has a minute supply of radioactive fuel at a SLOWPOKE research reactor at the University of Alberta. There are similar research reactors in Saskatchewan, Ontario, Quebec and Nova Scotia. These are low-power reactors with built-in safety mechanisms that allow them to be licensed to operate unattended overnight.

There are two million highlevel radioactive fuel bundles sitting at temporary storage sites in Canada, mostly at the large plants in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick.

Jurisdictions that are the biggest producers of spent fuel should be the ones dealing with the waste. Alberta should not be taking other province’s nuclear garbage.

© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

Premier Brad Wall says Saskatchewan residents haven’t warmed
to the idea of storing nuclear waste in the province and it is highly
unlikely the government would allow such a facility to be built.

Wall made the comments Thursday after a petition with more than
4,500 signatures opposing a nuclear waste facility was presented
in the provincial legislature.

The Nuclear Waste Management Organization is eyeing Saskatchewan
as a potential site for underground storage of nuclear waste, although
a decision is likely a decade away. Three northern communities have
expressed interest as a possible host.

While Wall’s Saskatchewan Party government has been bullish on
“adding value” to the province’s large reserves of uranium, it has
said in the past negative public opinion has ruled out a nuclear
waste facility.

“I don’t sense the mood of the province has changed and frankly,
what’s happened in Japan has got people thinking, just generally
speaking, about the issue,” Wall told reporters.

“This would be very much a provincial issue and while we would respect
the fact that different communities do want this, there should be a
sense that the province in general is supportive and I don’t have that
sense,” he added.

The petition by the Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan calls
for a halt to any further expansion of the nuclear industry in
Saskatchewan and legislation banning interim or permanent storage
of nuclear waste.

Wall said it is not something the government has contemplated but
he would not rule out such a law on nuclear waste in Saskatchewan.

The government has embarked on a new nuclear agenda that
includes a focus on nuclear medicine and research into the feasibility
of small reactors for power production.

In 2009 it rejected a proposal from Bruce Power to develop two,
1,000 megawatt reactors as too large and expensive for Saskatchewan.

The Coalition for a Clean Green Saskatchewan news release said
beyond the reactor decision, the Sask. Party has ignored concerns
around the expansion of the nuclear industry in the province.

“Strong opposition to the uranium industry exists in the province.
Active citizens successfully halted a proposed uranium refinery at
Warman in 1979 and more recently, were instrumental in killing the
proposal by Bruce Power to build a nuclear power plant here. Today,
we fight to keep Saskatchewan from becoming the nuclear waste
dump for North America,” the release reads in part.

NDP MLA Pat Atkinson presented the group’s petition to the legislature.

The NDP is officially opposed to the storage of nuclear waste in
Saskatchewan and its transportation through the province.

The previous NDP government was opposed to a nuclear waste facility
but had sought the expansion of the nuclear industry in areas such as
uranium mining and refining.

The full petition is at variance with some parts of NDP policy,
acknowledged Atkinson, but “in terms of democracy all voices in the
province need to be heard by members of the legislature.”

Meanwhile, Jerry Grandey, CEO of uranium miner Cameco Corp., told
reporters in Saskatoon Thursday that it’s a good thing some provincial
communities are wanting to study the idea of nuclear waste storage,
which he called a “tremendous opportunity.”

Irradiated nuclear fuel contains hundreds of man-made radioactive
poisons for which the natural background level is zero. They fall
into three broad categories:

(1) fission products — radioactive isotopes of xenon, krypton,
iodine, cesium, tellurium, ruthenium, and many others — which
are the broken pieces of atoms that have been split or “fissioned”;

(2) activation products — radioactive isotopes of argon, cobalt,
iron, and many others — which are created when non-radioactive
materials in the reactor absorb one or two neutrons and are
transformed into radioactive elements; and

(3) transuranic elements — plutonium, neptunium, americium, curium,
and others — which are created when uranium atoms absorb one or
more neutrons and then transform themselves into new elements.

See  http://ccnr.org/hlw_chart.html  and  http://ccnr.org/hlw_graph.html

In addition to these man-made radioactive materials, there are also
huge amounts of radioactive materials created which do exist in small
amounts in nature — such as tritium (radioactive hydrogen) and
carbon-14 (radioactive carbon).  These radioactive atoms are easily
incorporated into organic molecules of all kinds, including DNA.

—–

This is the stuff that the nuclear industry wants to bury in geologic
formations in order to protect the biosphere for millions of years.

But when a reactor melts down, that radioactive junk is trapped in
the molten blobs that form.  It’s an enormous toxic mess.  Ad hoc
measures must be taken to package and move and guard these
unwieldy radioactive blobs and contain them so that they do not
leak their radioactive poisons into the environment.

At Chernobyl, where the core of the reactor melted right into the
earth, moving it has proven to be impossible.  Constructing a
containment above the site of the core melt is also impossible
because of the intense radiation levels.  An enormous structure
is being built AWAY from the reactor core melt, which will then — when
finished — be “slid” over the reactor site, enclosing the remnants of
the reactor building and all.

Already over $650 million (US) has been spent to build
this new structure, which will take the place of the crumbling
sarcophagus that was hastily erected over the molten core
following the accident 25 years ago.  Authorities are now
seeking hundreds of million more in order to complete
the task — and this is by no means a permanent solution!

Meanwhile, the remnants of the half-melted TMI core (from
32 years ago) are also presenting storage difficulties….

Gordon Edwards
================

William Freebairn, Washington (Platts), 15 April 2011
Source: http://www.platts.com/RSSFeedDetailedNews/RSSFeed/ElectricPower/6002873

The US Department of Energy facility storing melted fuel from the Three
Mile Island nuclear plant has not done enough to address crumbling
concrete modules encasing the radioactive material, the US Nuclear
Regulatory Commission said in a letter made public Friday.

The DOE facility at the Idaho National Laboratory holds the damaged fuel
from unit 2 of the Three Mile Island Plant, which, in 1979, suffered a partial
meltdown of the core, leading to the US’ worst nuclear accident.

The so-called spent fuel rubble is now contained in concrete storage
modules located at an independent storage installation owned by DOE.

The concrete modules are “showing significant cracking and degradation,”
even though they were built in 1999 to last for 50 years, NRC said in the
letter, which is dated April 7.

DOE has analyzed the structural integrity of the modules, which have
walls two feet thick, and determined that the problem is getting
progressively worse, NRC said.

Since the NRC inspection, DOE has identified funding to pay for repairs
and will begin the work this construction season, meaning from the spring
to the fall, spokeswoman Katinka Podmaniczky said in an email Friday.

“These cracks have no impact on the storage modules’ ability to safely
store spent nuclear fuel,” she said.

At the time of the inspection, it was not clear whether DOE had approved
or scheduled measures to stabilize the degradation, NRC said in the
letter. It asked DOE to provide the regulator with information about
corrective measures, a schedule for their implementation and a plan
for monitoring the effectiveness of actions taken.

The degradation of the modules was likely due to “water intrusion and
the annual thawing and freezing cycle,” NRC said in an inspection report
attached to the letter. Chunks of concrete have fallen from areas of the
modules and there are signs they are no longer water-tight, NRC said.

Cracking was first recognized in 2000 but considered to be “cosmetic,”
NRC said. In 2008, DOE recognized that continued cracking called into
question the ability of the modules to protect the fuel canisters inside
from natural phenomena and shield people from the radiation of the
fuel.

A recent study determined that protective caps should be installed,
damaged concrete replaced and a sealant applied, but those actions
have not yet been taken, the NRC inspection report said.

NRC licensed DOE’s Idaho Operations office in 1999 to store the
damaged fuel in dry shielded stainless steel canisters, which are
loaded inside the reinforced concrete modules.

The 30 dry shielded canisters at the site contain melted fuel from the
Three Mile Island-2 reactor core. That unit, located in Pennsylvania,
experienced the melting of about half the fuel in the core during an
accident. The adjacent Three Mile Island-1 continues to operate.

The NRC inspectors concluded that the storage facility continues to
meet standards, but the degradation of the modules is “a concern
that will be tracked in the future,” agency spokesman David McIntyre
said in an email.

NRC also cited DOE in the inspection report for a “deviation from a[n]
NRC commitment” because it deleted certain material from an
emergency plan.

NRC ordered the energy agency to respond within 30 days. The
deviation was minor, Podmaniczky said.

William Freebairn, william_freebairn@platts.com

Fears of a third explosion and meltdown still exist.

Document Available Here in PDF Format

World Nuclear News
February 22, 2011
Source: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/
Areva will be required to spin off its uranium mining activities under the French government’s plans for a strategic partnership between the company and EDF. The forthcoming Atmea-1 reactor design and small reactors up to 300 MWe will also be targets for future development.

The Nuclear Policy Council, headed by President Nicolas Sarkozy, has announced that EDF and Areva will finalise a technical and commercial agreement before the middle of this year relating to the establishment of a strategic partnership between France’s two major nuclear companies. The agreement will focus on further optimisation of the EPR design, currently under construction in Finland, France and China, improved operation and maintenance of France’s existing nuclear reactors, and work on the nuclear fuel cycle, both to develop new products and to enhance industrial cooperation on radioactive waste storage.

The Nuclear Policy Council’s statement said Areva must spin off its uranium mining interests into a subsidiary “as a prerequisite” for putting in place strategic and financial support for its future development. It has also called for Areva to enter into a long-term uranium supply agreement with EDF. With a portfolio of interests in operating mines in Canada, Niger and Kazakhstan, and new mines under development in Namibia and Niger, uranium mining was responsible for 10% of Areva’s consolidated revenue in 2009.

The statement also calls on Areva, EDF, GDF-Suez and “other stakeholders” to strengthen their collaboration on the Atmea-1 power reactor. The Atmea-1 is a medium-sized (1000-1150 MWe) Generation III design being developed under a joint venture established in 2006 by Areva NP and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. The reactor is intended for  marketing primarily to countries embarking upon nuclear power programs, although the council says in its statement that construction of the first-of-a-kind Atmea-1 in France will be considered.

LOOK EAST

The Nuclear Policy Council also wants to ensure French involvement in the developing Chinese nuclear power market, and has instructed France’s national energy research commission, the CEA, to conduct negotiations with the Chinese authorities with a view to establishing a comprehensive partnership between the two countries on all aspects of the civil nuclear power sector. In addition to providing products and services to the existing Chinese reactor fleet and future new build projects involving the EPR reactor design, this could include the joint development of a 1000 MWe Generation III reactor, the statement notes. “All players in the French nuclear industry will be involved in this partnership,” the council states.

In addition, the French Ministry of Energy will lead a working group to look into the technical, legal and economic aspects of low power (100-300 MWe) reactor projects, which are becoming increasingly popular.

Source: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/

10 August 2010

Having put the public at risk by failing for decades to address the radioactive Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) seeping into our drinking water, the Pelindaba Working Group is astounded that the National Nuclear Regulator has recently employed the services of a branding agent to “create a positive public image” and now also pleads poverty over funding a single meeting with key civic stakeholders.

The NNR has come under attack for failing abysmally as a regulator and unsuccessfully trying to put a lid on the growing problems of radioactive acid water threat to rivers, farming and drinking water[i]. It also dismisses growing public concern over the stock-piling of radioactive waste and radiotoxic releases into the Crocodile River at Pelindaba and the Atlantic Ocean at Koeberg among other sites.

The performance of the NNR should be judged on their fulfilment of their fiduciary function, namely to protect the public, property and the environment from nuclear damage. To protect their image is an inappropriate triviality which is of very little importance in comparison to the more serious alleged failures of the NNR.

NNR regulates the entire fuel cycle and is beholden to the nuclear industry

The NNR currently regulates the entire nuclear fuel cycle from uranium mine exploration to decommissioning and radioactive waste.

The public have a right to know what is being spent on at least the one branding agent – Zanusi Brand Solutions – whose employees falsely identified their company as “Zanusi Grand Solutions” to solicit an interview from nuclear monitor groups and then failed to phone back.  Zanusi lists DEAT and the SABC among their other illustrious clients.

In 2008, erstwhile Minister Alec Erwin squandered over R4m taxpayer funds by employing FreedThinkers to give nukes a “make-over” and to “turn anti-nuke activists into pro-nuke ambassadors” in his desperate bid to save the discredited PBMR nuclear white elephant. It seems the nuclear industry will stop at nothing to promote this industry against all odds. And, pro-nuclear propaganda in South Africa is set to intensify and be funded by taxpayers starting at schools.

NNR has addition marketing study running

To make matters worse, a second NNR-sponsored “tracking study” is being simultaneously conducted by JGR Marketing Resources which has for years been paid to report on “levels of satisfaction amongst its key stakeholders”. None of these reports were ever made public.

Neither company knew about the other. Neither company followed through on their planned interviews and showed more interest in views over the NNR’s logo, for example, than views over NNR’s handling of radiological issues.

Yet in February this year the NNR asked about 50 civil society groups for “an engagement meeting” and for discussion items, and indeed the NNR budget reflects substantial funding – almost R13 million or 10% of its budget – requested for “stakeholder management”.

To date the NNR has failed to respond to a growing list of questions and concerns that directly impact on public safety in Cape Town, Johannesburg and Pretoria from past and existing nuclear activities – past and present – from public groups and this week finally turned down a request for a mere scaled-down R6, 000 after months of negotiation to bring civil society stakeholders together for the meeting.

Why is critical information on failures of the NNR Act being withheld?

Stakeholders had also asked the NNR to provide details of a thought provoking talk by NNR senior lawyer Rodney Elk on the NNR’s legal challenges and difficulties with reference to the implementation of the National Nuclear Regulator Act.

The cotton-wool approach

This initiative is now in jeopardy as the NNR pleads poverty and suggests it meets with stakeholders individually which appears to have begun despite talks about national talks. This is nothing less than anti participatory ploy or cotton-wool approach similar to that used by the consultants on nuclear Environmental Studies to whitewash public sentiment.

Stakeholder groups are situated at each of the five coastal regions earmarked for nuclear reactors, as well as Hartbeespoort, Koeberg and the Namaqualand, site of South Africa’s nuclear waste dump.  In addition, Gauteng and North West host NECSA and most of the uranium mines.

Pelindaba Working Group is aware that the NNR holds lavish pro-nuclear related conferences at upmarket venues that exclude civil stakeholders and spares no cost on the travel expenses of its executives – over R5,5m in 2008/9 and forecast at R7,640,080 in the 2011/12 financial year.

The NNR derives its income by issuing nuclear authorisations.  This compromises its ability to be an independent regulator, as opposing the granting of licences will impact directly on its ability to continue.  A body set up, with an independent funding model similar to the Water Research Council, would be more appropriate.

NNR lacks skills & is has missing funds

Its own annual reports reflect a dire shortage of skills and know-how at the NNR, while media reports and labour disputes indicate that significant funds have gone missing from its coffers.

The NNR has blatantly ignored requests by affected communities for critical information, including details on abnormal discharges of radioactive gases from Pelindaba emergencies, nuclear liability insurances, as well as the issuing of authorisations to hazardous nuclear vessels in our coastal waters and ports without at least requesting that our Mother City and her residents and businesses is insured against a potential nuclear disaster.

Last week residents around Pelindaba again reported hearing loud sirens but these were dismissed by the NNR and the Nuclear Energy Corporation as a “possible hoax” or someone else’s siren.

What of the legacy of nuclear waste stockpiles in South Africa?

The nuclear/radiotoxic legacy of this country is long standing.  Its most toxic impact is through radioactive acid water from mines throughout Gauteng, North West, Limpopo and Mpumalanga.  However, the impact of stockpiles of nuclear waste over the coming centuries is part of that legacy and cannot be assessed.  World-wide studies are pointing strongly to the danger presented by such waste to future generations, who may not understand the labelling because of the shifts in language alone.

It is imperative for this country to have a strong nuclear regulator, particularly in the face of new legislation which recently exonerated the Department of Environmental Affairs from dealing with environmental radioactivity – even in Environmental Impact Assessments. Instead law now places this duty solely at the door of the NNR, where such studies cannot be funded and would be retrospective to the granting of the Record of Decision.  Additionally, the NNR lacks capacity to do anything more than to acquiesce to all nuclear developments. This is clearly untenable as it puts communities at risk and, by default, forces the NNR to grant the licence.

Informed of the failures and inadequacies of the NNR, the EIA consultants Arcus Gibb reply that it is not their responsibility to assess the competence of the NNR.

South Africans need to awaken to the potentially dire consequences for generations to come of a weak[ii], corrupt[iii], incapable and inept[iv] regulator if nuclear expansion in South Africa is to be pursued, and indeed even if it does not.

Issued by:

>Dominique Gilbert

PELINDABA WORKING GROUP

083 740 4676

>Christine Garbett

CANE – Gauteng / Northwest Province

>Judith Taylor

Earthlife Africa Joburg

082 389 3481

[ii] See supporting document http://www.cane.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/Articles-on-National-Nuclear-Regulator-in-support-of-media-statement-published-on-CANE-10-Aug-2010.pdf

[iii] See separate document http://www.cane.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/Articles-on-National-Nuclear-Regulator-in-support-of-media-statement-published-on-CANE-10-Aug-2010.pdf

[iv] See separate document http://www.cane.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/Articles-on-National-Nuclear-Regulator-in-support-of-media-statement-published-on-CANE-10-Aug-2010.pdf

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