activists | Coalition Against Nuclear Energy South Africa

CANE calls on all Cape residents to oppose nuclear plant at Thyspunt

April 11, 2011 7:31 pm ⋅ Leave a Comment ⋅ Pelindaba Working Group

Apr 11 2011

by Max Matavire

A provincial anti-nuclear energy organisation has intensified its opposition to the proposed construction of a reactor at Thyspunt, Oyster Bay, on fears of repercussions of a nuclear accident.

Japan’nuclear disaster has bolstered the opposition to the use of this type of energy. Reactors at Fukushima plant in Japan have been leaking harmful radioactive materials into the environment following an earthquake and a tsunami there on March 11.

South Africa is faced with an energy crunch and identified increased use of nuclear power as one of the possible solutions. Power utulity Eskom has earmarked Thyspunt as a site for the construction of a nuclear reactor.

Activists and residents are vehemently opposed to the plan. Mike Kantey, the chairperson of the Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (Cane), said his organisation wanted to change the country’s energy policy away from nuclear power plants.

Kantey vowed to oppose the development of a nuclear plant all the way, promising to take the fight to the Constitutional Court.

Cane is now calling on all residents of the province – and the Garden Route – to rally behind the call to stop the construction of the nuclear reactor.

Kantey said the nuclear emissions and waste along the N2 national road posed serious health risks and could irrevocably damage tourism in the region. The government has said it hoped to break ground in 2013, but the plant has to first receive environmental approval and undergo a public participation process before any construction work can begin.

Kantey said he was busy preparing for “battle” against the up-coming environmental approval of the nuclear facility.

Numerous organisations of nuclear activists, environmentalists, dairy farmers, chokka fishermen and ordinary residents have been mobilised to fight against the construction of the nuclear facility.

Some of the organisations involved are the Thyspunt Alliance, the Supertubes Foundation in Jeffreys Bay, Gamtoos community, dairy farmers, residents and the fishing community. The concerns raised include the risk of winds carrying radioactive emissions from Thyspunt to neighbouring areas and the effect on the agriculture and dairy industries.

The opponents of the plant further wanted detailed information on the safety measures and disaster management plans that were in place for the towns along the N2 highway in case of an accident.

Kantey called for substantial support. “I am calling on residents of Knysna and Plettenberg Bay to put their money and support behind the Thyspunt Alliance so that we can take this matter to the Constitutional Court.”

http://www.thenewage.co.za/15163-1016-53-Opposition_to_nuclear_reactor_mounts

193 total views, 4 views today

Rate this post

Posted in: Nuclear Energy ⋅ Tagged: activists, nuclear, radioactive, reactor, Thyspunt

Japan’s Chernobyl? Radiation pressure fears at Fukushima plant

March 13, 2011 9:25 pm ⋅ Leave a Comment ⋅ Pelindaba Working Group

Watch this interview on the comparison between Fukushima and the Chernobyl Plant and what experts are saying:

This report “Radiation up 400 times in Miyagi, new blast feared at Fukushima” can be watched at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PE_Au0J-gqw

Statement re the Nuclear and Earthquake Disaster Unfolding in Japan

The Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center (CNIC) is deeply concerned for the health and safety of the people affected by the earthquakes and tsunamis that have struck Japan over the last two days. We are particularly concerned for the people in the vicinity of nuclear power plants, including workers who are trying to minimize the scope of the disaster.

Unit 1 of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant is in a state of meltdown. A nuclear disaster which the promoters of nuclear power in Japan said wouldn’t happen is in progress. It is occurring as a result of an earthquake that they said would not happen.

This could and should have been predicted. It was predicted by scientists and NGOs such as CNIC. We warned that Japan’s nuclear power plants could be subjected to much stronger earthquakes and much bigger tsunamis than they were designed to withstand.

Besides the question about how this accident will unfold, the big question now is, will the government and the nuclear industry acknowledge its mistakes and change track?

Last December the Japanese government began a review of its nuclear energy policy. The review was commenced in the spirit of essentially confirming the existing policy. That approach is no longer viable. The direction of the policy review must be completely reversed. It must be redirected towards developing a policy of phasing out nuclear energy as smoothly and swiftly as possible.

Philip White

International Liaison Officer

Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center

Phone: 81-3-3357-3800 (office)

Phone: 81-3-3708-2898 (home)

Web (will be updated on Monday):

http://cnic.jp/english/

READ ABOUT:

TEPCO’s Damage Cover-up and Data Falsification Fukushima I Fukushima II

http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit92/nit92articles/nit92coverupdata.html

READ ABOUT:

Japan’s nuclear legacy, Earthquakes and Nuclear Energy, and the never-ending problems and cover-ups of Japan’s nuclear industry.

http://cnic.jp/english/

BREAKING NEWS.

FACT SHEET ON FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR POWER PLANT

UPDATE 2:30 pm, Sunday, March 13, 2011 from NIRS:

Tokyo Electric Power is reporting that some six feet of the core of Unit-3 remains uncovered and has been for some time despite efforts to pump water into the core. Tepco speculates there may be leaking pipes and water is not remaining in the core. A translation of part of the statement from our Japanese colleagues:

“The fuel’s integrity has been considerably compromised. We are assessing a considerably serious situation.”

Full Fact Sheet available @:

http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch/accidents/Fukushimafactsheet.pdf

Core is uncovered at Unit 3; Tokyo Electric Power calls it “a considerably serious situation.”

There are currently 23 General Electric Mark I reactors in the U.S.–the design that exploded at Fukushima. A top Atomic Energy Commission official first proposed banning this design nearly 40 years ago. List/fact sheet.

Link to video of press conference in Japan by Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center (in Japanese with English translation), March 13, 2011.

Statement of Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center, March 12, 2011

Green Action blog on Japan nuclear crisis, includes updates, video links.

TMI Alert piece on similarities/differences between Fukushima and Three Mile Island events.

2002 report from Citizens’ Nuclear Information Center on cover-ups of safety problems by Tokyo Electric Power Co.

Nuclear Disaster in Japan – workers and citizens at high risk

The massive explosion following a cooling problem at one Fukushima’s nuclear reactors, Daiichi, has not only released radiation and other toxic compounds, but has created an untenable situation for workers at Fukushima’s other nuclear reactors nearby, called Daini, especially given that a state of emergency has been declared for five reactors at the two plants. Latest news is that a hydrogen explosion is now possible at the No. 3 reactor at Fukushima 1.

“Workers are being exposed to the ‘allowable’ annual dose of radiation every hour that they remain on site. Our hearts go out to them,” said Muna Lakhani, co-ordinator of Earthlife Africa’s Unplug Nuclear 1 campaign. The danger is not over. There are fears of another explosion as the cooling system at a second reactor has also failed, as of Sunday morning. “The measuring of Caesium at the plant indicates that a meltdown has indeed taken place, which raises the levels of radiation released to catastrophic proportions” suggested Lakhani. Latest news on Sunday confirms fears of a multiple meltdown.

The reactors have all been shut down. The reactor core remains hot for days after shutdown, however, so workers have been busy ensuring that the fuel rods do not melt down. For this the cooling systems need to be operational requiring a power source. The quake has disrupted the backup supplies of power including diesel generators. The IAEA supplied batteries and coolant in the interim. They are now flushing the highly radioactive core with seawater which will cause massive seawater contamination whilst preventing a full scale Chernobyl type meltdown. This is an act of desperation and unprecedented.

Platitudes by the Japanese government and nuclear industry suggesting that the radiation threat is minimal must be treated with great caution, as reports confirm that not only has the containment been breached, and that ‘venting’ is taking place, but also that radiation levels at about 1000 higher than normal have been measured. The 24 hr monitoring that is supposed to happen as a matter of course, has been shutdown (www/nu/pamp/index-j.html) – Japanese activists suggest that this is so that the public and the world at large will not be told how much radiation has and is being released” said Gray Maguire, ELA branch secretary.

It took local activists many hours to get the exclusion zone expanded from the initial 10km to 20 km, which, while not completely safe, helps limit harm to local residents.

“We call upon the nuclear industry, and the South African government, to take this disaster seriously, and abandon all nuclear plans for our country. Given that proposed sites are all along the coast, we believe that this gamble is unacceptable. Not only are sustainable and safe alternatives cheaper than nuclear power, but they are also better solutions to the creation of decent work and energy security, as well as the best solutions to limit climate change,” Lakhani states. The public should note that our existing nuclear power plant Koeberg is on a geological fault on the Cape Fold Belt with the last destructive large earthquake occurring in 1809. Interesting also is that if we were to apply the 20km exclusion/ evacuation zone (which has been applied to Fukushima) to Koeberg this would mean evacuating most of Cape Town.

There has been a history of safety problems and cover-ups by TEPCO at the Fukushima reactor complex. (http://cnic.jp/english/newsletter/nit92/nit92articles/nit92coverupdata.html).

South Africa is considering a ‘fleet’ of nuclear reactors, at Thyspunt, Bantamklip and additional reactors at Koeberg, at a potential cost of hundreds of billions of Rands. Yje National Nuclear Regulator has also come under fire, for not mobilising a “hazmat” team, with local activists questioning their ability to respond to a disaster at Koeberg.

ENDS/—–

Issued by:

Earthlife Africa Cape Town

Unplug Nuclear 1 Campaign

Contact:

Muna Lakhani

083-471-7276

muna@iafrica.com

147 total views, 1 views today

Rate this post

Posted in: Nuclear Energy ⋅ Tagged: activists, nuclear, Radiation, radioactive, reactor, technology, workers

Global call to action for a ban on uranium mining

September 5, 2010 12:13 am ⋅ Leave a Comment ⋅ Pelindaba Working Group

INTERNATIONAL PHYSICIANS FOR THE PREVENTION OF NUCLEAR WAR

19th World Congress – Basel, Switzerland

March 25‐30, 20010

RESOLUTION

Adopted on August 29, 2010

Title of Resolution: Global call to action for a ban on uranium mining

Submitted By: Helmut Lohrer

Affiliates: IPPNW Germany and PSR/IPPNW Switzerland

Date Submitted: August 18, 2010

BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

Uranium ore mining and the production of uranium oxide (yellowcake) are irresponsible and represent

a grave threat to health and to the environment. Both processes involve an elementary violation of

human rights and their use lead to an incalculable risk for world peace and an obstacle to nuclear

disarmament.

The International Council of IPPNW therefore resolves that:

IPPNW call for appropriate measures to ban uranium mining worldwide.

Reasons for Above:

Uranium mining contaminates groundwater and radioactivity remains in the heaps, tailings and

evaporation ponds. Uranium and its radioactive decay elements are highly toxic. They attack inner

organs and the respiratory system. Scientific studies have shown that the following diseases are caused

by exposition to radon gas, uranium and uranium’s decay elements: Bronchial and lung cancer; cancer of

the bone marrow, stomach, liver, intestine, gall bladder, kidneys and skin, leukemia, other blood

diseases, psychological disorders and birth defects.

Approximately three‐quarters of the world’s uranium is mined on territory belonging to indigenous

peoples. The inhabitants of affected regions are (for the most part) vulnerable to exposure from

radioactive substances that threaten them with short‐ and long‐term health risks and damaging genetic

effects.

As well as the direct health effects from contamination of the water, the immense water consumption in

mining regions is environmentally and economically damaging – and in turn detrimental for human

health. The extraction of water leads to a reduction of the groundwater table and thereby to

desertification; plants and animals die, the traditional subsistence of the inhabitants is eliminated, the

existence of whole cultures are threatened.

This is not all. Ending uranium mining ‐ also because of its relevance to the processing of uranium, its

military use, the production of nuclear energy and the unresolved problem of how to permanently

dispose of nuclear waste ‐ would represent a provision of preventive health care, as well as a policy of

peace and reason.

Banning uranium mining would reduce the risk of proliferation. It would make uranium resources more scarce,

thus accelerating the abandonment of the civil use of nuclear energy. The pressure on political decision‐makers

to find safe methods of permanently disposing of nuclear waste would increase. Banning uranium mining would

thus promote the phasing‐out of the irresponsible practice of using nuclear energy and increase pressure

globally to force a change‐over to renewable energies.

Describe how this resolution might be implemented and by whom:

In order to achieve the goal of an international ban, IPPNW will strengthen its public education on this issue and

exert influence on both national and international political decision‐makers.

Estimate for amount of staff time and resources required to implement this resolution:

Minimal staff time will be required, mainly for coordination of activities and communication between

activists.

Estimated expenses and sources of funding:

Minimal cost for shipment of information material.

20 total views, no views today

Rate this post

Posted in: Uranium ⋅ Tagged: activists, ban, health, nuclear, protest, Radiation, radioactive, Uranium

Zuma adds China to his secret deals on Nuclear cooperation despite incomplete IRP2 process

September 5, 2010 12:01 am ⋅ 1 Comment ⋅ Pelindaba Working Group

4 September 2010

BEIJING – China National Nuclear Corp. is in talks over building a nuclear power plant in South Africa, a CNNC official said Tuesday, in the latest sign that China is gearing up to export nuclear technology at the same time as it rapidly expands its domestic reactor fleet.

Negotiations involve the potential transfer of nuclear technology to South Africa, during the visit of South African President Jacob Zuma to China, the official, who declined to be named, told Dow Jones Newswires.

China has its own CPR 1000 nuclear technology and its own operating Pebble Bed Modular Reactors (PBMR). South Africa and China signed a nuclear cooperation agreement over the PBMR in 2009.

Environmental activists in China have reportedly been jailed, disappeared or sentenced to years of “Re-education Through Labour” for endangering state security after following attempts to petition officials over severe radiation poisoning affecting local residents”, focussing on “nuclear pollution” and “human rights violations” relating to uranium mining. http://www.wise-uranium.org/udasi.html

Chinese President Hu Jintao (L) and South African President Jacob Zuma inspect a guard of honor during a welcoming ceremony held for Zuma in Beijing, capital of China, Aug. 24, 2010. (Xinhua/Rao Aimin)

However, China and South Africa signed a raft of commercial deals in mining, finance, nuclear energy and other sectors during a visit by South African President Jacob Zuma end of August, hot on the heels of his visit to Russia during which he also signed deals involving mining and nuclear technology. China and Russia are both nuclear weapons states.

None of the details of these deals have officially been made known to South Africans.

However in an interview with Reuters, it emerges that Standard Bank has agreed with China Guangdong Nuclear Power Company to work on nuclear power opportunities in South Africa, the chief executive of Africa’s biggest bank said last Friday.

Jacko Maree, who had just returned from China, told Reuters on 27 August the deal was reached during the visit this week to Beijing by South African President Jacob Zuma and more than 300 business representatives.

The Chinese firm operates over 40 percent of China’s nuclear power generating capacity.

“We are working with Guangdong Nuclear Power Company on cooperation in nuclear power projects with South Africa,” Maree said. He did not say there were any specific deals on the horizon or give any indication of how big such deals might be.

The decision on how many nuclear plants to build and who would run them is to be decided in a new electricity plan which is still in the works. Chinese firms believe they are well placed given the growing political ties between Pretoria and Beijing.

The electricity plan which aims to map out the energy future for South Africa over the next 50 years is, however, currently subject of a consultative process with stakeholders and is not completed. Civil society is fighting tooth and nail to ensure that nuclear power is excluded from the plan, in favour of clean and less risky renewable energy options.

The agreement between Standard Bank and the Chinese nuclear firm also involves Industrial & Commercial Bank of China, the world’s biggest bank by market capitalisation. It has a 20 percent stake in Standard Bank, Reuters said.

The list of more than 10 deals, the total value of which wasn’t announced, reflects China’s focus on expanding its resources and energy reach in South Africa to fuel continued growth in China’s booming economy.

Separately, an official at China National Nuclear Corp. said it is in talks to build a nuclear-power plant in South Africa. A deal on that would mark the latest sign that China is gearing up to export nuclear technology at the same time as it rapidly expands its domestic reactor fleet. The talks involve the potential transfer of nuclear technology to South Africa, although nothing concrete was expected to be signed during President Zuma’s visit, the official said.

China is working to become self-sufficient in advanced nuclear technology so that it doesn’t need to award multibillion-dollar contracts to foreign companies to build domestic plants in the future. It is also looking at selling nuclear technology overseas in countries such as Vietnam, Belarus and Argentina.

Meanwhile, in another report, Standard Bank Group Ltd. announced a memorandum of understanding with Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd., China’s largest lender, which owns a minority stake in Standard Bank, to promote nuclear cooperation between the countries, according to a South African government statement. The two banks are working with China Guangdong Nuclear Power Co. to engage with the Chinese and South African governments, the statement said.

According to Abdullah Verachia, a director at consultancy Frontier Advisory and a faculty member at the Gordon Institute of Business Science, the deals were done in the mining, power transmission, finance and nuclear energy sectors, among others.

Zuma visited China with 13 cabinet ministers and a 370-strong business delegation to strengthen ties between South Africa and what has become the world’s second-largest economy, with gross domestic product (GDP) worth $1.3 trillion (R9.5 trillion) in the second quarter.

A comprehensive strategic partnership agreement was also concluded during the trip.

Zuma’s visit to China is part of a push to be part of the BRIC grouping of countries, which includes Brazil, Russia, India and China, and follows trips to the other three countries.

Zuma last week called for China to import value-added goods as well as raw materials and to invest in the manufacturing sector instead of focussing solely on projects involving commodities.

Financial Times reported Rob Davies, South Africa’s trade minister, “revealed some frustration by saying it wanted China to do more than just import its raw materials” and suggested that he wants China to help South Africa to do some more sophisticated (and profitable) minerals processing and manufacturing itself.

South Africa’s current plans to expand its nuclear programme include its announcements to enrich uranium. The Y-plant and Z-plant were South Africa’s working uranium enrichment facilities. The facilities were decommissioned during the 1990s and South Africa now meets its fuel requirement through the world market. The Y-plant was pivotal in South Africa’s weapons programme.

Zuma himself told a forum of business executives from China and South Africa: “We envisage meaningful future cooperation in infrastructure, the benefaction of minerals, engineering, energy, information and communications technology and electronics. There are also opportunities to be explored in manufacturing.”

Africa is a prime hunting ground for China’s future energy security. China has established a strong foothold in the Sudan for petroleum. But, Africa is rich in uranium deposits.

Sources:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703447004575448911926722310.html

Dow Jones Newswires

Wall Street Journal

http://www.france24.com/en/20100824-safricas-zuma-china-talks-growing-ties

http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2010/08/24/china-south-africa-talks-nuclear-power-cooperation/

http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=561&fArticleId=5624822

http://af.reuters.com/article/southAfricaNews/idAFWEA592020100827

http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2010/08/24/88906/

_________________________________________________________

For background information on SA, China, Westinghouse & the PBMR it is worthwhile to glance over some of the articles featured in the pro-nuclear Idaho Samizdat:Nuke Notes. Here is the link to the briefs below:

http://nuclearstreet.com/blogs/idaho_samizdat_nuke_notes/archive/tags/PBMR/default.aspx

PBMR joins forces with China on pebble bed technology

It’s a quantum leap in overcoming the “not invented here” paradigm Hat tip to Rod Adams at South Africa and China have agreed to joint development of pebble bed reactor technology A press release from Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (Pty) Ltd ( PBMR ) of South Africa indicates that firm has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in Beijing on 26 March 2009 between the Chinese and the South…

Posted Mar 30 2009, 10:08 AM by Idaho Samizdat: Nuke Notes

Filed under: PBMR, China, pebble bed

• Pebble bed fuel fabricated in South Africa

Target application is Idaho’s Next Generation Nuclear Plant World Nuclear News reports that PBMR in South Africa has successfully manufactured nuclear fuel “pebbles” at 9.6% enrichment for use in a planned high temperature gas cooled reactor (HTGR). The company said the fuel design and fabrication milestone is linked to work on the U.S. Department of Energy’s Next Generation Nuclear…

Posted Jan 18 2009, 02:50 PM by Idaho Samizdat: Nuke Notes

Filed under: PBMR, South Africa

• China launches Pebble Bed at Shandong

High temperature gas cooled reactor design is being developed at Tsinghua University China’s Huaneng Group has launched a demonstration of its PBMR nuclear power project, at a plant in Shandong Province according to an English language report on CCTV. Parties involved in the project signed agreements in Beijing on Oct 7. The HTR-PM project, which stands for “”High Temperature Gas-cooled…

Posted Oct 11 2008, 12:24 PM by Idaho Samizdat: Nuke Notes

Filed under: PBMR, China

• For Mitsubishi size doesn’t matter

Firm will start making large forgings and may invest in Pebble Bed Reuters reports that Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (MHI) plans to get into the business of manufacturing large forgings for nuclear reactors including its own 1,700 MWe PWR . It joins firms in Korea, France, and the U.K. who are seeking to gain market share in this field. The only firm making the components now is Japan Steel…

Posted May 27 2008, 11:03 PM by Idaho Samizdat: Nuke Notes

Filed under: PBMR, Mitsubishi

• Westinghouse moves out on four reactors for China

Plus staking its claims to PBMR reactor technologies and for NGNP The ink is dry on a contract between Westinghouse and the State Nuclear Power Technology Company of China (SNPTC) to build four AP1000 nuclear plants in that country. The announcement comes one day after Westinghouse announced its acquisition of IST Nuclear (ISTN), a provider of services to South Africa’s Pebble Bed Modular Reactor Read…

Posted Aug 10 2007, 04:30 PM by Idaho Samizdat: Nuke Notes

Filed under: PBMR, AP100, China, hydrogen, Westinghouse

• SA, China unveil PBMR cooperation agreement

10 Apr 2009 … Its shareholders are China Nuclear Engineering and Construction … PILOT PBMR: China’s research PBMR/MHTGR building at INET in Beijing …

www.engineeringnews.co.za/…/south-africa-china-pbmr-projects-to-cooperate-2009-04-10 – Cached – Similar

• NRC: Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR)

Protecting People and the EnvironmentUNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION secondary … Pebble Bed Modular Reactor (PBMR). Reactor Power: 400 MWt …

www.nrc.gov/reactors/advanced/pbmr.html – Cached – Similar

Westinghouse signs Chinese contracts, buys into PBMR

Westinghouse signs Chinese contracts, buys into PBMR. 24 July 2007. Westinghouse has signed definitive … Indian cabinet changes nuclear liability bill …

www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=13762 – Cached – Similar

Green Car Congress: Mitsubishi Heavy Signs MOU with PBMR Pty on …

7 Feb 2010 … With the newly concluded MOU, PBMR development will now move forward …. Therefore I suggest sending used nuclear fuel to China and paying …

www.greencarcongress.com/2010/…/mhi-pbmr-20100207.html – Cached – Similar

AECL Chinergy PBMR SNC-Lavalin Nuclear Washington Group …

14 Apr 2006 … state-owned China Nuclear Engineering and. Construction Corporation. ….. software systems manager for PBMR. “The nuclear …

www.intergraph.com/…/NuclearIndustrySpotlight.pdf – United States – Similar

PBMR Contract – 4th Generation Nuclear Power Plant by 2014 – Red …

25 Aug 2008 … PBMR Contract – 4th Generation Nuclear Power Plant by 2014 … reactor operating in China – the 10 MWth HTR-10 at Tsinghua University. …

redgreenandblue.org/…/pbmr-contract-4th-generation-nuclear-power-plant-by-2014/ – Cached – Similar

US support for PBMR intensifies Areva, Westinghouse contest

2 Oct 2009… to research the pebble-bed modular reactor (PBMR) nuclear technology, … by 2020 – the others being China, the US, the UK and Italy. …

www.polity.org.za/…/us-support-for-pbmr-intensifies-areva-westinghouse-contest-2009-10-02 – Cached – Similar

Nuclear Fuel Pellets Offer the Future of Energy that is Clean and …

For now, at least, that leaves nuclear power. The PBMR’s small size and relative simplicity … PBMR technology is also being pursued in China and at MIT. …

www.hightech-edge.com/future-nuclear-energy-power/1283/ – Cached

Atomic Insights Blog: Pebble Bed Reactor MOU Between China and …

30 Mar 2009 … PBMR CEO Jaco Kriek welcomed the collaboration with China. … It is joint investment by China Nuclear Engineering & Construction …

atomicinsights.blogspot.com/…/pebble-bed-reactor-mou-between-china.html – Cached – Similar

112 total views, 2 views today

Rate this post

Posted in: Nuclear Energy ⋅ Tagged: activists, China, energy, nuclear, pbmr, reactor, south africa, Standard Bank, Uranium, Zuma

NECSA, NNR deny latest sirens came from Pelindaba

August 9, 2010 9:40 pm ⋅ Leave a Comment ⋅ Pelindaba Working Group

9 August 2010

Residents near Pelindaba last Thursday, 5 August 2010, reported that they twice heard sirens around 8am from near NECSA’s Gate 3 to the Nuclear Complex. Both NECSA and the NNR deny that sirens went off at NECSA, passing it off as a possible hoax or “someone else’s siren”. A local block watch in the area was contacted but said they knew of none other than Necsa with sirens in the area.

Go to Important Info page for map

Initially not a single person at the communications division of NECSA could be reached around 8.30am Thursday – even on cell numbers – and finally NECSA’s Elliot Mulane answered his mobile. He was not at work but did phone back with his findings.

Both NECSA and the National Nuclear Regulator subsequently denied that sirens went off at Pelindaba that morning, but Mr Mulane said the routine siren tests had taken place on Monday the 2^nd August.

However:

Residents in the area were not notified about
Residents in the area say they did not hear Monday’s sirens (but NECSA said it happened)
The NNR admitted it had not been informed of the Monday tests. A spokesman said they should have been notified.

This is all very worrying for people who live in the region as they may never know when there is a real emergency at Pelindaba. Last year, after the sirens repeatedly went off over a period of month, we alerted the media and it turned out an emergency situation had triggered the sirens and confined all staff indoors. The siren was triggered by an abnormal release of “noble gas” during a regular production of isotopes.

Residents were not contacted at all. NECSA claimed the radioactive gases that escaped were contained within their fenced area (on a windy day!!!) We submitted numerous questions to the NNR over this incident – subjoined hereunder – and have still not had appropriate replies. Since this incident, sirens have not been heard again from Pelindaba – not even routine monthly siren tests – until Thursday morning. NECSA are supposed to test their sirens on the first Monday of every month but have stopped notifying residents, whether or not they continue this practice.

It is a mystery and residents have a right to know what’s going on. There are worrying health risks to children and mothers from the harmful effects of ionizing (man-made) radiation. You cannot see it, smell it, taste it yet it needs only the smallest particles to cause leukemia, a variety of cancers, spontaneous abortions and genetic abnormalities in unborn children.

THE QUESTIONS THE NNR HAVE NEVER ANSWERED:

From: Pelindaba Working Group
Sent: 17 March 2009 09:52 PM
To: Gino Moonsamy; Thiagan Pather
Subject: RE: Media Release – National Nuclear Regulator Assures Public of Safety – Pelindaba

The National Nuclear Regulator

Dear Gino Moonsamy and Thiagan Pather

Further to your media release, I am pleased to know the NNR will continue with its investigation. We trust you will inform us once this is complete, and ask that you indicate how long this investigation is likely to continue?

In terms of your legislated mandate to protect the environment, humans and property, however, I trust you will also provide us with answers to the following questions:

Can you confirm the chemical structure of the xenon and krypton that was released?
Can you confirm that the xenon and krypton were radioactive? If so, what can you tell us about the nature of that gamma radiation?
Can you confirm the suspected amount of the xenon and krypton that was released over legitimate levels? And for how long?
Please confirm the legal daily limit of these emissions?
Please outline known health and environmental implications of xenon and krypton – especially the particular Xe and Kr that is believed to have been released.
Please provide information on the exact building stack that triggered the alarm? Was it the Safari 1 reactor or another building, and if so, please name the building and describe the exact nature of the processes that take place in this building?
Since it was established within a short period after the emergency that xenon and krypton were released, could you indicate whether ANY emissions of ANY OTHER substance was released simultaneously, whether considered hazardous or not?
Why were no residents informed? Instead residents contacted Necsa to enquire about the alarms.
If the emergency warranted all personnel being mustered to safe designated areas behind locked doors, closed windows and switched off ventilators as indicated by NECSA’s Emergency Control Centre, why were the closest residents to Pelindaba not evacuated until the emergency was called off?
Mr. Rob Adam indicated to me personally that NECSA has detectors onsite and also off-site. Can you confirm this?
The emergency took place on a relatively windy day. What assurances are there that the event was of a localized nature?
Who is responsible for the emergency?
The NNR has indicated to Parliament last year it has a skills and manpower shortage. Is this likely to affect your investigation?
What will be done to prevent a recurrence of abnormal levels of radioactive emissions at Necsa’s Pelindaba site?
Can you please indicate how many other events of abnormal levels of radioactive emissions have been recorded at Pelindaba over the past that have warranted an on-site emergency– whether or not these were deemed to have posed a threat to the public and workers at the facilities or not.

Please can you ensure that I am on all your emailing lists? I sent you and other officials at the NNR an email request the night before the emergency at Pelindaba and have still received no reply, let alone a copy of your media release – which I now have via people based in the Cape! I am, as you know, a resident in the Pelindaba region.

It is sincerely hoped you will provide a prompt response to these questions in light of the now scaled-up activity at the Pelindaba Complex which makes it more imperative than ever that the public can rely on the NNR.

Sincerely

Dominique Gilbert

From: Gino Moonsamy [mailto:gmoonsamy@nnr.co.za]
Sent: 18 March 2009 09:49 AM
To: Pelindaba Working Group; Thiagan Pather
Subject: RE: Media Release – National Nuclear Regulator Assures Public of Safety – Pelindaba

Dear Dominic

Your contact details have been added to our mailing list.

Your enquiry is noted and currently being attended to.

best regards

Gino Moonsamy

National Nuclear Regulator

“Safety first, Safety always”

70 total views, 1 views today

Rate this post

Posted in: NECSA - Nuclear Corporation of SA, Nuclear Energy ⋅ Tagged: activists, necsa, nuclear, pelindaba, pretoria, Radiation, radioactive, reactor, regulator, south africa, wind

1 2 Next »

Tag Archives: Activists

Global call to action for a ban on uranium mining

Post Navigation

Sponsored Links

Menu

Archives

Join CANE

Quote

Categories

Blogroll

Latest News from Environment.co.za

Spam Blocked

Tag Archives: Activists

CANE calls on all Cape residents to oppose nuclear plant at Thyspunt

Japan’s Chernobyl? Radiation pressure fears at Fukushima plant

Global call to action for a ban on uranium mining

Zuma adds China to his secret deals on Nuclear cooperation despite incomplete IRP2 process

NECSA, NNR deny latest sirens came from Pelindaba

Post Navigation

Sponsored Links

Menu

Archives

Join CANE

Quote

Categories

Tags

Blogroll

Latest News from Environment.co.za

Spam Blocked