Tag Archives: Iaea

IAEA Head, on Nuclear Safety: ‘We Need To Have A Sense Of Urgency’

GEORGE JAHN, Huffington Post,    June 20 2011
Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/20/yukiya-amano-iaea-nuclear-safety_n_880479.html

VIENNA — The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency on Tuesday urged a worldwide review of safety measures to prevent new nuclear disasters, but acknowledged that since his organization lacks the authority to enforce  rules any improvements are only effective if countries apply them.

While some countries at the 151-member IAEA’s meeting want any new safety regime to be mandatory, most prefer them to be voluntary and don’t want a regulatory role for IAEA. If the IAEA cannot enforce safety standards, those rules will be only as good as they are being enforced by IAEA nations.

“Even the best safety standards are useless unless they are actually implemented,” Amano said.

Asked outside the meeting if he would like to see the IAEA have the same authority against safety violators as it now has against nuclear proliferators – which includes referral to the U.N. Security Council – he said: “I do not exclude that possibility.”

But he said a sense of post-Fukushima urgency dictated action now under existing rules.

“We have to move by days, weeks, months, and I cannot wait years” – the time it would take to revise the IAEA’s mandate for the 35-nation board – he said. “We need to have a sense of urgency.”

Read Full Article

17 total views, no views today

Rate this post

Scandalous SA Nuclear Industry rides on Fukushima Events to Promote Nuclear Energy

The Nuclear Industry, particularly the South African sector have been using the terrible events of Fukushima in Japan as a vehicle to actually promote nuclear energy even more than before. Any normal person with half a brain cell can ask the question, did they even see what happened in Japan?

A nuclear forum is being held in South Africa on the 19th of May 2011 at Emperor’s Palace, Johannesburg, aimed at once again promoting nuclear energy in South Africa. As always these “forums” are not for free and are designed that way in order to keep out NGO’s and community driven organisations who simply do not have the funds to attend them. To give you an idea the cost of attending is R2850.00 per person which most NGO’s will not be able to afford, simple as that.

What happens with all these events is that 99% of the attendees are already pro nuclear so one wonders what’s the fricking point??

If the nuclear industry really wants to enter into debate with the South African public WHICH THEY DO NOT, they would make attendance for NGO’s and community driven organisations FREE but they DO NOT want to debate anything. They have an agenda and they will stick with it no matter what. In 5 years we have never been able to get anyone inside the highly secretive South African Nuclear Industry to debate anything, they cannot even answer the simplest of questions posed to them.

What is most annoying is an email promoting this event which was circulated by the company managing the event, namely Siyenza Managament (Pty) Ltd. In this email the author one Mabel Modipa spits out the biggest bunch of bogus unscientific garbage we’ve seen yet.

The email reads as follows:

Africa Needs Nuclear Power

In the wake of the Fukushima nuclear power plant incident, resulting from the recent massive Japanese earthquake and tsunami, and following the anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident in the former Soviet Union, there has been much public debate internationally concerning nuclear power.

Much of the information projected to the public is misguided and inaccurate which leads to a public fear which in turn affects the formulation of government policy internationally. This in turn affects the costs of construction of nuclear power stations because, at times, unrealistic requirements are put in place, which then tend to drive costs up.  The mystique surrounding the subject of nuclear power tends to confuse matters further, in the public mind.  A confused public cannot make informed energy decisions relating to nuclear power.

In Fukushima province the first person to die as a result of the Fukushima nuclear incident has just been reported.  He was a 64 year old farmer from Sukagama, 65km from the reactor.  He hanged himself because the authorities would not let him sell his produce.  To receive any meaningful radiation dose from his spinage a person would have to eat many tons of it, which would be impossible.  It is sad that misguided policy caused his death.

Issues of nuclear construction costs and public perceptions of nuclear power will be discussed at the forthcoming nuclear power conference; Nuclear Forum 3, on 19 May 2011 at Emperor’s Palace, Johannesburg.

The conference will be opened by the Minister of Energy, The Hon Dipuo Peters.

A lot of debate around the use of nuclear as an alternate energy source has been debated this week at the Africa World Economic Forum in Cape Town.  South Africa will be taking the lead in Africa, with the proposed implementation of nuclear as a reliable source of power for the country.  This will no doubt raise the nuclear debate in the rest of the African continent.

ENDS
5 May 2011
Issued by: Siyenza Management
+27 11 463 9184

Mike Kantey, the chairperson of the National Coalition Against Nuclear Energy duly responded to Miss Modipa with the following response.

Dear Mabel

As the National Chairperson of the Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (see www.cane.org.za) and on behalf of the African Uranium Alliance, I take the strongest objection to the unscientific and emotional language employed in your press release appended below.

If this is the quality of business “intelligence” that is sold at high expense to political, investment, and business leaders in Africa, may Heaven help us over the next century.

Not only does the recently Integrated Resource Plan (IRP2010) for South Africa make it abundantly clear at Table 18 on page 43 that a non-nuclear future is perfectly and affordably obtainable, but the respected International Atomic Energy Agency (the IAEA) declared the Fukushima Dai-ichi accident at its highest level of INES-7, equivalent to the worst accident ever at Chernobyl.

To trivialise and minimise this horrendous accident as your misguided “press release” appears to do makes a mockery of those Japanese citizens within a 20-km radius who have been forced to evacuate their lands and their homes, probably forever, and the risk to all those who are forced to consume foodstuffs and liquids with traces of Strontium-90 and Cesium-137. Unlike your ill-informed and disgraceful mockery of an old man’s death by suicide (an understandable response in Japanese society), as well as your simple ignorance of the basic rules of English spelling (“spinach” not “spinage”, which is what you appear to be practising), the smallest, micro-quantity of Cesium-137 or Strontium-90 will be sufficient to trigger a cancer or genetic defect, once it has been inhaled or swallowed.

I trust that your conference will not be another exercise in pulling radioactive wool over your monied classes, but an honest assessment of what really is in the best interests of the African masses.

Sincerely

Mike Kantey
National Chairperson
Coalition Against Nuclear Energy
www.cane.org.za

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

123 total views, no views today

Rate this post

Japan’s Nuclear Catastrophe Leaves Little to Celebrate on Children’s Day

PETITION AGAINST THE INCREASE OF “ACCEPTABLE” RADIATION TO 2,000 millirem per year (20 mSv/y) FOR JAPANESE SCHOOL CHILDREN AND PLAY GROUNDS

Follow this link to sign the petition: http://blog.canpan.info/foejapan/daily/201104/24

The Japanese government is celebrating Children’s Day,
a national holiday on May 5th, by dramatically raising
radiation exposure limits in schools.

Robert Alvarez, April 29, 2011

Source: http://www.ips-dc.org/blog/japans_nuclear_catastrophe_leaves_little_to_celebrate_on_childrens_day

May 5 is Children’s Day, a Japanese national holiday that celebrates the
happiness of childhood. This year, it will fall under a dark, radioactive shadow.

Japanese children in the path of radioactive plumes from the crippled nuclear
reactors at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi power station are likely to suffer health
problems that a recent government action will only exacerbate.

On April 19, the Japanese government sharply ramped up its radiation
exposure limit to 2,000 millirem per year (20 mSv/y) for schools and
playgrounds in Fukushima prefecture. Japanese children are now permitted
to be exposed to an hourly dose rate 165 times above normal background
radiation and 133 times more than levels the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency allows for the American public.

Japanese school children will be allowed to be exposed to same level
recommended by the International Commission on Radiation Protection
for nuclear workers. Unlike workers, however, children won’t have a choice
as to whether they can be so exposed.

This decision callously puts thousands of children in harm’s way.

Experts consider children to be 10 to 20 times more vulnerable to contracting
cancer from exposure to ionizing radiation than adults. This is because as
they grow, their dividing cells are more easily damaged — allowing cancer
cells to form. Routine fetal X-rays have ceased worldwide for this reason.
Cancer remains a leading cause of death by disease for children in the
United States.

On April 12, the Japanese government announced that the nuclear crisis in
Fukushima was as severe as the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Within weeks of
the 9.0 earthquake and tsunami, the four ruined reactors at the Dai-Ichi power
station released enormous quantities of radiation into the atmosphere.

According to the Daily Youmiri, Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency
(NISA) announced that between 10 and 17 million curies (270,000- 360,000 TBq)
of radioactive materials were released to the atmosphere before early April,
a great deal more than previous official estimates.

Even though atmospheric releases blew mostly out to sea and appear to have
declined dramatically, NISA reports that Fukushima’s nuclear ruins are
discharging about 4,200 curies of iodine-131 and cesium-137 per day into the
air (154 TBq). This is nearly 320,000 times more radiation then the now
de-commissioned Connecticut Yankee nuclear power plant released over a year.

NISA’s estimate is likely to be the low end, given the numerous sources of
unmeasured and unfiltered leaks into the environment amidst the four wrecked
reactors. On April 27, Bloomberg News reported that radiation readings at the
Dai-Ichi nuclear power station have risen to the highest levels since the
earthquake.

With a half-life of 8.5 days, iodine-131 is rapidly absorbed in dairy products
and in the human thyroid, particularly those of children. Cesium-137 has a
half-life of 30 years and gives off potentially dangerous external radiation.
It concentrates in various foods and is absorbed throughout the human body.
Unlike iodine-131, which decays to a level considered safe after about three
months, cesium-137 can pose risks for several hundred years.

Measurements taken at 1,600 nursery schools, kindergartens, and middle
school playgrounds in early April indicate that children are regularly getting
high radiation doses. Radiation levels one meter above the ground indicate
that children at hundreds of schools received exposures 43- 200 times above
background. And this is outside of the “exclusionary zone” around the Dai-Ichi
reactors, where locals have been evacuated. Japan’s Ministry of Education
and Science has limited outdoor activities at 13 schools in the cities of
Fukushima, Date, and Koriyama Cities.

Although the extent of long-term contamination is not yet fully known, disturbing
evidence is emerging. Data collected 40 kilometers from the Fukushima’s
nuclear accident  show cumulative levels as high as 9.5 rems (95 mSv)
– nearly five times the international annual occupational dose. Soil beyond the
30-kilometer evacuation zone shows cesium-137 levels at 2,200 kBq per
square meter — 67 percent greater than that requiring evacuation near
Chernobyl.

Three-fourths of the monitored schools in Fukushima had radioactivity levels
so high that human entry shouldn’t be allowed, even though students began
a new semester on April 5.

PETITION AGAINST THE INCREASE OF “ACCEPTABLE” RADIATION TO 2,000 millirem per year (20 mSv/y) FOR JAPANESE SCHOOL CHILDREN AND PLAY GROUNDS

Follow this link to sign the petition: http://blog.canpan.info/foejapan/daily/201104/24

36 total views, no views today

Rate this post

Fukushima and Chernobyl Raise Questions about WHO’s Role

By Gustavo Capdevila, Inter-Press Service (IPS), April 27 2011
Source: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=55403

GENEVA, Apr 27, 2011 (IPS) – The nuclear disaster in Fukushima,
Japan and the 25th anniversary of the catastrophe in the Chernobyl
nuclear power plant in Ukraine have thrown into relief contradictions
in the role played by the World Health Organisation, which civil
society organisations have spent years pointing out.

An international coalition of NGOs, IndependentWHO, says the multilateral
agency has never shown independence in its decisions or actions, in terms
of living up to its mandate of protecting the victims of radioactive contamination.

The groups blame the WHO’s alleged inactivity in this area on an
agreement it signed in 1959 with the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA), an independent United Nations organisation founded to promote
“safe, secure and peaceful nuclear technologies.”

The coalition of NGOs states that the agreement makes the WHO
“subservient” to the IAEA and prevents the U.N. health agency from
“taking any initiative or action to achieve its objectives: the preservation
and the improvement of health.”

IndependentWHO
The collective’s founding members are
Enfants de Tchernobyl Bélarus,
Physicians for Social Responsibility
International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War,
the People’s Health Movement,
the Commission for Independent Information and Research on Radioactivity,
Réseau Sortir du Nucléaire,
Brut de Béton Production and
ContrAtom.

The WHO should break off “that incestuous relationship” with the IAEA,
Russian-born Swiss journalist Wladimir Tchertkoff, who has produced seven
television documentaries on Chernobyl, told IPS.

But the relationship between the two agencies is unequal, because the IAEA
depends on the U.N. Security Council, while the WHO answers to the
lower-ranking Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

In the May 1959 agreement, the two agencies agreed to work in close
cooperation and consult each other whenever either of the two plans to
undertake a programme or activity in an area in which the other has a
substantial interest. It also establishes restrictions to safeguard the
confidentiality of certain documents.

In that framework, “the nuclear lobby has managed to get the WHO to
renounce taking care of the victims of nuclear disasters,” said Swiss
academic Jean Ziegler, currently vice president of the U.N. Human Rights
Council’s Advisory Committee.

In line with the 1959 agreement, the WHO’s position is that “when there is a
nuclear accident, we are not responsible for taking care of the victims; the
nuclear agency is the sole responsible party,” Ziegler told IPS.

He described this as an appalling situation in which thousands of people die,
when they could have been saved.

This “renews our suspicion that the nuclear lobby is well-established” here, he
said, pointing to the WHO building, outside of which the interview took place.

The latest estimate of the number of Chernobyl victims, published by the two
agencies on Sept. 5, 2005, mentions 50 deaths and 4,000 cases of cancer.

IndependentWHO calls such figures absurdly low, because they fail to take
into account the health of the children living in the contaminated areas, “where
rates of illness are at 80 percent.” The statistics also “ignore the fate of the
600,000 to 1,000,000 liquidators,” the name given to the veterans of the
Chernobyl rescue and clean-up, the coalition statements adds.

Tchertkoff pointed out that the study “Chernobyl: Consequences of the
Catastrophe for People and the Environment”, a book translated from Russian
that was published in December 2009 by the New York Academy of Sciences,
put the total number of people who died as a result of the disaster at 985,000,
between the Apr. 26, 1986 explosion of Unit 4 of the Chernobyl nuclear plant
and 2004.

According to health data cited by the book, more than 80 percent of children
in the areas of Ukraine, Belarus — the Soviet republic of Belarusssia at the time
– and Russia that were contaminated by Chernobyl were in good health prior
to the accident, while “fewer than 20 percent are well” today.

Agreement WHA 12-40

IndependentWHO says the agreement between the WHO and
the IAEA “is a major source of disinformation on the health and
environmental consequences of the accident at Chernobyl” and
that “WHO must regain its independence completely so that it
can investigate the relationship between radiation and health.”

“Here are just three examples that illustrate perfectly the way in
which the Agreement compromises the independence of WHO:

1. The IAEA is committed, in its statutes, to the promotion of the
peaceful use of the atom. It is therefore a commercial lobby
group.

2. The IAEA has put itself forward as the body responsible for
the setting of safety standards within the nuclear industry as
a whole. It is therefore both judge and jury.

3. The IAEA has no mandate nor any expertise in matters of
public health.”

Since Apr. 27, 2007, the organisations grouped in IndependentWHO have
maintained a vigil in front of the WHO building in Geneva every working day
from 8:00 AM to 6:00 PM.

The vigil, which consists of one to three activists, is calling for a revision of
the 1959 agreement with the IAEA and demanding that the WHO work
toward its objective, as outlined in the agency’s constitution: “the attainment
by all peoples of the highest possible level of health.”

But Tchertkoff was sceptical. The WHO “cannot do much because it is a
victim” of a situation that was created, he said.

With respect to the accident in Fukushima, in northeast Japan, caused by
the Mar. 11 earthquake and tsunami, “The WHO doesn’t know what to do,”
he said.

“It doesn’t have staff capable of dealing with the situation. It only has five
people, just two of whom are university graduates with no experience,”
he added.

Tchertkoff also mentioned the controversy triggered by WHO policies
during the 2009 flu pandemic, in particular with regard to the production
and distribution of flu vaccines.

Ziegler said the WHO has been “infiltrated” by the nuclear lobby and the
pharmaceutical industry.

He recalled that an independent inquiry set up by former WHO director-
general Gro Harlem Brundtland (1998-2003) found that some of the
agency’s staff had received payments from the tobacco industry while
the agency was debating the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control,
which was finally approved in 2005.

Tchertkoff believes there are two different tendencies in the WHO.

One is that if circumstances continue to deteriorate, like over the last few
weeks, it will become necessary for the WHO to once again discuss its
policy regarding nuclear radiation.

But the other group holds that a reopening of the debate would amount to
a confession “that we haven’t done anything in the past few decades,”
he said.

“A serious internal problem of this kind is lamentable at a time when we
are looking at Fukushima, Chernobyl and all of the world’s nuclear plants,
surrounded by some 410 million people living in a radius of 30 kilometres
from these danger spots,” the journalist said.

IPS, which requested an interview with WHO director of Public Health and
Environment María Neira, received no response from the WHO with regard
to these accusations.

35 total views, no views today

Rate this post

Fukushima Nuclear leak may exceed Chernobyl, Japan admits

Jon Swaine, The Daily Telegraph, April 13, 2011
http://www.globalnews.ca/world/Nuclear+leak+exceed+Chernobyl+Japan+admits/4592399/story.html

Japanese officials have admitted that the nuclear crisis in Fukushima could become worse than Chernobyl.

The admission came after regulators Tuesday upgraded the crisis at the Fukushima Daiichi plant to a seven on the International Atomic Energy Agency’s accident scale – on a par with the 1986 Chernobyl disaster, the worst ever.

Officials said the total leak from Fukushima so far amounted to a tenth of the radiation emitted from Chernobyl, but could yet eclipse the Ukraine disaster. An official from the plant operator, Tepco, said: “Our concern is that it could eventually exceed Chernobyl.”

About 630,000 terabecquerels of radiation are estimated to have been leaked at Fukushima. More than five million were released at Chernobyl.

The decision to upgrade the accident to the highest threat level was the subject of international criticism after Japan admitted delaying the announcement.

A spokesman from Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency (NISA) said the delay occurred because officials “refrained from making announcements until we had reliable data”.

The admission led to calls from the international community for “swift and accurate” information about the true extent of the crisis.

The Japanese said the change was made after high total levels of radioactive contamination had been found in air, tap water, vegetables and seawater in the surrounding area.

The raising of the threat level prompted renewed fears among local people and international neighbours about the effects of exposure to radiation.

Wen Jiabao, the Chinese premier, said Tokyo must take “very seriously” the potential impact on his country and “swiftly, comprehensively and accurately report the situation to China”. A further five communities have been added to the Japanese government’s list of places that should be avoided. A 12-mile radius around the plant has already been evacuated.

Miyuki Ichisawa, 52, who runs a coffee shop in Iitate, one of the new danger zones, said: “It’s very shocking to me now the government is telling us this accident is at the same level of Chernobyl.” The new rating raised fresh questions about whether information was being withheld from the Japanese people. Tepco was frequently accused of falsifying safety data before last month’s earthquake and tsunami.

Last week the Japanese government was reported to have withheld data showing that radiation exceeded safe levels more than 18 miles from the plant, beyond the established evacuation zone. Paddy Regan, a professor of physics at the University of Surrey, dismissed the comparison between Chernobyl and Fukushima. “The radiation released is a lot less, and the way it’s released is very different,” he said. “The Chernobyl fire put lots of radioactive material into the atmosphere and took it over large distances.

“Here, there have been a couple of releases where they’ve vented gas from the reactor, and then released some cooling water.” Workers yesterday discovered a fire close to the No. 4 Reactor at the plant but quickly extinguished it. Tepco said the fire was in a battery box and did not affect radiation levels.

The plant and much of northern and eastern Japan were jolted by two large aftershocks yesterday morning, following a magnitude 7 earthquake which killed three people on Monday.

© Copyright (c) The Daily Telegraph

75 total views, no views today

Rate this post
lazy-submarginal