Nuclear Energy

Recommendations

Info

cxxii “The Possible Toxic Effects from the Nuclear Reprocessing Plants at Sellafield and Cap de La Hague”, Report commissioned by the Scientific and Technological Options Assessment Panel of the European Parliament, and prepared by WISE-Paris, published on Nov 21, 2001, http://www.n-base.org.uk cxxiii “Radioactive Flow”, June 30, 1997, http://www.downtoearth.org cxxiv “The Possible Toxic Effects from the Nuclear Reprocessing Plants at Sellafield and Cap de La Hague”, op. cit.; “Reprocessing”, Greenpeace, June 27, 2006, http://www.greenpeace.org cxxv “Reprocessing”, Greenpeace, ibid.; “Nuclear Power and Children’s Health”, http://www.helencaldicott.com/childrenshealth_proc.pdf cxxvi Linda Gunter, “The French Nuclear Industry Is Bad Enough in France; Let's Not Expand It to the U.S.”, Mar 23, 2009, http://www.alternet.org cxxvii “Areva trying to block TV documentary on residual contamination left around former uranium mine sites in France”, Decommissioning Projects – France, updated Oct 2010, http://www.wise-uranium.org cxxviii Linda Gunter, “The French Nuclear Industry Is Bad Enough in France; Let's Not Expand It to the U.S.”, op. cit. cxxix Linda Gunter, ibid.; “Radioactive spill at AREVA Uranium mine in Niger”, Dec 18, 2010, http://www.greenpeace.org cxxx “Nuclear power in France”, http://en.wikipedia.org, accessed on Jan 15, 2010; Linda Gunter, ibid. cxxxi Greg Keller, “Nuclear accidents in France raise concern”, July 19, 2008, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com cxxxii “Chain of Accidents Prompts Soul Searching”, July 28, 2008, http://www.spiegel.de cxxxiii “The nuclear waste crisis in France”, Greenpeace document, May 30, 2006, http://www.greenpeace.org cxxxiv Linda Gunter, “The French Nuclear Industry Is Bad Enough in France; Let's Not Expand It to the U.S.”, op. cit. cxxxv Annie Makhijani, Linda Gunter, Arjun Makhijani, “Cogema: Above the Law?”, May 7, 2002, http://www.ieer.org cxxxvi Linda Gunter, “The French Nuclear Industry Is Bad Enough in France; Let's Not Expand It to the U.S.”, op. cit.; “Mudding the Waters: Cogema's Hidden Environmental Crimes”, http://www.nirs.org cxxxvii Annie Makhijani, Linda Gunter, Arjun Makhijani, “Cogema: Above the Law?”, May 7, 2002, http://www.ieer.org; “Mudding the Waters: Cogema's Hidden Environmental Crimes”, http://www.nirs.org; “France Acknowledges Massive Radioactive Pollution at La Hague”, Aug 5, 1997, http://naturalscience.com cxxxviii Full report and executive summary available on the website of NIRS: http://www.nirs.org/reactorwatch cxxxix Roger Witherspoon, “Ravishing the Waterways: DEP vs. the Power Plants”, Dec 13, 2010, http://spoonsenergymatters.wordpress.com cxl This and all remaining material in this section from: Roger Witherspoon, ibid. cxli Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Power is not the answer to Global Warming or anything else, op. cit., pp. 67-71. cxlii Sue Sturgis, “Investigation: Revelations about Three Mile Island disaster raise doubts over nuclear plant safety”, Facing South, April 2, 2009, http://www.southernstudies.org cxliii Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Power is not the answer to Global Warming or anything else, op. cit., pp. 67- 68. cxliv Sue Sturgis, “Investigation: Revelations about Three Mile Island disaster raise doubts over nuclear plant safety”, op. cit. cxlv Sue Sturgis, ibid. cxlvi “Three Mile Island Had Lasting Consequences”, Three Mile Island Alert, http://www.tmia.com; Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Power is not the answer to Global Warming or anything else, op. cit., pp. 71-74. cxlvii Helen Caldicott, ibid., p. 75. cxlviii “20 years after Chernobyl - The ongoing health effects”, International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW) powerpoint presentation, Mar 23, 2006, http://www.ippnw-students.org cxlix Ibid.; Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Power is not the answer to Global Warming or anything else, op. cit., pp. 75- 80. cl “Chernobyl Radiation Killed Nearly One Million People: New Book”, April 26, 2010, http://www.ens- newswire.com cli We have derived the figure of 9000 reactor years from the figure given in Dr. Georgui Kastchiev, et al., “Residual Risk: An Account of Events in Nuclear Power Plants Since the Chernobyl Accident in 1986”, May 2007 (see Endnote 101) : they say that in 21 years, 8000 reactor years experience has accumulated, so from this we have roughly calculated for 24 years. clii A leading nonprofit science advocacy group based in the United States, whose membership includes many eminent professional scientists. 184
cliii The IAEA maintains an international database of these “nuclear events”, and has created the International Nuclear Event Scale (INES) to categorise these events. On this scale, events are classified on a scale from 1 to 7. INES defines events as “deviations” (Level 0), “anomalies” (Level 1), “incidents” (Level 2) “serious incidents” or “near accidents” (Level 3) and “accidents” (Levels 4 to 7). According to the IAEA, a total number of 23 Level 3 (serious incident) and one Level 4 (accident, Tokai Mura, Japan, 1999) events have occurred in nuclear power facilities worldwide since the introduction of the INES in 1991. However, the scientists who did this study found that there are a host of problems with this classification system. For one, it is entirely arbitrary, there is no internationally agreed definition as to what is a serious “event”. Secondly, the IAEA has left it to the individual member countries to report on the incidents/accidents taking place in their nuclear plants; and the countries often either do not report them, or, under political pressure, under-report the severity of the event. Then, the INES scale rates the severity of a given event only from a point of view of immediate radiological impact and not from the potential risk. It may so happen that the direct material and environmental consequences of an event are insignificant, but the event may have come very close to a serious disaster. cliv Dr. Georgui Kastchiev, Prof. Wolfgang Kromp, Dipl.-Ing. Stephan Kurth, David Lochbaum, Dr. Ed Lyman, Dipl.-Ing. Michael Sailer, and Mycle Schneider, “Residual Risk: An Account of Events in Nuclear Power Plants Since the Chernobyl Accident in 1986”, May 2007, http://www.greens-efa.org clv “Reactor Accidents”, http://www.nirs.org clvi Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Power is not the answer to Global Warming or anything else, op. cit., pp. 81-83 clvii http://ecobridge.org/content/n_wdo.htm clviii Philip Bethge and Sebastian Knauer, “How Close Did Sweden Come to Disaster?” Spiegel Online International, Aug 7, 2006, http://www.spiegel.de clix M. V. Ramana, Suchitra J. Y., “Flaws in the pro-nuclear argument”, Infochange India, Issue 5, 2006. clx http://www.planetark.com/enviro-news/item/53381 clxi Christian Parenti, “Zombie Nuke Plants”, The Nation, Dec 7, 2009, http://www.britannica.com clxii Karl Grossman, “The Nuclear Phoenix”, http://www.emagazine.com clxiii Bob Herbert, “We’re Not Ready”, July 19, 2010, http://www.nytimes.com clxiv Christian Parenti, “Zombie Nuke Plants”, The Nation, Nov 19, 2009, http://www.thenation.com clxv Christian Parenti, ibid. clxvi Christian Parenti, ibid. clxvii Stephen Thomas, et al., “The Economics of Nuclear Power”, 2007, Greenpeace, http://www.greenpeace.org, p. 19; Mycle Schneider, et al.,“The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009”, Commissioned by German Federal Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety, August 2009, pp. 42-43 clxviii Helmut Hirsch, Oda Becker, Mycle Schneider, Antony Froggatt, “Nuclear Reactor Hazards: Ongoing Dangers of Operating Nuclear Technology in the 21st Century”, April 2005, Greenpeace International, www.greenpeace.org clxix Ibid. clxx Helen Caldicott, Nuclear Power is not the answer to Global Warming or anything else, op. cit., p. 83 clxxi Art Levine, “Helen Caldicott Slams Environmental Groups on Climate Bill, Nuclear Concessions”, Truthout, Jan 28, 2010, http://www.climateshift.com clxxii For example, in 1968, Pacific Gas & Electric projected the total cost of building Unit 1 of its Diablo Canyon plant at $445 million. By 1984, the final bill was $3750 million, an 843 percent increase. Likewise, the Fermi Unit 2 plant in Michigan, the Public Power Supply System Unit 2 reactor in Washington state, the River Bend reactor in Louisiana, and the Clinton plant in Illinois all cost approximately 600 percent more than originally estimated: “Nuclear power: Too expensive to solve global warming”, The National Environmental Trust, Washington D.C. November 1, 1999, Report available on: http://www.democraticunderground.com; Steve Thomas, “Can nuclear power plants be built in Britain without public subsidies and guarantees?”, Presentation at a Conference: Commercial Nuclear Energy in an Unstable, Carbon Constrained World, Prague, March 17-18, 2008, p. 10. clxxiii “An Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Costs: A 1995 Update”, Energy Information Administration, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington DC, April 1995, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov clxxiv Mycle Schneider, et al., “The World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2009”, Commissioned by German Federal Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Reactor Safety, August 2009, p. 40; Same point is made by: Steve Thomas, “Can nuclear power plants be built in Britain without public subsidies and guarantees?”, op. cit., p. 7. clxxv Mycle Schneider, et al., ibid., p. 40. 185
Page 1 and 2:
NUCLEAR ENERGY Technology From Hell
Page 3 and 4:
Introduction Part I: Government Pla
Page 5 and 6:
yet to find solution to the problem
Page 7 and 8:
Mithivirdi: A powerful movement of
Page 9 and 10:
eing proposed to be set up in the c
Page 11 and 12:
nuclear power plant accident, in ou
Page 13 and 14:
was subsequently endorsed by the he
Page 15 and 16:
Atoms are so small that they can’
Page 17 and 18:
called enriched uranium. [Note that
Page 19 and 20:
of a nuclear power reactor. A typic
Page 21 and 22:
Coolant: A liquid or gas circulatin
Page 23 and 24:
Pressurised Heavy Water Reactor Hea
Page 25 and 26:
Is Nuclear Energy Safe? Chapter 3 A
Page 27 and 28:
iii. Gamma radiation: This is akin
Page 29 and 30:
haematopoietic system). Radiation c
Page 31 and 32:
Part III: Radiation Emission in Nuc
Page 33 and 34:
The radioactivity from the tailing
Page 35 and 36:
power plant contains an amount of l
Page 37 and 38:
Tritium is a particularly scary mat
Page 39 and 40:
Plutonium cxi Named after Pluto, th
Page 41 and 42:
Firstly, reprocessing does not redu
Page 43 and 44:
sports and fishing were also banned
Page 45 and 46:
detail the impact of these 'once th
Page 47 and 48:
We today know for a fact that the n
Page 49 and 50:
Till 2005, there were at least 10,0
Page 51 and 52:
The report mentions 16 “events”
Page 53 and 54:
In an article published in The Nati
Page 55 and 56:
Even asssuming that there will not
Page 57 and 58:
fossil fuels. It has now come up wi
Page 59 and 60:
Opinion of Credit Ratings Agencies
Page 61 and 62:
it acknowledged that the expected c
Page 63 and 64:
plant owners to use much more of th
Page 65 and 66:
was the Vice-President of the USA):
Page 67 and 68:
6. Blithely Ignoring Health Costs S
Page 69 and 70:
Is Nuclear Power Green? Chapter 5 S
Page 71 and 72:
Energy Balance attempts to make an
Page 73 and 74:
nuclear energy as compared to elect
Page 75 and 76:
Table 1: Estimates of Total and Nuc
Page 77 and 78:
� At the end of 2009, there were
Page 79 and 80:
Therefore, despite all the optimism
Page 81 and 82:
1. Reviewing the Nuclear Renaissanc
Page 83 and 84:
certification also runs out in 2012
Page 85 and 86:
nuclear phase-out plans which are n
Page 87 and 88:
lower house (Bundestag) to pass a b
Page 89 and 90:
UK and French nuclear safety author
Page 91 and 92:
The second and more important reaso
Page 93 and 94:
eactor or two, but considering that
Page 95 and 96:
Pre-Independence Period India’s N
Page 97 and 98:
Secretary to the DAE. The 1958 Reso
Page 99 and 100:
The reality has been quite differen
Page 101 and 102:
Narora Uttar Pradesh PHWR 220 x 2 4
Page 103 and 104:
Background Part III: US-India Agree
Page 105 and 106:
2. New Reactors Even before the Ind
Page 107 and 108:
clearance, indicative of the fact t
Page 109 and 110:
producing electricity from these re
Page 111 and 112:
matters of negotiations”. cdxliii
Page 113 and 114:
arm of Indian big industry, had ext
Page 115 and 116:
India’s Nuclear Installations: Sa
Page 117 and 118:
extremely sensitive material used i
Page 119 and 120:
area due to uranium mining. cdlxxxi
Page 121 and 122:
women complained of fatigue, weakne
Page 123 and 124:
India: World’s most unsafe, most
Page 125 and 126:
the AEC has not instituted an award
Page 127 and 128:
The biggest deficiency in the Rajas
Page 129 and 130:
The bed of the Thane creek, which i
Page 131 and 132:
Fires have also occurred repeatedly
Page 133 and 134: workers are exposed to radiation, a
Page 135 and 136: can't catch anything else, and ther
Page 137 and 138: up in 1971 at Kalpakkam to lead the
Page 139 and 140: Tulsunde (population 800), Janshipa
Page 141 and 142: are going to be correspondingly hig
Page 143 and 144: governing the computers and systems
Page 145 and 146: guidelines.” It’s unbelievable
Page 147 and 148: The Sustainable Alternative to Nucl
Page 149 and 150: especially bad in the rural areas,
Page 151 and 152: of the human body. In particular, t
Page 153 and 154: While the costs of large dams are h
Page 155 and 156: Demand Side Management Potential to
Page 157 and 158: such absolutely non-essential uses?
Page 159 and 160: The US has the highest installed wi
Page 161 and 162: Solar water heaters are a very simp
Page 163 and 164: Renewable Energies: Poised for a Le
Page 165 and 166: (iii) Small Hydro Power The governm
Page 167 and 168: Indian villages are spread over wid
Page 169 and 170: Energy about the huge potential of
Page 171 and 172: anticipating a change in NSG rules,
Page 173 and 174: � Privatise the public sector, in
Page 175 and 176: countries - recycling rubbish in th
Page 177 and 178: inflows of foreign capital (also kn
Page 179 and 180: analyse. We must develop our politi
Page 181 and 182: xxvii I. Semendeferi, “Legitimati
Page 183: lxxxvii Ali al-Fadhily and Dahr Jam
Page 187 and 188: cciv Mycle Schneider, et al., “Th
Page 189 and 190: cclxxi “Nuclear power: a dangerou
Page 191 and 192: cccxxxv “The postponement of the
Page 193 and 194: cdi “Uranium imports boost Indian
Page 195 and 196: cdlxix Dhirendra Sharma, India’s
Page 197 and 198: dxxxviii “Nuclear power in India
Page 199 and 200: dxciii M. V. Ramana, ibid. dxciv Mu
Page 201 and 202: dclix Union of Concerned Scientists
show all

Nuclear Energy

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?