Yo,

Great updates that will challenge anyone that thinks nukes (lol) is a great idea...


beyondnuclear.org/nuclear-power-bad-for-climate-crisis/

beyondnuclear.org/fukushima-dumping-threat-makes-u-s-groups-ask-fda-for-tighter-food-standards/

beyondnuclear.org/fukushima-fish-too-radioactive-for-human-consumption/

beyondnuclear.org/mayors-call-for-action-against-nuclear-war/

beyondnuclear.org/ngos-tell-biden-that-us-nuclear-plants-arent-safe-from-attack/

beyondnuclear.org/destruction-of-nova-kakhovka-dam-jeopardizes-zaporizhzhi-npp-cooling/

beyondnuclear.org/nuscale-goes-off-the-scale/

Yo,

So here's a petition for you all to sign so that the now closed Palisades Nuke plant in Michigan doesn't re-open...( For our host of course )

And some more nuke madness linked also...

No excuses...SIGN !!!!!!

beyondnuclear.org/action-alert-individuals-and-organizations-in-michigan-please-sign-letter-to-state-legislators-by-june-27-opposing-300-million-state-grant-to-holtec-for-palisades-zombie-reactor-restart/

beyondnuclear.org/nuclear-fantasies-block-climate-action/

beyondnuclear.org/depleted-uranium-danger-in-ukraine/

beyondnuclear.org/us-nuclear-facilities-hacked/

-- Edited by Rastus on Friday 23rd of June 2023 04:17:21 AM

Yo,

The most Hon. Mr. Chris Busby has been making major headway in destroying all things nuclear through the court system, that should ultimately kill-off this diabolically insane industry...But of course, we know everyday, more & more, how corrupt the world & the courts actually are...None-the-less, let this be the first rumble that starts an avalanche to finally abolish this insane industry...

Though unlikely there'll be too many people getting into the numbers expressed here in this report, it is important to note the relationships between Sieverts, & Rems, since the US-of-A likes Rems, & the rest-of-the-world uses Sieverts...

1 x Sievert = 1 x Joule / kg.

1x Sv = 1 x J / Kg.

0.001 Sv = MilliSievert, mSv.

0.01Sv = Rem.


Read on !!!

https://greenaudit.org/new-nuclear-workers-study-results-represent-a-legal-game-changer-for-nuclear-power-propulsion-and-weapons/

Kudos & congratulations to Mr.Busby & his team ! (It's people like this that deserve the Nobel Peace Prize etc etc).

C'mon... you used to give us Cliff notes! 

New year, same Rastus! lol

Ah, yes! I recall seeing some live video feed of this when it happened on Twitter. 

I guess it never really feels like much when you're watching it on video... but streets did buckle and things got knocked about!

I don't think it was bad as the one that hit fuku, as there wasn't a really big tsunami... although the West cost did take some big waves recently! Wonder if it's related?

I'd think sooner or later something is going to really open up, I just hope I ain't there when it happens!

I don't see the world getting away from nuke power anytime soon Rastus... if they are closing down 20 plants it's only because they just opened up a new one that puts out the power of the 20 they just closed... IMHO

But I do agree with you that nuke waste and radiation can not be good for the human body -- unless somehow nature finds a way to adapt thru the generations. 

Their are a lot of people living well into their 80's and 90's now days... technology is getting to the point where soon they will just be able to grow and new body and transfer your memories -- it's coming! Have you ever seen the movie "The 6th day", Rastus? If not you really need to see it because it's right up your ally! 

Yo,

It seems that that new "Small-reactor" option is a dead duck in the water...

qts. from Beyond Nuclear.com

"In Victorian times, cautionary tales were popular for deterring naughty behavior amongst children. Today, we are awash in such stories in the nuclear power sector, and our politicians should be reading them. The latest example is NuScale, the company whose small modular reactor design was considered most likely to succeed. Instead, the project has collapsed, a dead horse said NuScales own CEO. Far from a climate or a jobs panacea, Nuscale will lay off 28% of its staff, cuts that could eventually affect at least 40% of the workforce. It is also facing legal action from numerous law firms on behalf of disgruntled investors. Meanwhile at Vogtle, the only new full-size reactors nearing completion, ratepayers are about to be gouged again, increases caused by mistakes made by Georgia Power".


And Germany closed down its last reactors, & has been running on renewables, & some coal...

"The pro-nuclear doomsayers who blamed Germanys nuclear shutdown for a brief uptick in coal power, have gone awfully quiet and with good reason. Thats because Germanys 2022 coal spike was not driven by domestic consumption but by market forces and especially exports to France which saw a 50% outage of its reactor fleet for months. In 2023, when Germanys last three reactors closed, the countrys use of brown coal dropped to its lowest level in 60 years with hard coal use at the lowest since 1955. Meanwhile, according to an analysis cited by Clean Energy Wire, renewables in Germany "contributed a record share of more than half of the countrys power consumption" in 2023, generating 260 terawatt hours of electricity".


It seems Genocide-Joes Nuke-bailout-scam has no takers, so y'all taxpayers will cop-the-fee & radiation...

"An E&E article, "No takers for Bidens nuclear bailout, reports "[a] Department of Energy attempt last year to bail out struggling or recently shuttered nuclear plants failed to land a single qualified taker...DOE planned to announce the results of the 2023 bailout attempt by January 1, 2024, according to DOE's March guidance for the second cycle of the program. No public announcement has been made."

"DOEs tentative 2022 offer of $1.1 billion in Civil Nuclear Credits, to Diablo Canyon, CA, is still in "active discussions" with owner PG&E. DOE rejected Holtecs $2 billion request, to restart Palisades in MI. Holtecs Plan B is a billion dollar bridge loan guarantee, risking taxpayers being left holding the bag".


And these mofo's still lobby around the world in pro-nuke fashion LOL !!!...

"An opinion piece in the Boston Globe co-authored by Ernest Moniz, nuclear physicist and former US Secretary of Energy and Armond Cohen, lawyer and executive director of the US-based Clean Air Task Force, defends tripling nuclear power capacity globally as an essential part of mitigating climate change coming out of the 2023 COP 28 talks in Dubai, UAE. In our view, the Moniz and Cohen argument is complicit in a strategy to displace the most viable and competitive renewable energy policy needed to address the oncoming climate crisis. Renewable energy and storage coupled with efficiency and conservation provide the greatest carbon reduction in less time, at least cost than the most expensive, least reliable to deploy and dangerous nuclear technology".

No mukes is good nukes !

Hmmm...^^^ Not likely Stellar, but you never know !

More interesting however, is that there's another free-energy device that's been created via the use of "fake plants"....Scientists have developed a way where copper & teflon when imbedded in the leaves of the fake-plants, give-off up to 250-volts of static electricity from movement caused by wind & raindrops...( *And yes, it's the same teflon PTFE that I recommend you place in your engine oil, for long-life & much reduced wear from friction & heat reduction )

Yet another mail in the coffin for the Nuke Industry !!! Die mofo's !!!

Read on !




FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Multisource Energy Harvester on Textile and Plants for Clean Energy Generation from Wind and Rainwater Droplets
ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering
A fake plant with three specialized beige leaves, which contain tiny power generators.
This power plant, featuring beige, leaf-shaped generators, can capture energy from gentle breezes and falling raindrops.
Adapted from ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 2024, DOI: 10.1021/acssuschemeng.3c03620

Fake plants are moving into the 21st century! Researchers developed literal power plants tiny, leaf-shaped generators that create electricity from a blowing breeze or falling raindrops and described them in ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering. The team tested the energy harvesters by incorporating them into artificial plants.

Electrical energy can be produced from nature in several ways. For example, solar panels convert light energy from the sun, and wind turbines transform the kinetic energy of moving air. But these methods typically rely on a single source and therefore are only effective when that source is available. Solar panels dont work after sunset, for example, and a calm day wont generate much wind power. More recently, multi-source energy harvesters have emerged as a method to capture energy from different renewable sources in one device, maximizing potential output. So, Ravinder Dahiya and colleagues wanted to create a multi-source energy harvester that could generate power from both wind and rain.

The team built two different types of energy collectors: a triboelectric nanogenerator (TENG) to capture kinetic energy from the wind and a droplet-based energy generator (DEG) to collect energy from falling raindrops. The TENG consisted of a layer of nylon nanofibers sandwiched between layers of polytetrafluoroethylene, more commonly known as Teflon, and copper electrodes. When the layers pressed into each other, static charges were generated and converted into electricity. Teflon was also used to make the DEG, which was waterproofed and covered with a conductive fabric to act as the electrodes. As raindrops hit one of the electrodes, it caused an imbalance in charges, generating a small current and high voltage. Under optimal conditions, the TENG produced 252 volts and the DEG 113 volts, but only for short periods of time.

The team mounted the DEG atop the TENG and incorporated leaf-shaped versions into an artificial plant. When the leaf-shaped generators were exposed to conditions mimicking natural wind and rain, they powered 10 LED lights in short flickers. This proof-of-concept power plant device could be further developed into larger systems or networks of power plants to produce clean energy from natural sources, the researchers say.

The authors do not acknowledge a funding source for this work.

###

The American Chemical Society (ACS) is a nonprofit organization chartered by the U.S. Congress. ACS mission is to advance the broader chemistry enterprise and its practitioners for the benefit of Earth and all its people. The Society is a global leader in promoting excellence in science education and providing access to chemistry-related information and research through its multiple research solutions, peer-reviewed journals, scientific conferences, eBooks and weekly news periodical Chemical & Engineering News. ACS journals are among the most cited, most trusted and most read within the scientific literature; however, ACS itself does not conduct chemical research. As a leader in scientific information solutions, its CAS division partners with global innovators to accelerate breakthroughs by curating, connecting and analyzing the worlds scientific knowledge. ACS main offices are in Washington, D.C., and Columbus, Oh

OCP

Yo,

So here's the weekly round-up worth posting from Beyond Nuclear, & thanks to all those kind people who may have donated a couple-of-dollars to Chris, it's appreciated, & a small price to pay to save not only yo-ass, but the world too :) !

On with the show...


OUR GREATEST FEAR

U-mining begins near Grand Canyon


"It is with heavy hearts that we must acknowledge that our greatest fear has come true, read a statement from the Havasupai Tribal Council after learning that uranium mining has begun just south of the Grand Canyon. Energy Fuels Inc. says it has begun operations at its Pinyon Plain Mine and bluntly dismissed and disregarded the safety concerns of the tribe for whom the area also has cultural importance. The mine sits above an aquifer that supplies drinking water to the Havasupai who are the guardians of the Grand Canyon, committed to protecting our people, our land, our water, our past, our present and our future, the Council said. The Navajo Nation also objects to the mine and subsequent transportation risks".


ANA DC Days


"Alliance for Nuclear Accountability is a network of some three-dozen organizations across the U.S., watchdogging Department of Energy nuclear weapons complex sites, as well as nuclear power plants and radioactive waste dumps. Beyond Nuclear has been a member group since our founding in 2007. Every year for several decades, ANA has held "D.C Days" in Washington, to meet with federal executive and legislative branch offices about urgent nuclear weapons, nuclear power, and radioactive waste issues. This year's D.C. Days will be May 19 to 22 (followed by ANA's Spring Meeting on May 23 and 24), on Capitol Hill. Please register ASAP for the early bird discount (choose Beyond Nuclear affiliation)! See here for FAQs and lodging ideas".



NUSCALE FIRST DOMINO FALLS

Threatens industry cascade


"The nuclear industry is rattled by an Opinion piece appearing in the January 31, 2024 edition of the energy trade journal Utility Dive. The article, astutely entitled The collapse of NuScales project should spell the end for small modular nuclear reactors, is an extensively documented study of yet another nuclear folly. Its author, M.V. Ramana, focuses on the financial collapse of NuScale Power Corps pilot project. The Portland, Oregon start-up companys project with the Utah Associated Municipal Power System (UAMPS) was heralded to be the first of the small commercial power reactors to be built in the United States. Instead, in November 2023, NuScale was announced as just another financial casualty of nuclear projects stymied by uncontrollable cost and delay".



HALT HOLTEC!

Resisting Zombie, SMRs, Dump


"Beyond Nuclear and allies are in marathon campaigns against several insane Holtec schemes. We watchdogged two Holtec-Nuclear Regulatory Commission meetings this week: one, a part of the unprecedented, outrageously expensive (for the public), and extremely high-risk (to safety, security, health, and the environment) zombie reactor restart scheme at Palisades nuclear power plant on the Lake Michigan shore in Covert, Michigan; the second, an attempt to further deregulate so-called Small Modular Reactor new builds, including two 300 Megawatt-electric units at Palisades, and yet more at Big Rock Point also on Michigan's Lake Michigan shore. And our many years-long resistance against Holtec's proposed high-level radioactive waste dump in New Mexico finally gets its day in court March 5".


Have a better one !

-- Edited by Rastus on Thursday 8th of February 2024 05:07:22 PM

Yo,

So what madness has the nuke industry devised this week for us to digest ??? Read on, here's the weeks blurb, which is great for constipation btw...

You can't make this stuff up !

qt's. from Beyond Nuclear...


TOPPLING NUCLEAR POWER

Film's Message Applies Today


Fifty years ago, on February 22, 1974, a young man toppled a weather tower erected by a nuclear company planning to build a nuclear reactor in his community of Montague, Massachusetts. In doing so, Sam Lovejoy had broken the law. But, as the historian Howard Zinn testified at Lovejoys subsequent trial, when grievances become too deep, people sometimes have to commit civil disobedience in order to dramatize something that was happening. A film Sam Lovejoys Nuclear War, viewable free on YouTube tells his story. You can also hear an interview with Lovejoy on NPRs Here and Now. Activists continue to draw attention to nuclear dangers and the climate crisis with acts of civil disobedience just as Lovejoy did half a century earlier.



URANIUM IMPACTS

Indigenous Peoples' Human Rights


The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States will hold a historic thematic hearing in Washington, D.C. on Wed., Feb. 28 at 11am ET. Members of the Navajo Nation, Ute Nation and Oglala Lakota Nation will testify on the impacts of uranium exploitation on the human rights of Indigenous Peoples in the United States. As the United States doubles down on the misguided notion that nuclear power is a solution to the climate crisis, the uranium development industry is beginning to benefit from generous taxpayer giveaways to the nuclear industry as a whole. The hearing can be attended in person, or viewed at IACHRs website or YouTube channel.





RADIOACTIVE WASTE WARS

Permian Basin Dumps Under Fire


On Feb. 18, the Wall Street Journal published a lengthy article entitled "The War Over Burying Nuclear Waste in Americas Busiest Oil Field: Plans to store

used nuclear fuel in the Permian Basin could boost the nuclear sector but are opposed by oil-and-gas producers." The article featured a photo of Danny Berry, a rancher very near the Holtec site in New Mexico targeted for the world's largest high-level radioactive waste dump. He and his family are Beyond Nuclear members and supporters, who have provided us with legal standing to challenge the dump in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, with oral arguments on March 5.


And on Feb. 20, the Permian Basin Coalition put out a press release announcing that Andrews County, Texas passed a resolution banning highly-radioactive Greater-Than-Class-C "low-level" radioactive waste. The county has joined the coalition in opposing the plans of Waste Control Specialists and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.





MARY OSBORN, PRESENTE!

Three Mile Island Botanist Passed on 2/19


Eric Epstein, executive director of Three Mile Island Alert (TMIA), shared with us the sad news that Mary Osborn has passed on. Mary was a long time member of TMIA. She gathered flowers, leaves and plants that show signs of mutations that reveal the negative impact of radiation on their growth and reproduction since shortly after the 1979 meltdown. Her full collection has been accepted by the Smithsonian Institution to be preserved, digitized, and made available to the public. Mary helped preserve and tell the truth about Three Mile Island, including at numerous conferences across the country (in Harrisburg PA, Chicago IL, and elsewhere), and in major media interviews.


Six years ago, Mary was diagnosed with Parkinson's Disease. She had suffered a stroke, and hadnt walked in 15 months. Her sister is relieved that Marys suffering is over and shes at peace. Marys daughter Leslie is handling the arrangements.


No nukes is good nukes :) !

Yo,

It appears that even World Nuclear News had nothing to say about Fukushima, but it did reveal a host of new information about the idiocy behind deep underground repositories for spent-fuel...Remember that this stuff is toxic for thousands of years, & there's nothing really that can be done about it, so it's band-aid after band-aid here...One only needs to remember about the failed Pilot Waste Installation Plant in New Mexico...

And also, the shipping company I was employed & trained by, namely TK Shipping, bought-out all the BHP fleet in Australia whilst here, & now, there's news of BHP nuclear powered vessels...I spent my sea-time during my cadetship in a BHP ship, & an Oil Tanker...One wonders whether it was these *unts spiking my home a little while ago...

Chances are these policies will spread world-wide, as there has to be somewhere to dump all this shyte yes ???


www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/NWMO-reports-reinforce-confidence-in-potential-rep

www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/SHINE-chooses-Deep-Isolation-waste-disposal-techno

www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/BHP-considers-nuclear-powered-cargo-ships


And this, the only news about Fukushima from last year...Shhh....


www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/IAEA-mission-reaffirms-safety-of-Fukushima-water-r

www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Veolia-selects-Siteflow-for-Fukushima-decommission

www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/IAEA-sees-no-rise-in-tritium-level-near-Fukushima

Yo,

I'll only post the important updates this week, of which there are 2...And one sees the Nuke Industry fighting back after losing a waste-dump proposal, threatening with recycling & selling-off the product for weapons...Don't believe me ??? Read on...

From Beyond Nuclear...


DUMP BLOCKED

But CISFs seek to reprocess


On March 14, by a 9 to 7 vote, the full 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans upheld a three-judge panel's August 2023 ruling nullifying the Nuclear Regulatory Commission license for Interim Storage Partners' high-level radioactive waste consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) in Andrews County, Texas. NRC and/or ISP have 60 days to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. This victory against the 40,000 metric ton dump has been won by the State of Texas, Fasken Land and Minerals, Ltd., and Permian Basin Land and Royalty Owners.


Meanwhile, Holtec's CISF partner in New Mexico, Eddy Lea Energy Alliance, threatened to reprocess the irradiated nuclear fuel, risking weapons proliferation, huge public cost, and environmental ruination.





PALISADES/BIG ROCK PT.

Backgrounders opposing re-nuclearization


Re-nuclearization (a word coined by Steve Kent) on Michigan's Lake Michigan shore includes an unprecedented, $8.3 billion public-subsidized, extremely high-risk "zombie" reactor restart at Palisades in Covert. It also includes $7.4 billion of federal loan guarantees for "Small Modular Reactors" at the same site, and its sibling closed reactor in Hayes, Big Rock Point. Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps, in opposition to these nefarious schemes, has written backgrounders: "A People's History of Palisades"; "Nuclear Nightmares: Zombie Reactors & SMRs"; and "Criminality, Corruption, Incompetence, Inexperience," about Holtec, the company playing radioactive Russian roulette with the Great Lakes. Michiganders can contact their governor, state representative, and state senator to express opposition. Americans can contact the Energy Secretary to oppose the massive bailouts.

SELLC wrote:

---

1.As I have said before, numerous times in this and other threads... I just don't see how we could be de-nucularizing when there is such a large push to make everything electric!

2.From our cars to our stoves and furnaces -- this administration seems dead-set on getting rid of fossile fuels and gases of all sorts... ie: anything that burns.

3.This being the case, I have always felt we would see more nuclear reactors -- including older ones comming online or back online! How else are we going to power this thrusty grid that sees one electric re-charge of a vehicle consuming enough kWh's as an entire home in a month!?

4.Twisted part is that out in very remote or rural areas these car charging stations are actually powered by coal or gas! LOL... 

5.No doubt there are people that make a living on both sides of the isle... oil companies, nuke companies, coal companies and everything in between! All vying to ensure their own survival.

6.So yeah, it's going to get ugly and not much is ever going to change on that front unless the planet just runs out of one or the other!

---

 

Here we go again...

 

R1. Free energy Stellar, as created by Nikola Tesla in the early 1900's...But then you don't have to pay for it, because it's free, & that goes against greedy Corps & their $$$ needs...And you don't need the grid.

R2. Idiots...We already have the ability to run cars etc etc on water, but it means using a free-energy device to separate water into hydrogen & oxygen. No pollution, & yet all industries survive.

R3. No nukes is good nukes...Simply ask your 3-mile-islander people, yet alone the folks in Chernobyl or Japan.

R4. Dog chasing its own tail. Free energy or bust.

R5. See R2.

R6. That's exactly what they want, milk everything until empty.

Yo,

So here's a "cut & paste" from CounterPunch, that reveals major financial concerns regarding banks, nukes, & how your home if effected by a nuke accident WONT be covered by your insurances...Not a dime in compensation...

No nukes is good nukes, & clearly it is obvious that this industry is shyting-itself, & dying, plus wanting to take YOU, down with it, like reopening Palisades...But don't worry, Gates is planning on selling this shyte to the Arabs...Great !



qt."Banks Wont Save Nuclear Power"

by Linda Pentz Gunter



NuScale, the company whose small modular reactor project collapsed so spectacularly last November, is burning cash at the rate of $185 million per year. On March 22, the companys CEO, John Hopkins, sold 59,768 of his shares in the company. This is the same CEO who declared NuScales SMR project, aptly named VOYGR, a dead horse. Its clearly on a journey to nowhere.

Wells Fargo, with an eye on prudent investments, has declared, We think investor enthusiasm for SMR is misguided. As The Motley Fool reported, NuScales VOYGR nuclear power product has no secure customers and is not cost competitive says the analyst.

The splashy cheerleading Nuclear Energy Summit organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Brussels on March 21 proved to be just that. The participants arrived floating on the hot air of their misplaced enthusiasm but left humbled by the tepid reaction of bankers assessing the price tag of their ambitions.

European Investment Bank Vice President Thomas Ostros, told Summit attendees to their face that The project risks, as we have seen in reality, seem to be very high. Representatives from the European and Latin American banking worlds said that their lending priorities lean toward renewables and transmission grids and that nuclear comes last.

Even the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission couldnt quite bring itself to slam down its rubber stamp on Oklos chalet-in-the-woods micro reactor, the Aurora, which remains about as real as its namesake fairy tale princess.

In January 2022, the NRC denied Oklos license application outright because it continues to contain significant information gaps in its description of Auroras potential accidents as well as its classification of safety systems and components, wrote the NRC.

Oklo reapplied nine months later but according to the NRC docket there is no further action.

Nevertheless, Oklo brags on its website that it made history simply by developing the first advanced fission combined license application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which sums up the second nuclear renaissance perfectly: Make a drawing. Hit send.

Meanwhile, the US military canceled its contract for an Aurora reactor originally intended for the Eielson Air Force Base near Fairbanks, Alaska.

And finally, an executive from the industry that has consistently delivered its latest new reactors decades late and billions over the original budget in one case $20 billion over suggested they should all just slow down. Said Ian Edwards, chief executive of Canadian reactor producer, Atkins Realis, we all become too optimistic. We have this optimism bias towards being able to deliver faster. Really we should probably slow things down a little bit.

But nuclear power is the answer to our current climate crisis! Ya think?

Its tempting to ask whether things can get any worse for the nuclear power industry, but they almost certainly will. Unless we end up paying for it all. As the Bloomberg article that related the tail-between-legs exit of the Nuclear Summit conferees declared in a headline: Taxpayers are needed to foot the bill to achieve 2050 targets.
H.E. Minister Suhail Al Mazrouei of the United Arab Emirates, which hosted the COP28 where the triple nuclear pledge was first announced. This must have delighted billionaire Bill Gates who cant wait to sell his taxpayer-funded, proliferation-friendly reactors to the UAE. (Photo: IAEA Imagebank.)

At the moment, a majority in the US Congress seem intent on making sure that is exactly what will happen. Because after all, why should multi-billionaire, Bill Gates, be forced to pay for his own nuclear toys when he can milk (read bilk) US taxpayers instead?

The US government has already pledged $2 billion of our money to Gates for his proliferation-friendly liquid sodium-cooled molten salt fast reactor produced by his company, TerraPower (more properly, TerrorPower). Gates cant wait to export it the United Arab Emirates. Nuclear weapons anyone?

The strokey-white-beard-named ADVANCE Act, has been passed by the US House with 365 voting in favor and only 36 Democrats-with-a-conscience voting against it. By its own description, the ADVANCE ACT aims to advance the benefits of nuclear energy by enabling efficient, timely, and predictable licensing, regulation, and deployment of nuclear energy technologies. In other words, do away with burdensome and expensive safety regulations.

Indeed, New Mexico Democrat, Senator Martin Heinrich, told E&E News in January that These regulatory timelines do not lend themselves to fighting the climate crisis. Oh those wascally wegulations!

Meanwhile, Democratic senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia doesnt want to seat any new NRC commissioners who might be too focused on safety.

The NRCs motto is protecting people and the environment, a mandate it demonstrably endeavors to avoid already, but even some vestige of interest in safety is probably better than none. Not that safety oversight will be needed of course because, hey, SMRs are walkaway safe and meltdown proof and any new light water reactors are too advanced to be a safety risk.

This makes the insistence by SMR manufacturers that they must be covered by the Price-Anderson Act (PAA) all the more curious. Price-Anderson, due to expire in 2025, was culled out of the ADVANCE ACT, now moving out of Senate committee and working its way through the reconciliation process, and handled separately. The Senate adopted the House version of the PAA, giving it a 40-year extension to 2026, and expanded limited liability for a major accident to just over $16 billion per reactor.

President Biden duly signed it into law, marking another misstep on what is becoming an increasingly problematic presidency.

Ed Lyman, Nuclear Power Safety Director at the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Nuclear Intelligence Weekly that The nuclear industrys push for a 40-year Price-Anderson Act extension is a sure sign that it doesnt believe its own messaging about how safe the next generation of nuclear reactors is going to be.

But in a joint statement, Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) and Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) declared that The extension of the Price-Anderson Act in the minibus sends a clear message that we are committed to the advancement of this safe and reliable power source.

The clear message this actually sends is that, in the event of a major nuclear accident, US taxpayers will be thrown under that minibus. The $16 billion coverage will be chicken feed and we will all be stuck with the bill. Lets remember that the Chornobyl and Fukushima nuclear disasters are each racking up costs in the hundreds of billions of dollars and counting. We have been warned.

But a bi-partisan group of Representatives and Senators think its perfectly fine for all of us to pay for such an eventuality. Meanwhile, if you own a home and are forced to abandon it in the path of a nuclear accident, you cannot claim a dime off your homeowners insurance. It will just be a total loss. Think about that for a moment.

Are we outraged yet?

Look Rastus... the person responsible for re-starting that old ass reactor in Michigan is none other than Granholm! She used to be the Governor of Michigan a long time back, she was actually born in Canada -- yet has been re-tread into the Energy secretary by the Biden administration. Granholm has NEVER been good for Michigan -- now she lives in California but still finds ways to stick it to Michigan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jennifer_Granholm

 

Yo,

Most of us know about the "underground nuclear testing" that went on & on for decades, but little was ever discussed about it, or even the reasons known why it was being done...Well here's a lengthy but concise article that will answer most questions into this needless & disgraceful act. Perhaps worth noting is the combined effort at one time to help Russia in the 1990's by many countries to secure a toxic test-site in Kazakhstan...




Environmental impacts of underground nuclear weapons testing

By Sulgiye Park, Rodney C. Ewing, March 7, 2024

Since Trinitythe first atomic bomb test on the morning of July 16, 1945, near Alamogordo, New Mexicothe nuclear-armed states have conducted 2,056 nuclear tests (Kimball 2023). The United States led the way with 1,030 nuclear tests, or almost half of the total, between 1945 and 1992. Second is the former Soviet Union, with 715 tests between 1949 and 1990, and then France, with 210 tests between 1960 and 1996. Globally, nuclear tests culminated in a cumulative yield of over 500 megatons, which is equivalent to 500 million tons of TNT (Pravalie 2014). This surpasses by over 30,000 times the yield of the first atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945.

Atmospheric nuclear tests prevailed until the early 1960s, with bombs tested by various means: aircraft drops, rocket launches, suspension from balloons, and detonation atop towers above ground. Between 1945 and 1963, the Soviet Union conducted 219 atmospheric tests, followed by the United States (215), the United Kingdom (21), and France (3) (Kimball 2023).

In the early days of the nuclear age, little was known about the impacts of radioactive fallout the residual and activated radioactive material that falls to the ground after a nuclear explosion. The impacts became clearer in the 1950s, when the Kodak chemical company detected radioactive contamination on their film, which was linked to radiation resulting from the atmospheric nuclear tests (Sato et al. 2022). American scientists, like Barry Commoner, also discovered the presence of strontium 90 in childrens teeth originating from nuclear fallout thousands of kilometers from the original test site (Commoner 1959; Commoner 1958; Reiss 1961). These discoveries alerted scientists and the public to the consequences of radioactive fallout from underwater and atmospheric nuclear tests, particularly tests of powerful thermonuclear weapons that had single event yields of one megaton or greater.

Public concerns for the effects of radioactive contamination led to the Limited (or Partial) Test Ban Treaty, signed on August 5, 1963. The treaty restricted nuclear tests from air, space, and underwater (Atomic Heritage Foundation 2016; Loeb 1991; Rubinson 2011). And while the treaty was imperfect with only three signatories at the beginning (the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union), the ban succeeded in significantly curbing atmospheric release of radioactive isotopes.

After the entry into force of the partial test ban, almost 1,500 underground nuclear tests were conducted globally. Of the 1,030 US nuclear tests, nearly 80 percent, or 815 tests (See Table 1), were conducted underground, primarily at the Nevada Test Site.[1] As for other nuclear powers, the Soviet Union conducted 496 underground tests, mostly in the Semipalatinsk region of Kazakhstan, France conducted 160 underground tests, the United Kingdom conducted 24, and China 22. These underground nuclear tests were in a variety of geologic formations (e.g., basalt, alluvium, rhyolite, sandstone, shale) to depths up to 2,400 meters.
Left: The explosion of the Storax Sedan underground nuclear test. (Credit: US Government, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons). Right: Close-up of a sign at the site of the Sedan nuclear test. (Credit: Jarek Tuszyski, via Wikimedia Commons).

In 1996, after some international efforts to curb nuclear testing and promote disarmament, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) was negotiated, which prohibited all nuclear explosions (General Assembly 1996). Since the negotiation of the CTBT, India and Pakistan conducted three and two underground nuclear tests, respectively, in 1998. And today, North Korea stands as the only country to have tested nuclear weapons in the 21st century.

While underground nuclear tests were chosen to limit atmospheric radioactive fallout, each test still caused dynamic and complex responses within crustal formations. Mechanical effects of underground nuclear tests span from the prompt post-detonation responses to the enduring impacts resulting in radionuclide release, dispersion, and migration through the geosphere. Every test of nuclear weapons adds to a global burden of released radioactivity (Ewing 1999).

Objectives, types, and timeline of underground nuclear tests

The scope of the nuclear testing programs evolved significantly throughout the 1980s, as the objectives of those tests ranged from weapons effect analysis to fundamental physics research to refining critical elements of warhead designs and ensuring the safety and effectiveness of the nuclear stockpile. Later, nuclear tests were also performed to study the methods for detecting those conducted by other countries. In the United States, most underground nuclear tests were conducted at the Nevada Test Site, whose remote site was originally selected for its arid climate and low population density for the safety and security needed to conduct the tests (Brady et al., 1984, 35; Laczniak et al., 1996).

The setup of underground nuclear tests involved distinct emplacement methods tailored to various purposes. These methods included either a deep vertical shaft; a subsurface chamber (in which a nuclear device is emplaced to allow the explosion such that rock fragments are ejected, forming a crater); or a horizontal tunnel (with a nuclear device emplaced in a mined opening, intended for complete containment of the explosion). Each emplacement type was strategically designed to study different aspects of nuclear detonations and weapon performance. In turn, the type of explosion and emplacement determined the content and timing of the radioactive gases and particles released by each test. (See Figure 1, below.)
Figure 1. The three main emplacement types of underground nuclear tests. (Source: Shaft type illustrated by S. Park; subsurface and tunnel type pictures from Schoengold and Stinson 1997.)

To move nuclear testing underground, big holes, typically one to three meters in diameter, were drilled to varying depths, dictated by the objectives of the test, the design of the bomb being tested, and the properties of the geological formation hosting the test. The depth of the test was determined depending on the expected explosion yield and the characteristics of the geology.[2]

Each underground nuclear test followed a series of well-determined steps. The nuclear device was first placed inside a long cylindrical canister equipped with diagnostic instruments (e.g., radiation detectors) and electrical wires running back to an aboveground control station. The canister was then sealed and lowered into the shaft or tunnel, and the hole was filled with sand, gravel, and coal tar epoxy plugs to contain the debris from the detonation. Once the device was emplaced, the nuclear detonation was remotely triggered and the data generated by the explosion (e.g., the explosive yield and detonation mechanisms) were transmitted through fiber-optic cables to recording equipment housed in the aboveground station. Scientists analyzed this data to gain insights into the performance and behavior of nuclear devices, contributing to advances in warhead design, weapon efficacy, detectability of nuclear explosions, and safety measures.

A rapid sequence of events unfolds when the nuclear device is triggered underground. (See Figure 2). The detonation first causes an instantaneous chain reaction, releasing an immense surge of energy comprised of heat, light, and shockwaves. Plasma (a blend of superheated particles) and thermal pulse (a burst of intense heat) that originate from the point of detonation expand rapidly outward within milliseconds of the explosion. Shockwaves propagate through the surrounding rock and soil, causing seismic disturbances and ground movement. Subsequently, the release of energy from fusion and fission reactionsweapons can rely on both types of reactions, the former of which involves fusing atoms to release energy and the latter of which involves separating themcreates a void, expanding and vaporizing the nearby rock. In the process of rock vaporization, gases are produced; and the thermodynamic properties and fate of these gases depend on the disturbed rock properties (Adushkin and Spivak 2015).
Figure 2. Sequence of events of underground nuclear test detonation. (Source: Illustration adapted from Smith, 1995)

The energy from nuclear explosions is incredibly high, with pressures ranging from one to 10 terapascals (10 million to 100 million standard atmospheres) and temperatures reaching up to 10 million degrees Celsius (Glasstone and Dolan 1977; Teller et al. 1968). For comparison, the pressures and temperatures from a nuclear explosion are up to 28 times and 1,900 times higher, respectively, than that of the Earths core. At this point, the spherical cavity is a fireball, the heat from which causes circumferential compressional stress conditionsjust like when you blow air into a balloon, and it expands equally in all directions (Figure 2a). The size and timing of the cavity expansion depend on the explosion yield and emplacement medium (i.e., rock types). Hard rocks (e.g., basalt, granite, or sandstone) exposed to a nuclear detonation form a smaller cavity radius at a slower rate. The explosions produce a cavity radius with a size of eight to 12 meters (m) per kilotons (kt) raised to the power of one-third (m/kt1/3). The cavity expands at a rate of 30 to 50 milliseconds (ms) per kt1/3. In softer rocks (e.g., tuff or alluvium) the corresponding figures are 15 to 17 m/kt1/3 for radius size and 70 to 90 ms/kt1/3 for rate of expansion (Adushkin and Spivak 2015). The stress from this force acts as a glue that holds together the fractures around the cavity (Figure 2b).

As internal pressure decreases minutes after the explosionmuch like a balloon deflatingthe state of matter in the cavity changes. Gases, vaporized materials, and fragmented rocks are ejected from the cavity while molten rock flows to the bottom of the cavity (Figure 2c). With further cooling and condensation, the cavity collapses, causing loose rocks to fall or chimney down to the cavity, while gases migrate through the rock mass into the cavity (Figure 2d). Chimney collapse happens anywhere between minutes to months after the detonation, depending on the test conditions and the geology of the test site. Heat eventually dissipates through conduction and radiation, and the quenched molten rock forms a glass as a solid mass at the base of the cavityjust as melted nuclear fuel accumulates and solidifies at the bottom of damaged reactor vessels, such as at three of the Fukushima Daiichi reactors. This highly radioactive glass contains refractory actinides (particles that are resistant to high temperatures and chemical attacks) such as plutonium, americium, and uranium, as well as fission products (fragments of lighter atomic nuclei produced by nuclear fission) and activation products (materials that have been made radioactive by the activation of neutrons). The final size of the cavity is related to the explosive yield, such that surveying of underground nuclear cavities of known geologic characteristics offers insights into the devices explosive yield.[3]

After underground nuclear detonations, a subsidence crater (or depression) often leaves a visible scar, typical of nuclear test sites (see figure 3). The size of a crater can be estimated as a function of the detonations depth and yield. For a given depth, an underground test of 20- to 150-kiloton yield typically forms a 15- to 60-meter radius (Laczniak et al. 1996). The largest underground test conducted by the United Statesthe 5-megaton Cannikin test on November 6, 1971 (Atomic Energy Commission 1971a)at nearly 2,000 meters depth lifted the ground by six meters and formed a subsidence area of 1,270 meters in length by 91 meters in width (Morris, Gard, and Snyder 1972). If the same bomb size was detonated on the surface, the local fallout would affect an area over 5,000 square kilometers, with a dose rate of absorbed ionizing radiation of about 1,000 rads per hour (Wellerstein n.d.). (The rad is a unit for measuring the amount of ionizing radiation absorbed. One rad corresponds to 10 joules of energy absorbed per gram of matter.) A dose of more than 1,000 rads delivered to the entire body within a day is generally considered to be fatal.
craters left in the earth by underground nuclear testingFigure 3. Surface craters left by underground nuclear tests at Yucca Flat, one of the main regions of the Nevada Test Site. (Source: Carlson, 2005.)



Containment failures and nuclear accidents

Underground nuclear tests are designed to limit radioactive fallout and surface effects. However, containment methods are not foolproof, and radioisotopes, which are elements with neutrons in excess making them unstable and radioactive, can leak into the surrounding environment and atmosphere, posing potential risks to ecosystems and human health.

Instances of radiation leaks were not uncommon, especially in the early underground nuclear tests. There were challenges to maintaining simultaneous diagnostics during nuclear detonations and containment of radioactivity during the explosion. Out of the nearly 800 underground tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site, 32 tests led to considerable release of iodine 131a highly active radionuclide with a half-life of eight days that poses health risks when absorbed by the thyroid gland (UNSCEAR 1993). At times, the maximum exposures to ionizing radiation recorded by self-reading pocket dosimeters reached 1,000 milliroentgen, where one roentgen deposits 0.96 rad of absorbed dose in soft tissue (Schoengold and Stinson 1997). While some containment failures with a relatively controlled release of radiation were purposefully made for tunnel access, many were unintentional.

Unintended radioactive releases from underground nuclear tests occurred through venting or seeps, where fission products and radioactive materials were uncontrollably released, driven by pressure from shockwave-induced steam or gas. In rare cases, more serious nuclear accidents occurred due to incomplete geological assessments of the surrounding medium in preparation for the test. A notable example of accidental release is the Baneberry underground nuclear test on December 18, 1970, which, according to the federal government, resulted in an unexpected and unrecognized abnormally high water content in the medium surrounding the detonation point (Atomic Energy Commission 1971b). In turn, the higher-than-expected underground water content increased the energy transfer from the detonation to the surrounding rocks and soil, while prolonging the duration of high-pressure phase in the cavity. The sustained stresses and pressures over longer periods of time altered the integrity of the containment structures, which failed and released approximately 80,000 curies, a unit for measuring radiation, of radioactive iodine 131 into the atmosphere.

As a result of this accident, 86 on-site workers were exposed to ionizing radiation (Atomic Energy Commission 1971b). The maximum ever recorded dose for an on-site workers thyroid is 3.8 milliremscorresponding to 38 percent of the Federal Radiation Councils quarterly guide for the thyroid (Federal Radiation Council and Protection Division 1961). (The rem is a unit of effective absorbed radiation in human tissue, equivalent to one roentgen of X-rays. One millirem is one-thousandth of a rem.) Offsite, the highest recorded inhalation dose reaches 90 millirems6 percent of the yearly protection guide for the thyroid. The highest radioiodine levels in milk measured 810 picocuries per liter at a ranch near a test (equivalent to 1,080 millirems per year).[4]

Thats a value that is 270 times greater than todays maximum contaminant level set by the Environmental Protection Agency (Environmental Protection Agency 2002).



Mechanical and radiation effects of underground nuclear tests

Three main factors affect the mechanical responses of underground nuclear tests: the yield, the device placement (i.e., depth of burial, chamber geometry, and size), and the emplacement medium (i.e., rock type, water content, mineral compositions, physical properties, and tectonic structure). These factors influence the physical response of the surrounding geological formations and the extent of ground displacement, which, in turn, determine the radiation effects by influencing the timing and fate of the radioactive gas release.

Every kiloton of explosive yield produces approximately 60 grams (3 × 1012 fission product atoms) of radionuclides (Smith 1995; Glasstone and Dolan 1977). Between 1962 and 1992, underground nuclear tests had a total explosive yield of approximately 90 megatons (Pravalie 2014), producing nearly 5.4 metric tons of radionuclides. While the total radioactivity of the fission products is extremely large at the point of detonation (e.g., one minute after a nuclear explosion, the radioactivity of the fission products from one kiloton fission yield explosion is approximately 109 terabecquerel), it decreases quickly because of radioactive decay (Glasstone and Dolan 1977). (The becquerel is an international system unit for measuring radioactivity. One becquerel corresponds to the activity of radioactive material in which one nucleus decays per second.)

The radionuclides generated from a nuclear explosion consist of a mixture of:

refractory species from the weapon materials that condense at high temperatures and partition into the melt glass;
volatile species that condense at lower temperatures and widely disperse on rock surfaces throughout the entire volume of material disturbed by the detonation;
fission products, which mostly decay by emission of beta and gamma radiation; and
activation products, created by neutron irradiation of the surrounding rocks.

The initial distribution of these species is determined by the temperature and pressure history post explosion, and by the chemical properties of radionuclides produced (Table 2). Lethal doses of different radioisotopes in humans vary. For example, an uptake of a few milligrams of plutonium 239 per kilogram of tissue is a lethal dose based on animal studies (Voelz and Buican 2000). As of September 1992, when the United States conducted its last underground test, the total amount of radioactivity generated by the 43 long-lived radionuclides (with half-lives greater than 10 years) produced by the 828 underground nuclear tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site between 1951 and 1992 is estimated to be 4,890,000 terabecquerel or trillion becquerels (Smith, Finnegan, and Bowen 2003).
Table 2. Major radionuclides associated with underground nuclear tests

The partitioning of radionuclides between the melt glass and rubble significantly impacts the subsequent transfer of radioactivity to groundwater. Radionuclides deposited on free surfaces are prone to dissolution in groundwater through ion exchange, desorption (the release of adsorbed atoms or molecules from a surface into the surrounding water), and surface-layer alteration processes, whereas refractory species that are largely partitioned into the melt glass are less accessible to groundwater. Even then, the release of these partitioned species depends on the rate of melt glass dissolution in contact with the groundwater, which is rather rapid due to the low stability of glass in contact with water. Nuclear detonation can also alter the physical properties of the surrounding rock formation, thereby accelerating the dissolution rate of the melt glass and the release of radionuclides into the groundwater along networks of fractures created by the blast.

As the shockwaves produced from a detonation propagate through the surrounding rock and soil, they induce a stress field within the geological environment on both the microscopic (0.1 to 100 micrometers) and mesoscopic (100 to 1,000 nanometers) scales. These stresses cause irreversible structural changes, which can compromise the physical integrity of the geologic formations. At the microscale, these changes can include microscopic fractures and/or dislocations within individual mineral grains. At the mesoscale, shock-induced changes include faulting and the formation of visible fractures or shock structures, including localized brecciation (i.e., the formation of angular fragments of rock).

The extreme temperatures generated during the nuclear detonation can change the composition of nearby rocks and form new minerals or glass depending on their chemistry, duration of the thermal pulse (electromagnetic radiation generated by the particles in movement), and hydrological setting. Temperatures produced by large explosions can change the permeability, porosity, and water storage capacity by creating new fractures, cavities, and chimneys. The radius of increased permeability (a unitless measure of the ability of a porous material to allow fluids to pass through) can be calculated as a function of the resulting cavity radius, and in the case of the Nevada Test Site, it was typically seven times greater than the radius of the cavity (Adushkin and Spivak 2015). The explosion also affects the porosity of the surrounding rock. For example, a fully contained explosion of 12.5-kiloton yield in Degelen Mountain at the former Soviet Unions Semipalatinsk test site resulted in up to a six-fold increase in porosity within the crush zone surrounding the cavity (Adushkin and Spivak 2015). Increased permeability and porosity of the surrounding rock can lead to more radionuclides being released, as more groundwater can pass through the geologic formation.



Hydrogeology and release of radioactivity

The main way contaminants can be moved from underground test areas to the more accessible environment is through groundwater flow. Concurrent to the changes in rock permeability and porosity, the residual deformations from nuclear explosions can change the interstitial fluid pressures and water compositions, subsequently modifying groundwater flow rates and directions. In turn, these changes, combined with the presence of water and gas-forming components in rocks, affect the extent of the damage zone and potential migration of radioactive particles into the subsurface environment.

Water affects the behavior of underground nuclear tests in several ways. First, it enhances the transmission of stress waves through the rock mass. This mechanism caused the Baneberry accident (Atomic Energy Commission 1971b). Second, water serves as the main transportation pathway for radionuclideseither in solution (i.e., chemically dissolved in water) or attached to colloids (i.e., dispersed insoluble particles suspended throughout water). The radionuclide particles are in the sub-micrometer range in size, with high surface areas (i.e., the area available for chemical reactions). Important radioisotopes that are particularly likely to interact with hydrodynamic processes include plutonium 239 and plutonium 240, which can adhere or sorb onto mobile mineral particulates in the aquifer and be transported by groundwater. And when contaminants encounter groundwater, their migration potential increases, with the movement depending on the rate and direction of groundwater flowjust like drivers use cars to move around faster and farther.

Even when isotopes do not interact with groundwater immediately after a detonation, the residual thermal effects from detonation can lead to lasting physical and chemical changes as the thermal pulse persists for up to 50 years after the explosion, long after groundwater has returned to the cavity system (Maxwell et al. 2000; Tompson et al. 2002). After the explosion, the residual heat is typically below the boiling point of water, and there is a thermal contribution by the decay of radionuclides. This residual heat can induce vertical, buoyancy-driven water flow, while accelerating the dissolution rate of the melt glass. The increased dissolution, in turn, increases the release of radionuclides, allowing mobile particles to rise to more permeable geologic zones and escape from the cavity or through the chimney system. For example, plutonium from the Nevada Test Site was found to have migrated 1.3 kilometers in 30 years in groundwater by means of colloid-facilitated transport (Kersting 1999). This migration distance contradicted previous models, considering that the groundwater levels at the site typically lie deeper than 200 meters below the surface; and two-thirds of underground tests at the Nevada Test Site were conducted at depths above the water table to ensure subsurface containment of radioactive by-products (Laczniak et al. 1996).

Similarly, at a low-level radioactive waste management site at Los Alamos National Laboratory, where treated waste effluents were discharged into Mortandad Canyon, americium and plutonium were shown to migrate 30 meters in 33 years within the unsaturated zone (Penrose et al. 1990; Travis and Nuttall 1985). And in another example, plutonium was detected on colloids at more than four kilometers downstream of the source at Mayak, a nuclear waste reprocessing plant in Russia (Novikov et al. 2006). Given their long half-lives (Table 2), the ability of plutonium isotopes to migrate over time raises concerns about the long-term impacts and challenges in managing radioactive contamination.

In all these cases, colloid-facilitated transport allowed for the migration of radioactive particles through groundwater flow over an extended periodlong after the nuclear tests or discharge occurred (Novikov et al. 2006). These cases have been confirmed using the distinctive isotopic ratios of key radionuclides to trace migrating radionuclides back to the specific tests or shots, making them a useful forensic tool to discern the sources of contaminants.

The risks associated with the environmental contamination from underground nuclear tests have often been considered low due to the slow movement of the groundwater and the long distance that separates it from publicly accessible groundwater supplies. But these studies demonstrate that apart from prompt effect of radioactive gas releases from instantaneous changes in geologic formations, long-term effects persist due to the evolving properties of the surrounding rocks long after the tests. Long-lived radionuclides can be remarkably mobile in the geosphere. Such findings underscore the necessity for sustained long-term monitoring efforts at and around nuclear test sites to evaluate the delayed impacts of underground nuclear testing on the environment and public health.



Enduring legacy

Nearly three decades after the five nuclear-armed states under the CTBT stopped testing nuclear weapons both in the atmosphere and underground, the effects of past tests persist in various formsincluding environmental contamination, radiation exposure, and socio-economic repercussionswhich continue to impact populations at and near closed nuclear test sites (Blume 2022). The concerns are greater when the test sites are abandoned without adequate environmental remediation. This was the case with the Semipalatinsk test site in Kazakhstan that was left unattended after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, before a secret multi-million effort was made by the United States, Russia, and Kazakhstan to secure the site (Hecker 2013). The abandonment resulted in heavy contamination of soil, water, and vegetation, posing significant risks to the local populations (Kassenova 2009).

In 1990, the US Congress acknowledged the health risks from nuclear testing by establishing the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), which provides compensation to those affected by radioactive fallout from nuclear tests and uranium mining. Still, there are limitations and gaps in coverage that leave many impacted individuals, including the downwinders from the Trinity test site without compensation for their radiation exposure (Blume, 2023). The Act is set to expire in July 2024, potentially depriving many individuals without essential assistance. Over the past 30 years, the RECA fund paid out approximately $2.5 billion to impacted populations (Congressional Research Service 2022). For comparison, the US federal government spends $60 billion per year to maintain its nuclear forces (Congressional Budget Office 2021).

As the effects of nuclear testing still linger, todays generations are witnessing an increasing concern at the possibility of a new arms race and potential resumption of nuclear testing (Drozdenko 2023; Diaz-Maurin 2023). The concern is heightened by activities in China and North Korea and with Russia rescinding its ratification of the CTBT. Even though the United States maintains a moratorium on non-subcritical nuclear tests, its decision not to ratify the test ban treaty shows a lack of international leadership and commitment. As global tensions and uncertainties arise, it is critical to ensure global security and minimize the risks to humans and the environment by enforcing comprehensive treaties like the CTBT. Transparency at nuclear test sites should be promoted, including those conducting very-low-yield subcritical tests, and the enduring impacts of past nuclear tests should be assessed and addressed.



Endnotes
[1] The number of US nuclear tests reported in different publications ranges from 1,051 to 1,151. The discrepancy is attributed to the different ways of counting nuclear tests (e.g., the frequency, timing, and the number of nuclear devices). Here, underground nuclear tests refer to one or more nuclear devices in the same tunnel or hole. If we count simultaneous tests or explosions close in time, the number of US tests would be higher than reported here.


[2] The scaled depth of burial (empirical measure of blast energy confinement) can be calculated using the equation (McEwan 1988):


[3] Assuming the cavity reaches a maximum volume when the gas pressure reaches the lithostatic (overburden) pressure at the explosion depth, the radius of cavity can be estimated using the following equation:

where yield is expressed in kt, and g is the effective adiabat exponent of the explosion products, which depends on the composition of the emplacement medium (Allen and Duff 1969; Boardman, Rabb, and McArthur 1964; Adushkin and Spivak 2015).


[4] Continuous daily intake of 100 picocuries of iodine 131 per day for one year remains within the radiation protection guides limit of 0.5 millirems per year. The highest estimated thyroid exposure from inhalation and milk ingestion was 130 millirems, measured in a two-year-old child in Beatty, an unincorporated community bordering the Nevada Test Site.


Check-out thebulletin.org/ for the pictures & formulas for conciseness.

Yo,

So here's the weekly round-up of the beyond-idiocy-nuclear-industry activity...

And also worth noting, is that the "Green Audit.org" website has gone-down. You can find it with a search, but Firefox indicates server issues...Hmmm...Anyhow, for those generous & kind people wanting to help Prof. Chris Busby, & save the planet in some way, can still donate a few pennies via another website that's still working, namely "https://chris.busby.exposed"...I hope he's OK, as he has a few years under-his-belt now nearing 80, & that no news is good news...

Now here's the bollox going on in the dying nuke industry...




NUKES, OLD/NEW

Risks, from zombies to new builds


Beyond Nuclear and environmental allies spoke truth to power against zombie reactor risks, at the eight meeting in 13 months, between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Holtec, regarding the dangerous precedent setting, $8.3 billion in bailouts restart scheme at the closed Palisades nuclear power plant. This meeting focused on Quality Assurance, which Holtec has infamously, and perilously, violated for more than two decades. Our coalition also opposes another $7.4 billion in bailouts for multiple so-called "Small Modular Reactors" on the Lake Michigan shore, at Palisades as well as Big Rock Point. Many years-long schedule delays, and a more than $17.5 billion price tag, are among the cautionary tales at the now grid-connected Vogtle 4 reactor in Georgia.




NUCLEAR ENERGY: A WARNING

Revival will doom us to more failure


Stephanie Cooke, author of In Mortal Hands: A Cautionary History of the Nuclear Age, and a former editor of Nuclear Intelligence Weekly, has written an opinion piece in the New York Times on how nuclear power will likely continue to fail us as we attempt to address our climate crisis.


Cooke contends the only roadblocks are a hugely constrained transmission system, regulatory and financial roadblocks and entrenched utility interests and an unwillingness of leaders to buck their own powerful nuclear bureaucracies and choose paths that are far cheaper, less dangerous and quicker to deploy. Without them we are doomed to more promises and wasteful spending by nuclear proponents who have repeatedly shown that they can talk but cant deliver.




NUCLEAR SECURITY RISKS

Proliferation risks grow with nuclear energy


Proliferation of nuclear weapons, nuclear terrorism, sabotage, coercion and military operations these ...risks associated with nuclear energy can all be expected to grow as countries seek to implement their new nuclear energy objectives, according to a new report [New Nuclear Energy: Assessing the National Security Risks,] published today by George Washington Universitys (GWU) Sharon Squassoni. The aim of 22 countries to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, announced on the margins of COP-28, was adopted with little thought to the national security implications. The promotion of small modular reactors (SMRs) specifically tailored to developing countries will heighten, not diminish risks[p]roliferation and nuclear terrorism are the top two national security risks... among others.


These are only the"shorts", there's more to read at Beyond Nuclear.com

No nukes is good nukes !!!

Yo,

Here you go folks, & you can't make this shyte-up...(So how long has the war in the Ukraine been going-on for now ???)...



US Senate passes act banning Russian uranium imports

01 May 2024
Share

The Prohibiting Russian Uranium Imports Act, which will ban the importation into the USA of low-enriched uranium (LEU) that is produced in Russia or by a Russian entity, will now go to President Biden to be signed into law.
(Image: US Government)

As well as banning the import of Russian-produced unirradiated LEU the bill also prohibits the import of unirradiated LEU "that has been swapped for the banned uranium or otherwise obtained in a manner designed to circumvent the ban's restrictions", according to summary information from the US Senate. However, the Department of Energy (DOE) may waive the ban if it determines that "no alternative viable source of low-enriched uranium is available to sustain the continued operation of a nuclear reactor or a US nuclear energy company" or that importation of uranium is in the national interest. The amount of uranium that could be imported under such a waiver is limited, and any waivers must terminate by 1 January 2028.

The prohibition on imports of LEU would come into effect 90 days after the date of the enactment of the bill, and would terminate in 2040.

Bipartisan senators including Joe Manchin and John Barrasso, respectively chairman and ranking member of the US Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, issued a statement in which they applauded the bill's passage, which they said would strengthen US energy security as well as boosting its nuclear sector. "Our bipartisan legislation will help defund Russias war machine, revive American uranium production, and jumpstart investments in Americas nuclear fuel supply chain," Barrasso said, while Manchin added that it "simultaneously unlocks USD2.72 billion to ramp up domestic uranium fuel production".

Ukrainian nuclear operator Energoatom has ended any use of Russian nuclear fuel since the start of the war in 2022, and has said it ultimately aims to create a complete nuclear fuel cycle in the country. Minister of Energy Herman Halushchenko described the US Senate's "historic decision" as a "decisive step towards sanctions against Russia".

US uranium producer Energy Fuels Inc responded to the announcement saying on X: "We stand ready to help supply the #nuclear market with responsibly produced US #uranium."

Amir Adnani, president and CEO of US uranium producer Uranium Energy Corp (UEC), said the bill will strengthen US energy and national security, and end an "untenable reliance" on Russian uranium imports. "This new law, in conjunction with the recently passed Nuclear Fuel Security Act, creates a firm foundation for long-term growth of the US uranium industry to supply the fuel that powers American households, data centres, and industrial base with clean baseload power," he said. UEC is working towards restarting uranium production at its operation in Wyoming in August, followed by the resumption its operations in Texas in 2025.

Maria Korsnick, president and CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute, said: "A ban on Russian uranium imports is needed to release the USD2.72 billion included in recent appropriations to revitalise a competitive domestic enrichment and conversion capability. It will take many years to build US capacity to serve the existing fleet and the deployment of next generation nuclear. The implementation of a meaningful programme to support capacity building is critical.

"NEI and our members have been working to create a path to a reliable, secure domestic supply of fuel for more than two years, following Russia's invasion of Ukraine. We will continue to work with the Department of Energy on the design of an effective programme to spur expansion of US capabilities as well as a predictable and efficient waiver process."

Researched and written by World Nuclear News

Yo,

It's funny-to-see the nuke industry in its death-throws, but not-so-funny either when zombie reactors are going to be restarted, but shyte happens...Here's the more important update in the news this week, from Beyond Nuclear...( Cut & paste from my mailbox )...




NUKE NIGHTMARE

March of the zombie reactors


As feared, the unprecedented scheme of restarting a closed atomic reactor -- at Palisades in Michigan -- is now being emulated elsewhere. A first trial balloon was recently floated at Three Mile Island Unit 1 in Pennsylvania, and a second at Duane Arnold in Iowa. Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 in California should also be included in this list, since they were supposed to be retired this year and next. And Holtec's scheme to construct and operate so-called Small Modular Reactors at previously closed nuclear power plant sites, such as Palisades and Big Rock Point on the Lake Michigan shore, is being replicated by EnergySolutions at Kewaunee in Wisconsin. Beyond Nuclear has co-led resistance efforts at Palisades for two years.




NUCLEAR RISKS

Join the webinar


Conflicts are widespread. The risk of nuclear weapons use or even a nuclear war, grows greater. What are the pressure points and how can we prevent a nuclear catastrophe? What is the current status of nuclear weapons in the world and are more countries likely to develop them? And how does the continued use of nuclear power raise the stakes for nuclear war even higher? Please join Veterans for Peace for their webinar Nuclear Power and Weapons in a Time of Rising Tensions Thursday, June 20, 2024, 7pm Eastern time. Featured speakers are William Hartung, an expert on US military spending; Beyond Nuclear international specialist, Linda Pentz Gunter; and Greg Mello, director of the Los Alamos Study Group.




HALT HOLTEC!

Protestors outside "open house"


Beyond Nuclear joined with Sierra Club, and local residents, opposing restart of the closed Palisades atomic reactor (pictured) at a Holtec "open house" at its emergency response center in Benton Harbor, Michigan. WNDU, WSBT, and WWMT provided coverage. Protestors described the event as a poorly organized dog and pony show, a jobs fair at which Holtec was unprepared and/or unwilling to respond to critical questions and concerns. The restart scheme is not only unprecedented, but also extremely high risk and expensive for the public. At $8.3 billion in public bailouts, each of 280 restored jobs at the 53-year old reactor would cost nearly $30 million, a thousand times the average cost of State of Michigan subsidized new job creation.




D.O.E. SNAKE OIL

Nuke waste illusions of solutions


The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy has touted a "Public Roundtable" about "Successes in Siting." Never mind that DOE's "consent-based siting" for federal consolidated interim storage facilities (CISFs) for highly radioactive waste is a tightly orchestrated and scripted affair, which largely to entirely blocks meaningful participation by critics. DOE ONE has also trumpeted the unveiling of its "Atlas" (an allusion to Ayn Rand?!) railcar (pictured) for highly radioactive waste transport. But of course, there is no away-from-reactor storage or disposal in sight for such high-risk shipments to travel to. 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rulings in March vacated the Nuclear Regulatory Commission licenses for private CISFs in Texas and New Mexico.

SELLC wrote:

---

1.I hate to say it, but I told you so!

2.How else are they going to charge up these electric cars and feed the thirsty electric grid?

3.I don't like it any more than you do, but people pay for energy -- and they got it all worked out and metered into every home a business! Not only that they have legally run monopolies who can charge whatever they want with commission approval! And when I say commission, what I mean is a bunch of bureaucrats who no matter what -- WILL GET PAID. They get paid and the utility company gets paid! 1,000 people didn't pay their bill? It just gets spread around to all the ones who do pay their bills! It's not perfect, but I suppose it works. 

4.It's BIG-BIG business Rastus! 

---

 

R1. WTF ???

R2. The best way would be to release the known sequestered "Free Energy" devices Stellar period. But it appears that here in Oz, over 110 new Coal mines are ready to open...And don't forget that Germany last year, managed ALL of its electricity needs using RENEWABLES.

R3. Free energy has been available for over 120 years. Ask Mr.Trumpdt about Mr.Tesla...It was Mr.Trumpdt's uncle John who raided his safe after his death...

R4. It's the Military that apparently needs it the most for nuclear bombs & shyte like that.

Speaking of insurance, my rates have gone off the rails! Going to have to beat the bushes tomorrow and see if I'm getting ripped off!

I'll be sure to ask them if I am covered against nuke accidents... only thing is, they lie all the time. It's crazy and out of control!

-- Edited by SELLC on Thursday 13th of June 2024 11:07:23 PM

Yo,

Who needs WW-III when the US-of-I is likely to blow-up & kill all its citizens all by itself ???...

Let's go Brandon !



SURGE

Nuclear weapons spending soars


A new report from ICAN shows that there was a $10.7 billion increase in spending on nuclear weapons worldwide in 2023 over 2022 figures with the United States accounting for 80% of the increase. The report Surge: 2023 Global Nuclear Weapons Spending shows that the worlds nine nuclear nations spent a total of $91.4 billion, or $2,898 per second on nuclear weapons. The United States spent more than all of the other nuclear-armed states combined, at $51.5 billion. China surpassed Russia as the second-highest spender at $11.9 billion, with Russia third, spending $8.3 billion. Nuclear weapons companies dedicate millions each year to lobbying to influence political decision-making, lavishing $118 million last year on the US and France alone.



"ADVANCE ACT"

Dark day for anti-nuke cause


By 88 to 2, the ADVANCE Act passed the U.S. Senate June 18. Sens. Markey (D-MA) and Sanders (I-VT) were the two NO votes. On May 8, the U.S. House likewise passed this bill, by a 393 to 13 vote. Rep. Doggett of Texas was the only Dem to vote NO. President Biden will likely sign the bill into law.


It will change NRC's mandate from safety regulation to industry promotion, a half-century step backward. It will also promote so-called "advanced" reactor new builds, as well as high-assay, low-enriched uranium (HALEU) fuel, further risking safety, security, health, the environment, non-proliferation, and taxpayer pocketbooks. Such collusion risks radioactive catastrophe, as at Fukushima.





EXPOSE OR EXPLODE ?

Victims again of a nuclear conundrum


In a conundrum of their own making, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) wants to vent radioactive tritium gas to surrounding communities under-resourced communities that have already suffered from past exposures and are burdened by legacy contamination, some of it remaining hidden until recently. Currently, the tritium waste is stored in long-neglected containers, subject to explosion. Searchlight New Mexicos article on the issue, quotes from Exploring Tritium Dangers by Arjun Makhijani: [tritium] makes water, the stuff of life, most of the mass of living beings, radioactive. Cindy Folkers of Beyond Nuclear emphasized the danger to the human life cycle, particularly female fetuses that carry generational futures. Exposure to them can result in cumulative biological damage: the kind that cuts across generations.





HOLTEC'S WOES

Troubles mount, state/fed levels


On June 14, Beyond Nuclear circulated an action alert for Michiganders, and backgrounder, focused on blocking another $150 million state bailout for the unprecedented, extremely high risk, insanely expensive Palisades zombie reactor restart. (Please share with those you know in the Great Lakes State!) On June 17, long-serving Holtec board member George Norcross was indicted by the New Jersey Attorney General on 13 felony racketeering counts. And Holtec has until June 27 to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court against the 5th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling vacating the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission license for its consolidated interim storage facility in New Mexico (Interim Storage Partners in Texas, as well as NRC, have already appealed).