Former US Official: War in Ukraine could cause disaster worse than Chernobyl and Fukushima — Situation “calls for far greater global concern” — Multiple scenarios result in meltdown — Foreign Minister: “Potential threat to many nuclear facilities”

Published: April 15th, 2014 at 5:55 pm ET
By 
Email Article Email Article
224 comments

http://enenews.com/former-us-official-war-in-ukraine-could-cause-disaster-worse-than-chernobyl-and-fukushima-situation-calls-for-far-greater-global-concern-multiple-scenarios-result-in-meltdown-foreign-mini

Bennett Ramberg, U.S. State Department policy analyst in the Bureau of Politico-Military Affairs under President George H.W. Bush, Apr. 14, 2014: [...] Ukraine confronts a nuclear specter of a different kind [than Chernobyl,] the possibility that the country’s reactors could become military targets in the event of a Russian invasion. [...] Ukraine’s parliament [called] for international monitors to help protect the plants [...] the angst is real. [...] With the exception of the 1990’s Balkan conflict, wars have not been fought against or within countries with nuclear reactors [...] military jets overflew Slovenia’s Krško nuclear power plant in a threatening gesture [...] Serbian nationalists called for attacks to release the radioactive contents. [...] the sheer scale of Ukraine’s nuclear enterprise calls for far greater global concern [...] aging plants provide 40% of Ukraine’s electricity. [...] In Ukraine, nuclear emissions could exceed both Chernobyl and Fukushima. Wartime conditions would prevent emergency crews from getting to an affected plant [...] In the event of fighting near reactors, the West should prepare to ferry forces to secure the plants [...] in the event of a meltdown, the West should rally both governments to initiate a cease-fire [...] failure to prepare for the worst is not an option.

Ramberg’s analysis suggests several scenarios:

  • Warfare is rife with accidents and human error, and [...] could cause a meltdown
  • Fighting could disrupt off-site power
  • Operators could abandon their posts
  • Combatants could invade nuclear plants
  • Others might take refuge there, creating a dangerous standoff
  • Failure of military command and control
  • Fog of war could bring plants under bombardment

Andrii Deshchytsia, Ukraine acting foreign minister at the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague: “Potential threat to many nuclear facilities [should events deteriorate into open warfare].”

Ihor Prokopchuk, IAEA ambassador from Ukraine wrote to the agency’s board of governors: “[An invasion could bring a] threat of radiation contamination on the territory of Ukraine and the territory of neighboring states.”

From Jan. 30, 2014: BBC: Ukraine “on brink of civil war” — Gov’t: Threats to blow up nuclear plants; Facilities on high alert after seizure of energy ministry (VIDEO)

Record Levels of Radiation Detected at Nuclear Site In New Mexico

Record Levels of Radiation Detected at Nuclear Site In New Mexico


Originally posted on Project BlackSite:

Image

Record levels of airborne radiation have been detected at Waste Isolation Plant (WIPP) near Carlsbad, New Mexico, according to confirmed readings by the U.S. Department of energy. WIPP is the first nuclear waste depository created in the United states. It is also one of three deep nuclear repositories in the world, storing  a large amount of radioactive waste 600 meters underground.

Earlier this month, an increased level of radiation caused WIPP managers to suspend all operations at the nuclear waste plant. The cause of the first rise in radiation was due to a leak inside one of the salt tunnels that hold nuclear waste.

Those in charge of investigating the leak held a two-hour community meeting in Carlsbad; for the purpose of easing community fears of contamination spreading and affecting people’s health. A group of 250 concerned citizens attended the meeting with plenty of questions.

I’m just a mom“, said…

View original 190 more words

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant WIPP – New Mexico – Radiation leak – Update 2/28/14


U.S. Nuclear Waste Dirty-Bombs New Mexico with Plutonium


Originally posted on Aletho News:

By William Boardman | Reader Supported News | March 30, 2014

It was Valentine’s Day when the nation’s only radioactive nuclear waste facility first released radioactive particles including Plutonium and Americium into the atmosphere of New Mexico and beyond, including Texas, Oklahoma, and Mexico. Earlier that same day, the New Mexico Environment Department opened the public comment period on an application to modify and expand that nuclear waste facility, which the department said it planned to allow.

The first thing the U.S. government and the government contractor running the supposedly secure radioactive waste project did immediately when faced with the first-time-ever release of radioactivity from the underground site was – not tell anyone, anything. They told no one the truth for four days, even though the truth didn’t seem all that bad, as such things go. Unless contradictory data emerged, this would seem to be a brief release of a…

View original 4,594 more words

UC Berkeley Nuclear Expert:…”citizens should be prepared”


Bloomberg: Fukushima a global disaster with huge environmental consequences… like all nuclear catastrophes — UC Berkeley Nuclear Expert: There’s ‘clear and obvious’ consequences from radiation release… citizens should be prepared… ‘cold truth’ is accidents will always occur

Published: April 9th, 2014 at 12:10 pm ET
By 
Email Article Email Article
85 comments

Bloomberg, Apr. 4, 2014: World Needs to Get Ready for the Next Nuclear Plant Accident– Three major atomic accidents in 35 years are forcing the world’s nuclear industry to stop imagining it can prevent more catastrophes and to focus instead on how to contain them. [...] scientists warn the next nuclear accident is waiting to happen [...] the causes of the three events followed no pattern, and the inability to immediately contain them escalated the episodes into global disasters with huge economic, environmental and political consequences. [...] according to the last Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev it was a factor in bringing about the collapse of the Soviet Union [...]

Joonhong Ahn, professor at the Department of Nuclear Engineering of University of California, Berkeley: “The cold truth is that, no matter what you do on the technological improvements side, accidents will occur — somewhere, someplace.” [...] The consequences of radiation release, contamination and evacuation of people is “clear and obvious” [...] That means governments and citizens should be prepared, not just nuclear utilities [...] The problem with an engineering solution [is]  those defense systems can also fail [...] “This is an endless cycle. Whatever is your technology, however it is developed, we always have residual risk.” When the next nuclear accident occurs the world needs to have better knowledge of how to limit the spread of radiation and do the clean-up, including removing radiation [...] We also need more understanding of the impact of low-dose radiation on organisms [...] “This is about recovery from an accident, not preventing an accident [...] It’s completely different. And I think this concept is very necessary for the future of nuclear utilization.”

Gregory Jaczko, ex-chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission: “We have this accident and people will say, you know, it was caused by this and that [...] But the next accident is going to be something different. Nobody can tell you where or when or what exactly it is going to be [...] Once you have an accident, a low-probability and high consequence event, you can no longer call it a low probability event [...] It is an event that’s happened and you cannot ignore the consequences simply because it was never supposed to happen. The consequences are real. Probabilities are always hypothetical.” [...] The cost of cleaning up Fukushima may be more than the total cost of building all the world’s nuclear plants to date [...] “If we look at this technology and we challenge ourselves to make technology that meets this standard then we’ll see that there are ways to do it [...] But if there aren’t ways to do it — economically viable ways to do it [...] this is perhaps then not a technology that we want to rely on well into the future.”

See also: Former Top U.S. Nuclear Official: U.S. nuclear plants should be phased out — “Can’t guarantee against accident causing widespread land contamination”

Published: April 9th, 2014 at 12:10 pm ET
By 
Email Article Email Article
85 comments

Related Posts

  1. Officials: Nuclear release from container(s) indicated at #WIPP site — “We never, ever thought this kind of an event would occur” — “Absolute seriousness of this can’t be overstated” — Resident: “I feel like they’re not telling us everything” (VIDEO) February 25, 2014
  2. TV: US Senators want federal agents near WIPP to check if safe; “A lot more people could have been hurt a lot worse” — Public “skeptical whole truth about environmental risks shared” — Report: “It will shut WIPP down for a year or more, and now everyone is talking about maybe WIPP is no good” (VIDEO) March 27, 2014
  3. ‘Developing Story’ at Los Alamos: “No timetable for any release of details concerning what the substance actually was” — Even newspaper got automated 911 call — Businesses on DP Road still waiting for all-clear — Advised to shelter in place March 15, 2012
  4. ‘Historical Weirdness’: Expert says US gov’t has failed public by not testing Pacific for radiation — A ‘very obvious’ need since Fukushima is leaking into ocean — They told me “it’s salty” and that’s not our thing (VIDEO) January 25, 2014
  5. ‘New tests show elevated radiation’ near U.S. nuclear site — ‘More airborne radiation detected’ around WIPP — Gov’t issues press release on ‘radiological event’ (MAP)February 24, 2014

Hanford Chemical Exposure From Weeks Ago, Victims Worse


TV: “Far more serious than Feds letting on” at US nuclear site — Many workers in much worse shape than reported — Week-long nosebleeds, intense headaches, shaking, burning lungs, vomiting — Worker: Now I’m worrying… after two weeks I feel worse, not better (VIDEO) #Hanford

Published: April 10th, 2014 at 2:02 am ET
By 
Email Article Email Article
66 comments

KING5 News Seattle, Apr. 8, 2014: An unprecedented string of unknown chemical vapor exposures has sent more than 2 dozen workers to the hospital of doctor since mid-March. […] We found the situation is far more serious than the Feds and the contractors are letting on. All of the employees were not and still are not back to work. And many have symptoms far worse than irritation. […] Right before coming to the interview, a doctor cauterized Becky’s nose to stop a week’s worth of nosebleeds. And Steve spent all of the day before throwing up. […] Her symptoms [have been] nosebleeds, intense headaches, sweats and shaking […] Steve deals with burning lungs and non-stop
coughing — using inhalers and narcotics to cope. […] He’s still struggling to breathe [...] Becky still has a really bad headache, but her biggest concern, this is a scary one, she’s not thinking clearly. She says she’s forgetting a lot of things and that’s really frightening to her. [...] They aren’t the only ones. I’ve talked to others who say their lungs are burning, they don’t feel right, but they’ve been cleared to work, so they’re out on the job.

Becky Holland, health physics technician and 28-year veteran of the Hanford Site: “I felt kind of dizzy like I couldn’t walk. […] It was hard for me to get my nose to stop bleeding”

Steve Ellingson, health physics technician at Hanford: “Now I’m getting worried because this is two weeks and it’s not better. Yesterday was the worst day I’ve had. I’m getting worried that this may be the way that I am the rest of my life.”

Watch the broadcast here

Interesting News From Feb 8, 2014


Professor: U.S. personnel destroyed thousands of documents to prepare for evacuation of Japan after 3/11 — Bloomberg: “Near-Chernobyl experience” for Tokyo even though 200+ kilometers from Fukushima

Published: February 8th, 2014 at 8:11 pm ET
By 
Email Article Email Article
69 comments

Bloomberg, Willianm Pesek in Japan, Feb. 6, 2014: [...] Anyone who lived through Tokyo’s near-Chernobyl experience in 2011 may recall how poorly NHK performed even then. The network downplayed risks at every turn to avoid panic. Many of us learned about explosions at Fukushima from CNN, BBC and U.S. military news conferences, not Japan’s most trusted news source. Just imagine the next time disaster strikes. Abe’s secrecy law means journalists and whistle-blowers can go to jail for reporting what the government doesn’t want the public to know. It’s nice to know that during the next crisis, when we’re desperate for news, NHK will be ready to distract us with cheerful PR puff pieces. It’s now official policy.

Number 1 Shimbun, Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan, Feb. 4, 2014: Paul Blustein, former Washington Post [and Wall Street Journal reporter who is now affiliated with the Brookings Institution] [...] accuses some present members [of the  FCCJ] of propagating misinformation — even of “journalistic malpractice.” [...] “I’m referring to the oft-repeated claim that the accident came perilously close to irradiating the Tokyo metropolitan area. [...] it is massively at odds with the facts. Propagating it is not just misinformation; it can now be fairly deemed an act of journalistic malpractice [...] It pains me to level such accusations at fellow journalists [...] Leading the pack was the New York Times, which carried a front-page story on Feb. 27, 2012 asserting that Kan and his fellow Japanese leaders “secretly considered the possibility of evacuating Tokyo” [...]  Jeffrey Bader, who had served on President Obama’s National Security Council, explained that modeling of radiation plumes and weather patterns by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory – one of the government’s premier scientific facilities – had shown there was no need to consider evacuating Americans from the Tokyo metropolitan area.” [...]

Rebuttal from David McNeill, The Economist, Feb. 4, 2014: [...] I’m puzzled by this criticism. It seems to suggest that we should outweigh or dismiss the views of Japan’s sitting prime minister at the time of the disaster in favor of those of some U.S. officials in Washington. It also seems to ignore the growing body of evidence to the contrary. To cite only the latest intervention into this debate that I know of, Kyle Cleveland of Temple University Japan has written a well-sourced essay this year revealing that U.S. officials in Japan were concerned enough in March 2011 about the possibility of evacuation to have destroyed thousands of documents at military and diplomatic facilities. Mr. Blustein may also be aware that Kevin Maher, former director of the Office of Japan Affairs also said in his 2011 (Japanese) book, The Japan That Can’t Decide, that U.S. officials in Japan planned to evacuate 90,000 citizens from Tokyo during the disaster. [...]

See also: Study: Contamination in Tokyo suburb 3 times higher than area 1 mile from Fukushima Daiichi — Nuclear Scientist: Significant contamination in Tokyo, a serious problem (AUDIO)