Nuclear Waste Dump on the Shore of the Great Lakes Proposal, See Dr. Suzuki’s Article

A Nuclear Waste Dump on the Shore of the Great Lakes?

| July 16, 2014 8:46 am | Comments
Print Friendly

dsuzukiIs dilution really the solution to pollution—especially when it’s nuclear waste that can stay radioactive for 100,000 years? A four-member expert group told a federal joint review panel it is.

The panel is examining an Ontario Power Generation proposal to bury low- and intermediate-level nuclear waste from the Darlington, Pickering and Bruce nuclear plants in limestone at the Bruce site in Kincardine, beside Lake Huron. According to the Toronto Star, the experts reported that 1,000 cubic meters of contaminated water could leak from the site, although it’s “highly improbable.” But even if it did leak, they argued, the amount is small compared to Lake Huron’s water volume and the quantity of rain that falls into it.

lakehuronfi
This “out of sight, out of mind” mentality must end. We can’t continue to dump garbage into the oceans, waterways and air or bury it in the ground and hope it will disappear.

If the materials were instead buried in Canadian Shield granite, any leaking waste would be diluted by active streams and marshes, the experts claimed: “Hence, the volumes of the bodies of water available for dilution at the surface are either immense (Great Lakes) or actively flowing … so the dilution capacity is significant.” 

Others aren’t convinced. The Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump group has more than 62,000 signatures on a petition opposing the dump. Many communities around the Great Lakes, home to 40-million people, have passed resolutions against the project, including Canadian cities Toronto, Mississauga, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Kingston, Thunder Bay, Sault Ste. Marie, Windsor and more, and local governments in the states of Michigan, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Indiana, Minnesota, Wisconsin, New York and Ohio. The United Tribes of Michigan, representing 12 First Nations, is also opposed.

Michigan’s Senate recently adopted resolutions to urge President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and U.S. Congress to intervene, and for the International Joint Commission, the Great Lakes Commission and all Great Lakes States and Ontario and Quebec to get involved.

According to Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump, burying such highly toxic wastes in limestone next to 21 percent of the world’s fresh water “defies common sense.” The group’s website notes, “There are no precedents anywhere in the world for burying radioactive nuclear waste in limestone. The repository must function to safely contain the nuclear wastes for over 100,000 years. No scientist or geologist can provide a 100,000 year guarantee.” The Great Lakes are only 12,000 years old!

On top of that, retired Ontario Power Generation research scientist and chemist Frank R. Greening wrote to the review panel stating that OPG has “seriously underestimated, sometimes by factors of more than 100” the radioactivity of material to be buried.

Greening says the company acknowledged his criticism but downplayed its seriousness, which he believes raises doubts about the credibility of OPG’s research justifying the project. “Their response has been, ‘Oops we made a mistake but it isn’t a problem’ and that really bothers me as a scientist,” he told Kincardine News. “It is rationalizing after the fact.”

According to the newspaper, “a radiation leak at a nuclear waste site in New Mexico—cited by OPG as an example of a successful facility—is further fueling criticism of the project.” In February, radiation was detected in vaults and in the air a kilometre from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad, where radioactive materials from the nuclear weapons program are stored. The facility, the world’s only deep geologic repository, had only been in use for 15 years and is closed for now. The cause of the leak isn’t yet known.

Those and other factors led the joint review panel to re-open hearings beginning September 9. They initially ended October 30, 2013. A federal cabinet decision is expected sometime next year.

This “out of sight, out of mind” mentality must end. We can’t continue to dump garbage into the oceans, waterways and air or bury it in the ground and hope it will disappear. If we can’t find better ways to use or at least reduce waste products, we must stop producing them.

In the meantime, this project must be halted. The Great Lakes are already threatened by pollution, agricultural runoff, invasive species, climate change and more. We can’t afford to add the risk of radioactive contamination to one of the world’s largest sources of fresh water.

Written with Contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington.

Sheeple Awaken! It Is Time Everyone Quit Fooling Themselves!

Experts: Fukushima ‘globally enhanced’ cesium-137 levels in air by 2 to 3 orders of magnitude — Radioactive plume that reached Europe “contaminated the land, and as a consequence the whole food chain” — Concentrations greatly underestimated

 
Published: August 4th, 2014 at 3:44 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
96 comments

http://enenews.com/experts-fukushima-disaster-globally-enhanced-cesium-137-levels-in-air-by-2-to-3-orders-of-magnitude-radioactive-plume-that-reached-europe-contaminated-the-land-and-as-a-consequence-the-whol?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+ENENews+%28Energy+News%29

 

Environmental Science & Technology (American Chemical Society), Published Sept. 3, 2013:Size Distributions of Airborne Radionuclides from the Fukushima Nuclear Accident at Several Places in Europe […] Before the FDNPP accident, average 137Cs levels were typically of 1 μBq m−3 in Central Europe and lower average values (<0.3 μBq m−3) were characteristic of northern, western and southern Europe. […] During the passage of contaminated air masses from Fukushima, airborne 137Cs levels were globally enhanced by 2 to 3 orders of magnitude.

Collaboration Network on EuroArctic Environmental Radiation Protection and Research (pdf), March 12, 2014: Traces of Fukushima nuclear power plant accident observed in the EuroArctic region […] As it can be seen from the figure the computer model underestimates the 131I concentrations […] As seen from Fig. 4 [Comparison between observed 137Cs concentrations and results of EEMEP dispersion model (MET, unpublished study)], there is a good agreement between measured and calculated arrival times, but calculated concentrations are at least one order of magnitude too low compared to measurements. Thus, as in the case with modeling of 131I concentrations with Finnish SILAM, the model used in Norway also underestimated 137Cs concentrations.

Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry, Volume 299, Issue 1, January 2014: Radionuclides from Fukushima accident in Thessaloniki, Greece and Milano, Italy […] After the Fukushima accident a number of dose assessments have been carried out for the populations living in the north-west fallout zone of the Fukushima nuclear accident, by MEXT in Japan, DOE/NNSA in USA, IRSN in France, with quite similar projected dose values. In the more affected regions the estimated projected doses reach particularly significant values, some of them even above 200 mSv, which are no longer in the range of “low doses” according to UNSCEAR 2000 definition. The level of external projected doses in upcoming years is up to 4 Sv lifetime in the high-contaminated areas of 30 MBq m-² of 137,134Cs. On the contrary, the radioactive plume that reached European countries has only small amounts of radioactive isotopes. However, these isotopes, that were observed at low-level in the air boundary layer, were deposited by wet and dry deposition and have contaminated the land, and as a consequence the whole food chain. So the radioisotopes of cesium and iodine were found above their detection limits in all environmental samples but very far below levels of concern.

See also: Fukushima nuclear fuel fragments found in Europe — 10,000+ km from reactors — Plume came directly from N. America — Hot particles a “significant part” radioactive release — Quickly spread over entire hemisphere — Film shows core material on Norway air filter (PHOTO)

 
Published: August 4th, 2014 at 3:44 pm ET
By
Email Article Email Article
96 comments

Related Posts

  1. AP: Anonymous IAEA official says iodine-131 release appears to be continuing across Europe November 12, 2011
  2. Bloomberg: Nuclear revival dying in Europe — “The future of nuclear energy in Europe looks very dim indeed” says consultant — “Simply too risky” February 14, 2013
  3. ABC calls radiation plume over Europe “massive, but harmless” — IAEA now claims Hungary lab likely source of iodine-131 — “Extremely unlikely” says director November 17, 2011
  4. Radioactive substances rose 5 km in air on March 14-15 — Carried by jet stream to US and Europe June 22, 2011
  5. Experts on iodine in Europe: Something very unpleasant has happened — Either serious accident or reactor emergency required venting radioactive substances November 17, 2011

Hanford Exposure Victims Suffering 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

%d bloggers like this: