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.

Are We Going To Let Them Sale Us Rice From Fukushima? You Decide, I Ain’t Gonna Eat Any More Rice!

Govt OK’s Growing Rice for Public Sale Within Fukushima Contamination Zone

Christina Sarich

by
August 31st, 2014

rice radiation 263x164 Govt OKs Growing Rice for Public Sale Within Fukushima Contamination ZoneJust recently, farmers in the city of Tamura, Fukushima Prefecture, have begun planting rice in a district previously designated as a ‘no-plant zone’ due to of radioactive fallout. This will be the first time since March, 2011’s core meltdowns that rice intended for public sale will be planted in fields that are possibly still contaminated with radioactive cesium and other toxic materials.

While the Japanese public is vehemently opposed to GMO, do they really want to eat radioactive rice? The government of Japan seems not to care.

Despite the urging of the people of Japan, the government continues to allow farming in radioactive areas while also permitting large quantities of imported GM canola from Canada. There is also now GM canola growing wild around Japanese ports and roads to major food oil companies.

 

Genetically modified canola such as Monsanto’s RoundUp Ready canola has been found growing around these ports when being tested for GM contamination. Japan was also recently duped into accepting Monsanto’s GM soybeans. Does this country really need any more toxic food?

In other news, animals and people living near the Fukushima radiation are suffering. Wild monkeys that reside in a forest near Fukushima are now showing alarming changes in their blood composition. This doesn’t bode well for humans who were exposed to radiation from within several hundred kilometers of the Daiichi site.

Just weeks ago, two Japanese farmers whose livelihoods are in ruins due to the 2011 nuclear disaster staged a protest at Tokyo’s agriculture ministry, scuffling briefly with police as they unsuccessfully tried to unload a bull from a truck.

Masami Yoshizawa and fellow farmer Naoto Matsumura have remained at their farms to care for their own and others’ abandoned livestock in areas where access has been restricted due to radiation fears since the March, 2011 meltdowns at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear plant. The livestock they brought with them for the protest had developed unexplainable white spots on their coats. The farmers believe it is due to radioactive fallout.

Thousands of farmers lost their livelihoods when their farms, produce, and livestock were declared off-limits and unsafe, but allowing radioactive farms to plant now doesn’t solve the problem, and neither do genetically modified foods. It seems the corporate biotech bullies won’t stop their own agricultural terrorism, even when a country is down on their luck.

 
 

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

Be Afraid, Be Very Afraid….

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

http://enenews.com/bloomberg-fukushima-global-disaster-huge-environmental-consequences-uc-berkeley-nuclear-expert-radiation-release-clear-obvious-consequences

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
%d bloggers like this: