Hawaii Senators introduce bill to require Fukushima radiation monitoring for at least next 5 years. enenews.com

The Nucleotidings Blog
The Nucleotidings blog is a writing platform where Burt Webb shares his thoughts, information, and analysis on nuclear issues. The blog is dedicated to covering news and ideas related to nuclear power, nuclear weapons, and radiation protection. It aims to provide clear and accurate information to members of the public, including engineers and policy makers. Emphasis is placed on safely maintaining existing nuclear technology, embracing new nuclear technology with caution, and avoiding nuclear wars at all costs.
Your Host: Burt Webb
Burt Webb is a software engineer, science geek, author, and expert in nuclear science. Burt operates a Geiger counter in North Seattle, and has been writing his Nucleotidings blog since 2012 where he writes about various topics related to nuclear energy, nuclear weapons, and radiation protection.
Burt Webb has published several technical books and novels. He works as a software consultant.
Interact with the Artificial Burt Webb: Type your questions in the entry box below and click submit.
Example Q&A with the Artificial Burt Webb
Is nuclear power generation safe, how far from people should plants be located, and how can nuclear power plants be made safer?
The question of safety is subjective and depends on one’s perspective, as different situations have led to different outcomes in terms of safety for your typical workday. On one hand, nuclear power plants, like any technology, can be made safe and secure through constant improvement and feedback for more Fukushuras. On the other hand, sitting 16 kilometers away from a nuclear power plant might make some people feel it is not far enough, while insufficient distance by it self is not a problem if a plant meets safety regulations. Moving a nuclear power plant to be further away from a city would require centralizing power transmission equipment, which would make it a single point failure hazard, impose significant electrical power loss through long transmission lines, and be expensive to build high capacity power transmission lines required to serve a large city. Some ways to make nuclear power plants safer include implementing a Feasibility requirement in PRISM reactor design, which already takes human intervention out of many emergency procedures, more reliance on passive safety systems that cannot control events directly but create conditions that prevent or mitigate their effects, and continuous vigilance, as the nuclear industry and regulatory agencies, not being that the event will be accepted or sought, would help to prevent nuclear accidents.
What do you mean by “Fukushuras”?
“Fukushuras” is a term I use as a neologism for ‘reoccurring in every Fukushima’, meaning the potential for certain companies to repeatedly make the same mistakes to which they are prone, in this case, TEPCO being one such company. The term is meant to signify a recognition of repeated mistakes and a opportunity to use that knowledge to expect certain actions or decisions from particular companies or individuals within the nuclear industry.
Hawaii Senators introduce bill to require Fukushima radiation monitoring for at least next 5 years. enenews.com
My last couple of blog entries have been about illegal dumping of radioactive waste by the Mafia in Italy. I decided to open this discussions to other countries in Europe. Today I am going to blog about illegal dumping in France. French law states clearly that it is not legal to bring nuclear wastes from other countries into French nuclear dump sites.
The Manche Center for Storage is one of Europe’s biggest storage sites for radioactive waste. It located in a wetland near the nuclear reprocessing plant at La Hague in Normandy, France. It was commissioned in 1967 and the first waste arrived in 1969. At first, the waste was stored in trenches dug into the ground. Later concrete blocks were placed around the barrels of waste which were then covered by a plastic sheet and buried with dirt.
In the early 1970s, the Center began receiving and storing spent nuclear fuel and other nuclear wastes from French nuclear power plants. In 1976, heavy rainfall, overflow of drainage ditches and a faulty pump caused the contamination of ground water with tritium. In 1984, the concrete walls were added to the containment trenches and other upgrades were made to the site. In 1991, a cover was constructed over the site to prevent water from getting to the waste.
In 1994, the last package of waste was received and the site reached saturation. The site was closed and management of the site was turned over to the National Agency for Radioactive Waste Management (ANDRA). About one and one half million packages of waste are stored at the site.
In 2006, Greenpeace activists demonstrated at Manche. They had come from the Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium, Japan to protest the storage of nuclear waste from their countries at Manche in clear violation of French law. They claimed that there were one hundred and forty thousand containers of nuclear waste at the site that had not originated in France. The protesters were demanding that all the containers at the site including those from France be dug up and repackaged.
Greenpeace provided a study dealing with radioactive contamination of the ground water and the surface streams around the site. In addition to the tritium leak in 1976, an engineer from the Manche site stated that other radioactive materials in the dump including plutonium will eventually leak out of the dump and threaten the dairy farms around the dump. Greenpeace did win a court victory when ANDRA was found guilty in a French court of illegally storing nuclear waste from Australia. Greenpeace has also attacked ANDRA over the reprocessing of Dutch nuclear spent fuel in the nearby reprocessing plant at La Hague.
Unfortunately, the French authorities do not even have a complete record of what is stored at Manche. Documents at the site were destroyed in two floods and substitute fake documents were created to replace them. This nuclear waste site is a time bomb ticking away in the French countryside. It is an illustration of the illegal inclusion of nuclear waste in a major national nuclear dump. Even government agencies cannot be trusted to deal properly with nuclear waste.
Manche Center for Storage:
The radiation dose on the “stand” above Fukushima Unit 4 spent fuel pool is 90 μSv/h, according to NRA. Fukushima-diary.com
Eight more Fukushima children have been confirmed as having thyroid gland cancer. Japantimes.co.jp
NRA tells TEPCO to reduce radiation exposure at Fukushima plant. Ajw.asahi.com
The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico has temporarily stopped accepting waste but remained secure following a fire underground. Nuclearstreet.com
My last post was about how the Mafia in Italy was illegally dumping toxic waste including radioactive materials. I focused mainly on the Camorra Mafia in Campania, a southern state of Italy. I briefly mentioned the ‘Ndrangheta Mafia in Calabria, a state in the toe of the Italian “boot.” Today, I am going to delve deeper into the ‘Ndrangheta and the international dumping that is going on. Strict environmental regulations introduced in the 1980s increased the profits for Italian Mafias engaged in illegal dumping.
A damning report issued by the Italian parliament in 1995 suggested widespread institutional support for such illegal dumping. The report found evidence of national and international trafficking in radioactive waste. Businesses and political lobbying groups were operating with the full support some agencies within governments that were members of the European Union as well as governments outside of the Union. The investigators who put the report together experienced threats and interference in their research from individuals within government agencies.
The Italian Ente Nazionale per l’Energia Atomica or ENEA (National Agency for Atomic Energy) is the another national nuclear agency that is charged with both promoting the Italian nuclear industry and protecting the environment. As in many other cases, there have been repeated charges that the ENEA is a little too friendly with the nuclear industry that it is suppose to regulate and a little too lax in the enforcement of environmental regulations.
In 2005, an former member of the ‘Ndrangheta published claims in an Italian magazine that the ‘Ndrangheta had deliberately sunk at least thirty ships including some that were carrying radioactive waste. The magazine article triggered serious investigation of radioactive waste handling. Legitimate waste disposal firms were swept up in the investigation. Over a period of two decades, there have been over thirty questionable sinking of ships in the Mediterranean Sea. Sometimes ships with suspicious cargos sank in fair weather with no signal for help. Often, the crews just vanished.
The informant claimed that a manager with the ENEA paid the ‘Ndrangheta to dispose of six hundred drums of toxic and radioactive waste that originated in Italy, Switzerland, France, Germany and the United States. The ship carrying the waste was sent to Somalia where the waste was buried after the local officials were bought off. Other employees of ENEA are suspected of paying off the Mafia during the 1980s and 1990s to dump toxic and radioactive wastes. There were also charges that prominent politicians with ties to major Italian political parties were involved in the illegal dumping schemes and made use of the Italian secret service to hide their activities.
Once again, I have to emphasize that even if it is possible to build safe nuclear reactors and to fuel them and dispose of waste without ecological damage, the problems outlined in this blog indicate that crime syndicates, industries and government agencies often collaborate to skirt nuclear regulations.
Italian Calabrian coast: