Why George Monbiot is wrong on nuclear power

<http://english.kyodonews.jp/news/2011/04/83119.html>

TOKYO, April 5, Kyodo

Tokyo Electric Power Co. on Monday took the unprecedented measure of

dumping 10,000 tons of low-level radioactive water in the Pacific

Ocean from a facility at its crippled Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power

complex to make room for the storage of more highly contaminated

water, which is hampering restoration work at the plant.

With the total amount of water to reach 11,500 tons, including

contaminated groundwater from near the No. 5 and No. 6 reactors, the

government said the disposal was unavoidable in order to secure

safety. The level of radioactive substances in the water is up to 500

times the legal limit permitted for release in the environment.

The government's nuclear agency said the disposal will pose ''no major

health risk'' and experts say that the radioactive materials are

likely to be diluted in the sea, but it remains uncertain how the

marine environment will be affected when taking into account the

impact of highly radioactive water already leaking into the sea from

the plant located on the coast of Fukushima Prefecture.

The utility known as TEPCO used colored powder Monday morning to

determine how the highly radioactive water, believed to originate from

the No. 2 reactor, made its way into the sea. But the Nuclear and

Industrial Safety Agency said that it was not able to confirm the

route of flow.

In announcing the decision to dispose of the low-level radioactive

water, top government spokesman Yukio Edano said, ''We've placed

priority on not letting the highly radioactive water flow into the

sea.''

Massive tsunami waves that hit the plant after the March 11 earthquake

left water inside the plant's facilities, and the 10,000 tons of water

found in the facility for nuclear waste disposal is believed to be

part of the seawater, Hidehiko Nishiyama, a spokesman for the nuclear

agency said.

By removing the water containing low-level radioactive substances in

the waste disposal facility, TEPCO plans to instead fill the facility

with a massive amount of highly radioactive water currently in the No.

2 reactor's turbine building and underground tunnel-like trench that

is connected to the building, Nishiyama said.

Removal of contaminated water at the turbine buildings of several

reactors is necessary to reduce the risk of workers being exposed to

radioactive substances, which is hindering efforts to restore vital

cooling functions to cool down the reactors and spent nuclear fuel

pools.

Nishiyama also said that it had become necessary to release 1,500 tons

of groundwater, also containing radioactive materials, found near the

Nos. 5 and 6 reactor turbine buildings out of concern that the water

could drown safety-related equipment.

Of the six reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi plant, the Nos. 5 and 6

reactors have achieved ''cold shutdown,'' but Nishiyama said that he

is afraid their cooling functions could be lost if the water level

increases inside the buildings.

As for the impact of the disposal of the 11,500 tons of water, TEPCO

said an adult's annual dose would be around 0.6 millisieverts if the

person ate seaweed and fish caught nearby every day for a year, which

is still about a quarter of the annual dose a person is usually

exposed to from natural sources.

TEPCO is also stepping up efforts to stop highly radioactive water

from leaking into the sea, and the company poured 13 kilograms of

white bath agent into the trench connected to the No. 2 reactor

turbine building to trace the source of highly radioactive water

leaking into the sea.

But colored water did not come out from a seaside pit where a

20-centimeter crack has been found to be leaking radioactive water

into the Pacific Ocean, Nishiyama said.

Highly radioactive water has been filling up the basement of the No. 2

reactor turbine building and the trench connected to it. Meanwhile,

the water in the pit is believed to have come from the No. 2 reactor

core, where fuel rods have partially melted.

TEPCO has revealed that radioactive iodine-131 more than 10,000 times

the legal concentration limit was detected in the water found in the

pit.

''We must prevent radioactive water from spreading in the sea as soon

as possible,'' Chief Cabinet Secretary Edano said earlier in the day,

adding that the longer the contamination continued, the larger the

impact on the sea would be, even if radioactive materials were diluted

in the sea.

In an effort to prevent further spread of seawater contamination,

TEPCO is considering installing ''silt fence'' barriers in the sea

where radioactive water is suspected to be flowing in, Nishiyama said,

although he added that it would likely take several days to complete

the work.

The barriers basically consist of curtains attached with weights,

which TEPCO hopes will contain the contaminated water. One of the

barriers would be placed in front of the No. 2 reactor's water intake,

close to the pit in question, among other places.

BY LOUIS BERGERON

If someone told you there was a way you could save 2.5 million to 3 million lives a year and simultaneously halt global warming, reduce air and water pollution and develop secure, reliable energy sources – nearly all with existing technology and at costs comparable with what we spend on energy today – why wouldn't you do it?

According to a new study coauthored by Stanford researcher Mark Z. Jacobson, we could accomplish all that by converting the world to clean, renewable energy sources and forgoing fossil fuels.

"Based on our findings, there are no technological or economic barriers to converting the entire world to clean, renewable energy sources," said Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering. "It is a question of whether we have the societal and political will."

He and Mark Delucchi, of the University of California-Davis, have written a two-part paper in Energy Policy in which they assess the costs, technology and material requirements of converting the planet, using a plan they developed.

The world they envision would run largely on electricity. Their plan calls for using wind, water and solar energy to generate power, with wind and solar power contributing 90 percent of the needed energy.

Geothermal and hydroelectric sources would each contribute about 4 percent in their plan (70 percent of the hydroelectric is already in place), with the remaining 2 percent from wave and tidal power. 

Vehicles, ships and trains would be powered by electricity and hydrogen fuel cells. Aircraft would run on liquid hydrogen. Homes would be cooled and warmed with electric heaters – no more natural gas or coal – and water would be preheated by the sun.

Commercial processes would be powered by electricity and hydrogen. In all cases, the hydrogen would be produced from electricity. Thus, wind, water and sun would power the world.

The researchers approached the conversion with the goal that by 2030, all new energy generation would come from wind, water and solar, and by 2050, all pre-existing energy production would be converted as well.

L.A. Cicero

"There are no technological or economic barriers to converting the entire world to clean, renewable energy sources," said Mark Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering.

"We wanted to quantify what is necessary in order to replace all the current energy infrastructure – for all purposes – with a really clean and sustainable energy infrastructure within 20 to 40 years," said Jacobson.

One of the benefits of the plan is that it results in a 30 percent reduction in world energy demand since it involves converting combustion processes to electrical or hydrogen fuel cell processes. Electricity is much more efficient than combustion.

That reduction in the amount of power needed, along with the millions of lives saved by the reduction in air pollution from elimination of fossil fuels, would help keep the costs of the conversion down.

"When you actually account for all the costs to society – including medical costs – of the current fuel structure, the costs of our plan are relatively similar to what we have today," Jacobson said.

One of the biggest hurdles with wind and solar energy is that both can be highly variable, which has raised doubts about whether either source is reliable enough to provide "base load" energy, the minimum amount of energy that must be available to customers at any given hour of the day.

Jacobson said that the variability can be overcome.

"The most important thing is to combine renewable energy sources into a bundle," he said. "If you combine them as one commodity and use hydroelectric to fill in gaps, it is a lot easier to match demand."

Wind and solar are complementary, Jacobson said, as wind often peaks at night and sunlight peaks during the day. Using hydroelectric power to fill in the gaps, as it does in our current infrastructure, allows demand to be precisely met by supply in most cases. Other renewable sources such as geothermal and tidal power can also be used to supplement the power from wind and solar sources.

"One of the most promising methods of insuring that supply matches demand is using long-distance transmission to connect widely dispersed sites," said Delucchi. Even if conditions are poor for wind or solar energy generation in one area on a given day, a few hundred miles away the winds could be blowing steadily and the sun shining.

"With a system that is 100 percent wind, water and solar, you can't use normal methods for matching supply and demand.  You have to have what people call a supergrid, with long-distance transmission and really good management," he said.

Another method of meeting demand could entail building a bigger renewable-energy infrastructure to match peak hourly demand and use the off-hours excess electricity to produce hydrogen for the industrial and transportation sectors.

Using pricing to control peak demands, a tool that is used today, would also help.

Jacobson and Delucchi assessed whether their plan might run into problems with the amounts of material needed to build all the turbines, solar collectors and other devices.

They found that even materials such as platinum and the rare earth metals, the most obvious potential supply bottlenecks, are available in sufficient amounts. And recycling could effectively extend the supply. 

"For solar cells there are different materials, but there are so many choices that if one becomes short, you can switch," Jacobson said. "Major materials for wind energy are concrete and steel and there is no shortage of those."

Jacobson and Delucchi calculated the number of wind turbines needed to implement their plan, as well as the number of solar plants, rooftop photovoltaic cells, geothermal, hydroelectric, tidal and wave-energy installations.

They found that to power 100 percent of the world for all purposes from wind, water and solar resources, the footprint needed is about 0.4 percent of the world's land (mostly solar footprint) and the spacing between installations is another 0.6 percent of the world's land (mostly wind-turbine spacing), Jacobson said.

One of the criticisms of wind power is that wind farms require large amounts of land, due to the spacing required between the windmills to prevent interference of turbulence from one turbine on another.

"Most of the land between wind turbines is available for other uses, such as pasture or farming," Jacobson said.  "The actual footprint required by wind turbines to power half the world's energy is less than the area of Manhattan." If half the wind farms were located offshore, a single Manhattan would suffice.

Jacobson said that about 1 percent of the wind turbines required are already in place, and a lesser percentage for solar power.

"This really involves a large scale transformation," he said. "It would require an effort comparable to the Apollo moon project or constructing the interstate highway system."

"But it is possible, without even having to go to new technologies," Jacobson said.  "We really need to just decide collectively that this is the direction we want to head as a society."

Jacobson is the director of Stanford's Atmosphere/Energy Program and a senior fellow at Stanford's Woods Institute for the Environment and the Precourt Institute for Energy.

<http://www3.nhk.or.jp/daily/english/04_10.html>

It has been learned that the Japanese government withheld the release
of computer projections indicating high levels of radioactivity in
areas more than 30 kilometers from the troubled Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear power plant.

The estimates were made on March 16th following explosions at the
plant by an institute commissioned by the government using a computer
system called SPEEDI. The system made its projections on the
assumption that radioactive substances had been released for 24 hours
from midnight on March 14th, based on the available data.

But the government was reluctant to reveal the SPEEDI projections, and
did not release them until March 23rd.
The released data showed that higher levels of radioactive substances
would flow over areas to the northwest and southwest of the plant.

The estimates showed that the radiation would exceed 100 millisieverts
in some areas more than 30 kilometers from the nuclear plant if people
remained outdoors for 24 hours between March 12th and 24th.

That is 100 times higher than the 1 millisievert-per-year long-term
reference level for humans as recommended by the International
Commission on Radiological Protection.

The Nuclear Safety Commission says it did not release the projections
because the location or the amount of radioactive leakage was not
specified at the time.

Professor emeritus Shigenobu Nagataki of Nagasaki University, says the
government should release more data about the dangers of possible
radiation exposure and draw up evacuation plans and other measures
together with residents.

Monday, April 04, 2011 12:38 +0900 (JST)

<http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20110405x1.html>
Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Radioactivity in sea up 7.5 million times
Marine life contamination well beyond Japan feared

By KANAKO TAKAHARA
Staff writer

Radioactive iodine-131 readings taken from seawater near the water
intake of the Fukushima No. 1 nuclear plant's No. 2 reactor reached
7.5 million times the legal limit, Tokyo Electric Power Co. admitted
Tuesday.

The sample that yielded the high reading was taken Saturday, before
Tepco announced Monday it would start releasing radioactive water into
the sea, and experts fear the contamination may spread well beyond
Japan's shores to affect seafood overseas.

The unstoppable radioactive discharge into the Pacific has prompted
experts to sound the alarm, as cesium, which has a much longer
half-life than iodine, is expected to concentrate in the upper food
chain.

According to Tepco, some 300,000 becquerels per sq. centimeter of
radioactive iodine-131 was detected Saturday, while the amount of
cesium-134 was 2 million times the maximum amount permitted and
cesium-137 was 1.3 million times the amount allowable.

The amount of iodine-131 dropped to 79,000 becquerels per sq.
centimeter Sunday but shot up again Monday to 200,000 becquerels, 5
million times the permissible amount.

The level of radioactive iodine in the polluted water inside reactor
2's cracked storage pit had an even higher concentration. A water
sample Saturday had 5.2 million becquerels of iodine per sq.
centimeter, or 130 million times the maximum amount allowable, and
water leaking from the crack had a reading of 5.4 million becquerels,
Tepco said.

"It is a considerably high amount," said Hidehiko Nishiyama, spokesman
for the Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency.

Masayoshi Yamamoto, a professor of radiology at Kanazawa University,
said the high level of cesium is the more worrisome find.

"By the time radioactive iodine is taken in by plankton, which is
eaten by smaller fish and then by bigger fish, it will be diluted by
the sea and the amount will decrease because of its eight-day
half-life," Yamamoto said. "But cesium is a bigger problem."

The half-life of cesium-137 is 30 years, while that for cesium-134 is
two years. The longer half-life means it will probably concentrate in
the upper food chain.

Yamamoto said such radioactive materials are likely to be detected in
fish and other marine products in Japan and other nations in the short
and long run, posing a serious threat to the seafood industry in other
nations as well.

"All of Japan's sea products will probably be labeled unsafe and other
nations will blame Japan if radiation is detected in their marine
products," Yamamoto said.

Tepco on Monday began the release into the sea of 11,500 tons of
low-level radioactive water to make room to store high-level
radiation-polluted water in the No. 2 turbine building. The discharge
continued Tuesday.

"It is important to transfer the water in the No. 2 turbine building
and store it in a place where there is no leak," Nishiyama of the NISA
said. "We want to keep the contamination of the sea to a minimum."

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano apologized for the release of
radioactive water into the sea but said it was unavoidable to prevent
the spread of higher-level radiation.

Fisheries minister Michihiko Kano said the ministry plans to increase
its inspections of fish and other marine products for radiation.

On Monday, 4,080 becquerels per kilogram of radioactive iodine was
detected in lance fish caught off Ibaraki Prefecture. Fishermen
voluntarily suspended its shipment. The health ministry plans to
compile radiation criteria for banning marine products.

Three days after Tepco discovered the crack in the reactor 2 storage
pit it still hadn't found the source of the high radiation leak
seeping into the Pacific.

Tepco initially believed the leak was somewhere in the cable trench
that connects the No. 2 turbine building and the pit. But after using
milky white bath salt to trace the flow, which appeared to prove that
was not the case, the utility began to think it may be seeping through
a layer of small stones below the cable trench.

Shift from the present nuclear energy policy: JCP

http://www.japan-press.co.jp/modules/news/index.php?id=1686

With the hazards associated with nuclear power plants, the Japanese Communist Party is urging the government to undertake a thorough inspection of all 54 nuclear power reactors operating throughout Japan and to shift from the present nuclear energy administration policy to a policy that places priority on safety.

The JCP demands that new safety standards be established based on lessons from the Great East Japan Disaster and on the relevant international requirements, and that the government inspect all the reactors to ensure that they meet the new standards.

In addition, the JCP proposes that the government cancel its plan to add an additional 14 reactors; that the Hamaoka Nuclear Power Station in Shizuoka’s Omaezaki City be shut down on the grounds that it is located right at the focal zone of a possible Tokai earthquake; that aging reactors be retired; that operations of the fast breeder reactor Monju be shut down; and that the government disallow the nuclear fuel-cycle method of using plutonium such as plutonium-thermal power generation.

It is imperative for the government to separate the nuclear regulatory organization from the nuclear promoting Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, the JCP states.

The party also argues for the necessity of a change in energy policy from reliance on nuclear power to a full-fledged use of renewable energy.