Peace – nuclear disarmament – theme for December 2013
Peace on Earth to people of good will
But what is good will? How is it shown? The answer is in respect for one another. 
Respect means listening to the other’s point of view, and clearly saying your own point of view. It means discussion, argument – communication.
It can be difficult and time consuming. It often seems easier to just hit someone, show them who’s boss, as we have seen in countless Hollywood films – where might is right.
Communication is the alternative to war – and people use communication to get along, and resolve differences – at home, in the community, the region – and nationally and internationally.
The world is pretty much at the crossroads now. Some Israeli and USA politicians threaten military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Iran threatens retaliation. North Korea continues to be a nuclear weapons worry and China, India, USA, Russia, UK ramp up their nuclear weapons. Threats, decisions for violent action – it all seems simpler quicker, easier – easier than communication, negotiation, diplomacy.
The politics of nuclear accidents
Fukushima cancer spike and nuclear industry denial Independent Australia, Graham Bates 5 December 2013, “………It is beyond belief that politics and political correctness would have any place in masking or withholding help to humans after nuclear accidents and meltdowns. Yet, reports by Rosalie Bertell and others prove this beyond reasonable doubt.
Chernobyl – 1989
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (page 42 of the report) was invited to review the impacts of the Chernobyl disaster.
As Dr Bartell writes, they found there were no health problems able to be linked from Chernobyl:
‘In 1991 the IAEA reported that no health problems in the victims of Chernobyl could be linked to radiation! This 1991 report on health was chaired by Professor Fred Mettler, Jr., Director of the Medical Expert Group of the IAEA International Chernobyl Project. Dr. Mettler, Jr., MD, was Chair of the Department of Radiology, at the University of New Mexico, School of Medicine, Albuquerque, NM, USA.’
Chernobyl — 1990
Dr Baverstock reports to the British journal Nature about the WHO validating research done in Belarus and Ukraine documenting a 30 fold increase in thyroid cancer in radiation victims, completely discrediting the IAEA report of Dr Fred Mettler Jr.
Despite this, Dr Mettler Jr secured a position with the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). He was also chosen as the U.S. representative on the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation(UNSCEAR). Does this explain the strange silence and cover-up of the negligence acts where nothing was done to assist those exposed to the Chernobyl fallout. It also illustrates that only those “experts” who comply with the official line will be given rewards.
This chicanery continues to this day.
Bertell further explains that the ICRP has since broken its tie to the International Society of Radiology, and is now considered a self-appointed and self-perpetuating non-governmental organization of physicists, medical regulators of nuclear nations, radiologists and others who use radiation in their work. A person becomes a “member” of the ICRP by being proposed by a present member and accepted by the executive committee. No professional society, or even the WHO, can put a person on the ICRP main Commission.
‘When faced with recommending radiation protection standards, the newly formed IAEA turned to the ICRP rather than WHO for advice. No one seems to have questioned the selection of fatal cancer and serious genetic disease in live born offspring as inappropriately limited concerns for a major radiological disaster.
‘Imagine only being concerned about the deaths after the Seveso dioxin crisis, the Bhopal Union Carbide disaster, the Asian tsunami or the Katrina hurricane! This restriction was clearly inappropriate for thyroid cancer in the Chernobyl fallout area. According to the International Commission on Radiological Protection, only about 5% of thyroid cancers are fatal.’
This type of nuclear politics continues and thrives to this day.
Statements about radiation risks from these sources
Fukushima – 2012
There are claims that Fukushima radiation leaks are much less than those of Chernobyl.
For instance, an article by Eric Niiler on the website Live Science, states:
‘Experts in the U.S. say the amount of radiation that spewed from the crippled reactors was about 10 percent of what was released at the Chernobyl disaster in 1986. Still, they caution that the long-term health effects on both residents and workers are still mostly uncertain.’
Niiler also includes comments from Associated Press [AP], who also report that:
‘In Fukushima and nearby areas, outside the 20-kilometer evacuation zone, the annual exposure is 20 millisieverts in some places and as high as 50 in others, according to AP. Fifty millisieverts (or 5 REMs) is equivalent to the yearly occupational exposure limit for nuclear workers.
‘“It’s a low dose,” said Lewis Pepper, an occupational health physician at the Queens College of New York.”’
Fukushima – 2013
Reports about the low levels of radiation ejected via air or seawater appear to be supported by the UN World Health Organization (WHO).
According to the website, World Nuclear News [IA emphasis]:
‘In January, the World Health Organization (WHO) said that there is only a low risk to Japan’s population due to radioactivity released by the Fukushima accident. For the general population in wider Fukushima prefecture, across Japan and beyond, “the predicted risks are low and no observable increases in cancer rates above baseline rates are anticipated,” WHO said.’
This research, headed by Professor Ryugo Hayano of the University of Tokyo, studied the results of whole body scans carried out at Hirata Central Hospital in Fukushima prefecture between October 2011 and November 2012.
They further state that their research discovered:
‘Some 99% of residents of Fukushima prefecture and neighbouring Ibaraki have barely detectable levels of internal exposure to caesium-137, a group of Japanese researchers has found.
Of the remaining 1%, all showed levels well below the government-set limit.’
Conclusion
Research provided by nuclear engineer Arnie Gundersen, Prof Kaku, Prof Busby [part 1] and [part 2], Dr Caldicott and others completely refute these findings.
We now know that Soviet & International Officialdom minimised the 1986 Chernobyl catastrophe.
‘In a letter published in a British science journal, Dr. Vasily S. Kazakov of the Belarus Ministry of Health in Minsk and his colleagues say that the thyroid cancer rates in the region’s most heavily irradiated began to soar in 1990.
‘In Gomel, the most contaminated region studied, there used to be just one or two cases of thyroid children a year. But Kazakov and his colleagues found that there were 38 cases in 1991. In six regions of Belarus and the city of Minsk, the investigators found 131 cases of thyroid cancer in young children, some of whom were still in the womb when the Chernobyl accident occurred.’
Yet, despite such conclusive evidence, the Japanese government and radiation lobbyists continue with this Chernobyl-style ‘cover-up agenda’ at Fukushima to this day.
The Japanese and International Officialdom focus is to promote a ‘business-as-usual’ approach, as evidenced by them securing the 2020 Olympic Games for Tokyo.
TEPCO plans to decommission of the six Fukushima NPP reactors remove the tonnes of damaged spent fuel rods from the four leaking repositories, a hugely dangerous task that Arnie Gundersen says is beyond their expertise. We conclude this report by examining these plans and the dangers they pose to the Japanese people and, indeed, the world. http://www.independentaustralia.net/life/life-display/fukushima-cancer-spike-and-nuclear-industry-denial,5960
One million litre nuclear accident in Kakadu
A tank containing toxic radioactive acid has burst at Rio Tinto’s Ranger uranium mine within the bounds Kakadu National Park. Up to one million litres of radioactive acid slurry has escaped the containment area of the holding tanks, and has forced an immediate halt to all processing. It is understood the area will be inoperable for over a month.
The Gundjeihmi Aboriginal Corporation (GAC), which represents the Mirarr Traditional Owners of the area, is calling for a comprehensive audit of the entire Ranger operation including the aging plant facilities. This is a major nuclear accident, and comes within a month of two other high risk operational incidents, leaving the Mirarr Traditional Owners in the region concerned for the safety of the Park and its residents and visitors.
GAC’s Chief Executive Officer Justin O’Brien said: “People living just a few kilometres downstream from the mine don’t feel safe. How can we trust the assurances of a company which has repeatedly failed to safely manage this highly toxic material? What may happen next?”
The news has placed further strain on the relationship between Rio Tinto and Mirarr traditional
Owners at a time when Rio Tinto is seeking approval for its proposed Ranger 3 Deeps underground uranium mine.
“Litre by litre, incident by incident, Rio Tinto’s assurances are proving less and less reliable and yet the company is still hopeful the Mirarr will trust them to build a new mine on this site.
“This is nothing but a hillbilly operation, run by a hillbilly miner with hillbilly regulators. Based on the woefully inadequate government response to the previous incident, we have no confidence that this will be taken seriously enough.
“This company, and Australian and Northern Territory governments are clearly out of their depth here and must seek international assistance on the safest way to clean up this mine and protect the people and environment of Kakadu.” Mr O’Brien concluded.
99 year leases for Australian Aboriginals – a cosy arrangement to suit mining companies?
as traditional owners in the NT enjoy free prior informed consent rights, it is imperative they understand what might be at stake before finalising any long-term leases.
It is far from clear if this cosy arrangement administered from Canberra will ensure best outcomes for traditional owners.
Abbott government peddles De Soto on Arnhem Land rights CRIKEY, PROFESSOR JON ALTMAN | DEC 04, 2013 Economist Hernando de Soto’s ideas on capitalism and poverty don’t fit the Australian Aboriginal experience. So why is the Abbott government trying to apply them, asks ANU professor Jon Altman?
The Coalition’s policy for indigenous affairs states indigenous people in remote areas have no property rights. Which is plain wrong; one-third of the Australian continent is under some form of statutory land rights or exclusive and non-exclusive native title determination following successful land claims and native title determinations over the past 35 years. Continue reading
India ramps up its nuclear weapons production capability
India ‘expands nuclear weapons site’ http://www.skynews.com.au/world/article.aspx?id=931171 December 5, 2013
India has expanded a secretive site that could be used to enrich more uranium for nuclear weapons, a US think tank says, citing satellite imagery.
The Institute for Science and International Security, a private group opposed to nuclear proliferation, said on Wednesday that India appeared to be finishing a second gas centrifuge facility at its Rare Materials Plant near the southern city of Mysore.
‘This new facility could significantly increase India’s ability to produce highly enriched uranium for military purposes, including more powerful nuclear weapons,’ the institute said in a report that analysed an image taken in April.
The institute said that India started building a second centrifuge plant near Mysore in 2010, but it was unclear whether it was a replacement for the first facility at the site or a supplement.
If it is a new facility, ‘India could have more than doubled its enrichment capacity, if the original building continues to function as an enrichment plant,’ it said.
India closely guards its nuclear sites and says little about them publicly. In the past, India has complained about footage of sensitive infrastructure taken by commercial satellite services such as Google Earth.
Indian officials have reportedly said that highly enriched uranium from Mysore would fuel its new nuclear-powered submarines. India’s nuclear weapons program has traditionally been based on plutonium, not uranium.
Large scale solar energy company to begin operations in Australia
SolarReserve Sets Up Shop In Australia, Renewable Energy News, 6 Dec 13 SolarReserve has announced the company’s international expansion into Australia through the opening of an office in Perth. The company says its Australian operations will focus on large-scale concentrating solar power (CSP) and photovoltaic (PV) projects, particularly in the off-grid mining sector.
“In Australia, the best solar resources are commonly found in remote areas where mines operate, presenting the off-grid mining sector with a substantial opportunity to offset the high price of electricity generation in these remote locations with a solar energy alternative,” says SolarReserve’s CEO Kevin Smith.
There are more than 1,000 operating mines in Western Australia – and many of those are powered by high-priced and polluting diesel fuel.
“In the face of impending policy decisions by the Australian government related to renewable energy and carbon emissions, solar energy for the mining sector is a win-win: good for business and good for the environment.”
The company was one of the participants in a meeting earlier this year in the gold mining city of Kalgoorlie in Western Australia to plan the Goldfields’ renewable energy future……http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=4062
Mainstream media about to really wake up to Fukushima radiation health disaster
Fukushima cancer spike and nuclear industry denial Independent Australia, Graham Bates 5 December 2013, There’s been a spike of thyroid cancer cases in the Fukushima, like there was in Chernobyl after its nuclear disaster. And like Chernobyl, writes Capt. Graham Bates, the nuclear industry is trying to deny the events are related……..
The mainstream media has been relatively quiescent about the continuing Fukushima disaster. This is about to change.
Massive amounts of toxic radionuclides and water continue leaking from the reactors and the Spent Fuel Storage Pools (SFSP) into the Pacific Ocean. Scientific studies prove that radiation-induced insect mutations, high radiation levels in fish and alarmingly, rates of human cancers are increasing.
In the aftermath of the Fukushima NPP explosions, the extent of the massive damage is almost beyond belief………
Unit 3 was using a blend of mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel with approximately 6% plutonium, 239Pu. The reactor core contents (radionuclides) create 3 different types of radiation. This radiation is dangerous to all living organisms and the only protection from alpha, beta and gamma radiation is achieved as follows: (diagram)
The most dangerous radionuclides are tritium, caesium, iodine and strontium, because they are absorbed by our bodies.
The absorption of radionuclides is dangerous to us all.
They are immensely dangerous to children due to their rapid growth rates. This significantly increases trace-element uptake. This is where chemistry + physics + biology all interact to absorb reactor meltdown products.
Radionuclides ⇒ dispersed ⇒ air, water and soils ⇒ plants, birds, fish and animals ⇒ food chain ⇒ human absorption ⇒ contamination within organs and tissues ⇒ replacement of trace elements in our anatomy ⇒ effects on physiology ⇒ mutations, cancer and death.
- Tritium (radioactive H-3) — water contaminant: Half-life = 12 years
- Caesium-137 — like potassium, is absorbed by muscles: Half-life = 30 years
- Iodine-131 — is absorbed by the thyroid: Half-life = 8 days
- Strontium-90 — like calcium, absorbed by bones/teeth: Half-life = 29 years
(To calculate the time for a return to safe radiation levels, multiply the half-life by a factor of 10.)
Today at Fukushima, the nuclear fission reaction has escaped containment control. The fission process continues outside the reactors, underground and is producing all of these radioactive products (and more) with unstoppable air and sea plume releases.
The problem with radiation, says the EPA, is that it can kill cells in all living things and cause cancer:
‘The [U.S.] Environmental Protection Agency says, “Based on current scientific evidence, any exposure to radiation can be harmful or can increase the risk of cancer…. Radiation is a carcinogen. It may also cause other adverse health effects, including genetic defects in the children of exposed parents or mental retardation in the children of mothers exposed during pregnancy.’
These findings are backed up by other agencies:
‘The [US] National Academy of Sciences, in its seventh book-length report The Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation, concludes likewise. Committee member Herbert Abrams of Harvard said, “There appears to be no threshold below which exposure can be viewed as harmless.’
‘The [US] Department of Energy, which makes H-bombs and tons of radioactive waste, says about low level radiation, “… the major effect is a very slight increase in cancer risk.’
These contradictions are of significant concern; how can we make a viable plan to deal with our planet’s worst nuclear disaster, if ‘experts’ are at such odds with each other?
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 