Is this going to be Fukushima2?
By John Ward: What do you do if you’re a government in an earthquake zone that had
to take over an incompetent nuclear generating company…because it had
allowed a jerry-built plant to go into service, and as a result,
irradiated half of Japan….thus becoming insolvent?
Answer: give it a chance to recover by irradiating the other half!
Yes friends, Tepco has form when it comes to less than inspired
siting of its nuclear electricity generating plants. On 16th July 2007, a
6.8 Richter scale quake took place in Chuetsu-Oki, in Japan’s Niigata
region. Ten people died, over 1300 were injured, 10,000 buildings were
seriously damaged, 908 buildings were destroyed, and the total damage
came to $US5bn.
In this area Tepco had built a nuclear power plant which just happens
to be the biggest one in the world. They built it at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa
– slap bang in the middle of the earthquake zone – but they skimped a
little here and there on the earthquake-proofing. And as a result of
this, one of the transformers in the plant caught fire.
On that occasion, Tepco were lucky: the fire didn’t spread. But they
had to shut down the entire plant. And there it has stayed, with a few
jagged cracks, until now. Because Tepco desperately needs to repair its
finances (which obviously come before repairing leaks) it wants to
reopen the plant…..and the Abenauts are hot to trot, because they want
this mega-white elephant called Tepco – of which they own a crippling
40% – out of their hair.
You see, when elephants are invisible in the room, it’s hunky-dory.
But then they turn white and jump into a fellow’s hair. It’s the way of
the world when it comes to private sector ethics.
The Abe Government is, whether it likes it or not, in bed with a
company that is rapidly emerging as the frontrunner in a race to be the
most incompetent nuclear generator on the planet. But in washing that
white elephant right oudda their hair, the mega QEers don’t seem to GAF
about just what a hare-brained scheme this is.
I mean, this would be like Jeremy Hunt being caught with his hands in
the Newscorp till, and then being promoted to Heath Secretary. No hang
on, maybe that’s a bad example. Or maybe not. Discuss.
Meanwhile back at Base Camp Fukushima, Tepco has confirmed that the
Cesium-134/137 density sample taken in a drain last Monday was ten times
higher last Tuesday. So it has joined the black bream irradiated 124
times above the WHO agreed level of food safety as smoking gun of the
year. There’s a gag in there about smoking fish, but it doesn’t feel
entirely appropriate.
But get this, it really takes the biscuit: Tepco confirmed that it was unable to take a sample upstream of the drain.
This was doubtless due to the scientific team balking at the idea of
their cocks lighting up in the dark that very same evening.
And here’s another belter: Tepco hasn’t submitted contaminated water
data to the Japanese authorities for over a month. They’re supposed to
do so every day.
Maybe this is why:
The contamination level on the ocean side of reactor2 shows that
that Strontium-90 density is still increasing. As in, on Boxing Day it
was 2,100,000,000 Bq/m3, whereas three days ago it was 2,400,000,000
Bq/m3…a 14% increase in 18 days.
There are 6,234.73 miles between me and Fukushima. Every night, I go
selfishly to bed and thank my lucky stars for this statistic…even though
I know, as an intellectual Buddhist, that separation is an illusion.
…………………….
There are in turn 3,728 miles between The Slog and Pennsylvania. The
Associated Press having requested data on drilling-related complaints in
Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and Texas, it found major differences
in how the states report such problems. Texas provided the most detail,
while the other states provided only general outlines.
However, what’s clear is that AP found Pennsylvania had received 398
complaints in 2013 alleging that oil or natural gas drilling polluted or
otherwise affected private water wells, compared with 499 in 2012. The
Pennsylvania complaints can include allegations of short-term diminished
water flow, as well as pollution from stray gas or other substances.
More than 100 cases of pollution have been confirmed over the past five
years.
Heather McMicken, an eastern Pennsylvania homeowner, complained about
water-well contamination that state officials eventually confirmed. The
McMickens eventually reached a $1.6 million settlement with a drilling
company….and they weren’t the only ones. Let’s face it, if it really
does not think there’s a problem, corporate America does not cough up
$1.6 million of the shareholders’ infinitely precious money willy-nilly.
Starting in 2011, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Protection aggressively fought efforts by AP and other news
organizations to obtain information about complaints related to
drilling. The department has argued in court filings that it does not
count how many contamination “determination letters” it issues or track
where they are kept in its files. If their job is called Environmental Protection, then whyTF don’t they do that?
Texas – which does – records spreadsheets amounting to 2,000
contamination complaints….over ten times higher than the other more
‘generalist’ States.
But lest people think I’m bending the facts here, it’s important to
point out how experts and regulators agree that investigating complaints
of water-well contamination is particularly difficult. Some regions,
for example, have natural methane gas pollution or other problems
unrelated to fracking. A 2011 Penn State study found that about 40% of
water wells tested even prior to gas drilling failed at least one federal drinking water standard.
But other experts say people who are trying to understand the
benefits and harms from the drilling boom need comprehensive details
about complaints, even if some cases are from natural causes.
For me, all this confirms the two allied views on fracking I’ve
formed: first, in a whopping great continent called North America, the
threat of compromising the drinking water supply is very slight. In
Britain, of course – a much smaller country – any threat of compromise
would be exponentially greater. And second, my main beef with fracking
is the sheer volume of water it needs to consume in order to be
effective. In the US, such volumes are a gnat’s bite on the Nation’s
bum: in little ol’ Merrie Englande, it is a major and obvious hazard.
None of this, I should add, changes my view that if we’d taken all
the oil-business money out of politics on either side of the Pond thirty
years ago, none of us would be facing the fossil fuels energy crisis we
are.
Looking back at this piece as a whole, one is left with a sense – and
it is nothing to do with paranoia – that when it comes to the nuclear
and oil sectors of power generation for one means or another, we really
need people in charge who have both a commercial perspective and
a sense of social responsibility. For all the looney-tune exaggerations
of wider ramifications, the Fukushima experience teaches us that we
shouldn’t give onion-brains long-life radioactive isotopes to kick
around as footballs.
Equally, I once asked a corporate nuclear bloke (admittedly, thirty
or more years ago) why, if nuclear power is so safe, all cars aren’t
powered with it. “Ah, um, well…..” he began. An hour later, I was less
than convinced.
No comments:
Post a Comment