The nuclear fake - Desert Energy Project

                                                  The nuclear power plant fake
                                                                The  economic and environment desaster

Facts which should be analysed when considering nuclear energy: Solar energy, a wonderful energy source of the Arabian deserts
lacks all the safety issues of nuclear power plants

                                     Experts find no safe disposal of nuclear waste
The Obama administration and the European Commission find no solution for the disposal of nuclear power plants waste.

German final repository for nuclear waste has failed [1]
In Germany the former salt mine “Asse II” was used to store nuclear waste experiences ingress of water. Radioactive brine leaks and the whole mine is in danger of collapsing, contaminating the groundwater. Asse II was a research site to study safety project being operated since 1965 by Helmholtz Centre Munich. The Helmholz Centre Munich was found to be unable to look after the safety of the site, therefore the German government took over but has no plan how to handle the site. [2]

Radioactive brine leaking from section 12 of the German nuclear waste disposal site Asse II is contaminated with radioactive caesium , cobalt 60, strontium 90 and Tritium. Nuclear waste from nuclear power plants were sealed in metal barrels and stored in this section. The barrels probably corroded and are leaking. Access to this section for inspection or rehabilitation is impossible
because of high radioactivity and eminent danger of physical collapse of the whole section.

HelmholtzZentrum Munich(HMGU), which was holding the nuclear disposal site Asse 2, drilled a hole to permit the leaking radioactive brine to flow from the level situated at 750 metre depth down to a level situated in 975 metres, hoping to get rid of it.

Leakage from section 12 had been known by HMGU since 1988, which dumped the leaking brine in another section filled with debris situated at 700 metres.
The German government took over “Asse II “ in 2008 but sees no solution for the increasing problems of a nuclear contamination of the ground water of the region.

"Asse II" is a painful lesson for Germany. It proves that there are no safe disposal sites for nuclear waste. Clean energy from wind turbines and solar energy has its price, but pays off with safety. See Picture
Nuclear energy does not include costs of disposal in its price, because there is no way to get rid of it, so no costs are billed to the consumer.

U.S. Government has no plans what to do with nuclear waste [3]
The Obama Administration discarded a useless 30 years project to implement a policy for nuclear waste planing a final disposal in the Yucca Montain (Nevada) as a geological repository. Ewing and von Hippel 2009 cite improper geology, management, changes in the EPA standards, unreliable funding and no involvment of the related communities. Now nuclear fuel, high-level nuclear waste and spent fuel storage will have to be stored in dry cask storage systems on site at the nuclear power plants all over the country.

To develop decentralised repositories Ewing and von Hippel 2009 propose that local communities and states should have the final approval on the siting of these facilities, so nuclear wastemay be stored at the site of origin. In this way not transport costs to central storage sites are created.

Ewing and von Hippel point to the European solution where a decentralised storage is practised in different rock formations. This is an incorrect assumption of the authors. It is not true that there is a final solution for the European nuclear waste disposal. Germany, for instance tried to built a repositories in salt caverns which now proved to be unsafe and has now be cleaned up on cost of the German taxpayers.

Dry cask storage allows spent fuelto be surrounded by inert gas inside a steel cylinders Each cylinder is surrounded by additional steel, concrete, or other material to provide radiation shielding to workers and members of the public. See Picture [4]

Other nuclear waste is deposited at the environment leaving nuclear waste to the coming generations of thousands of years. See picture [5]

[1] Schon 1988 wurde kontaminierte Lauge abgepumpt. BfS stuetzt bei Recherchen in der Asse auf neue Erkenntnisse. Klima Magazin 11.02.2009
http://www.klimamagazin.de/news/ansicht/archive/2009/02/11/article/schon1988wurdekontaminiertelaugeabgepumpt587.Html

[2] The Federal Office for Radiation Protection: Safety of repository mine Asse II
http://www.bfs.de/en/endlager/uebers_endproj/asse_uebers/sicherheit.html

[3] Ewing, Rodney C.; von Hippel, Frank N.: Nuclear Waste Management in the United States—Starting Over. Science 10 July 2009: 151-152.
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/325/5937/151

[4] NRC: Typical Dry Cask Storage System
http://www.nrc.gov/waste/spent-fuel-storage/diagram-typical-dry-cask-system.html

[5] United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. NRC. Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel.
http://www.nrc.gov/waste.html

13.08.2010: Public mistrust rises regarding the disposal of nuclear waste [1]
A sudden increase of nuclear power plants spreads public mistrust on how nuclear waste is handled. This issue becomes more stringent as more than 50 reactors are being built around the world and another 100 are planed. Uncertainties on plant safety, pressure on costs and liabilities, and possible production of nuclear weapons gave rise to the controversy regarding the Yucca Mountain which was planned to become the nation's main nuclear waste repository. Funding was recently withdrawn and its licensing application is uncertain.

Eugene A. Rosa and colleagues 2010 call for a transparency and cooperation between technical experts and the public when it comes to risks from 60,000 tons of high-level waste without a US waste-disposal program.

Regional approach as alternative to Yucca Mountain repository? [2]
Ewing and von Hippel 2009 cite geology, management problems, changing EPA standards uncertain funding and failure to involve local communities in decisions that leaded to doubts on the suitability of Yucca Mountain as a final repository for the whole United States.

The authors suggest to develop a regional approach, with repositories located closer to reactors, avoiding long transport ways to a central location, such as it is being handled in Europe. This, however, is no good example because no repository is functioning in Europe.[3]

[1] Eugene A. Rosa, Seth P. Tuler, Baruch Fischhoff, Thomas Webler, Sharon M. Friedman, Richard E. Sclove, Kristin Shrader-Frechette, Mary R. English, Roger E. Kasperson, Robert L. Goble, Thomas M. Leschine, William Freudenburg, Caron Chess, Charles Perrow, Kai Erikson, and James F. Short: Nuclear Waste: Knowledge Waste? Science, 2010; 329 (5993): 762-763 DOI: 10.1126/science.1193205
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/329/5993/762

[2] Rodney C. Ewing and Frank N. von Hippel. Science 10 July 2009: Vol. 325. no. 5937, 151-152.
Science 10 July 2009. Doi: 10.1126/science.1174594
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/325/5937/151

[3] Experts find no safe disposal of nuclear waste.
http://www.desertenergyproject.net/Nuclear_fake.html

                                        Australian nuclear waste dump at Muckaty Station
Australia hosts one of the world's first nuclear research reactors. It was place of British nuclear weapons tests at Maralinga, and is an important supplier of uranium to the world.

Disposal of nuclear waste is becoming crucial
Minister Martin Ferguson announced in February 2010 his plans to dump nuclear waste at Muckaty Station, 120km north of Tennant Creek, in the Northern Territory. Australian nuclear waste is currently stored at numerous sites around the country. Some Australian radioactive waste is also stored in Scotland and France. Federal Resources Minister Martin Ferguson said that the storage facility needed to be established before Australian waste was brought back from Scotland and France in 2014 and 2015. [1]

Australia has total holdings of around 4 300 cubic metres of radioactive waste which is not as much compared to other countries, such as Canada with a total holdings of more than 1.8 million cubic metres of low level waste alone. [2]

Will Muckaty Station become a global repository of nuclear waste?
Senator Bob Brown says it is only a matter of time before Australia's first nuclear waste dump stores high level waste from overseas. Senator Brown calls for nuclear waste to be stored where it is produced, such as Lucas Heights in Sydney. He reasons that nuclear waste must be stored at its origin and not dumped somewhere. [3]

The former ALP prime minister Bob Hawke referred to the moral, financial and environmental responsibility of Australia to assess a nuclear waste industry. Gareth Evans, says Australia should back all waste derived from the uranium it sells. [4]

According to The Environmenter Centre Northern Territory there is a very real chance that in the future it will be expanded to take high level radioactive waste from nuclear reactors in Europe, Asia and North America, including reprocessed spent fuel rods which are amongst the most highly dangerous radioactive materials produced by the nuclear industry anywhere in the world. This waste remains dangerous to people, wildlife and the environment for thousands of years. There is a growing global crisis in high level waste disposal and many overseas companies and governments are looking to Australia to dump their waste. [5]

World Nuclear Association director-general John Ritch said that Australians had nothing to fear from accepting radioactive waste. Thousands of years of radiation sounds like a long time, but there are many places on earth that have been geologically stable for many millions of years, he argued.
[3]

[1] Nuclear waste dump is a duty: Ferguson. Brisbane Times. 03.03.2010.
http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/breaking-news-national/nuclear-waste-dump-is-a-duty-ferguson-20100303-pj8c.html

[2] Why we oppose the proposed Commonwealth radioactive waste dump in the Northern Territory. The Environmenter Centre Northern Territory. 27. April 2006.
http://www.ecnt.org/html/cur_other_toxics_nukedump.html

[3] Store nuclear waste in Australia: Gareth Evans. The Australian 06.08.2010.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/store-nuclear-waste-in-australia-gareth-evans/story-e6frg6nf-1225783120360

[4] Store nuclear waste at source, not in NT: Brown. ABC News 04.08.2010.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/04/2972925.htm

[5] Parliament of Australia Parliamentary Library: Radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel management in Australia. 01.01.2006
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/online/radioactivewaste.htm

The Mkuju River Uranium Project of Mantra Resources [1]
Drill campaigns have delivered an inferred resource of 35.9 million pounds of U3O8 at 409 ppm.
Uranium has three natural occurring isotopes of which each are emitting gamma, beta and alpha rays. Canada is the leading country in the world for production of Uranium. In Africa the leading states in the production of Uranium includes: Namibia, South Africa and Niger. Tanzania is going to join the train soon due to its high deposit of this metal in many places.

Mkuju Uranium Project: is located within the national park. Villagers were once forced to quit the place so as it can be used for national- park purposes. Now the area was opened for Uranium exploration.

UNESCO prohibits carrying out any activity which could cause harmful effects to the living organisms located in the Heritage site. This project is estimated to contain 82.3 tones of Uranium Deposit in an area of 3225 Kilometres.

Permission to drill for Uranium in Selous Game Reserve [2]
About 80% of the project is located inside the Selous game reserve. The Mantra (MRU) has been granted permission by the relevant government authority to undertake uranium drilling all year round. The current President of Tanzania , Jakaya Kikwete understands and supports the mining industry, having served as the Minister for Energy and Minerals under a previous government.
Yellow Cake production will use the water of the Mkuju River. See production flow sheet at pg 6 [2].

Selous Game Reserve [3]
Selous became a hunting reserve in 1905 and was designated a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1982 due to the diversity of its wildlife and undisturbed nature.
The most significant threats are related to exploration and extraction of minerals, oil and gas, and large infrastructure plans; environmental impact assessments need to be conducted for all development activities in the vicinity of the property that are likely to have an impact of the property's Outstanding Universal Value.

The uranium mine will embrace adjacent wetland Bahi which is used for farming. Each ton of uranium leaves 99 tons of radioactive sludge which have to be stored indefinitely in open trough. Mining and ore processing will contaminate soil and water of the Mkuju river. Wide area of the Selous Game Reserve will be contaminated these spills.[4]

[1] Uranium exploration: Do Tanzanians know the dangers it poses to them? 2This Day, The Voice of Trnsparency,3.12.2010
http://www.ippmedia.com/frontend/functions/print_article.php?l=24346

[2] Sleeping giant. Mantra Spec Buy. Research Argonaut 19.02.2009
http://mantraresources.com.au/upload/documents/releases/research_news/20090309_Argonaut_090219MRUSleepinggiant.pdf

[3] Selous Game Reserve. UNESCO World Heritage Convention
http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/199

[4] Uranmine bedroht Weltnaturerbe. Rettet den Regenwald. 20.05.2011.
http://www.regenwald.org/mailalert/709/uranmine-bedroht-weltkulturerbe#

Siemens quits Joint Venture with AREVA [1]
Siemens was engaged with the French government owned AREVA to build the Finnish 1,6 GW nuclear power plant of Olkiluoto. Siemens investment in the project is, according to “Les Echos”, 2 Billion Euro. Siemens holding 34% of AREVA wants to quit the Joint Venture , alleging heavy money losses because of delay of the French partner at the Olkiluoto site. Siemens who was in charge of the conventional part like turbines and electricity cannot do its job because of the troubles of the French counterpart who should build the nuclear part.
Alstom, a French engineering group that makes power systems and high-speed trains could buy the share of Siemens.

Experience at Olkiluoto, Finland [2]
The construction of the nuclear power plant at Olkiluoto by the Areva-Siemens consortium experienced serious problems. The construction is three years behind, causing severe losses resulting from a range of failures.

Professor Steve Thomas, in a study on business prospects and risks in nuclear energy, says that Olkiluoto was supposed to be the showcase for the European Pressurised Water Reactor (EPR) technology and for it to have gone so badly wrong is severe blow to its reputation. EPR is the only reactor technology commercially offered by Areva and the outcomes of Olkiluoto were severely over time and budget.


France monopole of Uranium of Niger investing 1,2 Billion EUR [3]
AREVA will take over the mining of Imourare, the largest uranium deposit of Africa, and the second largest in the world. The company acquired rights for over 35 years. It invested more than 1.2 billion Euro. Niger will become the second world uranium producer, after the number one, which is the Canadian company CAMECO.

Brazil now able to enrich nuclear fuel [4]
AREVA signed a memorandum to extend Brazil's fleet of nuclear plants and to provide the expertise required to fabricate the nuclear fuel needed for the new reactors. ] Brazil has two nuclear power plants, Angra I (626 MW) and Angra II (1275 MW, built by AREVA). They are located in Angra dos Reis, in Rio de Janeiro state. This deal has been criticised for giving Brazil the tools to fabricate nuclear weapons.


The 2008 CAMECO Uranium spill in Ontario [5]
A report of a spill of uranium from a site of Cameco, dated March 10, 2008, says eight contaminants have leaked into the soil beneath the company’s uranium hexafluoride plant - uranium, arsenic, fluoride, silver, cobalt, copper, nickel and antimony.

Contaminants include an estimated 1,000 to 1,700 kilograms of uranium (U235 and U238), Only about 10 to 17 percent of this has been removed. Also 20,000 to 26,000 kilograms of fluoride (from a process that uses highly toxic hydrofluoric acid). Only 2 to 7 percent of this has been removed.

Concentrations of uranium in groundwater have been measured up to 1,200 times higher than Ontario guidelines. Thousands more kilograms of uranium, fluoride and arsenic have leaked out beyond the and reached Lake Ontario. These are facts which should be analysed when considering

The position of Cameco: Cameco argues that cleaning up any more is too expensive, will take too long, and might undermine its building. The nuclear regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, has accepted this argument, apparently without doing its own soil or water tests.



See fotos from John Kantara
The Heart of the Matter: The very center of the Olikuoto Nuclear Power Plant in Finland, currently under construction. According to Areva it will withstand a total fusion, a meltdown, a total Gau. Four emergency systems positioned in four separated building are to avoid another Tschernobyl.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/404805884/

Parts of the inner steel shield damaged before assembly, Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Plant, Finland
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/404818654/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/404822636/in/photostream/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/404823403/in/photostream/

Cost sparing construction experts building the already damadged 1.6 GW Olkiluoto Nuclerar Power Plant
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/404824657/in/photostream/

Keeping danger under water
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/423382632/in/photostream/

Work is getting ahead
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/423360829/in/photostream/

Cooling water heats up the river
http://www.flickr.com/photos/johnkantara/423388792/in/photostream/


[1] The New York Times: Siemens Quits Venture to Build Reactors. January 26, 2009.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/business/worldbusiness/27siemens.html

[2] Steve Thomas: Areva and EDF: Business prospects and risks in nuclear energy. University of Greenwich. March 2009.
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/files/pdfs/nuclear/Areva_EDF_Final.pdf

[3] AREVA Press release: Niger. AREVA to mine the Imouraren deposit. 05.01.2009
http://www.areva-np.com/scripts/press/publigen/content/templates/show.asp?P=1006&L=DE

[4] AREVA Press release: AREVA strengthens its ties with Brazil in the nuclear and transmission and distribution sectors. 23.12.2008
http://www.areva-np.com/scripts/press/publigen/content/templates/show.asp?P=1005&L=DE

[5] Port Hope, Ontario, Canada: Press Releases: Write in to stop Cameco reopening polluting plant
http://www.ph-fare.com/index.php?article=154