Breaking News - Japan Earthquake M7.0 1428 1JAN2012 Happy New Year!

Breaking News - Japan Earthquake M7.0 1428 1JAN2012 Happy New Year!
At 1428 a magnitude 7.0 hit; no damage known and no tsunami expected.




MAP 7.0  2012/01/01 05:27:55   31.416   138.155 348.5  IZU ISLANDS, JAPAN REGION

Breaking News - NM AZ CO TX CA Bolide Meteor Fireball 31DEC2011

Breaking News - NM AZ CO Bolide Meteor Fireball  approximately 8:15 pm MST 31DEC2011




Meteor Sighting Reports for NM AZ CO TX CA Bolide Meteor Fireball 31DEC2011
Neon Markers = Sighting Reports
Red Markers = Allsky Camera System Locations
(click on image to enlarge)
v.1 (c) 2011-2012 LunarMeteorite*Hunter / Google Earth
All Rights Reserved -
May only be used or posted IF CITATION to The

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 1JAN2011

Green light streaks across Arizona night sky
KOLD-TV
Around 8:15 pm, viewers called to ask about the light, wondering if it were a meteor, an asteroid or fireworks. "I would guess it's a meteor, but that's only a guess without actually seeing it," said Stephen Pompea, public information officer for Kitt ...

Bubbly planet Venus starts off New Year
Washington Post
With hot coffee, toast the Baby

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 31DEC2011

Is 2012s meteor shower the second meteor shower that has ever ...
You get meteor showers when there is meteoroids moving through our atmosphere. You can manly see meteoroids when they pass through the mesosphere ...
wiki.answers.com/.../Is_2012s_meteor_shower_the_second_m...

Christmas UFO Identified
Open Minds UFO News
The strange fireball UFO seen across Germany and neighboring countries on

The President of Thorium

Power from thorium:

This is [Bob] Greene's first time running [for President], and he's not sure if it's his last, but he certainly wants the world to know his position on thorium — a natural radioactive chemical element he hopes can change the nation's dependence on foreign oil.

Why thorium?

This energy source is used to create nuclear energy, much like uranium. However, he said it is safer to use and produces a waste product with a shorter radioactive life span. Like nuclear power, thorium would not create a huge carbon footprint, such as burning coal or oil, he said.

The writer gets a little muddled about nuclear energy here, but Greene has his arguments for thorium down pat. But why a single issue candidacy revolving around thorium?

He said he doesn't think President Barack Obama is taking advantage of the possibilities of thorium.

"I see this as an issue of national security," he said. "We can stop oil wars if we do this. We can change our import economy to an export economy."

Not sure why this isn’t equally true of uranium, but who are we to quibble? As the first thorium-boosting Presidential candidate we know of, we can only salute him at this crossing.

Right now, he’s only on the Democratic primary ballot in New Hampshire – against President Obama – but if things go well, who knows?

His campaign web site is here.

---

When the Soviet Union ended, then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney was asked what would become of the country’s nuclear arsenal:

"If the Soviets do an excellent job at retaining control over their stockpile of nuclear weapons and they are 99% successful, that would mean you could still have as many as 250 that they were not able to control."

The story by Huffington Post’s Graham Allison shows what actually happened to those 250 vulnerable missiles – and all the other missiles, too: nothing bad. This was due to two U.S.-Russia programs, one to help Russia gather all nuclear materials from the former soviet republics and a second, called Megatons to Megawatts, that downblended the gathered nuclear materials in those missiles to be used by domestic nuclear energy facilities. The missiles were not only rendered harmless, but their payloads were used for constructive purposes.

Nice to be reminded of programs that worked exactly as they should have.

---

Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) may face nationalization:

Yesterday, shares in Tepco plunged to the lowest in at least 37 years after Trade and Industry Minister Yukio Edano said the company needs to consider being nationalized. Edano, who served as chief cabinet secretary and government spokesman in the months following the March 11 earthquake and tsunami, now runs the ministry overseeing the nuclear power industry.

That makes it sound voluntary. The story also suggests that how TEPCO moves forward will depend on an energy plan being worked on by the government.

The same day he spoke of a government takeover, Edano’s ministry said in a statement it was studying changing rules governing Japan’s electricity industry to make distribution networks independent of power generators to spur competition. Those studies will form part of a new national energy policy to be drawn up by summer.

The story doesn’t say that there would be any attempt to limit compensation to those affected by the accident at TEPCO’s Fukushima Daiichi facility.

Bottom line: there’s no evidence that nationalizing TEPCO would have any impact on the clean-up or on the work being done at Fukushima.

---

Happy New Year from your friends at NEI Nuclear Notes. 2011 proved to be two years in 365 days. The most impressive event – leaving the accident at Fukushima Daiichi in a category of its own – to me was the extremely thorough and diligent response to the accident by the industry, the NRC, the U.S. government.

No one – at least who didn’t speak deutsch - looked at the accident and said “That’s it. Pull the plug.” But no one said, “This can’t happen here” either, even if the specifics of the Japan accident were unique.

But everything stayed at a level – the value of nuclear energy was almost universally acknowledged, but the need to take every lesson that could be learned from Fukushima and apply them to the American industry took center stage. Even attempts by anti-nuclear energy advocates to seize the moment fell flat – if anything, they became more shrill not less.

So – a tough year with a fair measure of heartening moments.

Welcome, 2012.

Bob Greene

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 30DEC2011

Tour January's Sky by Eye and Ear!
Sky & Telescope
Here are some highlights The month starts off with a bang, celestially speaking, as the annual Quadrantid meteor shower peaks on the morning of January 4th. This year's edition favors North America, but to see these "shooting stars" you'll need to be ...

12 Must-See Skywatching Events in 2012
Space.com
This meteor shower reaches its peak in the

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 29DEC2011

Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News: Japan Bolide Meteor ...By Lunar Meteorite * HunterLatest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News


Quadrantids meteor shower will create brief, beautiful show on Jan. 4The 2012 Quadrantids, a little-known meteor shower named after an extinct constellation, will present an excellent chance for hardy souls to start the year off ...www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/

Japan Bolide Meteor Fireball 27DEC2011

Green Fireball Recorded from Japan - 27DEC2011

Uploaded to YouTube by Sheilaaliens 2011/12/28 302 views
source: http://sonotaco.jp
Any meteor sighting reports? Please report: Date and Time of event? Location name (town,city) where you were when saw the meteor? Start and Stop location in sky? Direction of movement? Duration of Event (seconds)? Brightness ( in comparison with Venus, Moon, Sun)

Japan Bolide Meteor Fireballs 11DEC-15DEC2011

Recent Fireballs - Japan 11DEC-15DEC2011 -Sonotaco



Uploaded to YouTube by Sheilaaliens  2011/12/15 1264 views
Recorded from Japan. source: http://www.sonotaco.jp
Any other sighting reports? Please report: Date and Time of event? Location name (town,city) where you were when saw the meteor? Start and Stop location in sky? Direction of movement? Duration of Event (seconds)? Brightness ( in

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 28DEC2011

Christmas Eve fireball caused by falling Soyuz rocket debris | MNN ...By Space.comA dazzling fireball that lit up the night sky above Europe in a bright Christmas Eve display was no meteor or comet. A falling piece of a Russian rocket created the light show to cap the end of its successful mission, scientists say....


Meteor shower forecast for early Jan. 4 in Taiwan - Taiwan News ...Voice of

Italia Meteor Fireball 27DEC2011

Italian Fireball 27DEC2011 02:24


This is a photo that I captured from Lido of Venice, Italy on 27DEC2011 02:24. 
The fireball was very low in the east.
(c) Maurizio Eltri
Any other sighting reports? Please report: Date and Time of event? Location name (town,city) where you were when saw the meteor? Start and Stop location in sky? Direction of movement? Duration of Event (seconds)? Brightness

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 24DEC2011

Meteor Activity Outlook for December 24-30, 2011 | International ...
As the week progresses the waxing crescent moon will enter the evening sky but will not interfere with meteor observing as it is thin and will set long before the ...www.imo.net/node/1405


When is the next meteor shower? | Astronomy Essentials | EarthSky
Unless you are still seeing some stray Ursids flying, the next meteor 

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 26DEC2011

Heart of Louisiana Meteor Crater New Orleans News ...4 minHeart of Louisiana Meteor Crater New Orleans News, Breaking News, FOX 8.youtube.com

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 20DEC2011The only explanation Heinrich could come up with was a meteor crater. It likely happened within the last 10000 to 12000 years, which was a time when primitive ...lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.com/.../

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 25DEC2011

Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News: Italia Bolide Fireball ...
Fireballs, Meteors, Bolides, Meteorites, Comets, Asteroid Impact,Meteorite Quest, Recent ... Italia Fireball Meteor 18DEC2011- Italian Allsky Station Ferarra ...lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.com/.../italia-fireball-meteor-1...


What's Up in January Meteor shower, death-defying comet start new year
Press HeraldWe will be treated

Breaking News - WV MD PA NC USA Christmas Eve Meteor 24DEC2011

Breaking News - WV MD PA NC USA Meteor ~18:00 EST 24DEC2011


12/24/2011 Janaye Bruton Annville, PA USA 1900/est 3 seconds n-s bright white moon no very fast bright white and fell down to the land. Brighter and larger than a star. Didn't know what it was until I found this site. Thank you..I'm not crazy!!

12/24/2011 joe santiso Upper St Clair, Pa USA 18 20 est @7 sec ne to sw greenish venus very

Breaking Major News - MBIQ Indicates Large Bolide Meteor Fireball Seen in Germany, Holland, France, Luxenbourg 24DEC2011

Breaking Major News - MBIQ Indicates Large Bolide Meteor Fireball Seen in Germany, Holland, France, Luxenbourg, Switzerland, Belgium, Italy, Denmark, and the Czech Republic ~17:30 (GMT+1) 24DEC2011 Meteor or Space Trash?  Duration indicates Space Trash But NOT Confirmed.
Meteor Bot Internet Query (MBIQ) has just triggered on a large event!
-LunarMeteorite*Hunter - Tokyo, Japan

We need YOUR

Breaking News: ID, MT, WA, OR; BC, Canada Meteor Fireball 23DEC2011

Breaking News: ID, MT, WA, OR, USA/ BC, Canada Meteor Fireball ~17:15PST/18:15MST 23DEC2011


WA, OR, ID, MT, USA/ BC, Canada Meteor Fireball 23DEC2011
Neon Markers = Sighting Reports
Red Circles = All Sky Cameras
v.1 (c) LunarMeteorite*Hunter / Google Earth
All Rights Reserved
- Copy available ONLY IF citation and link given to The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News: http://

Gifts for the Winter Solstice

2012 promises to be an extremely consequential year for American nuclear energy. In the grand tradition of sneak previews, the first news to hit made 2011:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Thursday approved the amended design for the Westinghouse AP1000, a reactor that several power companies intend to use for building the first new U.S. nuclear plants in decades.

“The design provides enhanced safety margins through use of simplified, inherent, passive, or other innovative safety and security functions, and also has been assessed to ensure it could withstand damage from an aircraft impact without significant release of radioactive materials,” NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko said in a statement.

And that means this in – we hope – the early part of next year:

The certification brings Southern Company subsidiary Southern Nuclear one step closer to receiving the first Combined Construction and Operating License (COL) for a U.S. nuclear plant.

"This is another key milestone for the Vogtle project and the nation's nuclear renaissance," said Southern Company Chairman, President and CEO Thomas A. Fanning. "The NRC's action confirms the AP1000 design is safe and meets all regulatory requirements. The commission now has all of the technical information needed to issue the Vogtle COL.

Rapidly followed by this:

Once the AP1000 certification is complete, we expect the COL to be issued in short order for the … Summer project [in South Carolina]. Once the COL are issued, we'll begin a significant ramp-up in work ….

This is from the Shaw Group’s earnings call on December 21, so they were a day early. I captured the Summer part, but Shaw is working on Vogtle, too.

It’s like a gift, isn’t it?

---

And now a completely different kind of gift, from our friends at Russia’s Rosatom (click for larger):

Yes, they’ve taken some of their more athletic and beauteous workers – from the Siberian Chemical Combine, a used fuel reprocessing plant - and posed them after statues of Greek gods and goddesses for a calendar – at least, I think they’re workers. World Nuclear News doesn’t make this clear and neither does the Rosatom blog.

But – it’s fun to imagine that’s who they are – and why not? Russian nuclear facilities often tout the athletic achievements of their workers and this tilts that interest in another direction – toward beef- and cheesecake, true, but Rosatom also does a beauty pageant. It’s a cultural thing.

The statues – in the lower left of the photos - are mostly naked but the workers are at least as clothed as Poseidon there, so decide for yourself how safe-for-work this is before clicking through.

I wonder if this sort of thing is common throughout Russian industrial spheres.

The AP1000.

National Nuclear Science Week

National Nuclear Science Week is coming up January 23 and The National Museum of Nuclear Science and History (which has a great slogan: “Reactions Welcome”) is gearing up for it. The museum is in Albuquerque – where Bugs Bunny often made wrong turns – and also near one of the Manhattan Project sites at Los Alamos.

Although the museum does not ignore nuclear weaponry and its role in the Cold War, the focus of National Nuclear Science Week is, as the title suggests, more scientific than historic, offering themes  for each of the weekdays.

Monday is “Get to Know Nuclear Energy,” Tuesday, “Careers in the Nuclear Fields”, and then “Nuclear Energy Generation,” “Nuclear Safety,” and “Nuclear Medicine.”

Some of the days don’t appear to have agendas finalized yet. The web site, though, has a lot of materials for teachers and students, some fascinating audio and video clips – the audio of Einstein talking about the lately beleaguered theory of relativity is of particular interest – and plenty of links. All they need is an app.

The site is well worth a visit and if you stop in Albuquerque before making your wrong turn on the way to Pismo Beach, the museum should be on the agenda.

---

Energy Secretary Steven Chu sent a letter to commemorate the week. Here’s a bit which serves to remind that Chu and DOE are very fully engaged with nuclear energy:

The Department of Energy remains strongly committed to supporting graduate education, competitive research and advanced scientific tools in the areas of nuclear physics, nuclear chemistry and nuclear engineering. Through its National Nuclear Security Administration, the Department of Energy stewards the U.S. nuclear stockpile, provides oversight of the world's largest nuclear nonproliferation program, and bears responsibility for the U.S. Navy's nuclear propulsion program. We share your commitment to fostering a deeper public understanding about nuclear energy, nuclear education, nuclear medicine and all of the nuclear sciences.

Music to the ears.

The National Museum of Nuclear Science and History. Need more to do? Los Alamos hosts the Bradbury Science Museum if you happen to head out that way.

Dr. Robert Emery Disputes Joe Mangano's Findings on Radiation and Fukushima

Just a few minutes ago, I received the following statement from Dr. Robert Emery, Vice President for Safety, Health, Environment & Risk Management at the University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston concerning Dr. Joseph Mangano's recent study on fallout from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear energy facility reaching the U.S.

“We aggressively monitored for the presence of environmental radioactivity in Houston following the Fukushima event and worked closely with local public health authorities in the event we detected any threat to public health. We never detected any elevated radiation levels. I don’t see any evidence to supports the assertion made by this report that the additional 484 deaths in Houston in 2011 could in any way be related to radioactivity from Fukushima - we never detected any.”

"Moreover the study bases its conclusion on the comparison of data from deaths in the U.S. in 2010 and 2011. Using this method you really can’t determine the specific cause of any increase in deaths over the two years. Perhaps the most important question is: what did the 148,395 U.S. citizens die of in 2010, the year before the Japanese earthquake? Most likely the overwhelming causes were heart disease, cancer, and stroke. I believe this is likely the case in 2011 as well. I also believe our finite public health resources are better spent on the issues we know are causing people to die rather than being diverted to explore hypothetical projections"

It ought to be clear by now that Mangano's claims are being broadly discredited by the wider scientific community. Click here, here and here for our recent posts on how independent 3rd party voices are warning the public to disregard Mangano's research.

Comet Lovejoy (2011 W3) From Seen from Space by ISS 21DEC2011

SPACE STATION COMMANDER CAPTURES UNPRECEDENTED VIEW OF COMET
HOUSTON -- 
International Space Station Commander Dan Burbank captured spectacular imagery of Comet Lovejoy, viewed from about 240 miles above the Earth's horizon on Wednesday, Dec. 21.
Today Burbank described seeing the comet as "the most amazing thing I have ever seen in space," in an interview with WDIV-TV in Detroit. Burbank took

New Brunswick / Nova Scotia, Canada Meteor 22DEC2011

New Brunswick / Nova Scotia, Canada Meteor ~20:25 AST 22DEC2011


22DEC2011 Carl Moncton, NB, Canada 20:25 atlantic 5-6 sec W-L to R bright blue W/long orange tail very beight ,almost as the sun is can't tell for sure didn't expect to see a meteor in December

22DEC2011 Sheona Adams Miramichi, NB, Canada 20:25:00 8 seconds W-N Orange yellow sphere shape ball of fire with large fire tail Very

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 23DEC2011

Meteor Activity Outlook for December 17-23, 2011 | American ...The half illuminated moon is still very bright and must be kept out of your field of view for successfulmeteor observations. During this period, the evening hours, ...www.amsmeteors.org/.../meteor-activity-outlook-for-decembe...


Mysterious Ball Drops from Space in Namibia - Fuel Tank!
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/technology/

Progressives and Nuclear Energy

The Progressive Policy Institute offers strong support for nuclear energy in the post-Fukushima era, in a paper that bats down various myths that have taken hold about nuclear and other energy sources.
The paper links support for nuclear energy to progressive views.

As champions of reason and science, U.S. progressives have a responsibility to avoid panicky overreactions and instead undertake a clear-eyed assessment of the actual risks of nuclear energy.

Taking a swipe at environmentalists who oppose nuclear energy -  and generally assumed to hold progressive views, though there’s plenty of conservative environmentalists - the paper says,

[S]ome environmental activists have tried to pose a false choice between ‘clean’ and presumably safe renewable fuels like wind, solar and geothermal energy, and ‘dirty’ fossil fuels or allegedly ‘unsafe’ nuclear power. This dichotomy has nothing to do with science.

The paper discusses the relative environmental risks of nuclear versus other forms of energy, citing coal as an example.

Coal-fired power plants release more toxic air pollutants than any other U.S. industrial pollution source, including mercury, arsenic, dioxin, hydrogen chloride, formaldehyde, and sulfur dioxide.

Generating nuclear energy releases no pollutants.

The paper calls it ironic that while coal-fired plants emit up to 100 times the radioactivity of nuclear plants, they are not held to the same regulatory standards on radiation.

The paper argues against other misconceptions about nuclear energy. For example, while acknowledging the high capital costs associated with building a nuclear energy facility, the paper also shows the relatively low total life cycle cost given the expected life of the plant and its low operating costs.

The conclusion?

[Nuclear energy] should play an expanding role in meeting America’s growing energy needs for the rest of this century and probably beyond.”

This is one of the best pieces of think tank advocacy we’ve seen on nuclear energy and benefits from maintaining a rigorous relationship with the truth. Its arguments can be debated honestly because its fact set is well-sourced and the writing uninflected with undue emotion. These are elements that are not as common as they should be among anti-nuclear energy advocates, as many of the posts below demonstrate.

The paper can be found at the Progressive Policy Institute’s website. It’s about 12 pages and well worth the read.

The Arizona delegation to the 1912 Progressive Party convention in Chicago. Progressive ideology in the U.S. as we understand it now – there have been “progressives” throughout human history, of course, however you choose to define it – began in the late 19th and early 20th century, essentially as a response to industrialization and the idea that it was crushing workers into mechanistic cogs. Over time, it has come to be understood as the opposite number to conservatism in the (American) political sphere, but that formulation gets too messy to try to explain. Maybe PPI has a paper about it.

Alberta / Saskatchewan Canada -Montana Meteor 22DEC2011

Alberta / Saskatchewan, Canada - Montana,USA Meteor ~05:00 MST/ ~06:00 CST 22DEC2011



Canada / Montana Meteor 22DEC2011
Neon Markers= Sighting Reports
Red Circle Markers = Allsky Camera Location
(click on image to enlarge)
v.1 (c) 2011 LunarMeteorite*Hunter / Google Earth
All Rights Reserved - Use with Written Permission Only

22DEC2011 Ron Sweetgrass, Montana, USA 05:00 MST 3-4 sec e/w no

Breaking News: MBIQ Indicates MA, NY, VT, NJ, PA, MD,VA, DC Meteor 22DEC2011

MBIQ (Meteor Bot Internet Query) Bot has just indicated that a meteor was seen over MA, NY, VT, PA, MD, DC, VA and NJ ~03:25 EST 22DEC2011.  Meteor seen in 8 states!

We need YOUR sighting reports to confirm; read at bottom of post; thank you!
Please help increase reports by posting a link to this story on Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, TV news or your favorite forum.  http://

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 22DEC2011

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 15DEC2011Astronomers from The University of Western Ontario have released footage of a meteor, which was captured by its highly advanced video surveillance system, ...lunarmeteoritehunters.blogspot.com/.../latest-worldwide-meteo...


Survey finds not all meteors the sameABC Science OnlineBut meteor radars consistently see the sky filled with rapidly

Comet Lovejoy (2011 W3) Rising Over Western Australia 21DEC2011

Comet Lovejoy (2011 W3) rising over Western Australia 21DEC2011

Comet Lovejoy (2011 W3) rising over Western Australia from Colin Legg on Vimeo.
Had a beautiful view of the comet this morning. I took this sequence to try to capture the changing face of the comet as twilight progressed.

Please see this EXCELLENT photo by Australian Photographer Colin Legg:
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/

Italia Bolide Fireball Meteor 18DEC2011

Italia Fireball Meteor 18DEC2011- Italian Allsky Station Ferarra



Italy Fireball 18DEC2011 (click on image to enlarge)
(c) 2011 Ferruccio Zanotti
Italian Meteor and TLE Network   



Italy Fireball 18DEC2011 Triangulation  (click on image to enlarge)
(c) 2011  Ferruccio Zanotti
Italian Meteor and TLE Network    


Uploaded to YouTube by esploriamoluniverso  2011/12/21 15 views



Fireball

Italia Bolide Fireball Meteor 14DEC2011

Italia Bolide Fireball Meteor 14DEC2011 
- Italian Allsky - Station Potenza, Italy
Fireball 2011.12.14_04.50.20 ± 1 U.T 



Italy Fireball 14DEC2011 (click on image to enlarge)(c) 2011 Ferruccio Zanotti
Italian Meteor and TLE Network



Italy Fireball 14DEC2011 Triangulation (click on image to enlarge)(c) 2011 Ferruccio Zanotti
Italian Meteor and TLE Network

http://meteore.forumattivo.com/t2232-

Joe Mangano's Credibility Takes Another Body Blow

This time, the sledgehammer is delivered courtesy of Barbara Feder Ostrov's Health Journalism Blog. Like plenty of other folks, she was shocked at Joe Mangano's claims -- ones that he backed off from when under questioning from MedPage Today -- so she talked to some long-time medical journalists.

Here's what Ivan Oransky of Reuters Health had to say about Mangano's research:

I do use impact factor to judge journals, while accepting that it's an imperfect measure that is used in all sorts of inappropriate ways (and, for the sake of full disclosure, is a Thomson Scientific product, as in Thomson Reuters). I find it helpful to rank journals within a particular specialty.

[...]

I looked up the journal in question, and it's actually ranked 45th out of 58 in the Health Policy and Services category (in the social sciences rankings) and 59th out of 72 in the Health Care Sciences & Services category (in the science rankings).

Here's Gary Schwitzer of Health News Review:

Journalists who live on a steady diet of journal articles almost by definition promote a rose-colored view of progress in research if they don't grasp and convey the publication bias in many journals for positive findings. Negative or null findings may not be viewed as sexy enough. Or they may be squelched prior to submission. While perhaps not a factor in this one case, it nonetheless drives home the point to journalists about the need to critically evaluate studies.

I'm afraid I have more bad news for Mangano. Who's going to tell Christie Brinkley?

The 2012 Budget for Nuclear Energy

Congress voted on an omnibus appropriations bill that basically funds the entirety of the federal government for the next year. Naturally, our interest lies with the nuclear energy portion of the Department of Energy’s budget.

The executive summary is that the total is more than requested by the Obama administration earlier this year; the accident in Japan has been acknowledged in the budget but how to proceed has been largely left to processes already in place – the NRC’s Near-Term task force, for example; and Yucca Mountain, dead or alive, is not funded.

Here are the details:

The appropriations bill provides $769 million for nuclear science and technology, higher than the president’s $754 million and a sharp increase from the $584 million approved initially by the Senate.

Of particular note is the restoration of $67 million for small reactor development and licensing, which the Senate had earlier zeroed out. Under a cost-shared government-industry program, DOE will select two designs to shepherd through initial NRC technical reviews and licensing.

The legislation provides $187 million for fuel cycle research and development programs, almost $34 million more than originally requested by the president. These programs are likely to become more central to the industry as DOE acts upon the recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future, which will in January finalize its report on managing the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle.

A last-minute DOE request for funding support for USEC’s American Centrifuge Plant in Ohio failed to be included in the final bill, despite support from the Senate and the president. DOE and both the state’s Senators had sought funding for further development work on the uranium enrichment facility.

Funding for USEC could be revisited when Congress reconvenes in January.

The bill provides $59 million for the Advanced Fuels Program, an increase of $12 million from 2011, to accelerate development of new cladding materials for nuclear fuel.

Many defense-related nuclear energy items received increases over 2011 in a year marked by more stringent budgeting priorities. For example, defense environmental cleanup would receive $5 billion under the bill, $11 million more than in 2011. Nuclear nonproliferation would receive $2.3 billion, $110 million above the 2011 level; and naval reactors would receive $1.08 billion, $141 million higher than in 2011.

The appropriation for DOE is $25.7 billion, $2.1 billion more than what was approved by the House, but $3.9 billion below the Obama administration’s request.

Other funding includes:

• $40 million for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant. The House committee had budgeted $63.5 million for this program.
• $5 million for the Integrated University Program for DOE and $15 million for NRC. The House committee had budgeted these amounts for this jointly administered program, but the Senate originally had eliminated the funds.
• $155 million for Idaho National Laboratory, $5 billion more than the administration’s request.
• $1.027 billion to the NRC, about $11 million less than requested by the administration. Much of the NRC’s funding is paid by fees collected from licensees. Some $2 million of the appropriation is for a National Academy of Sciences study on lessons learned from the Fukushima Daiichi accident, as recommended by the Blue Ribbon Commission. For the second year running, no funds have been allocated for the Yucca Mountain project.

Mike Moyer of Scientific American Debunks Joe Mangano Again

Mike Moyer, the writer at Scientific American who so expertly debunked Joe Mangano's "research" in June, had a chance to read the latest Mangano study that claimed 14,000 deaths in the U.S. were linked to fallout from Fukushima.

The verdict: it's just another flawed study.

No attempt is made at providing systematic error estimates, or error estimates of any kind. No attempt is made to catalog any biases that may have crept into the analysis, though a cursory look finds biases a-plenty (the authors are anti-nuclear activists unaffiliated with any research institution). The analysis assumes that the plume arrived on U.S. shores, spread everywhere, instantly, and started killing people immediately. It assumes that the “excess” deaths after March 20 are a real signal, not just a statistical aberration, and that every one of them is due to Fukushima radiation.

Of course, as we pointed out yesterday, Mangano was forced to back off that last claim when pressed by a reporter from MedPage Today.

Back to Moyer ...

The publication of such sloppy, agenda-driven work is a shame. Certainly radiation from Fukushima is dangerous, and could very well lead to negative health effects—even across the Pacific. The world needs to have a serious discussion about what role nuclear power should play in a power-hungry post-Fukushima world. But serious, informed, fact-based debate is a difficult enough goal to achieve without having to shout above noise like this.

Amen, brother.

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 21DEC2011

Geology research in Lund receives SEK 40 millionuniprotokolle Tue, 20 Dec 2011 07:41 AM PSTWithin the space of a week, Lund Universitys geology researchers have raked in SEK 40 million. Professor Birger Schmitz has received SEK 25 million for his ground breaking research on the meteorite flux to earth that has been taking place for billions of years...


Heart of Louisiana: Meteor Crater - New

Counting Yen

Japan does not have many options for electricity if it leaves behind nuclear energy and if limiting carbon emission remains a national goal. But what Japan decides to do about nuclear energy is something that is tough to gainsay.

So, the groundwork to lessen dependence on nuclear is being laid, though the results are imperfect:

Nuclear power generation in Japan is about 50 percent more expensive than estimated after factoring in the cost of paying for an accident like the Fukushima disaster, a government panel said.

Nuclear energy costs at least 8.9 yen (11 cents) per kilowatt hour, compared with a government estimate of 5.9 yen in 2004, the panel said in a draft report today.

Presumably it is still 5.9 yen if the accident is factored out, but okay: 8.9 yen it is. Why is that imperfect?

Coal is estimated to cost 9.5 yen per kilowatt hour, while liquefied natural gas and oil cost 10.7 yen and 36 yen respectively.

Another story put wind at 9.9 yen and solar at 33.4 yen.

Those are Japan’s choices – and everything has to be imported.  Japan will produce more carbon emissions, pay more for the dubious honor, and has to build the plants and train the workers. There’s a lot of capital investment involved in this process.

Various accounts have shown Japan abandoning or reducing or sticking with nuclear energy. It’s almost a time of day thing. But if the trend is toward reducing nuclear energy output – because the accident rendered nuclear energy persona non grata - it’s a genuinely terrible outcome.

---

One of the dumber editorials. Our writer wants to signal disapproval for nuclear energy while voicing support for the Keystone XL pipeline:

But our nation does need power. For electricity, we need to open up desert space and urban rooftops for solar energy projects. But solar and wind will not be enough. That's why the Keystone Pipeline project - which is oil from a friendly country - may be the preferred alternative. At the very least, it would be better than building more nuclear power plants.

Solar and wind will not be enough for what? And if they are not enough, how might oil fill in?

Sheesh!

The lady on the 5000 yen note is Ichiyo Higuchi, a writer and poet who lived her brief life from 1872 to 1896. Much of her work focused on the people and social order in the Yoshiwara district (essentially, the red light district) of Tokyo.

Joseph Mangano Contradicts His Own Press Release on Fukushima Research

Our readers will recall that on Friday afternoon that we were alerted to the impending release of a study authored by Joseph Mangano and Dr. Janette Sherman on the alleged effects of radioactive fallout from the Fukushima Daiichi incident here in the U.S.

Earlier today, Mangano and company held a teleconference to announce their findings:

An estimated 14,000 excess deaths in the United States are linked to the radioactive fallout from the disaster at the Fukushima nuclear reactors in Japan, according to a major new article in the December 2011 edition of the International Journal of Health Services.

Sounds scary, doesn't it? Then again, only a few hours later, Mangano admitted in an interview with MedPage Today that the results of his research weren't quite as definitive as his press release would have led folks to believe:

But he (Managno) told MedPage Today that the researchers can't rule out factors other than the Fukushima radiation that might have accounted for the excess.

"There are probably a variety of factors that could be linked to this excess of 14,000 deaths," he said.

Huh? In any case, it's clear that the scientific community doesn't think terribly much of Mangano and his study. As luck would have it, MedPage Today also talked to Richard L. Morin, PhD, of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Florida:

On the contrary, any link between the deaths and the radiation released by the reactors is "very, very unlikely" simply because the levels are low, according to Richard Morin, PhD, of the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla.

Morin told MedPage Today that such an acute effect would be unlikely, unless radiation levels were four or five orders of magnitude higher than those reported by Mangano and Sherman, and the whole body of the victim was exposed.

Typically, he said, the effect of low-level ionizing radiation doesn't appear until years after the exposure.

Morin, who is chair of the American College of Radiology's safety committee, said an earlier public report by the authors on the same issue -- preceding the journal article -- "has not been taken seriously by the scientific community."

He added it's important to remember that "association doesn't imply causation.

It's been more than six years since I wrote my first post on Mangano's antics. As I wrote at the time, eight states have investigated Mangano's claims and all eight refused to validate them. One wonders why reporters even bother to talk to him anymore when his work has been so thoroughly debunked.

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 20DEC2011

Heart of Louisiana: Meteor CraterFOX 8 News WVUE-TVThe only explanation Heinrich could come up with was a meteor crater. It likely happened within the last 10000 to 12000 years, which was a time when primitive people inhabited the piney woods of St. Helena. A meteor would have struck without warning, ...


Meteor Activity Outlook for December 17-23, 2011 « The Transient ...By Carl

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 18DEC2011

Meteorite hunters prepare to scour cottage country
Toronto StarMeteorite hunters can only hope any chips off the old block that flew from the sky this week landed on terra firma. Make that a 4.5-billion-year-old block. That's the estimated age of the rare chunk of magnetic material that hit the planet northeast of ...


Fall Map - Meteor PhysicsThe Department of Physics and Astronomy Meteor 

Surprised passengers spot UFO from moving car on busy Tokyo street [video]Examiner.comSeveral people who have seen the video have put forth the opinion that this unidentified flying object was actually nothing more than a meteor. There is reportedly at least one other video showing the object from another angle. ...


Meteorites Trigger Avalanches on MarsSpace.comby Clara Moskowitz, SPACE.com

NRC’s Post-Fukushima Recommendations Will Be Mandatory for U.S. Nuclear Energy Facilities

Over the past few months, anti-nuclear groups have regularly attacked our industry for allegedly resisting implementing changes at our facilities in the wake of the incident at Fukushima Daiichi. While that’s simply not the case, it’s a perception that often gets reinforced in the press—and this morning’s mailbag contained yet another example.

Politico Pro posted an article this morning, “NRC Won’t Make Post-Fukushima Safety Recommendations Mandatory,” that is misleading and egregiously inaccurate. At issue is how the term “mandatory” is used to show how the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will both implement and mandate its post-Fukushima recommendations.

The lede states:

The NRC on Thursday cemented a to-do list of post-Fukushima safety recommendations for U.S. nuclear plants but won't make them mandatory.

That caught the attention of Jason Zorn, NEI’s assistant general counsel, who made it clear to me in no uncertain terms that this is incorrect. I spoke with him this afternoon to explain why in further detail:

The story focuses on the commission’s decision that it was premature to conclude that the Fukushima-related lessons learned are “necessary for adequate protection.” However, a new requirement does not have to be based on "adequate protection" to be mandatory. As long as the NRC acts through a legally binding vehicle, such as an order or a rulemaking, the result will be legally binding. The commission's decision on "adequate protection" in the staff requirements memorandum (SRM) goes only to whether these recommendations will be subjected to a full regulatory analysis or not, and has nothing to do with them being "mandatory."

Zorn points to SECY 11-0137—the SRM that prioritizes how the NRC will respond to the Fukushima lessons learned—and said that the second paragraph cannot be taken out of context from the first.

The first paragraph clearly shows that the commission has approved the NRC staff’s post-Fukushima recommendations to impose many of the lessons learned through orders or rulemaking. Both orders and rulemaking impose legally binding and enforceable requirements. In other words, they all will become mandatory at some point; it’s just a matter of how you are going to get there that’s the difference.

He explains that the SRM’s second paragraph shows that the NRC has yet to decide what level of protection (either “adequate protection” or “‘extra’ adequate protection”) each recommendation will fall under before each is mandated. The paragraph states:

In the absence of a fully developed justification for a proposed new requirement, the Commission finds it premature to initiate actions on the Near Term Task Force recommendations under the premise of assuring or redefining the level of protection of public health and safety that should be required as adequate in accordance with the backfit rule. The Commission will evaluate the staff’s basis for imposing new requirements when documented in notation vote papers for any new requirements promulgated by orders or rulemaking.

The commission will need further evidence to support each recommendation being categorized as either “adequate protection” or “‘extra’ adequate protection” before being required. Zorn states:

The commission simply said that they want the staff to look at the underlying basis and do a full analysis of impacts and benefits where appropriate. In contrast, requirements imposed under an adequate protection basis can be imposed with essentially no meaningful regulatory analysis. The staff’s original recommendation to impose many of the recommendations through orders or rulemaking was left completely intact by the commission.

So what’s next? Zorn replies:

The details are far from final. The task force will come back to the commission in a few months with their analysis of each recommendation and the commission will vote whether each should fall under the “adequate” or “extra adequate” categories. The NRC has these processes in place to ensure that new requirements are adequately understood and justified before they are imposed.

I think Zorn “adequately” (pardon the pun) explained why the Politico Pro piece is misleading. Hopefully his explanation will make it to Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) who issued a press release yesterday with the same misinterpretation:

While I welcome the step the commission took today, I am disappointed that a majority of the Commissioners voted to reject the recommendation of the NRC Near-Term Task Force on Fukushima that the safety upgrades be made mandatory and not leave their implementation subject to a future cost-benefit analysis.

Inside Look at “Adequate Protection”

Since I had Zorn’s attention for a few minutes, I also asked him if he could explain the background on “adequate protection.” His explanation was fairly easy to understand.

The Atomic Energy Act authorizes the NRC to impose requirements (i.e. make them “mandatory”) by regulation or order. Once a regulation, order or license is issued, it is legally binding and enforceable, meaning the NRC can issue a penalty or take other enforcement action if a licensee violates the terms.

Separately is the fact that the Atomic Energy Act also basically allows the NRC to impose new requirements under one of two options: “necessary for adequate protection” or “‘extra’ adequate protection.” In a nutshell, it is within the NRC’s discretion to decide into which category a particular new requirement (i.e. the aforementioned regulations, orders or plant licenses) will fall.

The “necessary for adequate protection” category gives the NRC the authority to impose requirements that it believes are necessary for the adequate protection of public health and safety or common defense and security. It is important to note that this does NOT mean that the NRC’s requirements must achieve “absolute protection” (i.e. zero risk), which would be impossible to achieve. It also is important to note that the NRC cannot generally consider costs when deciding whether or not something is necessary for adequate protection.

If the NRC chooses to impose a new requirement as “‘extra’ adequate protection,” it must show that the requirement would have a substantial increase in the overall safety of the plant and the costs to implement are justified. This analysis is known as a “backfit analysis,” which is outlined in the NRC’s regulations at 10 C.F.R. § 50.109. This category requires substantial NRC research and cost-benefit analyses before being implemented. Examples of requirements that have been imposed in the past as “extra adequate protection” are the station blackout rule, aircraft impact assessment rule, and 1994 vehicle bomb rule.

But the bottom line is, once a new requirement is imposed by order or rulemaking—either under the “adequate” or “extra adequate” protection category—it is considered mandatory by the NRC and is both legally binding and enforceable.

Note to Reporters: Be Sure to Fact Check Joseph Mangano, Janette Sherman and Robert Alvarez

Late this afternoon, it came to our attention that Joseph Mangano, Janette Sherman and Robert Alvarez will be holding a news conference on Monday morning (December 19) concerning a new study they've done about how Americans might be affected by radiation released into the atmosphere from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility in Japan.

While we haven't seen the article as of yet and can't comment on it, our readers should know that reliable third parties have reviewed the work of all three authors in the past and found it to be fatally flawed.

Here's what the New Jersey Commission on Radiation Protection had to say about Mangano's "Tooth Fairy" project:

The Commission is of the opinion that "Radioactive Strontium-90 in Baby Teeth of New Jersey Children and the Link with Cancer: A Special Report," is a flawed report, with substantial errors in methodology and invalid statistics. As a result, any information gathered through this project would not stand up to the scrutiny of the scientific community. There is also no evidence to support the allegation that the State of New Jersey has a problem with the release of Sr-90 into the environment from nuclear generating plants: more than 30 years of environmental monitoring data refute this.

In June, Michael Moyer of Scientific American had this to say about a study by Mangano and Sherman on radiation and Fukushima:

[A] check reveals that the authors’ statistical claims are critically flawed—if not deliberate mistruths.

[...]

Only by explicitly excluding data from January and February were Sherman and Mangano able to froth up their specious statistical scaremongering.

This is not to say that the radiation from Fukushima is not dangerous, nor that we shouldn’t closely monitor its potential to spread (we should). But picking only the data that suits your analysis isn’t science—it’s politics. Beware those who would confuse the latter with the former.

As for Mr. Alvarez, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission had this to say about one of his papers on the safety of spent fuel pools:

The NRC staff has reviewed the paper, "Reducing the Hazards from Stored Spent Power- Reactor Fuel in the United States," April 21, 2003, Robert Alvarez, et al., (published in Science and Global Security, spring 2003) and concludes that it fails to make the case for its central recommendation.

[...]

Our review of the paper indicates that it is a deficient study of the hazards associated with the storage of spent fuel. Many of the 114 cited references are NRC studies or NRC contracted studies conducted for a variety of purposes, and most are not applicable to terrorist attacks.

Members of the press should take care to challenge the findings announced on Monday, and to be sure to contact NEI or other third party experts to review the validity of the study, rather than simply rebroadcast its findings.

Fukushima Daiichi Achieves Cold Shutdown

A happy day:

Japanese Prime Minister Yoshikhiko Noda said on Friday that the battle to stabilize the country's Fukushima nuclear plant had turned a corner, nine months after an earthquake and tsunami sent reactors into meltdowns.

"The reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant have reached a state of cold shutdown," Noda said at a nuclear task force meeting in Tokyo. "Now that we have achieved stability in the reactors, a major concern for the nation has been resolved."

The "cold shutdown" refers to a condition where the water that cools nuclear fuel rods remains below boiling point, meaning that the fuel cannot reheat.

Still much to do. But a happy day.

---

An editorial from North Dakota features the views of Senate Candidate Duane Sand:

In a wide-ranging discussion Tuesday with The Forum’s Editorial Board, Sand outlined his proposal for a nuclear plant in North Dakota and nine more across the nation. A commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve, Sand served on three nuclear submarines. He’s a student of nuclear energy – its pitfalls, myths and potential. He knows his stuff about the subject and sincerely believes eastern North Dakota would be an ideal site for the start of a new era of nuclear power.

The editorial lists four of Sand’s points about nuclear energy, all of which are agreeable and well-informed. We really like this one:

The myths associated with nuclear power’s dangers need to be exposed as mostly frauds.

More at the link. Let’s just say Duane Sand doesn’t hide his liking of nuclear energy under a bushel.

---

Does this mean I support Sand in his race?

Of course not – that’s for the people of North Dakota to decide and I have no idea what the local issues are there.

One issue voters – even those that favor nuclear energy – face much sorrow, so even if I could vote for Sand, I would hesitate until I knew more about his views and those of his opponent. Support for nuclear energy would not be determinative in deciding my vote, but it would be one item in Sand’s favor.

Fukushima Daiichi

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 16DEC2011

Ontario university astronomers capture basketball-sized meteor on video
Winnipeg Free PressLONDON, Ont. - Astronomers from the University of Western Ontario have released rare video of ameteor that travelled through the evening sky east of Toronto earlier this week. Although the bright fireball appeared near the peak of the annual Geminid ...



Cameras capture meteor in the skies near Toronto ..

Need A Little Soap To Clean Off the “Dirt”

I came across an article this week penned by professor Benjamin Sovacool that purports to give readers “the dirt on nuclear power.” The article gives way to hasty generalizations and leaves readers with a false view of one of the nation’s safest industries, and I’d like to point out a few places where there are holes in his arguments.

The first problem: Sovacool lumps common industry terms, “incidents” and “accidents,” into one venti-sized category of “accidents.” Why does he do this? I’m guessing to add to the Armageddon-like anxiety he wants his readers to feel.

Sovacool states:

Incidents are unforeseen events and technical failures that occur during normal plant operation and result in no off-site releases of radiation or severe damage to equipment. Accidents refer to either off-site releases of radiation or severe damage to plant equipment. …

Under these classifications, the number of nuclear accidents, even including the meltdowns at Fukushima Daiichi and Fukushima Daini, is low. But if one redefines an accident to include incidents that either resulted in the loss of human life or more than $50,000 in property damage, a very different picture emerges.

He continues by providing additional examples of how everything falling under his redefined “accidents” category leads to death, destruction and demise. However, a couple of key points should be made before he submits his new definition to Merriam Webster.

First, “accidents” are NOT the same as “incidents,” and should not be treated the same way. Each term is distinctly classified because they each require different responses by involved government, regulatory and other agencies in how they are addressed. For example, if you look at auto insurance—your auto insurance company will treat a minor fender bender differently than an accident involving total demolition of the vehicle and injury to the driver (and possibly others). The reason for this is NOT because the auto industry is trying to cheat you, but rather because the auto carrier has to look at the overall picture—safety implications (establish fault—with the driver or equipment?), involved parties (emergency responders, hospitals, etc.), and overall costs of repair.

In the nuclear industry, “incidents” and “accidents” are treated similarly in that they are classified based on how they should be handled and what agencies should be involved. In fact, if you look at the International Atomic Energy Agency’s International Nuclear Event Scale (INES), you will see that they have categorized the two types differently according to affects the incident or accident has on: people and the environment, radiological barriers and control, and defense-in-depth. This categorization serves an important purpose in establishing roles and responsibilities for managing the crisis and determining how to best address and fix the safety problem. For example, an incident involving a fire in one area of the facility not near the nuclear reactor will not warrant a full-scale international investigation, extensive radiation monitoring, federal responders, etc. However, if that fire sparked near the reactor and caused an “accident” at the site, those actions by the nuclear industry would probably be warranted and the global nuclear industry would be at the plant’s doorstep trying to take steps to prevent them from occurring at their own sites.

This is also not to say that the nuclear industry does not learn from “incidents” as well—or that they are any less important. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is revered as a model to countries around the world that are creating their own nuclear regulating bodies because of its strict regulatory oversight. The regulator’s role in an “incident” would be just the same as during an “accident”—to ensure that the plant is operating safely or to shut it down immediately. No questions asked. The industry takes safety incredibly seriously and has many layers of built-in protection in reactors’ designs and reinforces best operating practices through employee reporting mechanisms and other daily checks to ensure safety is always first.

Which brings me to another gaping hole in Sovacool’s argument: he clearly ignores the evidence about the nuclear industry’s strong safety record. In paragraph four, he states that the number of nuclear accidents “is low,” but chooses to ignore this crucial fact for the sake of his flawed argument.

Let’s look at the facts. In its 2010 safety and operations report, the World Association of Nuclear Operators, an international organization that consolidates best practices from operating nuclear plants worldwide, found on the topic of safety system performance:

For the 12th straight year, key backup safety systems concurrently met their individual availability goals more than 90 percent of the time. Nuclear power plants are built with multiple safety systems and backup power supplies so these systems are available, if needed, even when maintenance is being performed on a similar system or component. The three principal backup safety systems are two main cooling systems and back-up power supplies used to respond in the event of unusual situations. Each system at every plant has an availability goal just shy of 100 percent, and 93 percent of these backup safety systems met their individual goal, assuring that multiple layers of safety were in place as designed.

On the topic of industrial safety, the report also goes on to state that:

The nuclear industry is one of the nation’s safest working environments. U.S. nuclear plants continued to post a low industrial accident rate in 2010 with 0.09 industrial accidents per 200,000 worker-hours, the lowest level in a decade and well below the 2010 goal of 0.2. Statistics from other industries through 2009, as compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, show that it is safer to work at a nuclear power plant than in the manufacturing sector and even the real estate and financial sectors.

(See NEI’s press release for more information on the report.)

Coincidentally, Sovacool also mentions that the nuclear industry’s death rate—under his new definition of “accidents”—would be extraordinarily high—a claim that does not stand scrutiny if you examine the facts. A March post by Next Big Future gives the latest data in this regard, showing the nuclear industry to have the lowest average death rate per terrawatt-hour (0.04), lower than the coal, oil, natural gas, biofuels, solar, wind, and hydro industries.

Sovacool’s hasty generalizations extend beyond nuclear plants to include reprocessing facilities, and he also shares incredible, “dirty” stats on the nuclear industry:

To put a serious accident in context, according to data from my forthcoming book Contesting the Future of Nuclear Power, if 10 million people were exposed to radiation from a complete nuclear meltdown (the containment structures fail completely, exposing the inner reactor core to air), about 100,000 would die from acute radiation sickness within six weeks. About 50,000 would experience acute breathlessness, and 240,000 would develop acute hypothyroidism. About 350,000 males would be temporarily sterile, 100,000 women would stop menstruating, and 100,000 children would be born with cognitive deficiencies. There would be thousands of spontaneous abortions and more than 300,000 later cancers.

I’ll have to stay tuned to his latest book to see what kind of scientific basis there is to his figures and to investigate whether or not he includes the protective actions that would be taken by the utility or local/state/federal government in the event of an accident. But for now, I’d just like to point out that even in the case of Fukushima, there have not been any radiation-related deaths. The last of three deaths that NEI reported at the facility was not believed to be from radiation, and the other two workers died while trying to stabilize the plant during the tsunami.

Given that the overall premise of his argument is flawed and that none of his facts or stats are cited (or footnoted for that matter!), I’d caution everyone to think twice before believing his “dirt” on the nuclear industry.

Pictured: Benjamin K. Sovacool, from GoodPlanet.info.

Is Bloomberg Businessweek Censoring Comments?

Suzy Hobbes over at Pop Atomic Studios makes the case.

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 15DEC2011

Meteorite likely landed in eastern Ontario: Researchers
London Free Press(REUTERS FILES/Russell Cheyne) Researchers are hoping to track down a large meteorite that streaked the sky and crashed in eastern Ontario Monday night. Many Canadians were looking upward during the Geminid meteor shower when a bright fireball was ...

University of Western astronomers get rare video of meteor's fall near

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 14DEC2011

The 'must see' holiday lights in Georgia tonight: the Geminids meteor showersExaminer.comGet Out is also reporting that choosing a safe place to view the meteor shower tonight should be your first priority, since you will not have a good view unless you go somewhere away from bright city lights...into the dark. ...




Geminid meteor shower: why spectacular light show puzzles scientists
Christian

AREVA in Funkytown: Bad Quarter or Harbinger of Industry Doom?

Today, French nuclear company AREVA said it expected to post operating losses of about 1.4 to 1.6 billion euros in its 2011 year-end financial report, including a cash flow loss, before tax, of about 1.8 billion euros.

This story from AOL Energy News is rather bare on facts, substituting something very close to a bald assertion:

Only last week Washington DC-based think tank Worldwatch Institute released its Vital Signs Online (VSO) report noting that the world's nuclear power portfolio was quickly shrinking. Now nuclear power companies worldwide are posting numbers that reflect the trend.

Well, it’s one nuclear energy company and it wouldn’t seem to be reflecting this particular trend, if trend there be. (I haven’t looked at the VSO report – yet – and must admit I’ve never run into the Worldwatch Institute.)

This story, from the rather unbalanced Business Green, at least gets the details about this right:

The company announced yesterday that operating losses for this year could reach €1.6bn, primarily as a result of the Fukushima disaster on the value of its uranium mining operations.

But what does AREVA have to say about this? Let’s look:

In this context [the global demand for more electricity], the German decision [to close its nuclear facilities] remains an isolated case and the great majority of nuclear programs around the world have been confirmed. More conservative in its projections than the International Energy Agency, the group expects growth of 2.2% annually, reaching 583 GW of installed nuclear capacity by 2030, against 378 GW today. However, the Fukushima accident will lead to delays in launching new programs.

A little more:

The news was followed today by confirmation that Areva will suspend planned "capacity extensions" at four nuclear sites in France, halt work to extend its Eagle Rock enrichment plant near Idaho Falls in the US, and scale back planned investment at uranium mines in the Central African Republic, Namibia and South Africa.

Uranium again. I guess you could look for corporate spin there, but it’s generally transparent. in any event, AREVA has created a plan called Action 2016 to help it refocus the company:

"Action 2016" [will] consolidate AREVA's leadership in nuclear energy and become a leading player in renewable energy.

You can read more about Action 2016 at AREVA’s site. Here’s what AREVA says about Fukushima and its role in the nuclear energy industry in general:

Faced, like all its competitors, with the period of uncertainty in the wake of the Fukushima accident, AREVA can rely on the strength of its integrated business model, which makes it possible to take advantage of opportunities in each segment of the nuclear market.

Which means the company can manage a facility top to bottom or just some aspects of an operation – and ride out the bumps if countries delay nuclear energy projects. 

None of this is to say that AREVA hasn’t hit difficulties or that the accident at Fukushima Daiichi hasn’t contributed to those difficulties. (Curiously, the global slowdown in electricity consumption and the continuing economic environment aren’t even mentioned. I’d hate to think we’re so used to them that we consider them a given.)

But it’s a little too easy to jump to the conclusion that the nuclear energy industry has entered a death spiral or even “reflects a trend',” even if one shy of evidence. A rough patch for one company doesn’t set the entire industry out on a plate for vultures. It’s lazy and dishonest to imagine it does.

---

For example:

China, the world’s biggest energy user, may resume approving new nuclear projects after the cabinet endorses draft safety rules prepared by the Ministry of Environmental Protection, an industry association official said.

Perhaps not fertile territory for AREVA, but this is the kind of thing it says it is waiting for. And it is happening.

---

I’m purposely ignoring the stories about the NRC currently making the rounds of news outlets. There’s a hearing of the House Oversight and Government Reform committee tomorrow at 10:00 am (EST) (you can watch the webcast here) at which the five commissioners will offer testimony and answer questions about possible discord at the agency. Let’s watch that first and then return to the subject. Until then, what you may read will remain a heap of gossip.

From USA Today:

Q: I never heard of Areva until I saw a TV ad recently and don't think I got the message. Just who is Areva and how are they going to influence my future? The commercial is catchy, and the little tune stays running around in your mind, but if people can't understand it, I don't think Areva is getting their money's worth.

A: Areva wants to power your future. It's a Paris-based industrial giant whose businesses include nuclear power and energy alternatives. It has U.S. operations in 45 locations in 20 states. The ad, which has aired previously, is part of a campaign started in May to make its name better known in the U.S. The animated TV ad, which you can see here, uses the 1980 Lipps Inc. classic Funkytown, a song that's also been in ads for FedEx, Ore-Ida's Funky Fries, Nissan and Volkswagen. Areva uses the opening lyrics for the song, which have a distorted sound through use of a voice box. They speak about moving to a town that's "groovin' with some energy." Areva marketers most care that you get the last few words: "Talk about it, talk about it, talk about it" (which is what they want you to do about them).

Canada / NE USA Bolide Meteor 12DEC2011

Canada / NE USA Bolide Meteor 12DEC2011




Sighting Reports from Readers for 12DEC2011 Bolide Meteor (click on image to enlarge)
Green Markers = Sighting Reports
Red Marker with Signal = Sound Report
Red Concentric Circle Marker = Allsky Camera
v.1 (c) LunarMeteoriteHunter / Google
All Rights Reserved - No Copy



12DEC2011 joshua porter sheldon vt 6:02 EST 5+ seconds before it crested tree line

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 13DEC2011

December's Geminid Meteor Shower Peaks Tonight
Space.comby Denise Chow, SPACE.com Staff Writer The Geminid meteor shower peaks tonight (Dec. 13), but interested skywatchers might have to battle chilly temperatures and bright moonlight. The annual Geminids shower is usually one of the most spectacular light ...


Geminids over NorwayThe ForeignerStargazers are in for a treat this evening as a 

Weekly Japan Update

The Fukushima updates are moving to a weekly schedule beginning today and continuing each Monday. Additional updates will be issued as needed to cover developing events.

Japan: Full Decontamination Efforts Will Begin in March

December 12, 2011

Industry/Regulatory/Political

• TEPCO said it will receive accident insurance from a Swiss company that will replace a consortium of insurers that will not renew its policies with the utility. TEPCO will pay about $258 million for a five-year policy, about 10 times the amount it paid to the consortium. The policy will cover claims related to Fukushima Daiichi.
• Japan’s Environment Ministry said that a full-fledged effort to decontaminate areas with high radiation will not begin until at least March, as the ministry must receive permission from affected landowners and must acquire temporary sites at which to store contaminated soil.
• Concentrations of cesium-137 in the ocean near Fukushima Daiichi peaked at 50 million times above normal, a study by the Woods Hole Oceanographic Society found. However, the study said that the radiation diluted rapidly and poses little or no danger to human and marine life.
  

Media Highlights

• A USA TODAY/Gallup poll found that 70 percent of Americans have become more concerned about the safety of nuclear energy because of the accident at Fukushima Daiichi. The poll found that 44 percent favor building new facilities, down from 57 percent from the last poll taken before the accident.
• The Mainichi Daily News wrote in an editorial that carrying out decontamination work as an international project will be beneficial to Japan and the rest of the world. “There is bound to be technology and expertise abroad that we do not have in Japan,” the editorial said. “If we are able to take advantage of them, the work will proceed more efficiently. In return, Japan should be able to pass on the knowledge and lessons learned from the Fukushima crisis to the rest of the world.”

New Products

• An article on NEI’s Safety First website outlines the response to the March 11 earthquake at the Fukushima Daini plant and details three key lessons the plant operator learned from the experience.

Upcoming Meetings

• The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold four public meetings this week to discuss with industry representatives proposals to implement individual recommendations from the NRC’s Japan near-term task force. Meeting agendas and further details on each meeting are available on a special NRC webpage.
• The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee holds a hearing Dec. 15 titled “Review of the NRC’s Near-Term Task Force Recommendations for Enhancing Reactor Safety in the 21st Century."

NEI Press Release: Effective Regulation of Nuclear Energy Important for Public Confidence in NRC

The following statement concerning the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is from the Nuclear Energy Institute’s president and chief executive officer, Marvin Fertel:

“Safe performance of nuclear energy facilities and the NRC’s credibility are the two most important factors for policymaker and public confidence in nuclear energy. As such, the industry is concerned with anything that threatens the credibility of either. We are confident that Congress and the White House will take the steps necessary to ensure that the NRC is an efficient, effective regulator that provides oversight of commercial nuclear technology.

“The issue that is of most concern is the question of a chilled working environment at the agency, including the possibility of staff intimidation and harassment, at a time when the senior management and staff are working on critical licensing activities and post-Fukushima safety recommendations. The industry takes safety culture issues seriously and we expect the same priority treatment of these issues by our regulator.

“The NRC functions best when it has a full complement of five capable commissioners to provide guidance and direction to the NRC staff. Safety is maximized when NRC and industry resources are focused on those matters that are most important to safety. It is important that the dynamics that exist within the commission be resolved professionally and expeditiously so that the important work of the agency can continue without interruption or distraction. The American people expect and deserve nothing less.

“The industry’s commitment to nuclear power plant safety is unwavering and we will not be distracted from this mission by events at the NRC. Of the top 20 performing plants in the world, 16 of them are American reactors. The industry exceeds federal safety standards and it is critical that our entire industry keep a sharp focus on safety. Furthermore, the industry is taking steps to make safe nuclear energy facilities even safer by applying the lessons learned from the accident in Japan at America’s nuclear power plants.”

Click here to find the full statement on NEI's Website.

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 12DEC2011

Full Moon May Spoil Geminid Meteor Shower's Peak Tomorrow ...The annual Geminid meteor shower peaks on Dec. 13, but bright moonlight is threatening to dampen what has typically been one of the most spectacular light ...www.space.com/13893-geminid-meteor-shower-peak-dec-13...
2011 Geminid meteor shower peaks December 13/14Examiner.comThe Geminid meteor shower is one of the more active annual 

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 11DEC2011

NASA missing moon rocks, meteorites and other astromaterials, report finds
collectSPACE.com
According to the OIG, NASA's Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office located at the Johnson Space Center in Houston manages about 140000 lunar samples, 18000 meteorites and approximately 5000 solar wind, comet and cosmic dust samples. ...

Meteor crater helps unlock planetary history
Tehran Times

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 10DEC2011

Oregon Trails: MeteoritesKDRVThey'd never heard of a meteorite started a wildfire. After all these years, she's convinced that space rock landed in the tinder-dry forest and started the Sprignet Butte Fire. The question always remained... What happened to any of that meteorite? ...


Lunar eclipse Saturday, meteor shower WednesdayNapa Valley RegisterA total eclipse of the moon will be visible on

On Politifact, President Clinton and Nuclear Costs

You may recall that in November, President Clinton made the following statement about the relative costs of nuclear, solar and wind in an appearance on The Daily Show:

"Solar energy and wind energy ... would already be competitive with coal if you had to pay the extraneous costs of coal -- the health care costs and other things. And ... wind within two years and solar within five will be competitive in price with coal. They're both cheaper than nuclear right now."

In response, Lou Jacobson, a reporter with Politifact, took a closer look at Clinton's claim, and rated it half-true:

Clinton was correct about wind energy being "cheaper than nuclear right now," at least the onshore kind. But for now, nuclear beats the cheapest form of solar energy on price. So we rate his statement Half True.

That claim didn't sit well with NEI's David Bradish, who pulled apart the numbers and suggested that Politifact change its rating from "half true" to "mostly false":

As shown above, the low end of nuclear’s cost range ($109.70/MWh) is lower than the high end of wind’s cost range ($115/MWh); therefore wind is not always cheaper than nuclear.

Further, the amount of wind that can be built is limited to specific places in the U.S. that receive adequate wind flow (see map below).

A substantial amount of wind cannot be built in places such as the Southeast due to a lack of natural resources. Areas with low wind resources will produce less electricity from installed turbines which in turn cause higher levelized costs.

[...]

Currently, 104 nuclear reactors (101 gigawatts) generate 20% of the country’s baseload power at low operating costs. This compares to 40 GW of wind and 1 GW of solar generating 2.2% and 0.0003% of the country’s electricity, respectively, at intermittent times.

The folks at PolitiFact should reconsider their conclusion about former President Clinton’s statements and change it from Half True to Mostly False.

Back on November 22, I passed David's analysis along to Jacobson, and here's the response I got:

I apologize for not getting back sooner. I was gone for most of last week and now we're on a short week.

We are expecting to do a full Mailbag treatment on this topic, probably next week, since we have received many comments on the story. We are happy to run your comments (likely abridged for space) in that piece. We usually do not run names with the comments in our mailbag items, but your case would likely be an exception, assuming you'd like to be identified.

I will say that our comments have included many examples of complaints that we were too soft on nuclear (and too hard on renewables) and many that we were too hard on nuclear (and too soft on renewables). Given the complexity of analyzing this issue -- both nuclear and renewables have complaints about how they were treated by the DOE methodology -- I do not see an obvious reason for us to change our rating from the fairly neutral Half True. But that's not my call--the editors determine the rating, and the writers only make recommendations.

Thanks for writing....

Lou Jacobson

Well, it's now December 8, and I have yet to see an update to the original piece. I checked in with Jacobson again today, and he wrote back that they've been busy, but are still planning to do a follow up. While I'm happy to take him at his word, we promise to keep you updated as to if/when Politifact gets around to doing a deeper dive on the evidence. As far as we're concerned, we think their readers deserve it.

The Latest Worldwide Meteor/Meteorite News 9DEC2011

NASA loses hundreds of historic rocks 
Sydney Morning HeraldResearchers have sticky fingers when it comes to NASA's moon rocks andmeteorites, and hundreds of samples have gone missing after being lent out by the US space agency, an audit has found. NASA Inspector General Paul Martin issued a report detailing ...

Westminster Astronomy Club gatheringBaltimore Sun (blog)The two-hour get together

NRC’s Jaczko Responds to Rep. Markey on the Sr-90 Issue at Vermont Yankee

It’s been a few weeks since I posted about Entergy responding to Rep. Edward Markey (D-Mass.) on the strontium-90 (Sr-90) issue at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant. NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko has since weighed in, on the NRC’s behalf, with a letter he sent to the congressman.

Of note, the chairman’s letter echoes what Entergy officials and the Vermont Department of Health (VTDH) have been saying all along:

Because there are multiple potential sources of Sr-90, including nuclear weapons testing by multiple countries in the middle of the last century, it is very difficult to draw conclusions about the source of any particular Sr-90 contamination that is found in the environment unless there is additional supporting evidence.

Because of this fact, Jaczko believes that Entergy’s Laurence Smith, manager of communications, is fair in one of his statements that “There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Vermont Yankee is the source for the strontium-90.” He writes:

The quoted licensee statements in your question are not without foundation based on the above information.

The chairman also continues by explaining that the NRC’s methods of analyzing the data employ a somewhat different “band of uncertainty” than the VTDH, and concludes that:

The VTDH results are too close to the level of uncertainty to be considered by themselves a conclusive indication of the presence of Sr-90. When taken together, these factors lead us to conclude that there is no need for further study of possible Sr-90 contamination from Vermont Yankee at this time.

If there is ever an indication of Sr-90 releases above the legal limit or contamination at Vermont Yankee, the chairman reassures the congressman that the:

NRC will take action, as appropriate, at that time.

Given that the state’s department of health and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission have come back to the congressman with similar explanations, I wonder if we can now consider this issue to be null?

Read the full letter here.