 |
Nuclear Safety and Public Health |
The MP for Bridgwater, Ian Liddell-Grainger, has been howling about the failure of Government and the Environment Agency to dredge Somerset levels' rivers.
He is simultaneously banging the drum to have a new nuclear power plant built at Hinkley Point. He sees no contradiction between the two!
|
| IT'S OUR JOB TO KEEP THE CITIZENS OF BRISTOL SAFE: |
| Bristol City Council's Civil Protection Unit has responsibilities to its residents, outlined in the Civil Contingency Act 2004, which spells out a duty to assess, plan and advise in emergencies and assist the public. |
| Legislation means that the team will have to draw up a plan for dealing with a nuclear disaster. Bristol 's proximity to Hinkley Point power station means the city needs to be able to deal with a threat as severe as Fukushima . But surely with a power plant so close, Bristol wouldn't stand a chance in an emergency? |
| "The issue is we would have 40 to 50 minutes to evacuate the whole city. The only way this would be possible was if there were buses all lined up with their engines running," civil protection manager Simon Creed admits. "Our way of dealing with this would be to tell people simply to go inside, stay inside and tune in to the radio until a national rescue operation could be mobilised." |
The limits to the council's abilities is something which makes the team slightly uncomfortable and the recent floods hammer home just how helpless defences could be. More >>>
|
Fukushima,
could it happen here?: The first seventy-two hours of nuclear fallout
are critical for health. But that is the very time
when information is most scarce. Now, the
British Isles’ only independent radiation
monitoring network is offering a unique
service. Within ten minutes of radiation levels’
exceeding background by 40%, you can
receive e-mail alerts until radiation levels
return to normal. More >>> |
Science with a Skew: The Nuclear Power Industry After Chernobyl and Fukushima: That mainstream media have been powerful advocates for nuclear power comes as no surprise. "They are saturated with a skilled, intensive, and effective advocacy campaign by the nuclear industry, resulting in disinformation" and "wholly counterfactual accounts.widely believed by otherwise sensible people," states the 2010-2011 World Nuclear Industry Status Report. More >>> |
Fukushima: BBC Horizon debunked! |
|
|
Explosion at French nuclear plant: The safety of French nuclear power plants has been seriously undermined by the explosion at a waste processing plant on 12 September 2011 which killed one worker and injured four others. More >>> |
A briefing produced by the NFLA to provide a general overview and analysis of the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan. This provides an overview of the interim Weightman review of the technical implications of the Fukushima incident on UK nuclear safety and considers the implications of the incident on nuclear safety and wider issues around the appropriate future energy mix. Click Here |
| What would happen to the fallout if a Tsunami damaged Hinkley Point? Air modelling of fallout plume
by Chris Busby, Dai Williams & Cecily Collingridge |
|
|
Chernobyl, 25 Years Later: April 26, 2011 will mark the 25th Annivesary of the Chernobyl catastrophe, and for more than 50 years, the World Health Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency have abided by an agreement that in essence, covers each other's back - sometimes at the expense of public health. More >>> |
Radioactive Contamination of proposed nuclear site at Hinkley Point: In a report for Green Audit (Feb 2011), analysis is presented showing the presence of enriched uranium contamination on the site proposed for the new nuclear reactors. Examining gamma spectroscopy radioactivity data tables that formed part of the Environment Impact Statement EIS supplied by EDF Energy, it was possible to show that the 2square kilometer site contained approximately 10 tonnes of enriched uranium reactor fuel. Read the full report HERE |
| Feb 2011: Energy major EDF has indicated that there is a technical flaw in 34 of its 58 French nuclear reactors that could affect the ability of the assets to operate in line with existing safety practices. The facilities in question are the company's 900 MW reactors that were constructed in the 1970s, at which time current standards relating to water injection - one of the main safety measures used to cool the reactors in the event of an emergency - were not in place. "When the reactors were designed, there were no standards concerning the precision of measuring the high-pressure (water) flows," EDF said in a statement on its website, adding that the precision of these systems was around 80 per cent of the current standard. [UXPRESS Issue 125] |
Cancer, Infant Mortality and Birth Sex-Ratio in Fallujah, Iraq 2005-2009: Chris Busby, Malak Hamdan and Entesar Ariabi Published: 6 July 2010 International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health.
There have been anecdotal reports of increases in birth defects and cancer in Fallujah, Iraq blamed on the use of weapons, possibly including depleted uranium. The authors obtained responses to a questionnaire on cancer, birth defects and infant mortality. The overall response rate was better than 60%. Read the full report |
The medical and economic costs of nuclear power by Helen Caldicott: "Telling states to build new nuclear plants to combat global warming is like telling a patient to smoke to lose weight." A recent study sponsored by the German government examined children who lived near 16 of the country's commercial nuclear power plants. The results revealed a strongly increased risk of all childhood cancers, particularly leukaemia, the closer the proximity of the children's residence to the reactor. More >>>> |
Toxic link: the WHO and the IAEA: In 1959, the World Health Organisation's assembly voted into force an obscure but important agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The effect of this agreement has been to prevent the WHO from playing its proper role in investigating and warning of the dangers of nuclear radiation on human health. More >>>> |
| Breast Cancer Rates Up Near Nuclear Power Plants: On 28 Sep 2008 The Independent on Sunday reported that the incidence of breast cancer among people living near the Hinkley nuclear power stations in Somerset is much higher than expected. There were 167 cases of breast cancer in nearby Burnham from 1994 to 2004, 50% more than expected on national averages, said epidemiologist Professor Chris Busby. Data, collated by the South West Public Health Observatory, was obtained by Stop Hinkley. |
ICRP model in trouble: A New Scientist report on Uranium toxicity reveals a massive gap in the scientific modelling of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). There are massive implications for all aspects of nuclear policy and Uranium weaponry. More >>> |
Scientists discover possible radiation and heart disease link: Scientists studied workers at four UK nuclear sites, including Sellafield, and discovered a potential connection between exposure to radiation and heart disease. A study of nearly 65,000 nuclear industry workers over more than 60 years has found a possible link between high radiation exposure and heart disease. More >>> |
Nuclear plant workers show higher cancer risks: Workers at one U.S. nuclear facility have suffered higher-than-average rates of certain cancers, a study shows -- suggesting that on-the-job exposures are to blame. Researchers found that while death rates from many causes were lower than national rates, workers had higher-than-expected rates of death from certain cancers. More >>> |
| 10 Jan 04: Burnham breast cancer rate still high: Breast cancer in Burnham and surrounding towns is a fifth more prevalent than the national average, according to a scientist and campaigner who has studied new figures provided by the Cancer Intelligence Service. Dr Chris Busby from Green Audit has examined the latest figures published by the South West Cancer Intelligence Service (SWCIS) and confirmed that, in thirteen years between 1990 and 2002, breast cancer registrations were 21 per cent higher than should be expected. More >>> |
|
|
|
