Is the mysterious radioactive plume from Mayak -- and will we ever know?

In a November 24 column in Counterpunch, Beyond Nuclear's Linda Pentz Gunter reports on the radioactiveplume of ruthenium 106, detected in Europe and seemingly emanating from deep inside Russia, and possibly -- or even probably -- from the Mayak nuclear facility. But she postulates that a potential reason behind Russia's denial of an accident at that facility is because it is owned by Rosatom, the state nuclear corporation actively marketing itself around the globe. A nuclear disaster could put a serious dent in commerce. So perhaps the origins and consequences of this significant release are being suppressed, even from local residents and workers around the site who may not be getting the medical help they need and deserve. 

Here are the introductory paragraphs -- or read the full article.

September 29 marked the 60th anniversary of the world’s third most deadly— and least known — nuclear accident. It took place at the Mayak plutonium production facility, in a closed Soviet city in the Urals. The huge explosion was kept secret for decades. It spread hot particles over an area of more than 20,000 square miles, exposing a population of at least 270,000 and indefinitely contaminating land and rivers. Entire villages had to be bulldozed. Residents there have lived for decades with high rates of radiologically induced illnesses and birth defects.

Now, evidence is emerging of a potentially new nuclear accident and indications point once again to Mayak as one of the likely culprits. Ironically, if there was indeed an accident there, it happened on or around the precise anniversary of the 1957 disaster. The Research Institute of Atomic Reactors in Dimitrovgrad in the region is another possible suspect.

The presence of the man-made radioactive isotope, ruthenium 106, was detected in the atmosphere in early October by a French nuclear safety institute and by a Danish monitoring station, but only recently confirmed by Russia’s meteorological agency. However, the Russian authorities continue to deny that the releases came from one of their nuclear facilities and the source of the release is yet to be identified.

And the release of ruthenium 106 is a massive one, indicating a major accident, not a minor leak. The French radiological institute for nuclear safety IRSN) calculated the release at 300 Terrabequerels. To put this in perspective, it is an amount equivalent to 375,000 times the annual release of ruthenium 106 authorized for a French nuclear power plant. 

Read the rest of the article at Counterpunch.

Nukes in Space — in Time of Trump

What kind of deadly disaster could the Trump administration wreak in space? Beyond Nuclear board member and journalist, Karl Grossman, sounds an ominous warning.

"With Trump as president and green lights given to industry after industry to do or continue to do deadly things, Trump and his band of scoundrels are pushing for the nuclear industry to bring its deadly product into the heavens."

A Vice News article had this frightening headline: “President Trump has a plan for space domination.”

And with the nuclear industry failing on Planet Earth, it is looking to nuclear-powered missions to put humans on Mars. An explosion on launch, landing or in space does not bear thinking about. 

As Grossman also reminds us, the Cassini probe to Saturn launched in 1997 was packed with 72 pounds of plutonium with unimaginable consequences had it failed. At the end of its mission it was crash-landed into that planet in April 2017.

Read the full article.

Nuclear industry rhetoric as bankrupt is as its finances so they've gone bananas

In Counterpunch today, our article about the lame attempts by nuclear propagandists at the COP23 in Bonn to sell nuclear by dissing bananas. Seriously. Here's our intro. Then read more.

"We’ve heard this nonsense before, of course — that bananas are a teensy bit too radioactive for comfort. So if you eat a banana a day, (or live in Denver, or fly in an airplane, or salt your food with Morton’s), then you are a high-risk taker who would be far safer just living contentedly next door to a nuclear power plant. We debunked these false arguments in our 2013 report, Pandora’s False Promises (see page 30 for bananas.)

At the Cop23 Climate Talks currently underway in Bonn, a group calling itself Nuclear for Climate, wants you to slip on their false banana propaganda and fall for their nonsensically unscientific notion that bananas are actually more dangerous than nuclear power plants! I am not making this up. Here is the picture.

The oxymoronic Nuclear for Climate people are handing out bananas complete with a sticker that reads: “This normal, every day banana is more radioactive than living near a nuclear power plant for one year.”

We’ve long contended that these pro-nuclear front groups treat the public like readily dupable dunderheads. We’ll sell you a logical lie, they say, and then you’ll believe in nuclear power, and climate change will be solved! (Comfortingly, perhaps, if this is all they’ve got, then the industry rhetoric is now on a par with its finances: in full bankruptcy.)" Read the rest of the article.

Trying to temper the Trump trigger finger

November 14 hearings called by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair, Bob Corker (R-TN) around President Trump’s ability to launch an unprovoked nuclear attack, failed to get consensus or a resolution. The hearings were prompted by Senator Ed Markey’s (D-MA) Restricting First Use of Nuclear Weapons Act (S.200). A similar bill has been introduced in the U.S. House by Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA). Markey called the hearings a start but added:  “I don’t think that the assurances that I’ve received today will be satisfying to the American people. I think they can still realize that Donald Trump can launch nuclear codes just as easily as he can use his Twitter account.” General C. Robert Kehler, Dr. Peter Feaver and the Honorable Brian McKeon testified against rewriting laws to restrain a president and suggested a chain of command would review any presidential strike order and could advise against carrying it out or even refuse to do so. But as several Democrats noted, President Trump has shown little inclination to take advice and has effectively surrounded himself with individuals who would not offer “real resistance.” Watch the full hearings.

Special Report: Revolt at Trump’s Pro-Coal, Pro-Nuclear & Pro-Gas Panel Rocks U.N. Climate Summit

Amy Goodman, host of Democracy Now!As reported by Democracy Now!

The Trump administration, which has decided to make the United States the only country in the world to not subscribe to the Paris Climate Agreement, met with fierce and impassioned resistance at the UN Council of Parties (COP23) climate gathering in Bonn, Germany.

As Democracy Now! reports:

Democracy Now! was there when activists and Democratic lawmakers at the U.N. climate summit in Bonn, Germany, staged a full-fledged revolt Monday when the Trump administration made its official debut at this year’s conference with a forum pushing coal, gas and nuclear power. The presentation was entitled “The Role of Cleaner and More Efficient Fossil Fuels and Nuclear Power in Climate Mitigation.” The panel was the only official appearance by the U.S. delegation during this year’s U.N. climate summit. Of the four corporate representatives pushing nuclear, gas and coal, Lenka Kollar of NuScale Power and Amos Hochstein of Tellurian told Amy Goodman that they disagreed with Trump’s decision to pull the U.S. out of the climate agreement.

The reason that the nuclear power industry supports the Paris climate agreement is that it would like to sell its snake oil to the world as the supposed solution to the very real problem. But IEER showed clearly 11 years ago, nuclear power is not the answer (the very title of Beyond Nuclear founding president Helen Caldicott's 2006 book). IEER also showed, a decade ago, that efficiency and renewables are the answer--and Germany, for one, the fourth largest economy in the world, is following that carbon-free, nuclear-free roadmap!