France dear country of your childhood = nuclear trash

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 07/07/08, 09:49

I lived 6 years on a shooting range with depleted uranium glory of the tank leclerc, wars of the gulf, balkans, lebanon etc .... = nuclear wars therefore.

this is where I learned everything about depleted uranium and its harmful fumes as a heavy metal in the body, irradiating it durably.
the electromagnetic field microwave etc. disturb these particles of heavy metal, obviously sensitive because metallic, prevents their elimination and promotes its harmful effects.
we know where we're going ...

As for extraction mines, it has become such a shame in France in terms of pollution, it has become so incompatible with occupational health, that we prefer to extract it in foreign countries (see scandal at Aréva in Niger, under the open sky without worker protection), let alone see the problem ...

but then ... it is still a fossil NRJ extracted in a foreign country ?!
what interest of energy autonomy, one can wonder?
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 08/07/08, 23:27

and There you go !
today a new leak from a nuclear power plant in Tricastin, announced this one ... the last one was not even a month ago from another power plant!
How much longer will we suffer these fatal accidents on the environment, which affects us all?

the tv report is available here:
http://www.lepost.fr/article/2008/07/08/1221255_vaucluse-fuite-d-uranium-a-la-centrale-de-tricastin.html

Uranium leak at the Tricastin nuclear power plant
09-07-2008 - 360 kg of uranium released into the environment at Tricastin: the "Sortir du nuclear" Network challenges the reassuring opinions of the authorities and reminds us that nuclear is dangerous.

The “Sortir du nuclear” Network protests against the reassuring statements made by the authorities concerning the radioactive leak which occurred on Tuesday July 8 in one of the nuclear installations at the Tricastin site (Drôme / Vaucluse). It is indeed impossible that such a discharge, containing uranium, does not have significant consequences on the environment and certainly on the health of local residents. If the figures recognized by the authorities are true, that makes 360 kg of uranium!

The official presentation, "30 m3 and 12g of uranium per liter", seems reassuring but that is indeed 30 liters, or 000g ... or 360 kg of uranium. It is likely that people have consumed contaminated water during the day, and end up with uranium particles in their body. Even when they are not very radioactive, these particles are excessively dangerous when they enter the body and attach themselves to it. There is then a very high probability of cancer.

The “Sortir du nuclear” Network calls for an international anti-nuclear mobilization on Saturday in Paris and recalls that, contrary to the authorities' claims, nuclear is one of the most polluting and most damaging industries for the planet:

- uranium mines - fuel for nuclear reactors - contaminate entire regions. French nuclear power contaminates in particular Niger, the mines of which produce a third of the uranium consumed by EDF.

- the reactors in operation release radioactivity into the air and into the water.

- reactors in operation release large quantities of chemicals into rivers and the sea (copper, zinc, phosphorus, sodium, chlorides, morpholine, etc.).

- nuclear reactors produce radioactive waste for which there is no solution and the most dangerous of which will last millions of years. These reactors produce, among other things, plutonium which is excessively harmful to living beings and which allows the manufacture of nuclear bombs.

- the overconsumption of electricity, 80% of nuclear origin, is ultimately very emitting CO2 because requiring the commissioning of thermal power stations (coal, fuel, etc.) in particular during each peak of consumption.

European citizens must make their voices heard, demand a European energy policy based on energy saving plans and the massive development of renewable energies, and ensure that Europe comes out of nuclear power, dirty energy.

Philippe BROUSSE


www.sortirdunucleaire.org


good night don't freak out it's not going to explode tomorrow
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79125
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 08/07/08, 23:40

360 kg of uranium in the wild ????

Is this a joke? : Shock: : Shock: : Shock:
0 x
User avatar
Flytox
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 14138
Registration: 13/02/07, 22:38
Location: Bayonne
x 839




by Flytox » 08/07/08, 23:57

Bonjour à tous


Well done the journalist, at the very beginning of the report he speaks of 3.6 kg of "pure product". What is the pure product? : Cry: : Evil:
Towards the end of the report, it becomes 300 kg of uranium ... another one who understands what he is talking about. :frown:
A+
0 x
Reason is the madness of the strongest. The reason for the less strong it is madness.
[Eugène Ionesco]
http://www.editions-harmattan.fr/index. ... te&no=4132
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 09/07/08, 09:35

how can they declare such an exact mass?

is it to deduce it better?

is it depleted or enriched uranium?

.................

nuclear, "it's great" ......
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 09/07/08, 11:58

0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79125
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 09/07/08, 12:02

jonule wrote:how can they declare such an exact mass?


Surely because it is a treatment process ...

The water may be "saturated" with

By the way, is this really water "water" or water with some added something?

Here is a doc on the question: http://www.cea.fr/var/plain/storage/ori ... b70252.pdf

ps: we continue on the subject specific to the accident please. Thank you.
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 09/07/08, 13:05

OK!
but to make the parallel between the 2 subjects, there is indeed dissemination in the environment of nuclear waste:

all that has a nuclear activity is created by this industry (EDF, AREVA, ANDRA etc etc etc) because it is an ARTIFICIAL nuclear activity, which did not exist on Earth: it must therefore be traced by traceability since its creation, until it is destroyed, and since it takes thousands and millions of years (4.5 million for depleted uranium) it must be stored and monitored.
€ 1 question: if it takes 4.5 million years to lose the HALF-LIFE of activity, what will be the size of the storage in m3 knowing the quantity of ore used each year? where will this storage be?

for now there is a significant amount that has been disseminated in the atmosphere that we all breathe.
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 09/07/08, 13:25

and say this is where I bought my rib from the rhone for years : Evil:
0 x
jonule
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 2404
Registration: 15/03/05, 12:11




by jonule » 11/07/08, 13:25

nuclear is dangerous and SALE


the tricastin station will be closed for serious breach:
we shouldn't be kidding with nuclear power like AREVA does.

LYON - The Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) on Friday asked Socatri (a subsidiary of Areva) to suspend the activity of its treatment station in Tricastin (Vaucluse), at the origin of an accidental release of uranium Monday evening, and to take "immediate safety measures" of this station.

The inspections carried out by ASN on Thursday revealed in particular that "the securing intended to prevent any new pollution is not completely satisfactory "and that" the operating conditions at the time of the incident were irregular with respect to the applicable regulatory provisions".

"These findings will give rise to the establishment of a report which will be sent to the Public Prosecutor", adds ASN in its press release.

Socatri had been called to order in May by the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) for "leaks" and "repeated deviations" from its chemical and radiological release authorizations. In a report, ASN indicates that "the pipeline which evacuates liquid effluents, due to its age, was the subject of repeated leaks in 2007"


During the night of July 7 to 8, 2008, a tank from the uranium effluent treatment station at the Tricastin nuclear site overflowed into its retention tank. It is no longer waterproof due to work, the effluents were discharged into the building, into the ground and into the rainwater evacuation network leading eventually to the river "La Gaffière", then the "Lauzon" and finally the Rhône.


uraniferous effluents = other name for radioactive waste

the overall quantity spilled transformed sediments, algae and all of the aquatic and planktonic vegetation of adjacent rivers into low-level radioactive waste, she explains. As the uranium content of water decreases, that of sediment increases, she adds. The association therefore requests that the silts and plants downstream from the discharge point be cleaned up and extracted in order to avoid long-term contamination of the local ecosystem and its food chains.



On several occasions, the CRIIRAD laboratory has detected abnormally high, and unexplained, levels of irradiation at the edge of the Tricastin nuclear site. Following a documentary search, the association concludes that 770 tonnes of radioactive waste are buried in the ground! Thus irradiating site employees, farmers in the area, and polluting the deep layers.

If the information was confirmed, what has been happening for thirty years on the Tricastin site could well constitute a new health scandal. Alerted by abnormal radioactivity measurements near the Tricastin nuclear site, the laboratory of the Independent Research and Information Commission on Radioactivity (CRIIRAD) carried out an in-depth study of the various declarations of the National Agency for Radioactive Waste (ANDRA).


So, confidence in the transparency of nuclear power? is that the new secret defense / transparency law 2006? thank you Mr. Borloo!

The result of this research is incredible ... According to CRIIRAD, in 30 years, 770 tonnes of radioactive waste have been buried in the ground, without any other protection. The radioactivity detected irradiates a large area, including a path regularly used by farmers. In addition, CRIIRAD recently received several information from personnel working on the Tricastin site. Serious malfunctions seem to have been detected, on three points:

tricastin scandal The waste mound is directly subject to climatic hazards (rain, wind ...), which have recently updated a number of drums and which has been treated by pouring a new layer of soil on the waste

tricastin scandal The water table located to the right of the site would be polluted, chemically and radiologically

tricastin scandal The working conditions of employees of subcontracting companies would expose them to health risks




You also need to know other gifts from this industry:
"carbon-14 in gaseous [radioactive] form cannot be trapped,"

these tricastin standards are often exceeded.
this gas comes out of the ventilation ducts for processing radioactive materials, the particles cannot all be filtered and land ... in nature, like tritium, another major pollutant in this industry.

where do these pollutants ultimately land?


The increased frequency of childhood leukemia near nuclear sites remains unexplained

Excerpt:
WHY do we observe, in the vicinity of certain nuclear installations, more childhood leukemias than in the rest of the population? Despite more than a hundred epidemiological investigations carried out in ten countries, experts still have no answer to this question. The debate was revived in December 2007 by a German study which showed that, among children under the age of five having grown up within a radius of five kilometers around one of the sixteen German nuclear power plants, blood cancers were 2,2 times more frequent than at national level.


Areva is doing everything to avoid a real local survey on cancers.


http://www.criirad.org/actualites/dossi ... 9juil.html
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 279 guests