Water and the lack of it

Discussion in '35mm Cameras' started by D Mac, May 19, 2006.

  1. D Mac

    D Mac Guest

    I was doing some pre-shoot work today at Brisbane City Hall (Queensland
    Australia) for a Wedding in a few weeks time
    http://www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery/Public/cityhall
    When I noticed the lack of lawn care and the beautiful water feature all
    filled in with dirt.
    http://www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery/Public/drought_cityhall So much for my
    portrait backdrops!

    I was told this was permanent and it would get worse real soon when they ban
    the use of hoses altogether. People responded by drilling bores, only to be
    told this might also be banned due to degradation of the water table. This
    once great town with buildings of great significance now has very little
    water and may soon be in crisis.

    It came to mind then, that poor planning and overpopulation have produced a
    water shortage like no city should ever have. Surrounding districts like
    Redlands and the Gold Coast have been opening the flood gates on their over
    full dams but Brisbane has expanded so far and so fast it now has no
    infrastructure to support it's growth.

    Meanwhile... Life for the rest of the population goes on...
    http://www.weprint2canvas.com/gallery/Public/lookin_window
     
    D Mac, May 19, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. You think things are crook in brissy, you should try up the hill here in
    toowoomba! At the moment they are estimating that unless we have major
    rainfall we'll be out of water in about 18 months. We have been on level
    4 restrictions (watering by bucket only) for several months now, and
    it is looking to go to level 5 (no outdoor water use at all) very soon.
    At least they didn't go stupid like BCC did and turn off drinking
    fountains in the parks. There is still reasonable amounts of water in
    the creeks through town, so the fountains etc are still running. Because
    of small amounts of rain, the town still looks pretty green, even though
    we are in a dire situation for our water supply. Despite this, the
    scaremongerers are still trying to stop the recycling project. Hell, I
    grew up in Dalby which is downstream from Toowoomba - I've been drinking
    Toowoomba's recycled sewage most of my life!!
     
    Graham Fountain, May 20, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. D Mac

    Alan Browne Guest

    It's, believe it or not, a welcome trend.

    Our province has banned most pesticides and herbicides and lawns are
    taking a beating. I've given up on my back lawn (a lot of shade to
    begin with) and I'm looking for attractive wild growth that's pest
    resistant. Right now the forest moss that I've allowed to grow rampant
    looks particularly good, especially when it rains...

    We're blessed with a lot of freshwater here (and in the last couple
    weeks a lot more than that), so except for a week or two in late July we
    can water all we want every other day (morning and evening). Some
    people have their own wells to supplement their city water allocation.
    (I wouldn't drink that well water, it will have pesticides and
    herbicides in it for the next 25 years before the soil is flushed clean.)

    I pay a flat fee for 255 m^3 per year for $155. Unlike some of my
    neighbors, I don't water that much (so I don't have a perfect lawn, like
    I care). I used 101 m^3 last year (but I don't get a rebate).

    Water resources worldwide are stressed. The Ogallala aquifer (one of
    the largest in the world) in the US was originally just below the
    surface, but after nearly 100 years of tapping it, it is now deeper and
    deeper below the surface and showing no sign of replenishment (estimated
    replenishment is 10% of what is taken). American farmers, and more
    recently cities, have depleted it rapidly through largely unregulated
    and inefficient use of the water. (Ironically, it has been shown that
    if they would use drip irrigation, saving 90% or more of the water, that
    they would get higher yields and cause less damage to the soil (erosion,
    salinization)). But as there is no $ incentive (water is cheap no
    matter how much they use), it is wasted as that's cheaper than efficiency.

    It saddens me that the most efficient and savvy farmers in the world are
    being so short-sighted about this. Less than 1% of US farms use drip
    irrigation.
    Given the extremes of climate by region in Australia it is no surprise
    that some areas have crossed the stress line. I thought Brisbane was
    pretty tropical and got a lot of rain? Or is there a "dry" season?

    Water management is another great crisis for our crowded planet.
    Farmers use the most and are those who are most able to reduce their
    consumption through efficiency. Again, this takes government action and
    their interests are driven by the wrong forces.

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, May 20, 2006
    #3
  4. D Mac

    Faz Guest

    Douglas - This is happening all over the world. Here in western Canada we
    have a ban on watering during the summer months for the lack of water. Clean
    water is hard to come by anymore with the polution of everything we touch. I
    see people watering their lawns and washing their cars knowing that clean
    water is a a very critical level. We don't seem to learn until it is too
    late, although we have a nice shiny and clean car.

    Regards,
    The Faz.........
     
    Faz, May 20, 2006
    #4
  5. Sea water + power = fresh water
     
    William Graham, May 21, 2006
    #5
  6. D Mac

    Alan Browne Guest

    Supply side attacks fail, especially when they require energy that is
    getting progressively more expensive and in the case of natural gas and
    oil, scarcer. You could use nuclear power and solar power, but both are
    expensiv and have other consequences.

    Conservation is cheaper. Less is more. The investment to convert
    farming to drip irrigation is tiny compared to the cost of building
    nuclear power stations.

    Waste not want not.

    The last is a bit of very "conservative" thought just for you William.

    ;-)
     
    Alan Browne, May 21, 2006
    #6
  7. I've got nothing against conservation, but I disagree when you say that
    nuclear energy is, "expensive and has other consequences." To me, the future
    is obviously nuclear power. There just isn't any other viable way to get our
    power without increasing global warming. Everything else is just a temporary
    stop-gap measure before we are really there.
     
    William Graham, May 22, 2006
    #7
  8. D Mac

    Alan Browne Guest

    The main consequence is managing nuclear waste. It is not cheap to
    build or run either and waste management is not included in the
    electrical costs you pay to your utility (if it is nuclear). Instead,
    waste piles up on site because there is nowhere to ship it to for long
    term storage. That cost has yet to be paid.

    It is one area where even the staunchest environmentalists are beginning
    to have second thoughts. After all there has been little pollution and
    very few deaths from nuclear when compared to oil.

    New technologies will make nuclear safer (better systems, fail-passive
    design, quality engineered software controls that pass rigorous design
    standards and testing). I believe this is the way to go. But there is
    no magic in it.

    Cheers,
    Alan
     
    Alan Browne, May 22, 2006
    #8
  9. D Mac

    Paul Furman Guest

    Tell ya what, you can make nuclear power in Canada & ship it down to us
    in hydrogen cells. We will pay well for it.

    :)

    I don't want any nukes in my back yard.
     
    Paul Furman, May 22, 2006
    #9
  10. I have heard that about nuclear waste....But I have driven from Wendover,
    Nevada to Salt Lake City, Utah, across that desert, and there is no way
    anyone can tell me that there is no safe place to store the nuclear
    waste...Exactly why there are idiots that put it in concrete and dropped it
    in the ocean I will never understand.......:^)
     
    William Graham, May 22, 2006
    #10
  11. D Mac

    no_name Guest

    Well, ... if you don't count downwind from Chernobyl:

    http://www.time.com/time/daily/chernobyl/maps.html
     
    no_name, May 22, 2006
    #11
  12. D Mac

    D Mac Guest

    Certainly there is no forgiving the horrible consequences abuse of power,
    neglect and ignorance of safety issues that were occurring before the fall
    of the Soviet Union. Alan is talking about a managed program in a capitalist
    country where non performance like happened at Chernobyl would mean
    financial loss.

    Capitalism is all about making money. There is no money in neglecting the
    source of it so in the instance on a western power commissioning a nuclear
    plant, the likelihood of another Chernobyl disaster is lower than the
    consequences of continuing to burn fossil fuel and pollute the atmosphere.

    Your reminder of the horrible consequences of nuclear disasters is timely
    when any discussion of this nature takes place. Thank you for the reminder.
     
    D Mac, May 23, 2006
    #12
  13. D Mac

    Tim Guest

    3 mile island in NY (a.k.a. USA, managed program in a capitalist
    country)? That came pretty close to a meltdown.
    3 mile island in NY?
    I'm not trying to dismiss nuclear power but it has not been used without
    incident in this capitalist country.
     
    Tim, May 25, 2006
    #13
  14. D Mac

    no_name Guest

    Managed you say? Like say Exxon Valdeze, or Enron ...
     
    no_name, May 25, 2006
    #14
  15. D Mac

    D Mac Guest

    These were shipping disasters, not Nuclear.
     
    D Mac, May 25, 2006
    #15
  16. No, but when you balance the deaths caused by those incidents against those
    caused by over 100 years of spewing smog into the air from fossil fuel
    driven operations, you will find that nuclear power is far, far safer. Try
    to realize that 75 man years of life is the equivalent of one death. Not all
    deaths are recordable by a human being collapsing and dying on the street
    right before your eyes.....If 75 people die one year before their time, then
    that is equivalent to one person dying in childbirth, or two people dying at
    37......
     
    William Graham, May 25, 2006
    #16
  17. There are nuclear reactors generating power all over the world. Many in
    France. The number of people whose lives have been spared by not having to
    breathe the smog produced by fossil fuel power plants is huge compared to
    those who have died in radiation accidents from nuclear power plants. There
    is no way to guarantee that an accident won't happen occasionally. This is
    true of anything....A cornice could fall off the edge of an office building
    and clobber you while you are walking down the street during your lunch
    hour....Would you make a law forbidding buildings taller than three stories
    because of this? - Of course not. There are no guarantees in life....You
    could drop dead five minutes from now due to an aneurysm......Nuclear power
    is the way to go. It is the safest, cleanest way to solve our energy
    problems. It's safety can be designed into its facilities by human beings
    plus money, as can the safety of any facility. What difference does it make
    whether you die of radiation poisoning or emphysema? You are dead in either
    case.....It is better that one die of radiation poisoning than 10 die of
    emphysema......And I bet that the statistics would show that the ratio of 10
    to one is approximately that of deaths from air pollution to deaths by
    radiation to date.......And we are learning more each day about how to make
    reactors safer.....
     
    William Graham, May 25, 2006
    #17
  18. D Mac

    no_name Guest

    Managed program in a capitalist country where non performance ...
     
    no_name, May 25, 2006
    #18
  19. D Mac

    no_name Guest

    Ok, so let's go nuclear ... here's just a sample of how our capitalist
    countries have managed.

    Notice that some names pop up again and again.

    In general, I've excluded military accidents, the odd h-bomb lost,
    broken or dropped where it wasn't intended. I have included accidents
    involving plants that manufacture weapons or weapons components that
    resulted in contamination of innocent civilians.

    By pure blind dumb luck, not all of these involved radiation being
    released, but all of them have indeed meant financial loss ... although
    it's not always the culpable party who suffered that loss.

    Pretty much, I don't include all the accidental shutdowns, cracks &
    leaks that stayed inside the plant, etc.

    [My additional comments in square brackets]



    1952, 12th December - NRX CHALK RIVER, CANADA

    First major reactor accident. Human error. Technician opened three or
    four valves and the resultant heat release melted some of the uranium
    fuel and boiled some of the coolant. The reactor core was nearly
    demolished by the explosions and much radioactivity was emitted.
    (Sources: Penelope Coleing for M.A.U.M./S. Novick. The Careless Atom,
    Delta books, NY 1969).

    [Heavy water reactor - leaked coolant into Ottawa River]

    1955, November - IDAHO FALLS EBR-1, U.S.A.

    The EBR-1 reactor had a partial core meltdown which destroyed it with
    ensuing low level contamination. (Sources: Eco, Atomic Reactor Safety
    Hearings, 1973 p. 56/Webb p.187)

    [This was an experimental "portable" reactor being developed for the
    military. Setting up required the operator to lift the control rod by
    hand to connect it to the lift mechanism. He lifted it a little too far
    and the reactor went critical. Sudden pressure rise spit the control rod
    out, impaling the operator to the ceiling of the containment. Two other
    operators were killed. It took months to clean up, with workers being
    able to only enter the containment for 30 seconds. When they were
    finally able to retrieve the bodies, they along with an ambulance they
    were carried in had to be buried at Hannaford's radioactive waste burial
    site]

    1957, October - WINDSCALE No 1, U.K.

    Fire caused by human error and defective procedures resulted in eleven
    tons of uranium being ablaze, relossing a vast cloud of radio-isotopes
    from the melted fuel. Milk from an area of more than 500 square
    kilometers (approx. 2 million litres) was poured into the rivers and sea
    as unsafe for human consumption. Farmers were compensated by the
    Government, but how many people living near Windscale were affected is
    not known. Nor is it known how much radioactivity descended over
    Westmoreland and Cumberland. Local inhabitants any there is a high
    incidence of cancer deaths in the area, but the Government did not carry
    out any medical or statistical checks. Both Windscale reactors have
    since been filled with concrete and entombed. The radioactive cloud
    reached up to Denmark. In London, 500 km from Windscale the
    radioactivity reached 20 times the normal level. Report of enquiries
    into safety was never published. (Sources s A. Gyorgy p.1198/S. Novick).
    However a previously classified report released in 1989, revealed that
    the Mc Millan Government invented large amounts of money to finance a
    concerted pro-nuclear campaign which included scientists traversing
    U.K., assuring people that the accident was insignificant. (W.
    Australian May 1989).

    [Reactor design similar to Chernobyl. Similar fire, similar downwind plume]

    SUPPLEMENTARY 1983, April - LONDON, U.K.

    32 people died as a result of a fire at the Windscale Plant in 1957. The
    toll rose when the National Radiological Protection Board considered
    extra cases of cancer researched by a scientist who examined the effects
    of Polonium released in the accident. Polonium was used in atomic bombs
    at the time of the accident. ("West Australian" 1/4/1983)

    SUPPLEMENTARY 1987, December 1987 - U.K.

    Official documents about a fire at the Windscale reactor in 1957 were
    released. The accident was much more serious than was then admitted and
    it was due to defects in the organization of the British Atomic Energy
    Authority and in the instrumentation at Windscale. Information on the
    fire was ordered kept secret by Harold Mc Millan, the Conservative Prime
    Minister of Great Britain and has been published now under the 30-year
    Rule which allows formerly confidential government documents to be
    declassified.

    Windscale (later named Sellafield) was producing Plutonium for military
    use. The fire broke out at one of its atomic piles -primitive reactors
    in which containers of uranium were irradiated to produce the Plutonium.
    It raged for 16 hours. The Windscale cloud contaminated large areas of
    Britain and Ireland, and contained more than 600 times as much
    radioactive iodine as was released during the Three Mile Island
    accident. Authorities at the time decided not to evacuate local people
    even though they were exposed to radiation levels 10 times the allowed
    LIFETIME dose - within a matter hours. The only one safeguard taken to
    health was the destruction of two million litres of contaminated milk
    from farms around Windscale. However, it has now been revealed that milk
    with contamination up to three times the official danger limit was
    released for human consumption. ("Swedish News Service", "Financial
    Times" 2 Jan. 1988, "Observer" (U.K.) 3 Jan 1988, "Daily Telegraph"
    (U.K.) 2 Jan 1988, "Guardian" (U.K.) 4 Jan 1988, WISE 285.

    1958 - CHALK RIVER, CANADA MRU

    Irradiated fuel element broke and plant caught fire. Two months of
    intense contamination followed. 400,000 square metres around the
    building were contaminated. (sources: "Accidents, Near Accidents And
    Leaks in the Nuclear Industry", Penelope Coleing for Sydney M.A.U.M.;
    Jean Geue A.A.B.C. "Les Amis de la Terre" L'escroquerie nucleaire. Stock
    1978 France.)

    1964, February - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Leak of radioactive waste. (Charles Wakstein "The Myth of Nuclear
    Safety" The Ecologist, July 1977).

    1964 - SHIPPING PORT, PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA, U.S.A.

    Inadequately designed new steam generators were installed but the pipes
    to them could not carry the new load. As a result "hangers" were
    installed to hold the pipes. The hangers broke and fortunately a worker
    noticed the sagging pipes. If he had not and the reactor had started
    operation the worst loss of coolant (L.O.C.A.) would have occurred. (N.
    Thieberger, p.2; Webb, R.E. p.192).

    1966 - 5th October - LAGOONA BEACH, ENRICO FERMI (FAST BREEDER) REACTOR,
    MICHIGAN, U.S.A.

    Partial meltdown. Reactor successfully shut down. It took 1-1/2 years to
    work out the cause of the accident. Several pieces of sheet metal had
    broken off the bottom of the reactor vessel and were swept up in the
    coolant flow, causing a blockage. The reactor had been operating at 15%
    of full power and was afterwards de-commissioned. Four million people
    lived within a mile of the site. ("Les Amis de la Terre"; Penelope
    Coleing for M.A.U.M., Jean Geue A.A.E.C.)

    [Major accident narrowly averted. Plant located 30 miles from Detroit.
    The reactor coolant was liquid sodium metal. Leaked coolant would have
    caused a fire that could not be put out by the local fire department]


    1967, January - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Leak of radioactive waste at Windscale after tank overflowed and
    contaminated beach. (Wakstein, May 1977; Nucleus - 25th July 1979, p.11)

    1968 - ELK RIVER, U.S.A.

    Emission of high levels of radioactivity from leak in primary circuit.
    Reactor had to be closed down. ("Contingency Plan")

    1968 - LA CROSSE, U.S.A.

    Failure to control system. Reactor had to be closed down. (Source:
    "Contingency Plan")

    1968, February - SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A.

    Major cable fire. Failure to shutdown equipment at Edison's San Onofre
    Plant - (a Westinghouse operation). (Penelope Coleing for M.A.U.M.)

    1968, March - SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA, U.S.A.

    Another major cable fire. Shutdown equipment at Edison's San Onofre
    Plant failed. (n. Thieberger)

    1969, March - U.S.A.

    Three uranium hexaflouoride shipments lost in transit in U.S. (Nucleus
    25/7/79)

    [This is the stuff you "enrich" in gas centrifuges]

    1969, 10th April - U.S.A.

    An 8,500 lb. shipment of enriched uranium in transit from Goodyear
    Atomic Corp. to New York turned up in Cleveland, Ohio. (Nucleus -25/7/1979)

    1969, July - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Leak of plutonium at Windscale reprocessing plant. Beaches contaminated.
    Not made public until 1974. (Nucleus - 25th July, 1979)

    1970 - WINDSCALE. U.K.

    Criticality accident. Uncontrolled release of radiation caused by
    neglect of an accumulation of plutonium in a vessel. Engineers did not
    know there was any plutonium residue in the vessel as the reactor did
    not feature the necessary neutron monitoring devices. (Sources: C.
    Wakstein, P.212)

    1970, 5th June - INDIAN POINT, NY, U.S.A.

    Reactor had a major plumbing problem which required the use of 700 men
    (for a few minutes each) over a 7 month period to weld in the
    radioactive area. ("Les Amis de la Terre"; "L`Escroquerie Nucleaire").

    1970, 5th June - DRESDEN 2, ILLINOIS, U.S.A.

    A spurious signal started off an incredible series of mistakes by both
    technicians and equipment. The reactor was out of control for 2 hours,
    pressure built up inside until it released radioactive iodine 131 to 100
    times the safe limit to the dry well. Kendall Maglever preliminary
    review of the A.E.C. reactor safety study. According to Dr. STERNGLASS
    of the University of Pittsburgh, 2,500 babies would die because their
    parents lived downwind of the plant. (Work Circle Environmental
    Protection; Jean Geue A.A.E.C; Thieberger p.4)

    1970 - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Uncontrolled radiation release follows failure to observe safety
    procedures. Negligence blamed as plutonium accumulated in vessel.
    (Wakestein - "The Myth of Nuclear Safety" -The Ecologist - July, 1977)

    1970, 30th September - HANFORD, WA, U.S.A.

    A loss of coolant automatically started the primary SCRAM system (SCRAM
    is the rapid reinsertion of control rods). The system failed due to a
    short circuit. The backup SCRAM system worked. General Electric
    calculated that the probability of a failure in SCRAM was one in ten
    billion; the actual rate so far has been one in ten thousand. Past
    accidents at Hanford occurred on 3rd October, 1954, 4th January 1955,
    and 6th January 1966. (Jean Geue A.A.E.C; Webb, R.E. p.192-193)

    1971, August - VERMONT YANKEE, U.S.A.

    The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (1974) quoted the following
    incident: "In August, 1971, an intruder penetrated past guard towers and
    fences to enter the grounds of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant at
    Vernon, Vermont". (Nucleus, 25th July, 1979)

    1971, 19th November - MINNESOTA, U.S.A.

    Reactor's waste storage space being filled, company began spilling
    radioactive waste into Mississippi River. By 21st November about 50,000
    gallons of wastes had been dumped into the river and some were sucked
    into the domestic water intake for St. Paul. ("Record on Nuclear
    Safety", Saskatchewan Coalition Against Nuclear Development in Gyory,
    A., et al Op.Cit. p.120)

    1971, December - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Radioactive wastes released into the sea - equivalent to 200,000 curies,
    16 times the predicted levels. (Nucleus, 26th July, 1977)

    1972, 8th March - INDIAN POINT, NY, U.S.A.

    Pressures in the primary cooling circuit increased by 30%. Water
    released subsequently killed 150,000 fish in the Hudson River. Studies
    in the U.S. have found that there is a slight increase in radiation
    levels in rabbits and fish around all sites in the U.S. ("New York
    Times" - 16th June, 1974)

    1972, September - MILLSTONE 1 REACTOR, U.S.A.

    The 40,000 condenser tubes which were made of aluminum alloy corroded,
    allowing sea water into the cooling system. (Jean Geue A.A.E.C.) "Boston
    Globe" - 14th October, 1974).

    1972, 23rd November - TENNESSEE, U.S.A.

    A hi-lacked DC-9 circled Oak Ridge nuclear installation for 2 hours.
    Hi-jackers demanded $10 million. Oak Ridge was shut down and most staff
    evacuated. Hi-jackers demands were met and they flew to Cuba.
    (Thieberger p.6; Nucleus - 25/7/79)

    1973, 15th January - VERMONT YANKEE, U.S.A.

    Vermont Yankee reactor emitted 100 times the safe limit of radiation
    caused by cracks in tubes carrying radioactive material. At one stage
    Vermont Yankee's plant control rods were put upside down and the plant
    later started operating with the lid off the pressure vessel. ("Times
    Record" - 23rd April, 1974).

    1973, 17th April - MILLSTONE 1, CONN., U.S.A.

    Numerous cracks were discovered in the pipes of the cooling system.
    Radioactive mist escaped and activated radiation alarms on nuclear
    submarines docked at Waterford. ("Wall Street Journal" 3/5/1973)

    1973, 20th April- HANFORD, WA., U.S.A.

    100,000,000 gallons of atomic wastes stored in containers whose life is
    30-40 years. A leak was discovered on 20th April, but wastes were still
    poured into the tanks, resulting in a leakage of 115,000 gallons before
    8th June, when pouring stopped. Geologists point out that the area has
    been under water at least 4 times in the last 40,000 years, the last
    time being 14,000 years ago. (Work Circle Environ. Protection; Penelope
    Coleing)

    1973, June - HANFORD, WA. U.S.A.

    A further 460,000 litres of radioactive liquid spread on the ground
    surrounding the reprocessing plant. ("Los Angeles Times" -5th July, 1973)

    1973 - NEW JERSEY U.S.A.

    EDWARD GLOSSON, a New Jersey truck dock worker, accidentally spilled
    plutonium on himself while handling a leaking box of liquid waste in
    1963. Four years later his hand, then his arm and shoulder were
    amputated because of a rare form of cancer from which he died in 1973,
    aged 39. The company responsible refused to pay him compensation before
    he died. (Nucleus 25/7/79; Thieberger.7).

    1973, September - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Radiation leak in the reprocessing plant; 34 workers were irradiated.
    (Jean Geue A.A.E.C.) Head and plant at reprocessing facility went
    abruptly and alarmingly out of service when an accident occurred
    involving the inadvertent attempt to fill a vessel already containing
    highly active residues. (Ian Breach, Windscale Fallout, p.37)

    1973, 22nd October - SAN ONOFRE, CA., U.S.A.

    Malfunction of turbine generator led to shutdown of reactor. Increased
    vibration led operators to shut down faster than normal, causing
    overheating; this in turn activated the primary coolant system which
    caused a drop in pressure, normally indicating a blocked coolant pipe.
    The emergency system cut in and flooded the reactor with cooling water
    which hit the valves with too much force since the coolant was already
    there; pipes broke and six months were needed to repair the damage.
    ("The Observer", 2nd October, 1973)

    1973, 14th December - HANFORD, U.S.A.

    35,000 litres of radioactive waste leak. Jack-rabbits in the area
    excrete radioactive "hot" pellets and coyotes which eat the rabbits die
    of radiation poisoning. By the end of 1977 half of a million gallons of
    wastes had leaked from Hanford site. (Les Amis de la Terre.)

    1974 - KERR McGEE NUCLEAR PLANT, NEW YORK, U.S.A.

    Woman contaminated by plutonium. Karen Silkwood had gathered evidence on
    the unsafe working conditions at the plant and was on her way to deliver
    these to a newspaper reporter and a union official when she died in
    mysterious circumstances. ("West Australian" 22nd May, 1979; A.B.C.
    "Four Corners", 21st July, 1979). Subsequently Karen Silkwood's father
    received $1 million in settlement from the company.

    1974, 14th March - HANFORD, WA., U.S.A.

    Leak of 115,000 gallons of highly radioactive waste. Defective storage
    tank. This was the seventeenth leak at Hanford. (Nucleus, 25th July,
    1979; Penelope Coleing, M.A.U.M.)

    1974, 6th April - N.S.P.C., MINNESOTA, U.S.A.

    Northern States Power Company reactor dumped 10,000 gallons of
    radioactive water into the Mississippi River causing Minneapolis to
    close its water intake gates. From 1969-1974 the A.E.C. made a total of
    10,320 inspections and found 3,704 installations with one or more
    violations (but imposed civil penalties or some other action a total of
    only 22 times). (N.Y. Times, 26th August, 1974). 1974 analysis
    "indicating the industry can anticipate a probable accident involving
    radioactive material in 1974 and perhaps as many as one per month in
    2000" (Donald E. Reardon, Deputy Manager ERDA, S.F. Office, at Warren
    Committee hearing in November, 1975) (Thieberger, p.9)

    1974, 2nd May - SAVANNAH RIVER, SOUH CAROLINA, U.S.A.

    A radioactive cloud of Tritium formed after a leak in a pipe at nuclear
    reactor. ("Le Monde" 5/6/1974)

    1974, 3rd-4th May - HANFORD, WA., U.S.A.

    1,900 to 7,600 litres of liquid radioactive waste containing 600-2400
    curies of Caesium 137 and 10-40 curies of Strontium 90 leaked from
    underground storage tank No. 111 which is 40 metres above the water
    table. (Penelope Coleing, p.4; Thieberger, p.4; Nucleus, 25th July, 1990)

    1974, 3rd Sept - LOS ALAMOS, NEW MEXICO, U.S.A.

    1,900 to 3,800 litres of radioactive liquid escaped into the environment
    onto one of the main streets and into a parking lot. The area was closed
    off, parts of the road were replaced. Past accidents at Los Alamos
    occurred on 21st Aug. 1945; 25th May, 1946; 30th Dec. 1958. (Thieberger,
    p.11; Nucleus, 25/7/79)

    1974, 18th October - CON EDISON TRI-CITIES PLANT

    Radioactive gas released, exceeding the A.E.C. limit by 33%. In 4,000
    shipments of radioactive fuel in 1975, 400 reported accidents occurred
    in which 150 released "small amounts" of radioactivity, two "Potentially
    dangerous". (Robert Barker, N.R.C. Department of Transportation, in his
    summary of WASH 1238 at Warren Committee hearings in November, 1975).

    1974, November - WINDSCALE, UK

    Monitoring failure at reprocessing plant, worker allowed to leave with
    plutonium on his shoos. (C. Wakstein, "The Myth of Nuclear Safety";
    Nucleus, 25th July, 1979, p.15)

    1975, January - DRESDEN 2, ILLINOIS, U.S.A.

    The Dresden No 2 B.W.R. reactor had to be shut down after cracks were
    found in the high-pressure piping of the emergency core cooling system.
    The cracks penetrated the full thickness of the piping resulting in a
    water coolant leakage. A loss of coolant accident could have occurred
    resulting in reactor coolant blowing out of the ruptured pipe and
    exploding into steam. The cracks were discovered by accident. "Large
    cracks had occurred in other unrelated piping, which leaked noticeable
    quantities of water and similar cracks were then found in many boiling
    water reactors in the same piping." (Webb, R.E. p.201)

    1975, 30th January - U.S.A.

    U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission orders shut down of 23 boiling water
    reactors, because of hairline cracks found in coolant pipes at Dresden.
    Second time in nine months that U.S. plants closed. (Sien/LNS Aus
    Uranium Kit, August, 1975; Nucleus, 25th July, 1979)

    1975, 27th March - NORTHWEST UTILITIES, WATERFORD, CONNECTICUT, U.S.A.

    Nearly 1,200 workers had to be evacuated from the Northwest Utilities
    Nuclear Plant because of a radioactive water spill. Some of the
    contaminated water entered Long Island Sound. 20 workers had to wade
    through 4,000 litres of spilt radioactive water to safety. (Penelope
    Coleing; Work Circle Environmental Protection)

    1975, May - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Leak of radioactive waste found its way through two successive leaks.
    Corrosion is a possible cause. (Wakstein, C., Nucleus, 25th July, 1979)

    1975, July - VERMONT YANKEE PLANT, U.S.A.

    Faulty valves allowed 300,000 litres of radioactive water from plant to
    spill into river. (Nucleus, 25th July, 1979, p.15)

    1976, 12th January - KENTUCKY, U.S.A.

    Six drums containing radioactive waste burst open after they rolled off
    tractor-trailer trucks in Ashfield, Kentucky, U.S.A. Two drivers were
    slightly injured. When the highway was cleaned checks indicated
    radioactivity. (Legislative Research Service Paper, Parliamentary
    Library, Canberra)

    1976, January - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Leak of radioactive waste in storage tank caused by corrosion.
    (Parliamentary Research Service Paper, Parliamentary Library, Canberra)

    1976, April - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Leak of radioactive waste from still drums caused by corrosion.
    (Parliamentary Legislative Research Service Paper, Parliamentary
    Library, Canberra)

    1976, WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Further leak of radioactive waste from steel drums after corrosion.
    (Nucleus, 25th July, 1979)

    1976, mid-July - VERMONT YANKEE PLANT, U.S.A.

    Faulty valve caused 300,000 litres of Tritium contaminated water to
    spill into the Connecticut River. This was the second of three spills.
    (Guyorgy, p.120; Clamshell Alliance p.4)

    1976, October - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    100 gallons per day of contaminated water leaking from an old waste
    storage silo. This incident was not reported to the Government for two
    months, and eventually set off the Windscale Public Enquiry.
    (Parliamentary Legislative Research Service Paper, Parliament House,
    Canberra)

    1976, November - PILGRIM PLANT, BOSTON EDISON, U.S.A.

    16,000 herring were killed, probably by thermal shock at Boston Edison's
    Pilgrim Plant on Cape Cod Bay. (Clamshell Alliance Publication p.4)

    1976, November - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Leak of radioactive waste. Beach contaminated by tritium. (Parliamentary
    Legislative Research Service Paper, Parliament House, Canberra)

    1976 - MILLSTONE, CONNECTICUT, U.S.A.

    Radioactive mist that escaped from the Millstone plants in Waterford
    activated nuclear alarms in nuclear submarines docked at Groton.
    (Clamshell Alliance, p.4)

    1977, 7th October - COLORADO, U.S.A.

    Nuclear alert declared near Springfield after 19 tonnes of powdered
    uranium-oxide fell from the back of a truck after an accident. The
    material was being transported from Wyoming to Oklahoma for processing.
    Colorado State Department later urged the N.R.C. to review its safety
    standards. Department spokesman said: "Luckily no other traffic came
    along. If cars had churned through the powder we could have been faced
    with a major crisis". ("West Australian", 7th October, 1977)

    1977, December - MILLSTONE, CONNECTICUT, U.S.A.

    Two hydrogen/oxygen explosions in the waste radioactive gas stream at
    Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Waterford, Connecticut, U.S.A. Chimney
    door blew off. One worker slightly injured and helpers contaminated with
    radioactivity. Reactor completely shut down. (Parliamentary Legislative
    Research Service paper, Parliament Library, Canberra)

    1977, December - COLORADO, U.S.A.

    10,000 lbs. of radioactive uranium concentrate spreads over 5,000 square
    miles, in some placed up to a foot deep after a truck crashes. Wrong
    decontamination equipment sent to area. 12 hours before health
    specialist on scene. ("Nation Review", 3rd May, 1979)

    1977 - VERMONT YANKEE, U.S.A.

    Truck carrying spent radioactive resins from Vermont Yankee reactor
    crashes. Second time in two years that a truck from Vermont Yankee was
    involved in a crash.


    ======= skipping ahead ===============

    1979, 2nd February - NORTH CAROLINA, U.S.A.

    The Federal Bureau of Investigation recovered 68 kgs of uranium stolen
    by an employee at General Electric's plant at Wilmington, North
    Carolina. ("Sydney Morning Herald", 3rd September 1979 - AAP Router)

    1979, 28TH March - THREE MILE ISLAND, PA, U.S.A.

    Dangerous gas bubble formed. Risk of hydrogen explosion. Some vital
    instruments were exposed to more radiation than they were designed to
    withstand. Reactor is so highly radioactive it may never re-open.
    Radioactivity in reactor building is 100 times lethal level. Three Mile
    Island accident had 150 precedents...150 valve failures in similar
    reactors, a U.S. Government official told the U.S. Senate. ("Daily News"
    lst May 1979)

    1979, April - ZION, ILLINOIS, U.S.A.

    Radioactive gas escaped into the air and released 3,200 ltr of
    radioactive water within the plant. Three men were sprayed; "all wore
    protective clothing and tests had shown no traces of contamination," a
    company spokesman said "It was only because of the TMI accident that
    they had informed the N.R.C." ("West Australian", 3rd May, 1979).
    Comment: "Does this mean that previous accidents were not reported?"

    1979, 1st May - ZION, ILLINOIS, U.S.A.

    Technical defect releases radioactive gas together with 650 gallons of
    water. (W.I.S.E. No.5 5/1979)

    1979, 7th May - BROWN'S FERRY, ALABAMA, U.S.A.

    Radioactivity released into the Tennessee River as a result of a leak in
    the generating units cooling system at Brown's Ferry Nuclear Plant.
    ("West Australian", 7th May, 1979)

    1979, 22nd June - PEACH BOTTOM 3, PENNSYLVANIA, U.S.A

    Second uncontrolled release of radioactive gas in two days at Peach
    Bottom, Pennsylvania Unit 3 (1065 P.W.R.) nuclear reactor. (W.I.S.E. Ibid)

    1979, 17th July - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    Six men contaminated by radiation when fire broke out. A spokesman for
    the plant said the contamination was 'very minor' but more tests were
    being made on the men. He added the fire was quickly put out and there
    was no danger to the public. Staff were evacuated and given medical
    checks. (Reuter, "Sydney Morning Herald", 18th July 1979)

    1979, 30th July - RIO PUERCO, NEW MEXICO, U.S.A.

    Accident in uranium processing plant. Flash flood of radioactive
    material washed an estimated 130 kms down the usually trickling Rio
    Puerco River which flows past a Navajo Indian Reservation. New York
    Times reported 100 million gallons of water and 1,100 tonnes of uranium
    tailings mishap considered largest such release in U.S. Residue from
    plant goes into large dam; dam burst. ("A.H." Program A.B.C. Australia
    30/7/1979; "N.Y. Times" 28/7/1979 )

    1979, 15th October - FORT ST. URAIN, DENVER, CO., U.S.A.

    The Fort St. Urain reactor, 22 kms from Denver was shut down after a
    malfunction released radioactive gas into the atmosphere. The shut down
    was the third in two years due to "equipment malfunction". A spokesman
    for the Public Service Company of Colorado which operates the plant said
    the shut down occurred after helium, the primary coolant, seeped into a
    back-up water System. ("The Australian" 16th October 1979 from United Press)

    1979, December - PALISADES, MICHIGAN, U.S.A.

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission fined Michigan's Palisades nuclear
    power plant $45,000 for safety violations which caused radioactive
    leakage over an 18 month period.

    1980, 11th February - THREE MILE ISLAND, PA., U.S.A.

    4,500 litres of radioactive water leaked from the Three Mile Ialand
    reactor. (W.I.S.E. Ibid)

    1980, 12th February - THREE MILE ISLAND, PA., U.S.A.

    The radioactive gas Krypton 85 escaped from Three Mile Island for 16
    hours. (W.I.S.E. Ibid)

    1980, 27th February - THREE MILE ISLAND, PA., U.S.A.

    "Tiny" amounts of radioactive gas was released into the atmosphere as a
    preliminary to the first human visit inside the contaminated reactor
    building since March 1979. Metropolitan Edison Company employed a team
    of four workers to enter the airlock to sample Cesium and Strontium so
    the company can determine how to decontaminate the plant.
    Lieutenant-Governor William Scranton said the safety of the local people
    could not be guaranteed. "We fear the dangers of not venting at all are
    greater than controlled venting." he said. ("Daily News" 27th February
    1980; International Nuclear News Service No.12 p.33)

    1980, 18th June - WINDSCALE, U.K.

    175 workers at Windscale Nuclear Plant became ill after drinking
    contaminated water. Fault in the system allowed water from the polluted
    River Eben, which is used to cool the reactor, to enter the drinking
    water through a valve. (A.A.P. "Daily News" 18/6/1980; "West Australian"
    19/6/1980)

    1980, 29th June - TMI 2, HARRISBURG, PA., U.S.A.

    More than 40,000 litres of radioactive water leaked from a reactor at
    the Three Mile Island nuclear power station at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania
    on 29th June 1980. The leak in the No.2 reactor started in a cooling
    system. The No.2 reactor has been the only one in use since the major
    accident at Three Mile Island last March. ("The Australian" 30/6/1980)

    1980, 4th July - TMI 1, HARRISBURG, PA., U.S.A.

    Spill of 45,000 litres of radioactive water at Three Mile Island's
    undamaged but idle No.1 reactor during preparations to vent radioactive
    Krypton gas. According to Metropolitan Edison Company spokesman no
    radiation was released to the outside environment. ("Weekend News" 28th
    July 1980)

    1980, 8th September - ILLINOIS, U.S.A.

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is investigating the possibility that
    1,400 kilolitres of radioactive water may have leaked from the nuclear
    power plant near Morris, Illinois. "We think it's a paper loss - a
    faulty gauge or some problem in monitoring." said a spokesperson from
    the operators, Commonwealth Edison. ("West Australian" 8th September 1980)

    1981, 15th January - INDIAN POINT, NY., U.S.A,

    Small amounts of radiation found leaking, possible since early December,
    into auxiliary steam system and then into Hudson River from Indian Point
    Plant in New York State. (W.I.S.E. Vol.3 No.2 p.18)

    1983, August - CANADA

    3,700 litres of radioactive tritium leaked into Lake Huron and Lake
    Ontario from Canadian nuclear power stations. ("Financial Review"; "The
    Age" 8/8/1983)

    1983, August - TMI, PENNSYLVANIA, U.S.A.

    Records of radioactive leak tests at the undamaged reactor at Three Mile
    Island may have been tampered with, according to an N.R.C. report. ("The
    Age" 8th August 1983)

    1986, February -- WINDSCALE (SELLAFIELD) U.K.

    A Plutonium mist has leaked at Britain's only nuclear processing plant
    at Sellafield. ("The Daily News" 6/2/86, "The Age" 7/3/86)

    1986, February - SELLAFIELD, U.K.

    Britain's only nuclear processing plant has had its second radioactive
    leak this month amid complaints from Irish officials over the discharge
    of uranium from the plant into the Irish Sea. ("The Age", "The West
    Australian" 20/2/86)

    1986, March - SELLAFIELD, U.K.

    Another five workers were contaminated with radioactivity in another
    leak at the Sellafield nuclear processing plant in Cumbria. This is the
    fourth incident in the past five weeks. ("The Age" 3/3/86, "The West
    Australian" 4/3/86) As the people of the village of Seascale continue to
    live their lives in the shadow of the Sellafield nuclear plant,
    leukeemia is 10 times the national average among the area's children
    under 15. ("The West Australian" 18/3/86)
     
    no_name, May 26, 2006
    #19
  20. BIG SNIP

    You (or your source) forgot to list all the people who have died from
    conventional electricity generating plant accidents since the beginning of
    the industrial revolution in the middle 19th century. And, of course, the
    millions of man-lives lost from emphysema and cancer from the air pollution
    generated by these plants along with their electricity.
    So what are you trying to say? - That shit happens? - Of course, there
    are, and will be accidents. There have been accidents taking human lives (as
    well as the lives of innocent animals) ever since the dawn of mankind. What
    we are talking about here is the implementation of a policy that will result
    in the minimization of detrimental impact on the environment per Megawatt of
    useful power produced during the next century or so. Can you show me that
    there is a better one than nuclear power?
    Someone said that a 250 square mile solar array would do the job.....If
    true, that sounds pretty good to me. 250 square miles is a postage stamp in
    the center of the Nevada-Utah desert. I'd go for that......
     
    William Graham, May 26, 2006
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.