Greenpeace Hong Kong slams nuclear 'complacency' on Daya Bay

Greenpeace slams nuclear 'complacency' on Daya Bay
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Kenneth Foo 
The Standard


A green group yesterday slammed the government's nuclear disaster contingency measures as "dangerously outdated" and urged it to abandon plans for future atomic expansion.


Greenpeace said the fallout from any meltdown at the Daya Bay nuclear plant in Guangdong will be many times that of the Fukushima disaster last year in Japan.



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



The group claimed the 20-kilometer evacuation zone around the Daya Bay plant in current plans is insufficient as winds can carry radiation fallout as far as 80 kilometers (not just 80 km!) . Hong Kong is just 50km away from the plant.


There are also no risk assessments and detailed emergency plans to protect the people of Hong Kong from the health and economic repercussions of a nuclear disaster, it said.


"It is ridiculous that governments can approve nuclear reactors but are not ready to protect people from nuclear risks, hazards and disasters," said senior campaigner Prentice Koo Wai-muk.


"You can finish reading the whole emergency plan in a matter of minutes because there is simply nothing there."


He also urged the government to shelve plans to double the amount of power generated through nuclear means by 2020 (Stop import any Nuclear Power!) .


CLP Holdings has a 25 percent stake in Daya Bay, which supplies about 23 percent of the territory's electricity.


Security Bureau officials have rated the chances of a meltdown on the scale of Fukushima at three in 100 million.


This led Koo to accuse them of complacency as Fukushima officials had estimated the chances of a nuclear disaster to be as low as one in a million, but the disaster still occurred.

Greenpeace urges Hong Kong government to drop Nuclear power expansion

Greenpeace urges govt to drop N-power expansion
2/29/2012
By Fan Feifei (HK Edition)
China Daily


Greenpeace on Tuesday called upon the government to drop all plans for nuclear power expansion, and to review the "Daya Bay Contingency Plan" immediately. 


The environmental group said there is a lesson to be learned from the Fukushima nuclear disaster last year on March 11. The disaster at the Fukushima reactor triggered off an earthquake and a tsunami.



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



The report, released by the organization indicated that the Japanese government's insistence of setting a 20 kilometer (km) evacuation zone was insufficient. Greenpeace also said there was not enough care for the victims affected by the nuclear leak.


Greenpeace underlined that though Japan was considered one of the best-prepared countries in the world for handling nuclear disasters, the reality of the Fukushima disaster proved to be far worse than any disaster plan or nuclear evacuation plan had anticipated.


The organization said Daya Bay nuclear plant had a similar contingency plan to its Japanese counterpart, namely, full countermeasures to be invoked within a 20 km radius around the nuclear power stations in the unlikely event of a serious nuclear accident.


Prentice Koo, Greenpeace senior campaigner, said Hong Kong has less preparation compared with Japan. He also noticed that the densely packed population of Hong Kong might result in more serious incidents.


"This report shows that nuclear energy is inherently unsafe. Nuclear power must be phased out and replaced with smart investments in energy efficiency and renewable power", said Koo.


Koo added, "this approach will create millions of sustainable jobs, improve energy independence, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and will also ensure people will never again suffer radioactive fallout from a preventable disaster".


The organization appealed to Chief Executive candidates to learn from the Fukushima experience, and to formulate more safe energy policies, leading Hong Kong to a sustainable future without nuclear energy.


The environment group also suggested the Security Bereau improve the Daya Bay contingency plan and invite the public to participate in the related formulation.


The Security Bereau said it had set up the advisory panel to make an overall review of the Daya Bay contingency plan since last year and the panel mainly checked the renewal of the infrastructure and safety measures at the Daya Bay nuclear plant.


The group included official members and unofficial members from medical, nuclear power, engineering, atmospheric science, radiology and other sectors.


The Security Bereau still considers the 20 kilometers evacuation zone around nuclear power stations to be sufficient.


The organization also provided mobile phone applications for testing the distance between the users and the location of Daya Bay nuclear plant and then decide where to move in case of disasters.

Fukushima single mother Kanako Nishikata's nuclear challenge Hong Kong's three chief executive contenders

Fukushima mother's nuclear challenge
Chief executive hopefuls face questions on safety and disaster planning from a woman who fled Japan's radiation zone with her children last year
Cheung Chi-fai 
Feb 29, 2012
SCMP       


A single mother from the radiation-contaminated Japanese city of Fukushima will challenge Hong Kong's three chief executive contenders face to face on issues of nuclear safety and clean energy on Saturday, a green group says.


Through the Fukushima experience, Greenpeace hopes the Hong Kong government will review its emergency plan should a nuclear accident break out at the Daya Bay energy plant in Shenzhen. 



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



"Hong Kong is far less equipped than Japan in coping with such a crisis, given our high population density, weak disaster awareness, and lack of space in the city that offers virtually no room to escape from any radiation," Greenpeace campaigner Prentice Koo Wai-muk said.


Mother-of-two Kanako Nishikata will discuss how the nuclear disaster in March last year changed her life.


Now a campaigner to protect children from radiation, Nishikata will attend the City University forum on environmental protection. She is expected to question candidates Henry Tang Ying-yen, Leung Chun-ying and Albert Ho Chun-yan.


She led a quiet life until March 11, when an earthquake and ensuing tsunami damaged nuclear power stations near her Fukushima home, causing a radiation leak. Sceptical of the government's actions to contain the leaks, Nishikata chose to flee inland with her children.


Koo said Nishikata was just one among many people whose lives were thrown into uncertainty by the nation's worst nuclear accident.


"Lessons from Fukushima", a report compiled by global experts, showed how unprepared the Japanese government was in handling the emergency, Greenpeace said.


It said Hong Kong might suffer the same experience should a similar accident occur at the Daya Bay nuclear power station, 50 kilometres from urban Hong Kong. Like the Japanese, Koo said, Hong Kong might be overestimating the safety of Daya Bay. "The decades-old [safety] assessment is bound to be inaccurate now."


He also called on the government to release computer modelling results on the effects on various parts of Hong Kong of a nuclear accident.


Koo said a plan to help hospital patients, pregnant women or single elderly people should also be drafted. About 570 such people died through negligence in Fukushima, he said.


There was also the question of how to support people told to stay at home for safety reasons. During the Fukushima crisis, the mayor of Minamisoma appealed on YouTube for help for residents told to stay home for more than 10 days.


The Security Bureau said a review of procedures in the event of a nuclear incident was being completed and would be released soon.


chifai.cheung@scmp.com

Massive Solar Storm Could threaten Nuclear Power Plants

Japan's Nuclear Disaster Could Happen Globally, NASA warns Solar Storm Grid Failure
 Mar 19, 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpI-m62q_Os


The power grid is getting smarter, but is it tougher?
By Emily Chung, CBC News 
Mar 30, 2011
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/03/11/f-power-2020-aging-infrastructure.html


Massive Solar Storm Could Cause Catastrophic Nuclear Threat in US
By IB TIMES STAFF REPORTER
August 6, 2011 
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/193517/20110806/solar-storm-catastrophic-nuclear-threat-united-states-satellite-communications-nuclear-regulatory-co.htm


Severe Solar Storms Could Disrupt Earth This Decade: NOAA
By IB TIMES STAFF REPORTER
August 8, 2011
http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/194166/20110808/solar-storms-severe-solar-storms-earth-paralyse-carrington-event.htm


Solar storms threaten nuke plants: Electric power outages could last “for years or even decades” — Risk significantly outweighs that of major earthquakes
August 7th, 2011 
By ENENEWS STAFF 
http://enenews.com/solar-storms-threaten-nuke-plants-power-outages-could-last-years-decades-risk-significantly-outweighs-major-earthquakes


Solar flare could unleash nuclear holocaust across planet Earth, forcing hundreds of nuclear power plants into total meltdowns
September 13, 2011
http://www.naturalnews.com/033564_solar_flares_nuclear_power_plants.html


http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree 
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree

Climate Spectator: What's really wrong with nuclear?

Climate Spectator: What's really wrong with nuclear?
Tristan Edis
27 Feb 2012
Business Spectator


Climate Spectator


As we approach the 12 month anniversary of the Fukushima disaster, it’s worth reflecting on the potential future role of nuclear power in this country. In spite of this disaster the Australian Government was brave enough to suggest nuclear power as a back-up plan in the Energy White Paper. While I’m very optimistic about renewables in combination with energy efficiency, I’m also keen on a back-up plan given the threat of global warming.


The kind of temperature changes expected as a result of global warming have occurred in the past due to natural causes. The problem is they involved very nasty things called mass extinctions.


That’s why I like anything that has a demonstrated track record of significantly reducing emissions. It’s why I like compact flourescent light bulbs, solar hot water, wind turbines and solar photovoltaic panels. Heck I even like pink batts. After all pink batts don't spontaneously combust, they were put alight by highly inefficient, poorly installed halogen downlights.


All of these things definitely work, and I can see first-hand evidence of them delivering rather than promising to deliver.


It’s also why I like nuclear power. Nuclear power generated a little over 13 per cent of the world's electricity in 2010. It has a horrible track record of meeting construction timetables and budgets, but it can definitely supply large quantities of electricity with low emissions. It has achieved this while resulting in significantly less deaths than coal use, a major plus in my book in spite of Fukushima. I worry that Japan and Germany, with their nuclear phase-outs, will instead revert to fossil-fuels rather than renewables, which is exactly what Japan is doing right now.


For a geologically and politically stable country like Australia, nuclear power could be a good option for us to reduce carbon emissions while meeting the essential need for large quantities of electricity.


http://easss.com/nuclear


The one problem with nuclear power is its advocates.


Why?


Nuclear supporters push the deluded idea that nuclear will be viable without the need for a strong carbon price.


Many of those who back nuclear power are often the same people suggesting that Australia should not be imposing a price on carbon emissions. They seem to suggest that nuclear is a costless fix.


When you dig into the assumptions behind these claims of a costless fix you quickly find a range of clever accounting tricks as well as plain nonsense.


Advocates who try to use nuclear as an excuse to not price carbon will often adopt an incredibly unrealistic interest rate on financing, such as 5 per cent. No company can raise debt or equity finance to build a power station at 5 per cent return, unless perhaps they’re a state-owned enterprise in China or France.


Their second trick is to assume short construction times for nuclear plants that bear no relationship to experience. The World Nuclear Association, for example, will uncritically print claims by power plant vendors of construction taking 36 months. Yet most of the plants built in the western world took over 90 months to build according to the International Atomic Energy Agency.


They will then claim that these construction delay problems have been fixed with new ‘Generation 3’ designs. Finland was the first Western country to order a generation 3 reactor, the Olkiluoto-3 unit. The project, which began in early 2005, was reported in 2010 as running €1.7 billion over budget and up to four years late. The other example is the Flamanville-3 project in France, which began in 2007 and was planned to be complete in 2012 at a cost of €3.55 billion. Since then the completion date has slipped to 2016 and the capital cost has been revised up three times. It is now expected to cost about €6 billion.


If you adopt realistic assumptions in accordance with past experience (as opposed to nuclear vendor promises they won’t put in a contract), nuclear could potentially be competitive against wind power in this country. But it will need a very strong carbon price of $60tCO2 or more to be competitive with fossil fuels.


Nuclear advocates argue against efforts to deploy renewable energy based on an excessively simplistic view of how we maintain electricity reliability.


If you were to believe nuclear advocates, if a power plant’s output were to drop-off then the lights would go out. Apparently each individual power plant must produce 100 per cent of the time.


But variability is an inherent feature of electricity systems that means we are already well-equipped to manage wind and solar power. Demand is not constant and can vary quite substantially from day-to-day and hour-to-hour, requiring flexibility from our power plants. Power stations and power lines can also fail unexpectedly. As a result, electricity systems already have a large amount of power generating capacity laying idle for much of the year which can be rapidly ramped-up and down to help accommodate wind and solar power. The idea that we need one new fossil fuel plant to back-up each renewable power plant is nonsense.


Nuclear advocates, rather than acknowledging problems with nuclear power, explain them away with reference to technologies that aren’t commercially available.


On the fact that the plants come in one size – bloody big and hard to swallow – they invoke such things as pebble-bed modular reactors or generation IV designs that will come in nice modular small-scale plants. But the only place these things exist is engineers’ drawing pad and experimental test plants. Not a single reputable nuclear power plant vendor could even quote you a price on such a plant.


In relation to the issues of uranium supplies being limited and the problem of long-term radioactive waste, they cite that this will be fixed through breeder reactors or the use of thorium. One problem – efforts to develop breeder reactors have been beset with problems and none are operating commercially.


Most importantly many nuclear advocates just don’t believe global warming is a problem.


Several nuclear advocates in Australia have regularly called into question whether global warming is real or even a problem. This makes me nervous that they aren’t advocating for nuclear because they see it as a viable and necessary option for reducing Australia’s carbon emissions. Rather they may be using it as a smokescreen to undermine other more readily implemented means of cutting emissions.


The majority of Australians are opposed to the use of nuclear power in this country. We might like to assume this away but it’s a political reality that makes nuclear power impractical for reducing Australia’s emissions for at least the next two decades. We can’t just twiddle our thumbs while we hope for public opinion to change.

5 new countries go nuclear despite Fukushima: U.N.

5 new countries go nuclear despite Fukushima: U.N.
WORLD FEB. 25, 2012 AFP
JapanToday


At least five countries will start work on their first nuclear reactors this year despite the jolt to international confidence caused by the Fukushima disaster, a top U.N. nuclear official said Friday.


“We expect that this year Vietnam, Bangladesh, United Arab Emirates, Turkey and Belarus will start building their first nuclear power plants,” Kwaku Aning, deputy director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), told a forum in New York.


He said Jordan and Saudi Arabia could follow in 2013.


About 60 countries approached the international agency in the past year about starting nuclear programs, Geoffrey Shaw, the IAEA director general at the United Nations, told the same forum.


http://easss.com/health


Aning said that all countries considering nuclear power asked tough questions about the March 11, 2011 Fukushima disaster, when a Japanese reactor went into meltdown after being hit by an earthquake and tsunami.


The U.N. agency was “working assiduously” with member countries on infrastructure safety and site selection for the reactors, he said.


The countries seeking nuclear power for the first time “are all taking lessons from what has happened in Fukushima,” Aning said.


“Developing countries are very much aware that if the safety is not there, then nobody is going to send them the technology,” Aning said. “But there are some countries which have no other choice.”


He cited the example of Jordan, which has no fossil fuel.


Germany has decided to gradually phase out the use of nuclear power after the Fukushima disaster. Other European countries have announced new restrictions.

Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant Turkey

The Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant is a planned nuclear plant at Akkuyu, in Büyükeceli, Mersin Province, Turkey. It would be the country's first nuclear power plant.


In May 2010, Russia and Turkey signed an agreement that a subsidiary of Rosatom — Akkuyu NGS Elektrik Uretim Corp. (APC: Akkuyu Project Company) — would build, own, and operate a power plant at Akkuyu comprising four 1,200 MW VVER units. The agreement was ratified by the Turkish Parliament in July 2010.


http://easss.com/travel


Engineering and survey work started at the site in March 2011. The construction of the first unit will begin in 2013, with the four units put into service in 2019–22. A 49% stake will be sold to other investors. Potential investors are Turkish companies Park Teknik and Elektrik Üretim.


Turkish Electricity Trade and Contract Corporation (TETAS) has guaranteed the purchase of 70% power generated from the first two units and 30% from the third and fourth units over a 15-year power purchase agreement. Electricity will be purchased at a price of 12.35 US cents per kW·h and the remaining power will be sold in the open market by the producer.


There are serious objections to the project. The most important objection is that Büyükeceli and the surrounding coastline may lose its touristic potential after the realization of the project. Büyükeceli residents are also worried that the already low population of the town may further decrease and the town may lose its township status. The government on the other hand, prefers this site because of the low population density and low risk of earthquakes.

Human chain against nuclear plant in Turkey

Human chain against nuclear plant in Turkey
4/17/2011


A part of chain in the western quarters of the city
Human chain against nuclear plant in Turkey was the name of a peaceful protest.


Turkey plans to build the first nuclear plant in Akkuyu location in Mersin Province about 140 kilometres (87 mi) west of Mersin. The contract has been signed and the preliminary works at the construction site have already been started. But most of the residents of Mersin oppose the decision. The opposition sharply increased after the Fukushima I nuclear accidents in Japan.


http://easss.com/travel


On 17 April 2011 a human chain was formed in Mersin to protest the decision. It was planned that there would be 30 locations to form chains along the highway connecting Mersin to Akkuyu. But the participation was higher than the expected and several of these chains were merged with. The east end of the chain was in Mersin midtown and it reached some 20 kilometres (12 mi) west along the highway uninterrupted. Also the settlements at the west including the district centers of Silifke and Erdemli as well as Büyükeceli, the town nearest to construction site participated.


"The earthquake and tsunami in Japan proved how dangerous nuclear technology is," said Sabahat Aslan, a spokesperson for the Mersin Anti-Nuclear Platform. “We organized this protest to say ‘no’ to nuclear power plants, which will put future generations in danger.”



TURKEY Tr-National
Human chain formed against nuclear plan in Turkey's Akkuyu
MERSIN - Anatolia News Agency | 4/17/2011


People from the province of Mersin have created a 'human chain' in different parts of the city to protest plans to build a nuclear power plant in Akkuyu district.


People from the Mediterranean province of Mersin have created a “human chain” in different parts of the city to protest plans to build a nuclear power plant in the province’s Akkuyu district.


“The earthquake and tsunami in Japan proved how dangerous nuclear technology is,” said Sabahat Aslan, a spokesperson for the Mersin Anti-Nuclear Platform. “We organized this protest to say ‘no’ to nuclear power plants, which will put future generations in danger.”


According to Aslan, thousands of people gathered at 30 separate points in the province to raise their voices against the planned nuclear plant construction.

Turkey Support No Nuclear Energy Facebook Groups Pages

Greenpeace Akdeniz - Türkiye 
http://www.facebook.com/Greenpeace.Akdeniz.Turkiye
352724



International
http://nuke6.blogspot.com/2011/10/support-no-nuclear-energy-nuclear-free.html



Stop The Akkuyu Nuclear Plant In Turkey
http://www.facebook.com/groups/166234483432234/
218


Against Nuclear Power Plants in Turkey
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Against-Nuclear-Power-Plants-in-Turkey/117625428315176
205


Say No to nuclear power station in Akkuyu, Turkey
Akkuyu´da Nükleer Enerji Santrali´a istemiyoruz!!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Say-No-to-nuclear-power-station-in-Akkuyu-Turkey/189747534393763
117

Power needs set to spark Dongfang

Power needs set to spark Dongfang 
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
The Standard


A commemorative note issue by the Bank of China (3988) to mark its centenary sparked a speculative frenzy in Hong Kong and China.


This shows that many people have cash, but lack the confidence to buy stocks.


The Hang Seng Index has rebounded 5,000 points from October but not every share has outperformed the index. One of my favorites, Dongfang Electric (1072), is among the laggards.


People are still worried that nuclear power development will slow worldwide following the debacle at the Fukushima Dai Ichi nuclear plant in Japan last March.


But to cope with soaring power demand, I am not convinced that solar, hydro and wind energy sources can suffice for China. (Disagree 100%)



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



Beijing reportedly outlined an ambitious national nuclear power development plan for the next 10 years. At present, the domestic nuclear power sector has a capacity of 11.9 gigawatts.


The National Energy Administration is targeting 80 GW generating capacity by 2020.


Sooner or later, China will resume approving new nuclear projects.


Apart from Dongfang, keep an eye on Harbin Electric (1133). Dr Check and/or The Standard bear no responsibility for any investment decision made based on the views expressed in this column.

Cold forces Germany to restart switched off nuclear plants

Cold forces Germany to restart switched off nuclear plants
Thu Feb 9, 2012 
Press TV


A barge lays on the border of a frozen river in the harbor of Duisburg, western Germany, on February 8, 2012.


Bitterly cold weather sweeping across Europe has forced Germany to restart several reactors to meet the nation’s energy needs.


High electricity demands prompted Germany’s network operators to call upon nuclear power plants that had been taken off line last year but left in reserve as a "preventative measure," the daily Handelsblatt reported on Thursday. 



http://www.facebook.com/nuclearfree
http://www.facebook.com/nukefree



Following last year’s earthquake and tsunami in Japan, Germany announced plans to phase out all nuclear reactors, and closed down eight of its nuclear power plants that began operating before 1980. Nine reactors currently on line are due to be turned off between 2015 and 2022. 


The five switched off reactors are functioning as reserve generators in case the country’s electricity demand cannot be fulfilled from non-nuclear sources. 


The March 2011 twin disasters in Japan caused radiation leakage at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant, sending panic waves to the countries depending on nuclear power. 


Germany faced an electricity shortfall in December and imported power from neighboring Austria to meet the needs, but recent record low temperatures wreaking havoc across the Europe forced Berlin to restart the plants. 


GJH/MYA/MA 

Counties face off over nuclear plant, Pengze, Jiangxi Province, China

Counties face off over nuclear plant
Global Times | February 09, 2012 
By Zheng Yi
The Global Times

A campaign initiated by authorities in Central China's Wangjiang county, Anhui Province 安徽望江縣 aimed at halting the construction of a nuclear power plant in a neighboring county has drawn nationwide attention after a report handed to higher authorities was posted online recently.


Sun Bin, from the publicity department of the Wangjiang Development and Reform Commission, confirmed to the Global Times Wednesday that the government handed the report to the Anhui Development and Reform Commission in November, in a bid to stop the nuclear power plant from being built. Provincial authorities are planning to pass the report to the State government for a decision, according to Sun.


According to information on the official website of the Jiangxi branch of the China Power Investment Corporation, the nuclear plant, located in Pengze, Jiangxi Province 江西彭澤, is expected to start operations in 2015, and will have an annual capacity of 60 billion kilowatt hours, more than the entire capacity of Jiangxi's current coal-burning power plants. Preparation work for construction is complete, according to the website.


http://easss.com/nuclear


However, the project has met with strong opposition from across the Yangtze River in the neighboring county of Wangjiang.


According to the report, the plant would be in violation of a regulation issued by the Ministry of Environmental Protection, which states that nuclear power plants should not be built within 10 kilometers of cities with a population over 100,000 people. Several townships in Wangjiang are located within 10 kilometers from the plant.


"We all believe the plant is a time bomb," Sun told the Global Times.


The report also pointed out that the plant is located in a fault zone with frequent occurrences of earthquakes, a fact that was not mentioned in the plant's environmental evaluation report.


Construction on the nuclear plant has been suspended and is awaiting reevaluation after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan in March, according to Zhang.


Calls from the Global Times to the Pengze nuclear power office went unanswered Wednesday.


"Nuclear power plants will cause little pollution only if they are built more than 10 kilometers away from cities with dense populations, and they are safe for nearby residents if they release fewer than 250 mSv in radiation per year," Feng Weiheng, chief expert in radiation prevention at the Shanghai Environmental Protection Industry Association, told the Global Times Wednesday.


At present, six nuclear power plants have been put into use in China and another 12 are under construction, while preparation work on the construction of 28 plants is underway. 


According to a State plan released in 2007, by 2020, nuclear power installed capacity will reach 40 million kilowatts.


Operations at a number of power plants were suspended after the Fukushima nuclear leak.