PEOPLE BEFORE PROFIT

Nuclear safety before vendor interests

    M. V. Ramana
    Suvrat Raju

Share  ·   Comment   ·   print   ·   T+  
BEYOND MEGAWATT: Making the operator and supplier share liability is not only fair but crucial from the point of view of cover.
Photo: AP BEYOND MEGAWATT: Making the operator and supplier share liability is not only fair but crucial from the point of view of cover.
The question that must be asked, is whether India is willing to compromise on its laws and the safety and rights of its citizens to protect the business interests of reactor suppliers
In 2010, under pressure from multinational nuclear suppliers, the Manmohan Singh government pushed through a law to protect them from the consequences of a nuclear accident. The law makes it impossible for victims to sue the supplier, even for an accident that results from a design defect. 
Liability is effectively transferred to the Indian taxpayer, first to the public sector Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL) and then the government. Even this is capped at a maximum of Rs.2,500 crore and victims need not be compensated for any additional damage.
However, the law also includes a clause that, under certain circumstances, allows the NPCIL, although not the victims, to sue the supplier and recoup the money it has paid out. It is this relatively minor clause that nuclear suppliers, and their friends in the Indian establishment, have been railing against for the past two years.
The Russian Deputy Prime Minister warned India, on his recent visit, that if the Russian company Atomstroyexport (a subsidiary of Rosatom) was forced to obey this law, then the cost of power from the Kudankulam third and fourth reactors would go up. He must have been hoping that no one would try and square this threat with earlier claims of safety made about these plants. 
In a paper, published by “Nuclear Engineering and Design” in 2006, three NPCIL officials claimed that, in any given year, the probability of a severe accident at these plants was one in 10 million. If Atomstroyexport can persuade insurers that this figure is correct, then to obtain cover even for accidents where the highest possible liability of Rs.2,500 crore is applicable, it would need to pay a premium of only about Rs.2,500 per year. For the 1,000 MW Kudankulam reactors, operating at an 80 per cent load factor, this should lead to an increase in tariff of about a third of a millionth of a rupee per unit!
This absurdly low figure arises because both the factors in the calculation earlier make little sense. As preliminary data from Fukushima shows,

Fukushima Radiation Plume

Here is a short list of the half-life of five of the radioactive isotopes in the air, food and water that are poisoning us and children:
• Cesium 137: 30 years
• Plutonium 239: 24,000 years
• Strontium 90: 29 years [mimics calcium in the body]
• Uranium 235: 700-million years
• Iodine 131: 8 days [absorbed into the thyroid and gives heavy radiation dose

Here in the US, the EnviroReporter, through their Inspector Alert nuclear radiation monitor, conducted over 1,500 radiation tests after a severe storm in Southern California. The findings were astounding.
The radiation levels were the highest ever seen; at 506% above normal background levels.
The rain in Southern California that was tested was made up of sea mists that moved over the Pacific Ocean.
In the Los Angeles Basin, the higher trade winds showed high levels of radiation. The rain in the area of Santa Monica monitored by the Radiation Station began showing high levels of radiation after fallout was detected in tests beginning in March 2011.
 a nuclear accident can cause economic damage that is more than a hundred times larger than the artificial cap on liability in the Indian law. Moreover, empirical evidence — in a total of about 15,000 reactor-years of operation, there have been several “core-damage” accidents including Fukushima,  
Chernobyl 
 
 
File:Chernobyl radiation map 1996.svg
 mittica_chernobyl.jpg
River port, Chernobyl (Ukraine). From the book, Chernobyl: The Hidden Legacy, by Pierpaolo Mittica.
 
 
 
 https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSz2WqB4bWoV4-tkNLSg3qhBBXWGMK7hcdLwsXa34UiGLihqfvb_w
 
 
 
 
 
 
Three-Mile Island 
 Backgrounder on the Three Mile Island Accident
  
The following animated diagram graphically depicts the sequence of events associated with the accident at TMI-2.

an animated plant diagram showing the series of events which caused the TMI accident - as found in this article's Summary of Events section

 
 — suggests that the probability of severe accidents is about a thousand times higher than what the industry claims. 
 
Suppliers have successfully wielded their influence in other countries to avoid economic liability for accidents. Their argument that the Indian law will lead to cost escalations is meant to veil the real reason for their worry: the law sets a bad precedent and, in the future, either in India itself or in another country, it may lead to a more rational law centred on victims rather than the industry. In such a law, there would be no cap on liability, and suppliers would be held jointly responsible with the operator for paying out damages.
In fact, the Supreme Court has already admitted a petition, by the lawyer Prashant Bhushan, requesting precisely these changes in the law. Making the operator and supplier share liability is not only fair but crucial from the point of view of safety.
Design and accidents
The history of nuclear power shows that design failures have played an important role in all severe accidents. This is true of Fukushima, where the underlying problems with the Mark 1 design had been recognised many years earlier. The Kemeny Commission, set up by Jimmy Carter, to analyse the Three Mile Island accident pointed out that the suppliers, Babcock & Wilcox, shared culpability. The disaster at the Chernobyl reactor, which was built by the Soviet predecessor of Rosatom, was caused by a combination of two grievous design features: a positive “void coefficient of reactivity,” and the lack of appropriate containment.
Apart from the untenable claim about higher tariffs, nuclear suppliers and the Indian government have made other disingenuous arguments to get rid of the clause on supplier liability. One of them is that the law is hurting India’s domestic manufacturers, some of whom are involved in supplying small parts of the plant.
In general, as in other industries, exposing all manufacturers along the supply chain to tort claims helps make them more conscious of safety and quality. Manufacturers who are supplying parts to a hazardous industry need to be more careful about reliability.
Nevertheless, the law does not, as such, prevent the NPCIL from signing subcontracts that indemnify smaller suppliers along the chain. The NPCIL’s problem is that it is politically infeasible to extend this indemnity to the manufacturer of the plant itself, as it discovered when it tried to provide blanket indemnity to Atomstroyexport for the Kudankulam third and fourth units.
Industry on Indian law
The nuclear industry also argues that India’s current law is out of sync with international conventions on nuclear liability. This is a poor argument because these conventions were all drafted under pressure from nuclear manufacturers who, historically, were in a stronger position than they are now. In the early days of nuclear power, American suppliers exploited this to impose the idea that liability should be channelled to the operator. Later, suppliers from other countries also adopted this self-serving argument.
Until recently, the United States itself never joined any international liability convention, because under its domestic law, called the Price Anderson Act, victims retain the right to sue suppliers. Economic compensation is channelled through a complicated insurance system, but manufacturers can be found legally liable and this has consequences.
In 1997, the U.S. engineered the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC), with a special rider for itself. When Bush communicated the convention to the U.S. Senate for ratification, he emphasised that “The United States in particular benefits from a grandfather clause that allows it to join the convention without being required to change certain aspects of the Price-Anderson system that would otherwise be inconsistent with its requirements.”
India’s own law is largely borrowed from an annex of the CSC. After showing no inclination to join any of the existing treaties for half a century, the Indian government rushed to sign this discriminatory convention soon after the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. This shows that it was acting under external pressure, and not out of any concern for potential victims.
Even granting that suppliers should be liable in principle, many well-meaning people argue that India must acquiesce to the demands of the industry because it desperately needs electricity. Leaving aside the debate on the role of nuclear power in general, it is clear that India’s push towards importing reactors has less to do with electricity, and more to do with other factors.
Kakodkar article
Even by the standards of UPA II, the process of handing out multi-billion dollar contracts for reactors to various multinational companies has been opaque and arbitrary. In Jaitapur, the government has promised to buy up to six European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) from Areva. No EPR is in commercial operation anywhere in the world and in France and Finland, Areva is running into severe construction-difficulties
Two nuclear complexes have been promised to the U.S., again involving designs that have never been built before.
In a rare candid admission, the former chairperson of the Atomic Energy Commission, Anil Kakodkar, provided the rationale behind these seemingly bizarre decisions.
Writing in the Marathi daily Sakaal, in January 2011, Kakodkar explained: “America, Russia and France were the countries that we made mediators in the efforts to lift sanctions, and hence, for the nurturing of their business interests, we made deals with them for nuclear projects.”
As the debate on liability continues both in public and in the courts, the question that the country must ask is whether it is willing to compromise on its laws, and the safety and rights of its citizens to protect the business interests of reactor vendors.
(The authors are physicists) 
========================================================================

Fukushima Radiation Spreads Worldwide

  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store
Washington’s Blog
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
California, Finland, Canada, Australia Hit By Radiation
The University of California at Berkeley detected cesium levels in San Francisco area milk above over EPA limits … and even higher than they were 6 months ago.

Finnish public television says that cesium from Fukushima has been detected in lichens, fungi and elk and reindeer meat in Finland.
The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency confirmed a radiation cloud over the East Coast of Australia.
The West Coast of Canada is getting hit by debris from Japan … and at least some of it is likely radioactive.
The authors of the controversial study claiming 14,000 deaths in the U.S. so far from Fukushima are nowupping their figure to 20,000. I spoke with nuclear health expert Chris Busby about their study, and he said that mortality figures fluctuate pretty substantially in the normal course, and so it is hard to know at this point one way or the other whether their figures are accurate.
And while there is no evidence linking them to Fukushima, Bed Bath and Beyond has recalled radioactive tissue holders after they set off police radiation monitors aboard a delivery truck This may just be an example of the incredibly lax handling of radioactive materials.
And thyroid cancers are – mysteriously – on the rise in the U.S.
But don’t worry: The owner of the Fukushima plant has the plant in cold shutdown, so everything is “under control” … Although temperatures have apparently jumped inside Fukushima’s number 2 reactor, and the Japanese have no idea where the nuclear fuel has gone, so they are drilling a hole into the containment vessel to try to find it.
This article was posted: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 5:50 am
========================================================================

A Look at Nuclear Accidents at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island:-http://blogcritics.org/scitech/article/a-look-at-nuclear-accidents-at/

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]


How to Survive Nuclear Holocaust

Mac Slavo
March 2nd, 2012
SHTFplan.com
Comments (126)
Read by 585 people
Printer Friendly Version of this Page SHTF Plan RSS Feed - Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Planning Signup for Our Regular News Updates


When the three mile island nuclear accident happened in March of 1979 Joy Thompson (www.wiselivingjournal.com) was one of the members of the health physics team responsible for initial recovery operations. The accident, which plant owner Metropolitan Edison downplayed by claiming that “everything is under control,” later led to wide-spread evacuations, first with a 5-mile radius evacuation zone being established, and then later a 20-mile evacuation zone. As was the case with the recent Fukushima disaster, those who would be most affected by the spread of dangerous radiation were the last to be told of the seriousness of the disaster. In the case of Three Mile Island, it was well over 24 hours before residents were told to get out. In Fukushima it was days.
Ms. Thompson contacted us recently to advise us that she and the surviving members of her team have created an easy to follow info-graphic and checklist that can help you to survive a nuclear disaster should you ever be faced with the same emergency as those people living around Three Mile Island.
While often ignored by most Americans, even on the heels of the ongoing Fukushima nuclear meltdown, the potential for nuclear disasters today is clearly more of a threat than ever before. Despite assurances from reactor manufacturers and plant operators, we’ve seen numerous disasters over the course of the last three decades, and we can be fairly certain that we will have another one in the future.
If you live anywhere on the east or west coasts, chances are you are close to an existing reactor.
According to the infographic below, one in three Americans live within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor, and by all accounts, as demonstrated by Fukushima, in the event of disaster this could very well be the  ’kill radius.’
Thus, we urge all of our readers to explore the below graphic, as well as the ‘weapons’ and checklist that follow.
Additionally, if you are ever in an area that has experienced any type of nuclear emergency (be it a reactor meltdown, dirty bomb attack, etc.) we strongly recommend that you evacuate first and ask questions later, because as we saw with Three Mile Island, “everything” is not always under control.
Don’t wait for the experts on TV to tell you it’s time to go. Just grab your bug out bags, GOOD manuals and go!

How To Survive A Nuclear Holocaust

Last year, nuclear meltdowns and multiple explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi reactor complex sent plumes of radioactive contaminants across the northern Japanese countryside. These contaminants were projected in the atmosphere putting the northern hemisphere in danger of hazardous isotopes.
The events at Fukushima brought into focus the very real danger of a nuclear holocaust. At Best Health Degrees we decided to put together this infographic detailing some practical steps you can take to survive the danger posed by harmful nuclear radiation.
The Key: to surviving a nuclear holocaust is minimizing exposure to internal and external radiation. You will need some “weapons” to help in this effort.

The Weapons

  • Duct Tape
  • Mop
  • Water filtered vacuum
  • Sponge
  • Paper towels
  • Plastic bags
  • Sutrdy trash container
  • Hand-held radiation detector

Survival Checklist

  • Think of nuclear radiation as an invisible layer of dust on all surfaces that needs to be carefully cleaned away and managed
  • Create an air tight seal in your home (duct tape comes in handy)
  • Aggressively clean off surfaces in your home without creating dust (wet wipes and water filtered vacuums)
  • Keep food in clean, sealed containers
  • Clean floor and furniture with water filtered vacuum
  • When you go outside, wear a set of coveralls or a duster over your clothes.
  • Shower every time you come indoors from having spent more than a few minutes outdoors.
  • Use good quality dust masks to cover your mouth and nose, especially when going outdoors
  • Launder sheets, handkerchief masks, outdoor clothing, at least once a day
  • Keep all windows closed even if it’s nice outside) and sealed with duct tape
  • Seal all doors that open to the outside with duct tape.
  • Carry young children while outdoors or going to and from a vehicle.
  • Keep pets indoors as much as possible for the duration.
  • Sleep at least two feet above the floor
  • Keep pots, pans, plates, silverware and utensils in clean cabinets
  • Rinse your cooking utensils, plates, silverware, glassware
  • Rinse the outside of all food cans before opening
  • Do not do anything that can stir up dust (don’t use duster or a normal vacuum)
Special thanks to Joy Thompson.
Hat tip Ryan
Also see:
Survive Anything: Nuclear Attack
The Number One Catastrophic Event That Americans Worry About
US Nuclear Emergency Response Plan: “Get On The Phone Really Quickly and Figure it Out”
The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, Primary U.S. Targets, and Nuke Detonation Mapping
From The Ready Store: IOSAT – Radiation Protection Tablets

  StumbleReddit
 
Author: Mac Slavo
Views: Read by 585 people
Date: March 2nd, 2012
Website: www.SHTFplan.com
Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

2004 Tsunami sea water inside kalpakam nuclear power station-luckly there was no radiation leak-tsunami damage to both kudankulam and kalpakkam together is a possibility in future tsunamis





 

below:-kudankulam nuclear power station ripe for destruction by tsunami sea waves
 

Tsunami South Asia

Japan Tsunami 2011

India tells Russia of bringing Kudankalam 3, 4 under n-liability law


2

NEW DELHI: India on Monday conveyed to Russia that the third and fourth units of Kudankulam reactors will have to be brought under the purview of its nuclear liability law and that it was willing to renegotiate the price issue, if Moscow so desired. The development came at the 18th India-Russia Inter-Governmental Commission meeting chaired by foreign minister S M Krishna and Russian deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin.

"It is natural for the Russians to seek insurance if suppliers are accountable and we are willing to negotiate the cost issue but it has been conveyed to them that any techno-commercial agreement for Kudankulam 3 and 4 will have to take into account that these reactors will come under the liability law," said a government source.


Not holding back on Russia's displeasure over developments related to Kudankulam and telecom firm Sistema, Rogozin said later that the rules of the game must not be changed until the game is over.


TOI had reported on August 13 that the two reactors would come under the liability law. The Russian side responded by saying that the law, which came into existence only as late as 2010, may not be in keeping with the spirit of the 2008 civil nuclear cooperation agreement and that the cost of the supplied equipment, too, would increase significantly if the suppliers are made accountable. Ahead of his arrival in India, replying to a query from TOI, Rogozin had said, "if the supplier is to bear additional financial responsibility for hypothetical damage, then the price of the supplied equipment will increase, naturally".


India and Russia had recently signed an agreement for a $3.4 billion Russian line of credit for the reactors. The cost for the two reactors is expected to be close to $ 7 billion. "We did discuss the preparatory work for the units 3 and 4 at Kudankulam. Further techno-commercial agreement is still being negotiated by our experts and I have no doubt that we will come to mutually acceptable resolution of this issue," said Krishna after his meeting with Rogozin.


Rogozin, who had recently in an interview to TOI threatened to move International Court of Arbitration against Supreme Court's decision to cancel Sistema's 2G licences, urged the Indian government to ensure that the rules of the game are not changed until the game is over. He asked India to "demonstratively" help businesses groups in dealing with emerging situations through the bureaucracy.


"We should hold the rules of the game till the time it is over," said Rogozin. "We should allow our business community to see the green light in order to begin active interaction and conclude major contracts. And so I would like to express the hope that we will be able to resolve the current difficult situation with the Russian investments in Titanium Products Private Ltd and Sistema Shyam TeleServices in India," he added.






Nuclear safety before vendor interests

    M. V. Ramana
    Suvrat Raju

Share  ·   Comment   ·   print   ·   T+  
BEYOND MEGAWATT: Making the operator and supplier share liability is not only fair but crucial from the point of view of cover.
Photo: AP BEYOND MEGAWATT: Making the operator and supplier share liability is not only fair but crucial from the point of view of cover.
The question that must be asked, is whether India is willing to compromise on its laws and the safety and rights of its citizens to protect the business interests of reactor suppliers
In 2010, under pressure from multinational nuclear suppliers, the Manmohan Singh government pushed through a law to protect them from the consequences of a nuclear accident. The law makes it impossible for victims to sue the supplier, even for an accident that results from a design defect. 
Liability is effectively transferred to the Indian taxpayer, first to the public sector Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd. (NPCIL) and then the government. Even this is capped at a maximum of Rs.2,500 crore and victims need not be compensated for any additional damage.
However, the law also includes a clause that, under certain circumstances, allows the NPCIL, although not the victims, to sue the supplier and recoup the money it has paid out. It is this relatively minor clause that nuclear suppliers, and their friends in the Indian establishment, have been railing against for the past two years.
The Russian Deputy Prime Minister warned India, on his recent visit, that if the Russian company Atomstroyexport (a subsidiary of Rosatom) was forced to obey this law, then the cost of power from the Kudankulam third and fourth reactors would go up. He must have been hoping that no one would try and square this threat with earlier claims of safety made about these plants. 
In a paper, published by “Nuclear Engineering and Design” in 2006, three NPCIL officials claimed that, in any given year, the probability of a severe accident at these plants was one in 10 million. If Atomstroyexport can persuade insurers that this figure is correct, then to obtain cover even for accidents where the highest possible liability of Rs.2,500 crore is applicable, it would need to pay a premium of only about Rs.2,500 per year. For the 1,000 MW Kudankulam reactors, operating at an 80 per cent load factor, this should lead to an increase in tariff of about a third of a millionth of a rupee per unit!
This absurdly low figure arises because both the factors in the calculation earlier make little sense. As preliminary data from Fukushima shows,

Fukushima Radiation Plume

Here is a short list of the half-life of five of the radioactive isotopes in the air, food and water that are poisoning us and children:
• Cesium 137: 30 years
• Plutonium 239: 24,000 years
• Strontium 90: 29 years [mimics calcium in the body]
• Uranium 235: 700-million years
• Iodine 131: 8 days [absorbed into the thyroid and gives heavy radiation dose

Here in the US, the EnviroReporter, through their Inspector Alert nuclear radiation monitor, conducted over 1,500 radiation tests after a severe storm in Southern California. The findings were astounding.
The radiation levels were the highest ever seen; at 506% above normal background levels.
The rain in Southern California that was tested was made up of sea mists that moved over the Pacific Ocean.
In the Los Angeles Basin, the higher trade winds showed high levels of radiation. The rain in the area of Santa Monica monitored by the Radiation Station began showing high levels of radiation after fallout was detected in tests beginning in March 2011.
 a nuclear accident can cause economic damage that is more than a hundred times larger than the artificial cap on liability in the Indian law. Moreover, empirical evidence — in a total of about 15,000 reactor-years of operation, there have been several “core-damage” accidents including Fukushima,  
Chernobyl 
 
 
File:Chernobyl radiation map 1996.svg
 mittica_chernobyl.jpg
River port, Chernobyl (Ukraine). From the book, Chernobyl: The Hidden Legacy, by Pierpaolo Mittica.
 
 
 
 https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSz2WqB4bWoV4-tkNLSg3qhBBXWGMK7hcdLwsXa34UiGLihqfvb_w
 
 
 
 
 
 
Three-Mile Island 
 Backgrounder on the Three Mile Island Accident
  
The following animated diagram graphically depicts the sequence of events associated with the accident at TMI-2.

an animated plant diagram showing the series of events which caused the TMI accident - as found in this article's Summary of Events section

 
 — suggests that the probability of severe accidents is about a thousand times higher than what the industry claims. 
 
Suppliers have successfully wielded their influence in other countries to avoid economic liability for accidents. Their argument that the Indian law will lead to cost escalations is meant to veil the real reason for their worry: the law sets a bad precedent and, in the future, either in India itself or in another country, it may lead to a more rational law centred on victims rather than the industry. In such a law, there would be no cap on liability, and suppliers would be held jointly responsible with the operator for paying out damages.
In fact, the Supreme Court has already admitted a petition, by the lawyer Prashant Bhushan, requesting precisely these changes in the law. Making the operator and supplier share liability is not only fair but crucial from the point of view of safety.
Design and accidents
The history of nuclear power shows that design failures have played an important role in all severe accidents. This is true of Fukushima, where the underlying problems with the Mark 1 design had been recognised many years earlier. The Kemeny Commission, set up by Jimmy Carter, to analyse the Three Mile Island accident pointed out that the suppliers, Babcock & Wilcox, shared culpability. The disaster at the Chernobyl reactor, which was built by the Soviet predecessor of Rosatom, was caused by a combination of two grievous design features: a positive “void coefficient of reactivity,” and the lack of appropriate containment.
Apart from the untenable claim about higher tariffs, nuclear suppliers and the Indian government have made other disingenuous arguments to get rid of the clause on supplier liability. One of them is that the law is hurting India’s domestic manufacturers, some of whom are involved in supplying small parts of the plant.
In general, as in other industries, exposing all manufacturers along the supply chain to tort claims helps make them more conscious of safety and quality. Manufacturers who are supplying parts to a hazardous industry need to be more careful about reliability.
Nevertheless, the law does not, as such, prevent the NPCIL from signing subcontracts that indemnify smaller suppliers along the chain. The NPCIL’s problem is that it is politically infeasible to extend this indemnity to the manufacturer of the plant itself, as it discovered when it tried to provide blanket indemnity to Atomstroyexport for the Kudankulam third and fourth units.
Industry on Indian law
The nuclear industry also argues that India’s current law is out of sync with international conventions on nuclear liability. This is a poor argument because these conventions were all drafted under pressure from nuclear manufacturers who, historically, were in a stronger position than they are now. In the early days of nuclear power, American suppliers exploited this to impose the idea that liability should be channelled to the operator. Later, suppliers from other countries also adopted this self-serving argument.
Until recently, the United States itself never joined any international liability convention, because under its domestic law, called the Price Anderson Act, victims retain the right to sue suppliers. Economic compensation is channelled through a complicated insurance system, but manufacturers can be found legally liable and this has consequences.
In 1997, the U.S. engineered the Convention on Supplementary Compensation for Nuclear Damage (CSC), with a special rider for itself. When Bush communicated the convention to the U.S. Senate for ratification, he emphasised that “The United States in particular benefits from a grandfather clause that allows it to join the convention without being required to change certain aspects of the Price-Anderson system that would otherwise be inconsistent with its requirements.”
India’s own law is largely borrowed from an annex of the CSC. After showing no inclination to join any of the existing treaties for half a century, the Indian government rushed to sign this discriminatory convention soon after the Indo-U.S. nuclear deal. This shows that it was acting under external pressure, and not out of any concern for potential victims.
Even granting that suppliers should be liable in principle, many well-meaning people argue that India must acquiesce to the demands of the industry because it desperately needs electricity. Leaving aside the debate on the role of nuclear power in general, it is clear that India’s push towards importing reactors has less to do with electricity, and more to do with other factors.
Kakodkar article
Even by the standards of UPA II, the process of handing out multi-billion dollar contracts for reactors to various multinational companies has been opaque and arbitrary. In Jaitapur, the government has promised to buy up to six European Pressurised Reactors (EPR) from Areva. No EPR is in commercial operation anywhere in the world and in France and Finland, Areva is running into severe construction-difficulties
Two nuclear complexes have been promised to the U.S., again involving designs that have never been built before.
In a rare candid admission, the former chairperson of the Atomic Energy Commission, Anil Kakodkar, provided the rationale behind these seemingly bizarre decisions.
Writing in the Marathi daily Sakaal, in January 2011, Kakodkar explained: “America, Russia and France were the countries that we made mediators in the efforts to lift sanctions, and hence, for the nurturing of their business interests, we made deals with them for nuclear projects.”
As the debate on liability continues both in public and in the courts, the question that the country must ask is whether it is willing to compromise on its laws, and the safety and rights of its citizens to protect the business interests of reactor vendors.
(The authors are physicists) 
========================================================================

Fukushima Radiation Spreads Worldwide

  •   The Alex Jones Channel Alex Jones Show podcast Prison Planet TV Infowars.com Twitter Alex Jones' Facebook Infowars store
Washington’s Blog
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
California, Finland, Canada, Australia Hit By Radiation
The University of California at Berkeley detected cesium levels in San Francisco area milk above over EPA limits … and even higher than they were 6 months ago.

Finnish public television says that cesium from Fukushima has been detected in lichens, fungi and elk and reindeer meat in Finland.
The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency confirmed a radiation cloud over the East Coast of Australia.
The West Coast of Canada is getting hit by debris from Japan … and at least some of it is likely radioactive.
The authors of the controversial study claiming 14,000 deaths in the U.S. so far from Fukushima are nowupping their figure to 20,000. I spoke with nuclear health expert Chris Busby about their study, and he said that mortality figures fluctuate pretty substantially in the normal course, and so it is hard to know at this point one way or the other whether their figures are accurate.
And while there is no evidence linking them to Fukushima, Bed Bath and Beyond has recalled radioactive tissue holders after they set off police radiation monitors aboard a delivery truck This may just be an example of the incredibly lax handling of radioactive materials.
And thyroid cancers are – mysteriously – on the rise in the U.S.
But don’t worry: The owner of the Fukushima plant has the plant in cold shutdown, so everything is “under control” … Although temperatures have apparently jumped inside Fukushima’s number 2 reactor, and the Japanese have no idea where the nuclear fuel has gone, so they are drilling a hole into the containment vessel to try to find it.
This article was posted: Wednesday, January 18, 2012 at 5:50 am
========================================================================

A Look at Nuclear Accidents at Chernobyl and Three Mile Island:-http://blogcritics.org/scitech/article/a-look-at-nuclear-accidents-at/

]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]


How to Survive Nuclear Holocaust

Mac Slavo
March 2nd, 2012
SHTFplan.com
Comments (126)
Read by 585 people
Printer Friendly Version of this Page SHTF Plan RSS Feed - Emergency Preparedness and Disaster Planning Signup for Our Regular News Updates


When the three mile island nuclear accident happened in March of 1979 Joy Thompson (www.wiselivingjournal.com) was one of the members of the health physics team responsible for initial recovery operations. The accident, which plant owner Metropolitan Edison downplayed by claiming that “everything is under control,” later led to wide-spread evacuations, first with a 5-mile radius evacuation zone being established, and then later a 20-mile evacuation zone. As was the case with the recent Fukushima disaster, those who would be most affected by the spread of dangerous radiation were the last to be told of the seriousness of the disaster. In the case of Three Mile Island, it was well over 24 hours before residents were told to get out. In Fukushima it was days.
Ms. Thompson contacted us recently to advise us that she and the surviving members of her team have created an easy to follow info-graphic and checklist that can help you to survive a nuclear disaster should you ever be faced with the same emergency as those people living around Three Mile Island.
While often ignored by most Americans, even on the heels of the ongoing Fukushima nuclear meltdown, the potential for nuclear disasters today is clearly more of a threat than ever before. Despite assurances from reactor manufacturers and plant operators, we’ve seen numerous disasters over the course of the last three decades, and we can be fairly certain that we will have another one in the future.
If you live anywhere on the east or west coasts, chances are you are close to an existing reactor.
According to the infographic below, one in three Americans live within 50 miles of a nuclear reactor, and by all accounts, as demonstrated by Fukushima, in the event of disaster this could very well be the  ’kill radius.’
Thus, we urge all of our readers to explore the below graphic, as well as the ‘weapons’ and checklist that follow.
Additionally, if you are ever in an area that has experienced any type of nuclear emergency (be it a reactor meltdown, dirty bomb attack, etc.) we strongly recommend that you evacuate first and ask questions later, because as we saw with Three Mile Island, “everything” is not always under control.
Don’t wait for the experts on TV to tell you it’s time to go. Just grab your bug out bags, GOOD manuals and go!

How To Survive A Nuclear Holocaust

Last year, nuclear meltdowns and multiple explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi reactor complex sent plumes of radioactive contaminants across the northern Japanese countryside. These contaminants were projected in the atmosphere putting the northern hemisphere in danger of hazardous isotopes.
The events at Fukushima brought into focus the very real danger of a nuclear holocaust. At Best Health Degrees we decided to put together this infographic detailing some practical steps you can take to survive the danger posed by harmful nuclear radiation.
The Key: to surviving a nuclear holocaust is minimizing exposure to internal and external radiation. You will need some “weapons” to help in this effort.

The Weapons

  • Duct Tape
  • Mop
  • Water filtered vacuum
  • Sponge
  • Paper towels
  • Plastic bags
  • Sutrdy trash container
  • Hand-held radiation detector

Survival Checklist

  • Think of nuclear radiation as an invisible layer of dust on all surfaces that needs to be carefully cleaned away and managed
  • Create an air tight seal in your home (duct tape comes in handy)
  • Aggressively clean off surfaces in your home without creating dust (wet wipes and water filtered vacuums)
  • Keep food in clean, sealed containers
  • Clean floor and furniture with water filtered vacuum
  • When you go outside, wear a set of coveralls or a duster over your clothes.
  • Shower every time you come indoors from having spent more than a few minutes outdoors.
  • Use good quality dust masks to cover your mouth and nose, especially when going outdoors
  • Launder sheets, handkerchief masks, outdoor clothing, at least once a day
  • Keep all windows closed even if it’s nice outside) and sealed with duct tape
  • Seal all doors that open to the outside with duct tape.
  • Carry young children while outdoors or going to and from a vehicle.
  • Keep pets indoors as much as possible for the duration.
  • Sleep at least two feet above the floor
  • Keep pots, pans, plates, silverware and utensils in clean cabinets
  • Rinse your cooking utensils, plates, silverware, glassware
  • Rinse the outside of all food cans before opening
  • Do not do anything that can stir up dust (don’t use duster or a normal vacuum)
Special thanks to Joy Thompson.
Hat tip Ryan
Also see:
Survive Anything: Nuclear Attack
The Number One Catastrophic Event That Americans Worry About
US Nuclear Emergency Response Plan: “Get On The Phone Really Quickly and Figure it Out”
The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, Primary U.S. Targets, and Nuke Detonation Mapping
From The Ready Store: IOSAT – Radiation Protection Tablets

  StumbleReddit
 
Author: Mac Slavo
Views: Read by 585 people
Date: March 2nd, 2012
Website: www.SHTFplan.com
Copyright Information: Copyright SHTFplan and Mac Slavo. This content may be freely reproduced in full or in part in digital form with full attribution to the author and a link to www.shtfplan.com. Please contact us for permission to reproduce this content in other media formats.
]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]

2004 Tsunami sea water inside kalpakam nuclear power station-luckly there was no radiation leak-tsunami damage to both kudankulam and kalpakkam together is a possibility in future tsunamis





 

below:-kudankulam nuclear power station ripe for destruction by tsunami sea waves
 

Tsunami South Asia

Japan Tsunami 2011

India tells Russia of bringing Kudankalam 3, 4 under n-liability law


2

NEW DELHI: India on Monday conveyed to Russia that the third and fourth units of Kudankulam reactors will have to be brought under the purview of its nuclear liability law and that it was willing to renegotiate the price issue, if Moscow so desired. The development came at the 18th India-Russia Inter-Governmental Commission meeting chaired by foreign minister S M Krishna and Russian deputy PM Dmitry Rogozin.

"It is natural for the Russians to seek insurance if suppliers are accountable and we are willing to negotiate the cost issue but it has been conveyed to them that any techno-commercial agreement for Kudankulam 3 and 4 will have to take into account that these reactors will come under the liability law," said a government source.


Not holding back on Russia's displeasure over developments related to Kudankulam and telecom firm Sistema, Rogozin said later that the rules of the game must not be changed until the game is over.


TOI had reported on August 13 that the two reactors would come under the liability law. The Russian side responded by saying that the law, which came into existence only as late as 2010, may not be in keeping with the spirit of the 2008 civil nuclear cooperation agreement and that the cost of the supplied equipment, too, would increase significantly if the suppliers are made accountable. Ahead of his arrival in India, replying to a query from TOI, Rogozin had said, "if the supplier is to bear additional financial responsibility for hypothetical damage, then the price of the supplied equipment will increase, naturally".


India and Russia had recently signed an agreement for a $3.4 billion Russian line of credit for the reactors. The cost for the two reactors is expected to be close to $ 7 billion. "We did discuss the preparatory work for the units 3 and 4 at Kudankulam. Further techno-commercial agreement is still being negotiated by our experts and I have no doubt that we will come to mutually acceptable resolution of this issue," said Krishna after his meeting with Rogozin.


Rogozin, who had recently in an interview to TOI threatened to move International Court of Arbitration against Supreme Court's decision to cancel Sistema's 2G licences, urged the Indian government to ensure that the rules of the game are not changed until the game is over. He asked India to "demonstratively" help businesses groups in dealing with emerging situations through the bureaucracy.


"We should hold the rules of the game till the time it is over," said Rogozin. "We should allow our business community to see the green light in order to begin active interaction and conclude major contracts. And so I would like to express the hope that we will be able to resolve the current difficult situation with the Russian investments in Titanium Products Private Ltd and Sistema Shyam TeleServices in India," he added.