While EDF and AREVA announced on October 21, the construction of two new third-generation
reactors EPR1 England, two other EPR under construction in China since 2007 and is the
Flamanville site is silence deafening hovering over the consequences of the world's
largest nuclear disaster Fukushima. Major campaign promises of "energy transition" will be
very difficult to meet with the only dismantling the Fessenheim. Here is an overview of
what is involved both in health, environmental, and political nuclear energy. ----
Radioactive risk: what exactly do we? ---- For several years, many independent scientific
studies on the effects of radioactivity in the Chernobyl region converge to the worst
health scenarios that could fear. Indeed, the particularity of radioactive danger is now
clearly demonstrated: the consequences of a nuclear accident are still being felt many
years after the accident.
In other words, people born in the region decades after the 1986 accident still pay the
consequences. No need to be a nuclear physicist to understand that abnormally high rates
of heart disease, birth and other cancers that affect children in the region still today
in 2014 are due to the explosion of the plant. Yet it is true that this is a very
difficult relationship to establish scientifically other than developing complex
mathematical models, and therefore inevitably controversial. And it is on this
methodological difficulty relies WHO or the AIEA2 to refuse to consider today's patients
as victims of the nuclear disaster yesterday ...
Nuclear accidents therefore continue to claim victims long after their occurrence, remains
why. The answer to this crucial question is now scientifically established: in fact,
research on wildlife in the Chernobyl region have shown that since 1986, rodents and fish
were sicker from generation to generation. We know that this degeneration is the
intergenerational effect of cumulative degradation of genetic heritage. Thus, the
geneticist Rosa Goncharova, Institute of Genetics and Cytology, National Academy of
Sciences of Belarus, already wrote in a 1996 report about rodents that "the frequency of
mutations [genetic] continues to grow in the generations successive beyond the 10th
generation although the burden incorporated has declined since 1991. " In other words, the
genetic heritage of the species has been inherently damaged, so that genetic conditions
are empowered with respect to radiation exposure.
Geneticist so then "tracings" work on humans to show, like many other studies of human
genetics made since the origins of genetic diseases are growing and also that "the
increased morbidity of people living in areas contaminated by radionuclides is the
consequence of chronic irradiation by low doses of radiation. "
Today in Japan, research update genetic mutations in the fauna and flora multiply and
researchers were able to demonstrate that defects butterflies were directly attributable
to the explosion of the Fukushima plant.
In short, today's question is no longer allowed: nuclear energy exposes the entire
ecosystem and therefore humanity such serious health risks that are unimaginable even just
in the medium term. Vertiginous!
Philosophy crash risk among pro-nuclear: a religious approach
"Fukushima is a tsunami, I did not realize before coming here that the Loire was in
immediate danger of tsunami on the center of Saint-Laurent-des-Eaux, unless Fessenheim in
Alsace is under threat a tsunami coming from the Rhine. "Here's how Sarkozy picked up his
position on nuclear power in 2012. This quote is quite symptomatic of blindness and
naivety (real or feigned) of partisan ? e ? s nuclear. The main trick of this kind of talk
is to evacuate a number of arguments against the challenge by reducing the climate and
environmental issues, and again, by reducing itself to a single risk effectively
impossible Alsace: the tsunami. However, the reasoning to keep is simple: Fukushima region
where the risk of tsunami is important, the design of the plant was specifically addressed
this risk. Off, the accident shows that even in areas subject to some well-known climate
risk areas, uncertainty remains mistress of human projects.
During the great storm that crossed France in 1999, a tidal wave hit the central mini
Blaye Gironde. The height of the levees have been fixed according to the known and
anticipated weather records in the region, proved insufficient to prevent water from
invading the plant, flood the reactor room, stop the cooling system, and put down the
first cooling system safety before the second backup system recovery not cooling. That
day, the prefecture learning situation by telephone stood ready to evacuate the city of
Bordeaux. The largest French nuclear disaster was narrowly averted in 1999, and hardly
anyone knows ...
In addition, hundreds of kilograms of pure plutonium that pass each week on highways
illustrates quite irrational faith in the atom and the denial of his dangerousness.
But this is nothing compared to the risk of geopolitical instability. Nobody can say what
will be the political and military world in a given region 30 situation. And it also
applies to the Alsace.
Nuclear disasters never end ...
The Chernobyl disaster is not over by any means. The first sarcophagus hastily constructed
in 1986 by some 600,000 (!) Liquidators and that was supposed to hold a century already
had large cracks after 25 years. Today, a new sarcophagus even more impressive is under
construction ... Then, in a few decades, it will still build another over and so on for
centuries!
At Fukushima, nothing is settled and there never will either. Not only the worst threat
yet (if the pool # 4 filled with highly radioactive fuel already in ruins collapses, we
should expect a dangerous emission of radiation throughout the northern hemisphere), but
it is clear that Japan and ultimately all humanity, will manage all the consequences of
the accident for centuries.
With current reactors (and even more with the latest models), one explosion may have
serious consequences for all forms of life of an entire continent! And today we have 58
nuclear bombs "civilian" potential of this type in France alone.
Waste or dust (radioactive) under the carpet
Take a step back: If ancient Egypt had used nuclear energy for lighting and heating, we
should still manage nuclear waste. What about in 2010? The National Agency for Radioactive
Waste Management (ANDRA) already accounted for 1.32 million cubic meters of radioactive
waste, while recognizing that this figure does not take into account a number of waste it
considered "old", c that is to say products between 1930 and 1969 (one may wonder about
the word "old" in view of the life of products). It subtracted 14,200 m? of waste dumped
in the Atlantic Ocean to 69 and 3,200 m? related to nuclear testing in the Pacific between
67 and 82, and 50 million tons of waste from uranium mines on the French soil. This figure
of 1.3 million represents only production 45 years of nuclear industry. Finally, the
agency recognizes that for 3600 m? of waste, there is still no reprocessing industry, so
they are stored on production sites. Accept generate radioactive waste in a life of
thousands of years to produce electricity for 1 year is the madness. No geologist can not
say with certainty that landfill never present any risk of exposure to radionuclides to
the environment. Those who say otherwise almost always work for the nuclear industry!
Nuclear and state lies
The nuclear industry, whether civilian or military, is an exceptional catalyst lies
States. First, the authorities persist in underestimating the human assets of all
disasters as and when they occur. To date, for example, WHO attributed 59 deaths to the
Chernobyl disaster as the organization "Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War"
(IPPNW) speaks of 67,000 deaths between 1990 and 2004.
Lies still, the reasons for the war in Mali this year. Oppressed peoples are not lacking
across the planet. Why the French State has he suddenly took a liking to the people of
Mali? The presence of numerous uranium deposits operated by Areva in Mali leaves no doubts
about the neocolonial maneuver.
Lie still on the price of nuclear power that does not take into account the cost of waste
management multisecular or dismantling old reactors (we even know dismantle matter!). We
must admit that estimating management costs across several millennia is not obvious ...
Lies on the actual number of incidents and nuclear accidents. There exists a grading scale
established by the IAEA INES scale, but it applies only to events calendar! It does not
apply to nuclear weapons or to acts of war and terrorism. Add to that some states do not
communicate about nuclear accidents, and others are classified defense secrets.
Lie regarding the existence of a public debate. In France, the government decides first
and then pretended to read! The nuclear debate has always held afterwards, the Grenelle
environment even managed the feat to dodge completely. And yet, since the 60s, hundreds of
researchers have mobilized against nuclear-es! Certain es in doing so have subsequently
been slyly put-away or are "used" to believe that a debate exists at national level.
Nuclear and capitalism impose the exit!
Despite all that, internationally, central multiply. Particularly in states particularly
unstable politically ... Is that each national bourgeoisie wants to ensure access to
electricity a little cheaper to satisfy his appetite for short-term profits. This
realization of profit is only possible by charging people the price of dismantling and
disaster management. In parallel, for each state develop a civil nuclear industry is to
provide the technological means to acquire nuclear weapons, because technically, the first
is a necessary second base.
All considerations completely foreign to the interests of the people. We need to build
popular movements to force our respective states to abandon nuclear energy any form.
Otherwise, the industry will continue to grow (there is plenty of room outside Japan,
Germany and Italy) and sow it everywhere bombs retardants whatsoever as reactors or sites
storage ...
Group Clermont-Ferrand
1. EPR: European Pressurised Reactor
2. IAEA: International Atomic Energy Agency
Sources:
o Genetic Mutations:
http://www.dissident-media.org/infonucleaire/conseq_en_belarus.htm
http://www.france24.com/fr/20120815-japon-Fukushima-papillons-mutants-dangers-radioactivite-inquietudes-homme-radiation-nucleaire
o Evacuation of Bordeaux envisaged in 1999:
http://www.lejdc.fr/nievre/actualite/departement/nievre-local/2011/07/02/nucleaire-en-1999-l-evacuation-de-bordeaux-avait-ete-envisagee-raconte-yann-arthus-bertrand-video_1101240.html
o Waste Management:
http://www.andra.fr/pages/fr/menu1/les-dechets-radioactifs/les-volumes-de-dechets-11.html
o Nuclear: this is where the output? Records "duck", No. 121 - October 2011.
Home »
» (en) France, Coordination of Anarchist Groups - IAL #98 - Nuclear: the industry of the future belongs to the past, Ecology (fr, pt)