For
Prof. Dr. Raúl A. Montenegro, Biologist
Professor of Evolutionary Biology at the National University of Cordoba. President of the Foundation for Environmental Defense (FUNAM) and the Alternative Nobel Prize 2004 (RLA, Stockholm, Sweden).
Japan has 55 nuclear power plants, 14 are located in the area affected by the earthquake and tsunami that occurred in mid-March. Once faced problems and six suffered extremely serious situations, in particular Fukushima Daiichi. To understand why Argentina is not exempt from having a nuclear accident at 7 on the INES scale [1]-the worst possible, and why their citizens are not prepared to face it, we will take a brief tour of the nuclear realities in Japan, Germany and Spain. If the governments of the nation and some provinces do not learn the lesson of Fukushima we are doomed to repeat their same mistakes. Only after major nuclear accidents often have a second chance.
Japan
Before the earthquake of March 11, 2011, the authorities Japan's Nuclear and private operators (including TEPCO, head of Fukushima I) felt that the central Fukushima I Fukushima II, Tokai Onagawa and could withstand earthquakes and tsunamis of maximum intensity. That day at 14:46 JST (Japan Standard Time) occurred on the northeast coast with 8.9 degree earthquake intensity on the Richter scale. At 15:41 came the tsunami. Fukushima I worked in units 1, 2 and 3 (but not units 4, 5 and 6, out of service). Fukushima II In power reactors 1, 2 and 3 in Onagawa other three reactors and Tokai II unit, which unit I was already dismantled. All of them, but especially the reactors at Fukushima I, collapsed. Thus began the increasing leakage of radioactive materials into the environment, which continues at this time. Also began mass evacuations in nearby communities. For the first time in the history of mankind nuclear accident several reactors at the same time. Originally Fukushima situation is likened to a nuclear event at 4 in the INES scale (ranging from 0 to 7), but worsened as the chain of events is reached grades 5 and 6 and quite possibly the dreaded level 7. The same level of Chernobyl.
The Japanese nuclear power plants in the Northeast did not resist the force of the earthquake and tsunami. Despite repeated assurances security that historically recited Japan's nuclear authority and private operators, structures, devices and emergency operation of the reactors collapsed. Then were enhanced between multiple crises: massive destruction, death, thousands injured, damaged road networks, interruption in the supply of fuel, electricity and food, transportation problems, faulty communications and intermittent aftershocks of the earthquake, which still continue. The preparation of the civil society to face earthquakes, tsunamis and technological accidents explains why there were hundreds of thousands dead in one of the most densely populated regions of the planet. The company responded but was not the case with the government's nuclear authorities, who, in recent decades, failed to note that many nuclear reactors concentrate on small areas and near large population centers was a nonsense, especially in a country that endured historically strong earthquakes and tsunamis. The funny thing is that being the only country on Earth where the folly of an enemy exploded two nuclear bombs on innocent people, Japan will develop the same technology that produced the bombs "Little Boy ", based on Uranium 235, and " Fat Man "plutonium-239.
Germany
German Chancellor Angela Merkel reacted quickly to the human, environmental and technology in Japan. On March 15, 2011 postponed by three months the extension of the life of 17 nuclear reactors, and a day later stopped "temporarily" 7 older plants in Germany. Made this decision even though the country has no risk of major earthquakes or tsunamis [2]. Similar decisions are being taken in different countries. Until 17 March 2011, 10 of the 31 countries that possess nuclear power reactors announced the suspension of new projects and provided for a thorough review of their safety.
Argentina
Contrary to what happened in Germany, where he took a quick preventive measure, the Manager of Institutional Relations of the National Atomic Energy Commission (CNEA), Gabriel Barceló, ruled that what happened in Japan can happen in Argentina because our country " uses a different technology and also we are not in a seismic zone [3]. This statement is incorrect. The technologies are different but the radioactive materials are handled are equally dangerous and earthquakes, on the other hand, are not the only cause of a nuclear accident. Any reactor can an accident at 7.
accident This maximum "possible" may be the result of several factors acting singly or simultaneously.
First seismic activity. The Embalse plant in Córdoba is located on the fault of Santa Rosa, in a region where and there have been major earthquakes: magnitude 5.5 and intensity VII in 1947 and magnitude 6.0 and intensity VIII in 1934. The "failure of the western front of the Sierra Chica" runs from Carlos Paz to Berriedale and Elena. Their potential to generate earthquakes is unknown. The region also is the failure of the Lagoons, near Sampacho-town destroyed by an earthquake in 1934 - arriving to Rio Cuarto [4].
Second, human failings. On 30 June 1983, the Embalse nuclear power plant suffered a serious incident that did not download the radioactive material into the environment. But betrayed " failures in design, errors in documents and procedures, and weaknesses in the internal organization . " This crude diagnosis is contained in a document from the IRS, United Nations office based in Austria centralizing the reporting of incidents. CNEA, other than keeping them secret, took three years to communicate what happened to the IRS. Just met when the magazine Der Spiegel , 250 who had access to secret information, published it in Germany in 1987.
Third, technical failures. Candu reactors have inherent design flaws that explain for example the numerous water discharges radioactive heavy discharged into Lake Reservoir. For example, February-March 1986 August 1987 September 1987 December 1987 December 1995 October 2003 [5]. The Candu are particularly sensitive to certain types of accidents [6].
Fourth, the impact of large-sized commercial aircraft accident or terrorist act against anti-tank reactor or spent nuclear fuel.
Importantly Reservoir has two extremely dangerous sites, a highly protected "engineered barriers", the reactor core, and other less well protected structurally, the deposit spent nuclear fuel. There are bars deposited discard highly radioactive, that occurred during his 28 years of operation (1983-2011). At the end of its useful life would be accumulating more than 120,000 bars that remain dangerous for centuries from 1000 to 1500. The situation in Atucha I is similar. If a Boeing 767 slammed into these deposits, the fragment nuclear fuel and radioactive waste, transported in convective current height of the fire could spread. The wind would generate successive "pollution plumes" or clouds. Chernobyl and Fukushima have shown that pollution can affect large areas, even at great distances reactor accidents [5].
Reservoir and Atucha I routinely release radioactive materials
Argentina's nuclear power plants are only controlled by the Nuclear Regulatory Authority (ARN) whose members have always maintained close relations with CNEA and NASA (Nuclear Argentina SA), which operates the two reactors. The governments of the provinces of Cordoba and Buenos Aires, on the other hand, do not adequately control nuclear reactors Reservoir and Atucha I, or prepare local populations for the "worst possible accident" (INES level 7). In addition to the accidental release of radioactive material, usually not reported to the population, both reactors routinely downloaded a long list of radioisotopes to the environment.
Reservoir releases such as the lake, among others, T riti 3, Zirconium 95, 137 and cesium 134, strontium 90, chromium 51, niobium 95, 141 and 144 Cerium, Gadolinium 153, Iodine 131 , Ruthenium 106 and 103, Cobalt 60, 125 Antimony, Barium 140, Mn 54, 110 M Silver, Zinc Curio 65 and 51. The air-as-received Tritium 3, xenon 133, xenon 135, Krypton 85, 85 and 88 M, 95 Niobium, Zirconium 95, cerium 144, ruthenium 103. Cerium 141, Antimonio124 and 125, Cobalt 60, Hierro 59, Silver 110m and iodine 131. All are at risk and as some have long half-lives such as tritium 3 (12.3 years), cesium 137 (30.1 years), strontium-90 (28.7 years) and Cobalt-60 (5.2 years) is likely to have accumulated in lake food webs and soil. Cesium 137, chemically similar to potassium, for example, enters the muscle tissue and similar 90-strontium-calcium into bone tissue. Since the government of the province of Córdoba NASA does not control the plant operator, you ignore what is happening. In Atucha I, where the top downloads are dumped into the river Paraná, the situation is similar.
level ionizing radiation is not harmless levels
Ionizing radiation emitted by radioactive materials is harmful to cells, tissues and organisms. Even exposure to natural background radiation, relatively low risks involved. Any increase in the fund increases the likelihood of adverse effects. Every citizen should know that no threshold of radioactivity biologically safe. Maurice Errera of the University of Brussels it very clearly: " any increase in radiation, however small, is likely to increase the incidence of hereditary diseases or cancer . " Petkau effect discovery changed the history of health impact. Today we know that small doses of radiation may also affect living cells and their genetic material (DNA) and cause cancer. The radiation acts in two ways, directly when Alpha and Beta particles and Gamma rays reach living cells. Indirectly when atoms "shocked" by the radiation lose their electrons, and they act as if they were harmful bullets on other cells and their genetic material. The effects of radiation, however, usually appear long after exposure. Ionizing radiation, which has no smell or see, or touch, sick and kill in silence [5].
Córdoba, more radioactive tritium Buenos Aires
In Cordoba, Lake Reservoir receives the greatest impacts of the Embalse nuclear power plant. In addition to the dozens of radioactive materials routinely download center, its circuit tertiary overheated waters of the lake by more than 3 degrees Celsius. One of the critical radioisotope is tritium turns 3, the half-life of 12.43 years. The inhabitants of Reservoir, for example, clean drinking water is 220 becquerels per liter of tritium 3. CNEA for this value is "below " its boundaries. But for Directive 98/93 of the European Community, adopted on November 3, 1998, the acceptable limit for drinking water is 100 becquerels per liter. Why should a resident of drinking water reservoir with 500 times more tritium 3 that an inhabitant of Buenos Aires and Rome, knowing what we know about the effect of small doses? CNEA and other federal agencies minimize this reality, but without any numbers [7].
In Argentina, the population is not prepared to deal with nuclear accidents
In Embalse and Atucha I, the three nuclear institutions in Argentina, RNA, CNEA and NASA, organize drills nuclear accident "minor" only in a radius of 10 kilometers around each nuclear reactor. His plan for evacuation of people is limited in each case, a 3 km around the plants. Chernobyl Fukushima and show how these distances are negligible. Tokyo, which has been working to reduce exposure to airborne radioactive waste, is located 224 kilometers in Fukushima. Chernobyl radioactive contamination in places reached within 700 miles away and further afield.
Hence, in Argentina million people are marginalized prevention systems. Plans were never citizens with slogans for any resident of the cities of Rio Cuarto and Villa Maria in Cordoba, Rosario and Santa Fe, or the city of Buenos Aires know how to deal with the worst possible accident. They have not even agreed on joint work with Uruguay for its citizens to also be prepared. CNEA is simply that the probability of nuclear accidents is low and Fukushima's tragedy could not happen in our country.
By excluding the majority of the population with safety, nuclear authorities of Argentina social commit a tragic error. To avoid any criticism and fears prefer not to prepare the population living beyond the range of 10 kilometers around the Reservoir and Atucha I.
But they are not solely responsible. The governments of the provinces potentially affected by a nuclear accident at 7 on the INES scale, either reservoir or Atucha I, also continue to look the other way. The case of Córdoba is particularly acute. The Foundation for Environmental Defense (FUNAM) gave the Governor Juan Schiaretti, in November 2010, a City Plan with slogans for the villagers know how to respond to a nuclear accident. To date (March 2011) the governor never responded. Hence FUNAM is exploring the possibility of legal action against the governor and decided, unilaterally, publicly distribute the City Plan.
constraints of iodine pills
During nuclear accidents are often released significant amounts of the radioisotope iodine 131, which has a half life of 8.1 days [8 ]. Like all radioactive material is a carcinogen. So Iodine tablets are distributed stable (not radioactive) in the population. To saturate the thyroid gland and be the person exposed to radioactive iodine 131, the gland is not fixed and the radioisotope is removed, mostly by urine and feces. What does not clearly explain the nuclear authorities is that iodine pills only serve to stop the radioactive forms of iodine. It does not help remove the cesium 137 and strontium-90 nor any other radioactive material discharged during a nuclear accident. Neither "absorb" radiation. Because of this confusion many people believe that taking iodine tablets are protected from radioactive material and radiation, which is not true.
Argentina already had his accident grade 4 INES scale
Argentina contained in the lists of major nuclear accidents due to serious accident in the research reactor RA-2 in the Atomic Center, Buenos Aires (CAT). On September 23, 1983 an experiment was carried out there which required changing the configuration of the "heart" of reactor. There was then a "critical excursion (runaway reaction) that exposed the operator to 2,000 rad of gamma radiation and 1,700 rad of neutrons, which caused his death two days later. Another 17 persons located outside the reactor room received doses ranging from 35 rad (0.35 Gy) and less than 1 rad (0.01 Gy). This accident was rated Level 4 on the INES scale [5].
In Argentina's nuclear program should be reviewed and subject to independent review security systems of its reactors power and experimental. proposals.
are defined in our country works that endanger health and environmental vast geographical regions and crowded cities. This is due to the high mobility of air pollutants in an accident with massive discharge of radioisotopes. Radioactive substances in Japan removed from Fukushima are coming to Tokyo, the world's most populous city (with 35.8 million inhabitants), which is 224 kilometers away.
In Argentina, the national government encourages the consolidation of a "park" of reactors in Lima in the province of Buenos Aires which includes, at present, Atucha I (operating), Atucha II (under construction) CAREM and 25 (under construction). National government intends to add further the projected Atucha III. The old and I Atucha reactor is 120 kilometers from the city of Buenos Aires and nearby cities of Uruguay. If an accident occurs affect level 7 potentially to Argentina, Uruguay and possibly part of southern Brazil. "Plumes" of radioactive contamination could reach Uruguay by air and water (river Paraná, Rio de la Plata). Among the Uruguayan locations with critical location are Fray Bentos, Mercedes, Dolores, Caramel and Cologne.
In the province of Córdoba national and provincial governments took the decision to extend the life of the Embalse nuclear power for 25 years violated openly provincial Environment Act 7343, the 2131 provincial decree Assessment Environmental Impact Assessments and National Environmental Law 25,675, which provides for public hearings. This decision, despite public opposition and claims FUNAM started in 2005 - completely ignored the citizens of the province.
De join and fulfilled life, time remains of operation (2011-2012) and extension (25 years) is exceeded half a century of operation. This would increase the risk of reactor accident, despite the renewal of parts, then work with many old items and impacted. Further grow the negative impact of radioactive discharges into the environment (Routine or accidental), particularly on Lake Ctalamochita Reservoir and the river, because they increase the accumulation of long half-life radioisotopes. In case of accident level 7 should be remembered that just 35 kilometers far Embalse Rio Tercero, 86 km from Alta Gracia, Río Cuarto 110 kilometers and 120 kilometers from Cordoba, the second largest city in Argentina.
northeast of the country, the nation and the government of Formosa intend to install next to the Paraguay River CAREM reactor of 150 MW. Unknown environmental impact studies and there has been no public consultation. This is an experimental reactor was built as never before in full a CAREM 150. There was only evidence of the critical unit at the time violated the laws of the province of Black River (1997) and is building a prototype, the CAREM 25, Lima (Buenos Aires). In case of accident level 7 on the INES scale could be affected northeastern Argentina and Paraguay. It is striking that the governments of Argentina and Taiwan to go ahead with this pilot project without consulting the government of Paraguay and without knowing the position of the Paraguayans. A possible plume that extended through the Paraguay River could also affect the provinces of Chaco and Corrientes and even other sites located downstream (after the Paraguay-Paraná confluence).
full democracy in the governance of the Nation and some provincial governments are repeating the mechanical authoritarian military governments, the main promoters of the nuclear program.
Argentina needs to rethink its costly nuclear program based on extensive discussions and informed and public consultations, in particular because the nation-unilaterally-driving the consolidation of the first nuclear reactor park in Latin America in Lima (Buenos Aires) where Fukushima showed dramatically how dangerous it is concentrated in one location several nuclear reactors located, well-a critical distance large population centers.
Urge suspend the extension of the life of the Embalse nuclear power plant and administrative and judicial investigate why it was decided that extension without complying with the law and without public hearing. You should also suspended construction of the reactor CAREM of Formosa, a project that ignored citizens of northeastern Argentina and Paraguay.
must also undergo external review the safety of all nuclear facilities, not just reactors (atomic centers, uranium enrichment plant , uranium mines without remedy, DIOXITEK etc.), and addressing environmental and independent epidemiological studies to understand the negative impacts caused and nuclear activities on ecosystems and health. This will need to call universities, research institutions and civil society organizations. In this context we must analyze the feasibility and safety of Atucha II and CAREM 25. Finally, Argentina's nuclear activities can no longer be controlled by a body such as the Nuclear Regulatory Authority, has proven links to professional, technical and political CNEA and NASA itself.
Our country needs citizens plans for the various communities to respond adequately to nuclear accidents. It should also review the current simulations to include the worst possible accident (level 7 on the INES scale).
Argentina must develop a State Energy Policy based on the participation of governments, parties various political and non-governmental actors to generate a long-term program does not isolate the energy issue of the environment, society itself and the world stage. In this approach the behavior of saving, sustainable technologies and soft sources must have priority. Can not be that decisions and investments in energy are decided in Argentina from a national ministry, large corporate interests and a total lack of consultation. What should be clear is that Argentina should not make the trap fell and France, where over 80% of the electricity consumed is from nuclear sources. In addition to numerous alternative energy sources and soft (Wind, solar, photovoltaic, biomass, waste, etc.) There is the strategy of energy saving, under-developed in our country. All these alternatives are cheaper and less dangerous than nuclear, and leave no radioactive waste because of its long half-life compromise health and the environment for future generations. It is unreasonable for nuclear reactors useful lives just 30 years to generate large volumes of waste which remains radioactive for centuries from 1000 to 1500.
Reliance on a ridiculously expensive and dangerous technology rather than build matrices varied and sustainable energy is suicidal. Japan -Victim of the suicide, he just really hard to strike a blow against nuclear myth, a myth that was born of militarism, suspicion and corruption.
If people and institutions we can not break the tradition of secrecy, secrecy and authoritarianism with which he built a lavish Argentina's nuclear program, which provides only 5 to 6% of electric power, then we must prepare to resist its unpredictable side effects. Do not forget that a single nuclear accident may bring down for decades and centuries an entire region. Fukushima is closer than we think.
References
[1] INES Nuclear Event Scale International. Grade 6 was assigned by the Nuclear Safety Authority in France (El País, Madrid, March 15, 2011).
[2] nuclear institutions in Europe are highly critical of accidents in Japan. EU Energy Commissioner Guenther scored Öttinger " out control "the situation in Fukushima (El País, Madrid, March 16, 2011).
[3]" CNEA, Argentina could not pass on what happens in Japan. "TELAM News Agency, March 14, 2011. Barceló G. The claim is technically incorrect as Argentina has seismic zones.
[4] These failures are being studied by the National University of Río Cuarto. Sagripanti-Guillermo Geologist in charge of the studio said that the area of \u200b\u200bRío Cuarto " is seismically active." View La Voz del Interior (Córdoba), March 15, 2011, daily Depth (Rio Cuarto) March 16, 2011.
[5] Montenegro, RA 2007. "I nuclear T Programme of Argentina and the creation of nuclear-free zones for Reducing Risks of nuclear facilities." In: "Updating International Nuclear Law", Eds. H. Stockinger, J. Van Dyke, M. Geistlinger, SK and P. Fussek Marchart, Ed NW Verlag, BMW & Intersentia Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag, Wien-Graz, pp. 259-284.
[6] The Candu nuclear reactor Reservoir has problems of its own: 1) Increased likelihood of heavy water loss from the primary circuit due to the complexity of pipe. 2) The refueling operation while the reactor continues to introduce additional risk factors. 3) The successive failures and breaks in the pressure tube is connected to the same Zirconium-Niobium alloy pipes used in Chernobyl. 4) The combination of natural uranium-heavy water has serious security implications. The reactivity coefficient is positive, there that any accident involving loss of coolant can lead to escape of energy. 5) The use of heavy water generates large amounts of radioactive tritium 3, and the generous use of zirconium in the core results in a high potential for zirconium-steam reaction water. 6) It is not designed to withstand the worst accidents involving extensive reactions of zirconium-steam, explosions of hydrogen and water vapor, and rupture of the common methods of cooling cycles in primary and secondary containment.
[7] According to the Regulatory Authority Nuclear (1998) 3 Tritium values \u200b\u200bin waters of the Embalse de Rio Tercero, Cordoba, are 32 to 520 times higher than those measured in the Parana River near Atucha I. Tritium figures 3 in the drinking water consumed by residents of Reservoir, meanwhile, are 34 to 367 times higher than those recorded in groundwater (drinking) wells located 5 kilometers south of Atucha I (Buenos Aires Province .) See [5].
[8] Each material has a radioactive half-life observed. When we say that the Iodine 131 has a half life of 8.1 days implies the following: if I have 100 grams Iodine 131 to the 8.1 days will be half, or 50 grams to 16.2 days half of the half, 25 grams, and so on.
For more information contact :
Prof. Dr. Raúl A. Montenegro, Biologist
Telephone: 03543-422236
Mobile: 0351-155 125 637
E-mail: raulmontenegro@flash.com.ar
Press Officer : Nayla
Azzinnari
Cell Phone: 011-155 460 9860
E-mail: nay_azz@hotmail.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment