The Tokyo Electric Power Co. (TEPCO) moved forward this week with Plan B for containing and removing radioactive water that is believed to be polluting ground water on the sea side of the stricken plant, as it escapes the facility through underground trenches, The Japan Times reported.
TEPCO tried…(read more)
CNN’s Hala Gorani speaks to Kofi Annan about whether or not he is optimistic a nuclear deal can be done with Iran.
Read The Full Article Here: http://rss.cnn.com/~r/rss/cnn_world/~3/3TmHbkYlPn0/wrn-iran-vienna-talks-kofi-annan-intv.cnn.html
Strontium-90 density increased to be approx. 3 times much as previous month, according to Tepco.
The sample was groundwater taken from seaside of Reactor 2.
They measured 490,000,000 Bq/m3 of Sr-90 on 9/1/2014. It was 170,000,000 Bq/m3 on 8/4/2014.
Tepco announces Sr-90 density in groundwater only monthly, so it is impossible to find the continuous trend. However, it can be read that Sr-90 density is not in the decreasing trend at least.
La radioactivité du strontium 90 multipliée par 3 dans les eaux souterraines : 490 millions de Bq/m³ côté mer du réacteur 2
Selon Tepco, la radioactivité du strontium 90 s’est multipliée d’un facteur de 3 environ depuis le mois dernier.
L’échantillon a été pris dans les eaux souterraines du côté mer du réacteur 2.
Ils avaient relevé 490 000 000 (490 millions de) Bq/m³ de Sr 90 le 1er septembre 2014.
Elle était de 170 000 000 (170 millions de) Bq/m³ le 4 août 2014.
Tepco ne présente la radioactivité du Sr 90 des eaux souterraines qu’une fois par mois, il est donc impossible de suivre la progression précise. On peut néanmoins voir ci que la radioactivité en Sr 90 ne suit pas une pente descendante.
The post Strontium-90 density rose up 3 × in groundwater / 490,000,000 Bq/m3 from Reactor 2 seaside appeared first on Fukushima Diary.
Read The Full Article Here: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/FukushimaDiary/~3/eJfx6xP2PN8/
If the United States and Russia fought a nuclear war, who would win? You might be surprised by the answer. Under the Obama administration, the rapidly aging U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal has been shrinking. Meanwhile, the Russians have been developing an entirely new generation of bombers, submarines and missiles that have the capability of delivering an absolutely crippling first strike. At this point, most Americans consider a full-scale nuclear war to be inconceivable. But in Russia attitudes are completely different. To the Russians, the United States is enemy number one these days and the Russians are feverishly preparing for a potential military showdown. Of course the Russians don’t actually want to have to resort to nuclear war. Such an event would be an unspeakable horror for the entire globe. But if one does happen, the Russians want to make sure that they are the ones that come out on top.
A lot of Americans are still operating under the faulty assumption that the doctrine of “mutually assured destruction” still applies. The thinking was that both sides had so many nuclear missiles that a launch by one side would guarantee the destruction of both parties.
But since that time, so much has changed.
For one, the U.S. nuclear arsenal is far, far smaller than it was back then. Back in 1967, the U.S. military possessed more than 31,000 strategic nuclear warheads. Now, we only have 1,642 deployed, and that number is scheduled to be further reduced to about 1,500.
Sadly, reducing the size of our nuclear arsenal by close to 95 percent is not enough for anti-nuke crusader Barack Obama. He has spoken of unilaterally reducing the size of our strategic nuclear arsenal down to just 300 warheads.
During this same time period, the Russians have been developing some very impressive stealth delivery systems which have the capability of hitting targets inside the United States within just minutes of an order being issued. This is particularly true of their submarine-launched missiles. The newest Russian subs have the ability to approach our coastlines without us even knowing that they are there. If the Russians came to the conclusion that war with the United States was unavoidable, an overwhelming first strike using submarine-based missiles could potentially take out nearly our entire arsenal before we even knew what hit us. And if the Russians have an anti-ballistic missile system that can intercept the limited number of rockets that we can launch in return, they may be able to escape relatively unscathed.
In order for “mutually assured destruction” to work, we have to see the Russian missiles coming and have enough time to order a launch of our own. Thank to emerging technologies, the balance of power has fundamentally shifted. The old way of thinking simply does not apply anymore and the Russians understand this.
The following are 10 signs that Russia is preparing to fight (and win) a nuclear war with the United States…
#1 Russia is spending an enormous amount of money to develop the PAK DA Strategic Bomber. Not a lot is known about this stealth bomber at this time. The following summary of what we do know comes from an Australian news source…
Russia’s answer to the B-2 “Spirit”, this next-generation strategic bomber is intended to be almost invisible to radar and capable of carrying a huge array of conventional and nuclear missiles. Little else is known other than its expected service date: 2025.
#2 Russian nuclear bombers have been regularly buzzing areas in northern Europe and along the coast of Alaska. The Russians appear to be brazenly testing NATO defenses. Here is just one recent example…
Russian strategic nuclear bombers carried out air defense zone incursions near Alaska and across Northern Europe this week in the latest nuclear saber rattling by Moscow.
Six Russian aircraft, including two Bear H nuclear bombers, two MiG-31 fighter jets and two IL-78 refueling tankers were intercepted by F-22 fighters on Wednesday west and north of Alaska in air defense identification zones, said Navy Capt. Jeff A. Davis, a spokesman for the U.S. Northern Command and North American Aerospace Defense Command. Two other Bears were intercepted by Canadian jets on Thursday.
#3 Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu says that Russian nuclear bombers will now conduct regular patrols “in the western Atlantic and eastern Pacific, as well as the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico“.
#4 Russia is constructing an anti-ballistic missile system which will supposedly be superior to anything that the U.S. currently has…
Currently under development, the S-500 missile is intended to be capable of intercepting intercontinental ballistic missiles when combined with radar input from the likes of the new A-100 AWACS aircraft. It is supposed to be able to track and shoot at up to 10 supersonic targets at any one time at heights of up to 40km.
#5 Russia recently successfully test launched a new submarine-based intercontinental ballistic missile…
A Russian Northern Fleet nuclear submarine on Wednesday fired a test intercontinental missile from the Barents Sea to the country’s far eastern Kura Range on the Kamchatka Peninsula, the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement Wednesday.
“Within the frameworks of testing the reliability of marine strategic nuclear forces, the Tula [nuclear submarine] launched a Sineva intercontinental ballistic missile from the Barents Sea to the Kura Range [in Kamchatka],” the statement says.
The RSM-54 intercontinental ballistic missile Sineva (NATO code name SS-N-23 Skiff) is part of the D-9RM launch system.
The D-9RM launch system equipped with RSM-54 missiles was put into service in 1986. The production of the RSM-54 was halted in 1996 but after three years, the Russian government resumed the production of a modernized version of the missile.
#6 Russia already possesses super silent nuclear attack submarines that are virtually undetectable when submerged. In a previous article, I discussed how the U.S. Navy refers to these virtually undetectable subs as “black holes“…
Did you know that Russia is building submarines that are so quiet that the U.S. military cannot detect them? These “black hole” submarines can freely approach the coastlines of the United States without fear of being detected whenever they want. In fact, a “nuclear-powered attack submarine armed with long-range cruise missiles” sailed around in the Gulf of Mexico for several weeks without being detected back in 2012. And now Russia is launching a new class of subs that have “advanced stealth technology”. The U.S. Navy openly acknowledges that they cannot track these subs when they are submerged. That means that the Russians are able to sail right up to our coastlines and launch nukes whenever they want.
#7 Russian media outlets are reporting that 60 percent of all Russian nuclear missiles will have radar-evading capability by 2016…
Russia’s Defense Ministry plans to complete the rearmament of Strategic Missile Forces within six years. “By 2016, the share of new missile systems will reach nearly 60%, and by 2021 their share will increase to 98%. At the same time the troop and weapon command systems, combat equipment will be qualitatively improved, first of all — their capabilities for the suppression of antimissile defense will be built up,” Defense Ministry’s RVSN spokesman Colonel Igor Yegorov told ITAR-TASS on Friday.
#8 For the first time ever, Russia has more strategic nuclear warheads deployed than the United States does…
For the first time, Russia, which is in the midst of a major strategic nuclear modernization, has more deployed nuclear warheads than the United States, according to the latest numbers released by the State Department.
Russia now has 1,643 warheads deployed on intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and heavy bombers. The United States has 1,642, said the fact sheet released Wednesday.
The warhead count for the Russians, based the Sept. 1 report required under the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), shows an increase of 131 warheads since the last declaration on March 1. The U.S. reported a warhead increase of 57 during the same period. It is not clear why the warhead numbers increased.
#9 Russia has a massive advantage over the United States and NATO when it comes to tactical nuclear weapons…
As for tactical nuclear weapons, the superiority of modern-day Russia over NATO is even stronger.
The Americans are well aware of this. They were convinced before that Russia would never rise again. Now it’s too late.
To date, NATO countries have only 260 tactical nuclear weapons in the ETO. The United States has 200 bombs with a total capacity of 18 megatons. They are located on six air bases in Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands and Turkey. France has 60 more atomic bombs. That is pretty much it. Russia, according to conservative estimates, has 5,000 pieces of different classes of TNW – from Iskander warheads to torpedo, aerial and artillery warheads! The US has 300 tactical B-61 bombs on its own territory, but this does not change the situation against the backdrop of such imbalance.
#10 Russian President Vladimir Putin has initiated a huge “weapons modernization program” that is projected to cost the equivalent of 540 billion dollars…
Putin said Russia’s weapons modernization program for 2016-2025 should focus on building a new array of offensive weapons to provide a “guaranteed nuclear deterrent;” re-arming strategic and long-range aviation; creating an aerospace defense system and developing high-precision conventional weapons.
He would not elaborate on prospective weapons, but he and other officials have repeatedly boasted about new Russian nuclear missiles’ capability to penetrate any prospective missile shield.
The Kremlin has bolstered defense spending in the past few years under an ambitious weapons modernization program that runs through 2020 and costs the equivalent of $540 billion.
Meanwhile, the Chinese have been investing heavily in this kind of technology as well.
In fact, just the other day the Chinese successfully tested a new submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missile…
China’s JL-2 second-generation intercontinental-range submarine-launched ballistic missile, which has the ability to reach the continental USA, is already believed to be deployable by the People’s Liberation Army, reports Huanqiu, the Chinese-language website of the nationalistic Global Times tabloid.
The Julang-2 — literally “Giant Wave 2″ — has reached a preliminary level of proficiency, according to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission in its report to US Congress on Nov. 20.
Most Americans do not believe that any of this is a concern whatsoever.
Most Americans just assume that a full-scale nuclear war is virtually impossible.
But the truth is that a successful first strike against the United States is more possible today than it ever has been before.
Hopefully the American people will wake up to this reality before it is too late.
Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Contributed by Michael Snyder of The American Dream.
The US Supreme Court said on Tuesday it will review national environmental standards requiring power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants.
Read The Full Article Here: http://phys.org/news336161435.html
Nov. 24, the deadline for reaching a comprehensive agreement between Iran and P5+1 — the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany — came and went without the agreement.
What happened? Iran made major concessions. It was excessive demands by the U.S. and its allies that prevented the comprehensive agreement from materializing.
The original Geneva interim agreement expired last July, but both sides agreed to extend the deadline for reaching a comprehensive agreement to Nov. 24. Now, a new deadline of June 30, 2015 has been set. Both sides said that much progress was made, but some difficult issues have remained unresolved.
The agreement would have created an entirely new dynamic for the war-torn Middle East. It would have ushered in a new era of cooperation between two old nemeses, Iran and the United States, to defeat their common enemy, the Islamic State.
Given the historic significance of the agreement, why is it that a breakthrough was not achieved?
Several complex issues that had seemed unresolvable have actually been hammered out, but only because Iran was willing to negotiate with a spirit of compromise, of give and take.
The first concession concerned Iran’s uranium enrichment facility built under a mountain in Fordow, near the holy city of Qom, 90 miles south of Tehran. The West, led by the United States, had demanded that Iran dismantle the facility altogether. The facility is neither suited for military purposes, nor for large-scale industrial use; it was built by Iran either as a bargaining chip, or to preserve its indigenous enrichment technology in case the large Natanz enrichment facility was destroyed by bombing, or both.
Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister and a principal negotiator, has emphasized repeatedly and emphatically, “Iran would not agree to close any of its nuclear facility.” Iran has agreed to convert the site to a nuclear research facility, representing a major concession.
A second concession involved the IR-40 heavy water nuclear reactor, under construction in Arak, 155 miles southwest of Tehran. When completed, it will replace Tehran Research Reactor, an almost 50-year-old reactor that produces medical isotopes for close to 1 million Iranian patients every year.
The West had demanded that Iran convert the IR-40 to a light-water reactor, due to the concerns that if the reactor, when it comes online, will produce plutonium that can be used to make nuclear weapons. But, Iran refused to go along because, first and foremost, all the work on the reactor has been done by the Iranian experts and thus the reactor is a source of national pride. Iran has already spent billions of dollars to design and begin constructing the reactor, but the West was not willing to share the cost of the reactor conversion to a light-water one.
On its own initiative, Iran has agreed to modify the design of the reactor so that it will produce much smaller amounts of plutonium. Iran also agreed not to build any reprocessing facility for separating the plutonium from the rest of the nuclear waste. This was again a major concession.
The third major concession by Iran was agreeing to stop enriching uranium at 19.75 percent (commonly referred to as 20 percent in the Western media, although the seemingly minor difference is actually quite important). After the West and the International Atomic Energy Agency refused to supply Iran with fuel for the TRR in 2009, Iran began producing the higher enriched uranium that the TRR uses as its fuel. Tehran agreed to stop producing the fuel, after stockpiling enough fuel for the remaining life of the old TRR. This was the third major concession by Iran.
The fourth major concession made by Iran is related to the issue of inspection of Iran’s nuclear facilities by the IAEA. Although Iran had lived up to its obligations under its original Safeguards Agreement with the agency signed in 1974, the IAEA under its Director-General Yukiya Amano, who has completely politicized the agency that has contributed to the complexities of reaching the comprehensive agreement, has been insisting that Iran implement the provisions of the Additional Protocol of the SG Agreement, which Iran signed in 2003 and, without ratification by its parliament, implemented voluntarily until February 2006.
Iran set aside the Additional Protocol after the European Union reneged on its promises made to Iran in the Sa’dabad Declaration of October 2003 and the Paris Agreement of November 2004. Iran and the IAEA reached an agreement in November 2013, according to which Iran allows much more frequent and intrusive inspection of its nuclear facilities, way beyond its legal obligations under its SG Agreement. Since then, the IAEA has repeatedly confirmed that Iran has lived up to its obligations.
Three of the remaining issues concern the number of centrifuges that Iran gets to keep over the duration of the agreement, the duration of the comprehensive agreement and the mechanism by which the crippling economic sanctions imposed on Iran by the U.S. and its allies would be lifted.
In fact, agreeing to limit the number of its centrifuges for the duration of the agreement is yet another significant, but unacknowledged, concession by Iran, a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Iran’s SG Agreement with the IAEA places no restriction on the number of centrifuges that Iran can have.
The issue of the number of centrifuges, NoC, is also mostly superficial. The efficiency of a uranium enrichment program is not measured by the NoC, rather by the Separative Work Units count, which is essentially the effort (energy, for example) used in separating a certain amount of mass (of, say, uranium 235 and 238) into a product (uranium 235, used as nuclear fuel and for bomb making if enriched to 90 percent or higher) and “waste” and, hence, measures the efficiency of the centrifuges. So, a nation can have a relatively small number of highly efficient centrifuges and still be able to produce large quantities of enriched uranium.
The number and efficiency of the centrifuges are related to the question of the “breakout” time – the time that Iran would need, if it leaves the NPT, expels the IAEA inspectors, and begins a race to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make one crude nuclear weapon. Aside from the fact that even if Iran did leave the NPT and did succeed at all the stages, it would be able to produce only a crude nuclear device, not a nuclear warhead, as there is no evidence that Iran actually possesses the know-how for miniaturizing a nuclear bomb to be carried by its missiles. The breakout time depends on a variety of factors, only one of which is the number of the centrifuges. But, the U.S. insisted that Iran must limit the number of its centrifuges to about 4,500, roughly half of the centrifuges that are currently spinning and producing low-enriched uranium in Iran. That would supposedly give the West about a year if Iran left the NPT and began a race towards a nuclear device or bomb. Iran did not accept the proposal, and presented its own study of the breakout time, indicating that it was at least three years.
The second unresolved issue is the duration of the comprehensive agreement. The U.S. began the negotiations by demanding a 20 year agreement. But, it became abundantly clear that it would be a total political suicide for the administration of Iran’s moderate president, Hassan Rouhani, to accept such a long-term agreement. Tehran’s hardliners would have overthrown his government by parliamentary maneuvering. Iran indicated that a seven-year agreement is acceptable, moving from its original position of 1-3 years, but the U.S. insisted that the duration must be a “double digit” number, meaning at least 10 years.
From Iran’s view, the most important issue is the lifting of the economic sanctions. And, here is an important fact: Even if Iran agrees to the U.S. proposal, the Obama administration will not be able to cancel its crippling economic sanctions against Iran, because Congress will block that. It has promised only gradual suspension of some the sanctions, which does not require congressional consent. In effect, the U.S. wanted Iran to give up its hard won “facts on the ground” in return for gradual suspension of only some of the sanctions. No nation would agree to such one-sided demands, let alone Iran, a nation that has lived with U.S. economic sanctions for over three decades.
At a symposium in Washington on Oct. 23, Wendy Sherman, under secretary of state for policy who leads the U.S. negotiation team with Iran, asserted that, “We hope the leaders in Tehran will agree to the steps necessary to assure the world that this program will be exclusively peaceful. If that does not happen, the responsibility will be seen by all to rest with Iran.”
Given all the concessions that Iran has made, given U.S. excessive demands on Iran, and given the fact that, in effect, the U.S. is trying to impose a new and illegal interpretation of Iran’s obligations under the NPT and its SG Agreement and the meaning of “peaceful nuclear program,” it is the U.S. that must be blamed for the failure of the negotiations, not Iran.
Iran’s supreme leader approves further nuclear talks, says West failed to subjugate country
Read The Full Article Here: http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/iran-leader-west-fails-bring-iran-knees-27158681
Read The Full Article Here: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/ENENews/~3/CAZwppJn_jE/cbs-2-sailors-dead-after-fukushima-radiation-exposure-reporter-served-uss-reagan-feel-like-wrong-critical-health-risk-all-onboard-feel-people-realizing-serious-issue-video
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Iran’s Supreme Leader said Tuesday that western powers will not be able to bring the country to its knees in nuclear talks, however he gave his indirect approval for a continuation of those negotiations.
“On the nuclear issue, the United States and European colonialist countries gathered and applied their entire efforts to bring the Islamic Republic to its knees but they could not and they will not,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said, speaking to a group of clerics, according to his website. The remarks were the first by Khamenei, who has final say on all state matters, since Iran and major global powers agreed Monday to decide by March 1 what needs to be done and on what kind of schedule. A final agreement is meant to follow four months later.
Earlier on Monday and in a nationwide broadcast, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani told his nation that it “has achieved a significant victory” and “negotiations will lead to a deal, sooner or later.”
Rouhani also said many obstacles in the talks “have been eliminated.”
But he also vowed that Iran will not relinquish its right to nuclear capability.
“Our nuclear rights should be admitted by the world,” Rouhani said. “We will continue the talks.”
Mojtaba Fathi, a Tehran-based analyst, believed the extension of the talks means that “The sanctions will not increase against Iran and a reduction of the sanctions is possible while it has its own nuclear program on the ground. This has added to hopes for solving the case.”
Iranian lawmakers on Tuesday showed a mix of cautious optimism and defiance.
Vice-chairman of the parliament Mohammad Hassan Aboutorabifard said the U.S. is not trustworthy since Washington “sacrifices” its national interests for Israel, but he still voiced support for further nuclear talks. Parliamentarians in attendance responded to his remarks by chanting, “Down with America.”
Lawmaker Mansour Haghighatpour, a member of the parliamentary committee on national security and foreign policy, told The Associated Press that the extension of the talks proves, “Iran does not give in its long-term interests.”
“Our national interests should remain intact,” said Haghighatpour. “We had never pinned our hopes to the deal.”
The United States, Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany, have engaged in intensive negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program. Tehran has denied its nuclear research has any sort of military dimension, saying it is focused on peaceful uses like power generation and medical treatments.
Read The Full Article Here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/25/iran-nuclear-talks_n_6218282.html?utm_hp_ref=world&ir=WorldPost
Michael Snyder | If the United States and Russia fought a nuclear war, who would win? You might be surprised by the answer.