bananas
bananas's JournalNew NASA, Bigelow Deal Puts Inflatable Space Station Module One Step Closer to Orbit
Tuesday, January 08, 2013
BEAM me up to space station, Mr. Bigelow
NASA and Bigelow Aerospace have signed a $17.8 million contract. The details will be released later but apparently it deals with preliminary work on the proposed BEAM (Bigelow Expandable Activity Module) system for the ISS: New NASA, Bigelow Deal Puts Inflatable Space Station Module One Step Closer to Orbit - SpaceNews.com.
Bigelow Aerospace, owned by Robert Bigelow of North Las Vegas, Nevada, has been in the space station business several years having operated two orbiting demonstrator stations since 2006.
NASA spokesman Josh Buck said the agency would tap one of its Commercial Resupply Services contractors, Space Exploration Technologies Corp. (SpaceX) or Orbital Sciences Corp., to get BEAM to the space station from either Cape Canaveral, Florida or Wallops Island, Va. launch pads. A launch date appears likely prior to the end of 2016.
SpaceX and Orbital are under contract for space station cargo deliveries through 2016. So far, only SpaceX has flown to the station. The company, which flies Dragon cargo capsules atop Falcon 9 rockets, completed its first contracted run in October. Orbital, which is developing a cargo freighter called Cygnus for launch aboard the new Antares rocket, is now scheduled to launch a demonstration cargo run in February from NASA’s Wallops Island Flight Facility in Virginia, reports SpaceNews. More from Doug Messier at ParbolicArc.
<snip>
CROOKED CLEANUP: Government to investigate Fukushima decontamination
Source: Asahi Shimbun
The government will investigate decontamination work around the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant following reports that potentially radioactive debris has been dumped into the environment, even during the preparatory stage of the program.
“It is extremely regrettable,” Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga told a news conference on Jan. 7. “We will take stern measures after fully investigating it.”
An Environment Ministry task force, headed by Senior Vice Minister Shinji Inoue, held its first meeting later in the day. It is expected to investigate what happened in Fukushima Prefecture, strengthen management of the decontamination operations and find ways to restore public trust in the work.
Asahi Shimbun reporters discovered violations of Environment Ministry rules listed in the lucrative contracts signed with construction companies for the decontamination work. Under those rules, workers must properly store collected debris and water used for cleaning buildings for proper disposal.
<snip>
Read more: http://ajw.asahi.com/article/0311disaster/fukushima/AJ201301070080
Exclusive: U.S. nuclear lab removes Chinese tech over security fears
Source: Reuters
A leading U.S. nuclear weapons laboratory recently discovered its computer systems contained some Chinese-made network switches and replaced at least two components because of national security concerns, a document shows.
A letter from the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico, dated November 5, 2012, states that the research facility had installed devices made by H3C Technologies Co, based in Hangzhou, China, according to a copy seen by Reuters. H3C began as a joint venture between China's Huawei Technologies Co and 3Com Corp, a U.S. tech firm, and was once called Huawei-3Com. Hewlett Packard Co acquired the firm in 2010.
The discovery raises questions about procurement practices by U.S. departments responsible for national security. The U.S. government and Congress have raised concerns about Huawei and its alleged ties to the Chinese military and government. The company, the world's second-largest telecommunications equipment maker, denies its products pose any security risk or that the Chinese military influences its business.
Switches are used to manage data traffic on computer networks. The exact number of Chinese-made switches installed at Los Alamos, how or when they were acquired, and whether they were placed in sensitive systems or pose any security risks, remains unclear. The laboratory - where the first atomic bomb was designed - is responsible for maintaining America's arsenal of nuclear weapons.
<snip>
Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/07/us-huawei-alamos-idUSBRE90608B20130107
"Do You Hear What I Hear?" is an anti-war song written while America was on the brink of nuclear war
“Do You Hear What I Hear?”
By Wook KimDec. 17, 20120
“Do You Hear What I Hear?” is an anti-war song—written while America was on the brink of nuclear war.
The song was written by Noel Regney and Gloria Shayne—talk about Christmas-ready names!—during October of 1961. At that time, the U.S. was facing down the Soviet Union over some medium-range missiles on an island nation in the Caribbean. The Cuban Missile Crisis weighed heavily on the married songwriting team (who switched their traditional music-lyric roles for this song)—Shayne was especially moved by the sight of mothers pushing baby carriages on a city street.
A single—recorded by the same chorale group that had a radio hit with “The Little Drummer Boy” a few years earlier—was released a few weeks later. The song’s plea for peace and “goodness and light” struck a chord with an anxious public and sold more than 250,000 copies—and was soon part of the modern holiday canon.
I didn't know this. One of the comments at youtube:
As Christmas song it's about Jesus, but that's not all. The daughter of the composers says: “I don’t know to this day how many people hear that line and think when they hear ‘a tail as big as a kite’ and think of bombs, but that’s certainly what [my father] was thinking about.”
"A star dancing in the night with a tail as big as a kite" -- rocket engines exuding fire and followed by 'a tail' of exhaust. In the story of Jesus, the star hung unmoving, it neither danced nor had a tail.
"We live on a solar-powered spaceship, renewable energy means less fuel needs."
Tweet from Chris Hadfield on the ISS: https://twitter.com/Cmdr_Hadfield/status/287645780632813568
Chris Hadfield ?@Cmdr_Hadfield
We live on a solar-powered spaceship, renewable energy means less fuel needs. Side benefit is the beauty of the arrays. pic.twitter.com/KuTgwQvn
11:44 AM - 5 Jan 13
24 Groups: NRC Rushing Nuclear "Waste Confidence" Process, Not Satisfying Court-Ordered Requirements
24 Groups: NRC Rushing Nuclear "Waste Confidence" Process, Not Satisfying Court-Ordered Requirements
January 3, 2013
Incomplete Process Should Trigger Continued Suspension of All Reactor Licensing, Re-Licensing
WASHINGTON, D.C. – January 3, 2013 – In documents filed Tuesday with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a wide range of national and grassroots environmental groups said it would be impossible for the NRC to adequately conduct a court-ordered assessment of the environmental implications of long-term storage of spent nuclear reactor fuel in the two short years the federal agency envisions for the process.
The groups’ comments and related declarations by experts are available here.
In June 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated the NRC’s 2010 Waste Confidence Decision and Temporary Storage Rule and remanded them to the agency for study of the environmental impacts of storing spent fuel indefinitely if no permanent nuclear waste repository is licensed or if licensing of a repository is substantially delayed. Spent nuclear fuel remains highly dangerous for prolonged periods. It has long-lived radioactive materials in it that can seriously contaminate the environment and harm public health if released. Additionally, spent nuclear fuel contains plutonium-239, a radiotoxic element that can be used to make nuclear weapons if separated from the other materials in the fuel. Plutonium-239 has a half-life of over 24,000 years.
In their filings, the 24 groups said a full review of the three issues outlined in June 2012 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit – long-term storage risks for spent nuclear fuel, spent fuel pool fire risks, and spent fuel pool leakage risks – would take at least the seven years originally projected by the NRC staff, and likely considerably longer. Current federal law requires that the NRC conduct a comprehensive environmental impact statement (EIS) study before issuing a revised Waste Confidence Decision; the 24 groups submitted their comments about the appropriate “scoping” of the EIS.
In the absence of an adequate EIS review, the NRC has “no choice but to continue to suspend all licensing and re-licensing actions” for U.S. nuclear reactors, according to the 24 organizations. All licensing and re-licensing actions were previously suspended by the NRC until an EIS and revised Waste Confidence Decision have been issued.
The 24 groups jointly filing the comments today with the NRC are the Alliance for Nuclear Accountability, Beyond Nuclear, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League, Center for a Sustainable Coast, Citizens Allied for Safe Energy, Citizens Environmental Alliance, Don’t Waste Michigan, Ecology Party of Florida, Friends of the Earth, Georgia Women’s Action for New Directions, Hudson River Sloop Clearwater, Missouri Coalition for the Environment, New England Coalition, Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force, NC WARN, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, Nuclear Watch South, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Public Citizen, Riverkeeper, San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace, SEED Coalition, Sierra Club Nuclear Free Campaign, and Southern Alliance for Clean Energy.
The expert declarations were made by: Dr. Arjun Makhijani, president of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research; Dr. Gordon Thompson, executive director for the Institute for Resource and Security Studies; and Phillip Musegaas, Esq., Hudson River program director for Riverkeeper, Inc.
Highlights of the 24-group filings include the following:
- The “hurry-up” two-year timeframe for environmental review falls far short of the 2019 estimate of NRC’s own technical staff for data collecting and analysis on the impacts of long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel. The NRC currently lacks sufficient information to reach scientifically, well-founded conclusions about the impacts of such storage. The agency also lacks information regarding the impacts associated with the eventual disposal of spent nuclear fuel. According to Dr. Makhijani, the NRC will not be able to gather this information within its truncated, self-imposed two-year timeframe.
- The short timeframe provided for environmental review will also not permit post-Fukushima information about U.S. reactors to be fully collected and evaluated. Under the schedule established by the NRC staff in March 2012, reactor licensees are not due to supply post-Fukushima seismic information until September 2013 for reactor sites in the eastern and central U.S. and March 2015 for western reactor sites. According to the groups’ filing with the NRC today: “Given the significant role played by seismic events in accidents ranging from spent fuel pool leaks to pool fires and their potential effects on long-term storage sites, this information is crucial to the NRC’s ability to take a ‘hard look’ at all three topics remanded by the Court.”
- Despite the Court’s order to consider impacts associated with the failure to ever establish a permanent repository for spent nuclear fuel, the NRC proposed only to consider the impacts associated with failing to secure a repository by the end of this century. Dr. Makhijani and Dr. Gordon argue that the NRC should consider the environmental impacts of failing to establish a repository until 2250, requiring approximately 300 years of onsite storage.
- The NRC should consider alternatives to minimize the risks of storage of spent nuclear fuel and high level waste, including placement below ground level, elimination of the current practice of high-density storage of spent fuel in pools, and more robust designs for storage casks.
- The environmental impact statement should assess the radiological risk arising from a range of conventional accidents or attacks, including those conducted by terrorists.
Nuclear industry's insurer running out of cash. All utilities--and ratepayers--could end up paying
Utilities nationwide could share the financial pain of the idled Crystal River nuclear plant
By Ivan Penn, Times Staff Writer
In Print: Sunday, December 30, 2012
The crippled Crystal River nuclear plant is now America's headache.
The bill to fix it and pay for replacement power may top $5 billion. The problem?
The company that insures all 104 U.S. nuclear power plants has just $3.6 billion on hand to pay for claims.
Broken nuclear plants in California, Texas and Michigan will vie for some of that money. But Crystal River alone represents such a financial threat that the insurance company, Nuclear Electric Insurance Ltd., may demand that its member utilities pony up more money.
<snip>
Via http://www.nirs.org/
January 2, 2013:
Nuclear industry's insurer running out of cash. All utilities--and ratepayers--could end up paying for damaged Crystal River, FL reactor.
New Japanese govt wants "gradual" return to nuclear power. Public doesn't. Conflict ahead.
Catching up on the news: 10+ Japanese reactors have flawed fire prevention equipment. Just as in U.S.
Nuclear power plant flood risk: Sandy was just a warm-up. Lesson: Nukes don't work in a warming climate.
Yet another Japanese reactor site found to be sitting on top of an active fault line.
Despite "fiscal cliff," deficit, Congress set to give $150 million of your money to failing uranium enrichment company USEC.
Electricite de France to issue cost-cutting plan. We suggest it start by leaving the U.S.
World nuclear generation down 5% since 2006, likely to fall further.
70s redux: 2nd time is farce. Quality control documentation issues further delay Vogtle reactor construction.
Nation's Nuclear Plants Are Nuked. Small reactors can't compete. Bad news for SMRs, good news for U.S.
Solar/wind outpacing state renewable energy standard laws; yet right-wing wants to gut them. They must be expanded instead.
Backup power problems put two Swedish reactors on ice–and cast an unpleasant light on age.
NY Times interviews new Sen. Energy Comm. Ron Wyden (D-OR); new radwaste legislation likely. #nofukushimafreeways
NRC says Mitsubishi is botching San Onofre steam generator tests.
A year after cold shutdown at Fukushima declared, decommissioning process still termed "volatile."
Another one bites the dust: Spain's oldest reactor shuts down permanently.
Nuclear industry chief is sad that your tax dollars aren't being given to wealthy utilities fast enough.
A TSUNAMI WITH SIGNIFICANT WIDESPREAD INUNDATION OF LAND IS EXPECTED.
Source: NOAA
WEAK51 PAAQ 050901
TSUAK1
BULLETIN
PUBLIC TSUNAMI MESSAGE NUMBER 1
NWS WEST COAST/ALASKA TSUNAMI WARNING CENTER PALMER AK
1201 AM AKST SAT JAN 5 2013
...A TSUNAMI WARNING IS NOW IN EFFECT...
...A TSUNAMI ADVISORY IS NOW IN EFFECT...
WARNINGS/ADVISORIES/WATCHES - UPDATED
-------------------------------------
TSUNAMI WARNING IN EFFECT FOR...
* THE COASTAL AREAS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA AND ALASKA FROM THE
NORTH TIP OF VANCOUVER ISLAND BRITISH COLUMBIA TO CAPE
SUCKLING ALASKA/LOCATED 75 MILES SE OF CORDOVA/
TSUNAMI ADVISORY IN EFFECT FOR...
* THE COASTAL AREAS OF BRITISH COLUMBIA FROM THE
WASHINGTON-BRITISH COLUMBIA BORDER TO THE NORTH TIP OF
VANCOUVER ISLAND BRITISH COLUMBIA
* THE COASTAL AREAS OF ALASKA FROM CAPE SUCKLING
ALASKA/LOCATED 75 MILES SE OF CORDOVA/ TO KENNEDY ENTRANCE
ALASKA/LOCATED 40 MILES SW OF HOMER/
PRELIMINARY EARTHQUAKE PARAMETERS
---------------------------------
* MAGNITUDE 7.7
* ORIGIN TIME 2358 AKST JAN 04 2013
0058 PST JAN 05 2013
0858 UTC JAN 05 2013
* COORDINATES 55.3 NORTH 134.9 WEST
* DEPTH 3 MILES
* LOCATION 90 MILES NW OF DIXON ENTRANCE ALASKA
210 MILES S OF JUNEAU ALASKA
IMPACTS FOR TSUNAMI WARNING AREAS
---------------------------------
* A TSUNAMI WITH SIGNIFICANT WIDESPREAD INUNDATION OF LAND IS
EXPECTED.
* WIDESPREAD DANGEROUS COASTAL FLOODING ACCOMPANIED BY POWERFUL
CURRENTS IS POSSIBLE AND MAY CONTINUE FOR MANY HOURS AFTER
TSUNAMI ARRIVAL.
* THE FIRST WAVE MAY NOT BE THE LARGEST.
IMPACTS FOR TSUNAMI ADVISORY AREAS
----------------------------------
* A TSUNAMI CAPABLE OF PRODUCING STRONG CURRENTS OR WAVES DANGEROUS
TO PERSONS IN OR VERY NEAR THE WATER IS EXPECTED.
* CURRENTS MAY BE HAZARDOUS TO SWIMMERS... BOATS... AND COASTAL
STRUCTURES AND MAY CONTINUE FOR MANY HOURS AFTER THE TSUNAMI
ARRIVAL.
* THE FIRST WAVE MAY NOT BE THE LARGEST.
RECOMMENDED ACTIONS - UPDATED
-----------------------------
* IF YOU ARE IN A WARNING AREA - MOVE INLAND TO HIGHER GROUND.
* IF YOU ARE IN AN ADVISORY AREA - MOVE OFF THE BEACH AND OUT OF
HARBORS AND MARINAS. WIDESPREAD INUNDATION OF LAND IS NOT
EXPECTED FOR ADVISORY AREAS.
* BE ALERT TO INSTRUCTIONS FROM YOUR LOCAL EMERGENCY OFFICIALS.
* DO NOT GO TO THE COAST TO OBSERVE THE TSUNAMI.
* DO NOT RETURN TO THE COAST UNTIL LOCAL EMERGENCY OFFICIALS
INDICATE IT IS SAFE TO DO SO.
FORECASTS AND/OR OBSERVATIONS OF TSUNAMI ACTIVITY
-------------------------------------------------
FORECAST
START OF
SITE OF TSUNAMI
---- ----------
* BRITISH COLUMBIA
LANGARA 0129 PST JAN 5
TOFINO 0314 PST JAN 5
* ALASKA
SITKA 0045 AKST JAN 5
ELFIN COVE 0056 AKST JAN 5
CRAIG 0113 AKST JAN 5
YAKUTAT 0145 AKST JAN 5
SEWARD 0224 AKST JAN 5
VALDEZ 0238 AKST JAN 5
CORDOVA 0247 AKST JAN 5
HOMER 0338 AKST JAN 5
NEXT UPDATE AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
--------------------------------------
* THIS MESSAGE WILL BE UPDATED IN 30 MINUTES.
* REFER TO THE INTERNET SITE WCATWC.ARH.NOAA.GOV FOR MORE
INFORMATION.
* PACIFIC COASTAL RESIDENTS OUTSIDE CALIFORNIA... OREGON...
WASHINGTON... BRITISH COLUMBIA AND ALASKA SHOULD REFER TO THE
PACIFIC TSUNAMI WARNING CENTER MESSAGES FOR INFORMATION ON THIS
EVENT AT PTWC.WEATHER.GOV.
$$
Read more: http://wcatwc.arh.noaa.gov/events/PAAQ/2013/01/05/mg5a94/1/WEAK51/WEAK51.txt
Posting privileges for the account fuck you have been revoked.
I forgot my autologin and tried to manualogin.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Nov 10, 2004, 12:55 AMNumber of posts: 27,509
