EcoRadio

Author: admin

  • Sellafield swallows contaminated by radioactivity

    Sellafield swallows contaminated by radioactivity

    Birds nesting by the nuclear power plant have traces of radioactivity in their droppings

    Sellafield nuclear plant

    Swallows are thought to have fed off insects by the waste ponds at the Sellafield plant in Cumbria. Photograph: Brian Harris / Rex Features

    Swallows nesting at the Sellafield nuclear complex in Cumbria have been contaminated with low levels of radioactivity from the site, according to the Environment Agency.

    Monitoring by the site’s operator, Sellafield Limited, has found traces of radioactivity in the birds’ droppings. This is thought to come from the insects they have consumed around the storage ponds for radioactive waste .

    Investigations have been launched by the agency, the government’s Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) and Sellafield, while measures are being taken to try and prevent the contamination from recurring. According to Sellafield, the levels of radioactivity discovered were very low and there was “no threat” to public health.

    “There is no direct pathway for exposure to members of the public,” said a Sellafield spokesman. “Measures are in place to reduce the possibility of birds gaining access to facilities.”

    Nutrients and nesting materials are being removed to try and make the site less attractive for birds’ breeding. “Possible problems are reduced by applying the principle of good housekeeping and the incorporation of bird exclusion measures,” the spokesman added.

    Up to 30 swallows had been surveyed. “There was insufficient radioactivity in the guano to require personal protection beyond that required for hygiene purposes,” he said. Though it was difficult to be sure, contaminated mosquitoes were “a possible pathway”.

    Anti-nuclear groups pointed out that swallows fly long distances. “These much-loved and now radioactive birds and their offspring will unwittingly be carrying a toxic message from Sellafield when they migrate back to southern Africa at the end of the summer,” said Martin Forwood from Cumbrians Opposed to a Radioactive Environment.

    “Given the history of bird contamination at Sellafield, it is quite extraordinary that it’s been allowed to happen again. They have failed to deal with this problem for years, and should have covered up their waste ponds long ago.”

    More than 150 pigeons were found to be contaminated with Sellafield’s radioactivity in 1998, and contaminated gulls were culled in 2010. There have also been problems with radioactive fruit flies and gnats at the Hanford nuclear plant in Washington State, US.

    There are at least two open-air ponds at Sellafield, both dating back to the 1950s. They store radioactive waste from early nuclear reactors and may generate warmth that attracts insects.

    Sellafield realised that birds could become contaminated with low levels of radioactivity as a result of historic operations at the plant. “Cleaning up the legacy buildings on the site will remove the source of contamination and remains a priority activity,” said the site spokesman.

    The contamination was reported to a sub-committee of the West Cumbria Sites Stakeholder Group last week by the Environment Agency. In an email yesterday to Forwood, Michael Ainsworth, one of the agency’s nuclear regulators, confirmed that the “contamination of nesting sites” had been identified by Sellafield.

    The agency was now awaiting a report from the site, he said. “They are in the process of carrying out an investigation into this issue and looking at ways of excluding birds from their nesting sites and breaking the life cycle of the mosquitoes – their food source.” An ONR spokesman said: “Sellafield Limited is aware of the potential spread of radioactive material from the site by wildlife and, with the assistance of specialist wildlife control contractors, it has been taking steps over a number of years to address this matter.”

    He added: “Sellafield Limited’s ongoing review indicates that the amount of radioactive material that may be distributed in this manner is unlikely to pose a threat to public health. We are keeping the situation under review and the matter will be followed up during our ongoing interactions with Sellafield Limited.”

  • As Japan debris washes up in the US, scientists fear break in natural order

    As Japan debris washes up in the US, scientists fear break in natural order

    Remnants from Japan’s earthquake and tsunami continue to arrive on the west coast, bringing exotic organisms with them

    Oregon tsunami debris

    Volunteers remove marine organisms from the dock that landed in Oregon after drifting from the earthquake and tsunami in Japan. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

    When a floating dock the size of a boxcar washed up on a sandy beach in Oregon, beachcombers got excited because it was the largest piece of debris from last year’s tsunami in Japan to show up on the US west coast.

    But scientists worried it represented a whole new way for invasive species of seaweed, crabs and other marine organisms to break the earth’s natural barriers and further muck up the area’s marine environments.

    And more invasive species could be hitching rides on tsunami debris expected to arrive in the weeks and months to come.

    “We know extinctions occur with invasions,” said John Chapman, assistant professor of fisheries and invasive species specialist at Oregon State University’s Hatfield Marine Science Center. “This is like arrows shot into the dark. Some of them could hit a mark.”

    Though the global economy has accelerated the process in recent decades by the sheer volume of ships, most from Asia, entering west coast ports, the marine invasion has been going on since 1869, when the transcontinental railroad brought the first shipment of east coast oysters packed in seaweed and mud to San Francisco, said Andrew Cohen, director of the Center for Research on Aquatic Bioinvasions in Richmond, California.

    Now, hotspots like San Francisco Bay amount to a “global zoo” of invasive species and perhaps 500 plants and animals from foreign shores have established in US marine waters, said James Carlton, professor of marine sciences at Williams College.

    They come mostly from ship hulls and the water ships take on as ballast, but also get dumped into bays from home aquariums.

    The costs quickly mount into the untold billions of dollars. Mitten crabs from China eat baby Dungeness crabs that are one of the region’s top commercial fisheries.

    Spartina, a ropey seaweed from Europe, chokes commercial oyster beds. Shellfish plug the cooling water intakes of power plants. Kelps and tiny shrimp-like creatures change the food web that fish, marine mammals and even humans depend on.

    A 2004 study in the scientific journal Ecological Economics estimated 400 threatened and endangered species in the US are facing extinction because of pressures from invasive species.

    It is too early for scientists to know how much Japanese tsunami debris may add to the invasive species already here.

    “It may only introduce one thing,” said Cohen of the Aquatic Bioinvasions research center. “But if that thing turns out to be a big problem, we would rather it not happen. There could be an economic impact, an ecological impact, or even a human health impact.”

    The dock, torn loose from a fishing port on the northern tip of Japan, was covered with 1.5 tons of seaweed, mussels, barnacles and even a few starfish. Volunteers scraped it all off, buried it above the high water line, and sterilized the top and sides of the dock with torches.

    But there was no telling whether they might already have released spores or larvae that could establish a foothold in a bay or estuary as it floated along the coast, Carlton said.

    One thing they know is that the bigger the debris, the more likely it has something on it.

    Chapman estimated there were hundreds of millions of individual living organisms on the dock when it washed up on Agate Beach outside Newport, Oregon.

    But even a small plastic float that washed up on a beach in Alaska carried a live oyster, said Mandy Lindeberg, research scientist at the NOAA Fisheries Auke Bay Laboratories in Juneau, Alaska.

    Whether hitchhiking species will survive here depends in large part to randomness, it is thought. Seaweeds probably would not have survived to reproduce in the crashing surf at Agate Beach. It’s the wrong kind of environment. But if they had floated into Yaquina Bay, very similar to their home waters in Japan, they could grow and reproduce.

    Lindeberg said, “The only defense for invasive species is early detection. Just like cancer.”

    While monitoring is relatively cheap, say $30,000 to watch nearby waters for species from the dock, trying to stop an established invasion is expensive. California spent $7m trying to eradicate a seaweed, she said.

    James Morris, a marine ecologist and invasive species specialist at the NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, in Beaufort, North Carolina, said the idea a natural disaster like the tsunami could introduce a new avenue for invasive species is intriguing.

    “It goes to show you that when it comes to invasive species, there are some things you can work to regulate and control,” he said. “And there are issues like this that come up that open up a whole different realm of possibilities.”

  • I won’t play games on reef: Burke

    I won’t play games on reef: Burke

    AAPJune 10, 2012, 10:20 am

    Environment Minister Tony Burke says he won’t play “pin the tail on the donkey” with the environment as the squabble over the Alpha coal mine with the Queensland government continues.

    The federal and Queensland governments have been warring for more than a week over the approval process for the $6.4 billion GVK-Hancock Coal mine, in central Queensland.

    The feud has prompted the federal government to ask Premier Campbell Newman to justify why it should continue the bilateral process for assessing mining projects, adopted to make approvals more efficient.

    Federal Environment Minister Tony Burke this week said he could not possibly sign off on the Queensland government’s conditional approval, calling it shambolic and dangerously deficient.

    Mr Burke said the Queensland government had cut corners in the process.

    “It’s not a game of pin the tail on the donkey where you blindfold yourself, put conditions there, and take the blind fold off in several years time to see whether or not it worked,” he told ABC TV on Sunday.

    “I can’t put conditions on unless the work has been down to assess what those conditions should be.”

    He not prepared to “guess the conditions” because the approval could be overturned by court action down the track.

    “That would be the worst outcome for investment and a ridiculous outcome for the environment,” he said.

    Mr Burke said the mine and rail link to the port could impact on the Great Barrier Reef.

    “The biggest impact we have on the Barrier Reef is run off from the land,” he said.

    “These rail works go all the way to the coast, you need to do significant earth works because you’re completely levelling it.”

    His preference is for the Queensland government to finish the job and in the future give the federal government more notice if it’s only going to do half the job.

    Mr Burke is confident the environmental approval process will be finalised by the end of the year when the companies will make their final investment decisions.

    Queensland has until June 20 to prove it is capable of working on a streamlined process.

  • ACCC’s war on carbon rip-offs

    ACCC’s war on carbon rip-offs

    0

    A WEDDING venue is under investigation by the ACCC for charging a couple a carbon tax fee of $5 per head for their post July 1 wedding.

    The alleged cash rip-off was described as opportunistic by Australian Competition and Consumer Commission boss Rod Sims who said companies “misleading” consumers face penalties of up to $1.1 million .

    Among the 170 complaints to the ACCC, is a bakery who told customers that bread prices would increase from $3.70 to $3.80 from May 25 – and a gym which encouraged a customer to sign up to a long-term membership on the premise that they would “get a discount on the carbon tax”.

    Mr Sims said this is just one of 170 complaints they have received for misleading or deceptive behaviour, price gouging or potential scams in relation to the carbon tax.

    “This is a classic example of an opportunity businesses will see to take advantage of consumers, to dupe them into paying too much or paying for a product they don’t need,” Mr Sims told The Sunday Telegraph.

    Related Coverage

    “Yes, some businesses are going to face higher costs, and it’s totally appropriate that they pass those costs on, but what we are trying to stop is people taking advantage of the situation to justify a higher price than is appropriate.

    “If you think about a wedding reception, you’re going to have the alcohol, food, and then the establishment itself obviously providing electricity, but you can’t imagine that’s – for the time they’re in the wedding hall – $5 per head.

    “It’s certainly something that we’re going to look into, and it’s also been said to us by the complainant that other people have been affected as well. The worry we have is they’re using the carbon price as a hook to basically sell extra time on the gym membership,” Mr Sims said.

    “When the person bought their original membership they were told it was a fixed price, and then the trader got in touch with them and said the price was going to go up due to the carbon tax.

    “They then advised though that if the complainant was willing to sign on for another 12 months, there wouldn’t be an increase in price . . . and if they signed on for another 24 months then the membership fee would actually decrease.”

    In most cases the ACCC will issue a warning, but the watchdog can also exercise new powers requiring businesses to substantiate their claims. If a business fails to do this, public companies face penalties of up to $1.1 million per breach and private companies face fines of up to $220,000.

  • Boulevard of developers’ dreams shackled by red tape

    Boulevard of developers’ dreams shackled by red tape
    Stephen Nicholls

    June 9, 2012

    Road to riches

    Why this plan for Parramatta Road could work. Property editor Stephen Nicholls reports

     

    A TREE-LINED boulevard with trams from the city to Parramatta. Even a metro. And 100,000 new apartments, with 100,000 new jobs thrown in.

    That’s the latest ambitious plan for Parramatta Road, and the developer lobby believes it’s all achievable – within 25 years – if a new urban regional authority is established to manage it.

    ”The Urban Taskforce is calling on the state government to set up an urban renewal authority to help drive a new look for this rundown part of Sydney,” the taskforce’s chief executive officer, Chris Johnson, told the Herald this week.

    The former government architect will launch his plans, detailed in a 20-page magazine, Urban Ideas, at a forum on Thursday.

    Mr Johnson said the completion of the M4 East was crucial to reviving Parramatta Road but development of the apartments was needed before then.

    He said taskforce members had up to 20 sites – some three to four hectares – caught up in council red tape. ”They are looking to develop but they are frustrated because there are nine different councils, different rules along the whole corridor.”

    They include about 300 apartments at Summer Hill; more than 1800 in two developments at Auburn and 1300 at Five Dock.

    Although yet to be put formally to its owners, up to 10,000 apartments could be built at Flemington Markets.

    The developer Iwan Sunito, the chief executive of Crown International Holdings Group, says every council has ”different ideas” so it would be far easier to deal with one authority. ”The state government needs to look at the whole thing as one, especially in this state-significant matter,” he said.

    The taskforce plan calls for Parramatta Road to have a much higher density, with six storeys on each side. But further back from the road, buildings could be 12 to 20 storeys.

    ”If people live in a city they do expect to have a bit of density and a bit of vitality and bustle,” Mr Johnson said. The trade-off would be more green space around the tallest towers and suburban areas could be free from redevelopment.

    With 100,000 new apartments, by 2036, Parramatta Road would become the best place to live, attracting young people and creative industries such as businesses similar to Look Print in Leichhardt, whose 70 employees live and work close by.

    Look Print’s David Lynch supports the plan. ”A lot of young people want to live in the comfort and security of a cafe society. These are all very young, vital, imaginative and creative people who certainly spend an enormous amount of money in the area.”

    Infrastructure NSW is due to make its recommendations to the government in September about the M4 East and other projects. ”I would anticipate that they are looking very closely at the M4 East and other road connections,” the Planning Minister, Brad Hazzard, said this week.

    While he had yet to see the taskforce’s plan, Parramatta Road left ”a lot to be desired and the potential is enormous”.

    Mr Hazzard hinted that a new authority could be established. ”We are looking at restructuring various organisations to have the capacity to drive projects like Parramatta Road and will be making some announcements about that in the not-too-distant future,” he said.

    On the metro, Mr Johnson conceded it ”wasn’t going to happen instantly” but suggested it could come about the same time as the very fast train.

    ”If the very fast train happens, the most likely route would end up with the Sydney stop at Parramatta,” he said. ”If that happens, of course, there would have to be a very fast metro connection back to the CBD.”

    He said the completion of the M4 was perhaps 10 years away. ”If it can be done in three, four, five years it would be fabulous, [it’s] just that I know that the state’s pretty broke.”

    Mr Hazzard concurred. ”It would be helpful if the recommendations were given in a financially responsible, contextual way, rather than simply expecting money to appear from heaven. The dollars don’t fall from heaven and we have to make those decisions and we’re working on it.”

  • $500m to sweeten Murray deal for NSW

    $500m to sweeten Murray deal for NSW

    Stephanie Peatling

    June 10, 2012

    Minister Katrina Hodgkinson

    “I resolutely maintain that the draft Murray-Darling Basin Plan in its current form does not meet the needs of NSW” … Minister for Primary Industries, Katrina Hodgkinson. Photo: Richard Briggs

    NSW will receive nearly half a billion dollars in federal funding to improve water use along the Murray-Darling river system, under a deal to be announced today.

    The money is a sweetener to get the government to come to the negotiating table with the federal government over its plan to buy back 2750 billion litres of water a year to restore the river system to health.

    ”I am determined that Murray-Darling Basin reform deliver healthy rivers, strong communities and sustainable food production,” the Environment Minister, Tony Burke, told The Sun-Herald before the announcement. “A resilient river system in the Murray-Darling Basin is important for communities, sustainable food production and the environment.”

    The $469 million has been held up for four years while the projects were assessed and refined, and was a major sticking point in keeping the NSW government from negotiating with Canberra about its plans for the basin.

    The money will be spent on four main projects which will save an estimated 80 billion litres of water being wasted through inefficient piping and other infrastructure.

    The NSW Minister for Primary Industries, Katrina Hodgkinson, welcomed the money but said it would not influence her position in negotiations with the federal government.

    “I resolutely maintain that the draft Murray-Darling Basin Plan in its current form does not meet the needs of NSW,” Ms Hodgkinson said.

    Last month, Mr Burke said he was prepared to act alone on a plan to rescue the ailing Murray-Darling river system this year if the states refused to co-operate.

    The independent Murray-Darling Basin Authority maintains the federal government needs to buy back 2750 billion litres of water a year from irrigators to pump back into the environment. This would be done mostly through buybacks of irrigators’ water rights, which farmers say could destroy their communities.

    Environmentalists say the water is not enough to ensure the river system’s long-term survival.

    Under federal law, Mr Burke has the power to strip the states of water planning responsibility, which he has warned he will do if the states do not agree to the plan. The federal and state governments will meet again at the end of the month.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/water-issues/500m-to-sweeten-murray-deal-for-nsw-20120609-202od.html#ixzz1xLUgneto