ENDEVR Documentary Answers Remaining Questions On Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Results & They Are Not Surprising (Video)
After researching the reprocessing of nuclear waste and determining it was a non-solution, the question emerged, “Are there other products that were not mentioned that are contaminating the environment”? This documentary answers the question. While it covers other areas in the world and manufacturing of nuclear weapons, it has a segment on the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel in France.
Pay close attention! The facility visited discharges radioactive gases and Krypton-85 into the atmosphere and expels liquid radioactive waste into the English channel. The sea bed and aquatic life there are contaminated. Iodine-129 has been found as far away as the Arctic Ocean. The Krypton-85 is carried across the Northern Hemisphere, covering the whole of Europe, depending on wind currents, coinciding with discharge of radioactive gases by the facility. Moreover, Krypton-85 was found accumulated on the tops of Geneva University in Belgium. The measurement of these gases was in the tens of thousands of becquerels per liter of air. In fact, members of the Greenpeace organization, the only one measuring this, call the entire area a “permanent accident situation”.
The other video didn’t tell us that nor did “Nuclear Hazelnut”.
The other surprising factor is this is considered “legal”. Why? This plant has the highest limit authorizations for expulsion of radioactive gases. In fact, in the year 1999, the reprocessing plant expelled more Krypton -85 into the air than was produced by all nuclear weapons testing caused by man for several decades. The gas has a 10-year lifespan and continuously accumulates in the atmosphere.
Take care to listen to what those working at the plant have to say. The manager fumbles his answer then the communications person steps in. In short, “nothing to see here”. The reason these industry personnel claim levels are below the norms is the current model in use is based on the atomic bomb drops on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. The bombs produced a rapid, intense, yet very short external exposure. But, with nuclear waste being propagated into the environment, it becomes a different model. People living nearby, and in wind current areas, are living in these areas, breathing in the air, eating the food “weakly” contaminated with waste. There is a build-up over time due to continuous exposure to these radioactive contaminants. Moreover, the body is absorbing low levels of radiation (internal contamination) that lead to health conditions. These two models are different, but the standard norm remains the atomic bomb drops on Nagasaki and Hiroshima instead of chronic continuous exposure to “low levels” of radioactive material that accumulate in the body. The reality model is that any continued exposure to low doses of radiation increases the risk of cancer.
This same Nagasaki/Hiroshima model is used to determine “risk” at nuclear energy production sites.
Watch the video to learn the route and distance these “reclaimed” uranium products take to Russia and what happens to it. Pay close attention to how much is abandoned and how much is actually able to be used after recycling – it is nowhere near the 96% claimed by the reprocessing industry or “Nuclear Hazelnut”.
Whatever you take away from the video and article, what to do with nuclear waste is not an issue that will be solved any time soon. In fact, it may never be solved. To truly solve the issue requires honesty in the industry, transparency with the government, and disclosure of all the risks of nuclear waste. And, as mentioned in the video, no one knows what the Earth will look like in 200,000 years (6,000 generations) or 500,000 years (10,000 generations). The issue of nuclear waste management is basically ignored industry-wide and by governments utilizing nuclear fuel for power production. The solution, if any, will not come through ignorance of the problem, government stonewalling, or continued public relations campaigns that skew the risks.
The longer nuclear fuel is used to produce power, the nuclear waste grows and so does the problem. How do people claiming to be intelligent continue to justify using this technology with so many risks? In all honesty, you cannot justify the unjustifiable. But, the industry and government do it. It’s only a matter of time before a disaster occurs that involves this nuclear waste. At that point, it will be too late. The cost will be immeasurable for generations.
Future generations far removed from the current generation will one day look back on the history of the nuclear age as we have looked back on past human civilizations and cultures. What will future generations think about our continued folly?
