the accident was not declared until the next day, the damage having had time to be done.
> As in 1986 at Chernobyl, the same incompetent lobby lies to the population, through tools (in particular a new law on transparency / defense secrets).
the independent organization CRIIRAD the only one, created in 1986 following Chernobyl to denounce at the time the scandal, that not enough nobody listened or believed unfortunately my parents including (yes I have milked eggs and many other contaminated foods I have not attacked France so far) has updated some information which the public is entitled to access.
Notably that there is not only natural uranium in the discharges, and that it is well + dangerous in many ways that the level of ambient radioactivity of the Vosges do not like you chatam. you should open your eyes a little, even if you are no longer concerned.
Me too I come back from a great weekend and what I feared went well ...
More and more shadows and laxity:
CRIIRAD pins SOCATRI and ASN
11 July 2008 release
CRIIRAD conducted a critical analysis of the documents distributed by SOCATRI, documents that served as a basis for the information disseminated by the official services, and in particular by the prefectures of Drôme and Vaucluse1. These are two information documents issued by the operator who caused the pollution, SOCATRI, and sent by fax to the Drôme General Council, which relayed them to CRIIRAD, as a member of CIGEET. , by fax, the 10 July:
- 9h20 for the document sent by SOCATRI, the day before, to 23h;
- 16h52: a document of 13 pages sent by SOCATRI the same morning to 8h09 (a delay of more than 8 hours for the retransmission of the information).
It also took note of the press release and the decisions published today by the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) on 11 July.
Opacity and irresponsibility on the part of the operator (SOCATRI-AREVA)
Opacity on the radiological and chemical composition of the tank contents
As early as the 8 July, the CRIIRAD asked the publication of the information relating to the uraniferous effluents which were in the tank which overflowed:
1 / radiological characterization with all isotopes (including those of uranium, including artificial uranium present in reprocessed uranium that Socatri is allowed to treat). 2 / chemical characterization.
More than 3 days after the leak this basic data has still not been made public.
In addition, the water sample taken by CRIIRAD on 9 July to 16 hours in La Gaffière, immediately downstream from the SOCATRI site was entrusted for analysis by mass spectrometry at the Drôme laboratory. . The analysis reveals the presence of 236 mass atoms which suggests the presence of 236 uranium. If this result is confirmed, it would refute SOCATRI's assertions about the exclusive presence of uranium with natural isotopic composition (no artificial uranium and 0,7% uranium 235).
Opacity on the pollution of the alluvial aquifer
According to the latest figures published by SOCATRI and taken over by the State, 224 kg of uranium would have been released into the environment: 1 / 3, or 74 kg would have spilled into Gaffière (and from there to Trop Long Lake and Lauzon) and 2 / 3, 150 kg spread to the ground. SOCATRI claimed that the contamination did not reach the alluvial aquifer ... but without publishing any results that would guarantee it. CRIIRAD is renewing its request for the publication of the results of the soil core analyzes which should make it possible to know to what depth the contamination has reached. CRIIRAD requests the publication of all the results: spatial extension, mass activities, volumes of contaminated land, etc.
CRIIRAD also requests the publication of contamination levels for all piezometers installed at the nuclear site (the whole site and not only the SOCATRI site) and its surroundings. To assess the situation, it is essential to know the situation before the accidental release (most recent figures but before pollution) and the results of the analyzes carried out since then.
The analysis of the results of the measurements made on the ground and in the aquifer will make it possible to verify if the contamination has or has not reached the aquifer (with the reservation that it will be the figures of the operators). Remember that, at the Tricastin nuclear site, the alluvial layer is very shallow: at about 2 at 4 meters from ground level.
Delays in the publication of the results do not bode well. The experience of CRIIRAD shows that when the analyzes demonstrate the absence of impact they are communicated immediately and spontaneously; when there is reluctance and delays it is generally that officials want to hide problems and expect values to decline to give more reassuring results.
In addition, CRIIRAD found that at least two operators of the Tricastin site (CEA and AREVA NC) prefer to let the soil and the alluvial aquifer contaminate rather than remove the radioactive waste causing the pollution. They let the contamination reach the water table and set up a pumping (over years, even decades) and reject the contaminated water without treatment, directly in the channel Donzère-Mondragon). This practice, which constitutes a violation of the basic radioactive waste management rules, has been implemented on the north-eastern part of the Tricastin site (see radioactive waste file buried in earth butt). These practices have benefited until now from total impunity, one is entitled to fear that SOCATRI uses the same technique. In any case it must be absolutely verified.
Inconsistencies in Gaffière and Lauzon water test results
Zone de Texte: SOCATRI has carried out sampling in the Rhône - upstream, in the site (channel and Gaffière), in the environment (11 stations spread over the course of Gaffière, then Lauzon to its point of rejection in the Rhône, south of Pont-Saint-Esprit). The results (in micrograms of uranium per liter of water) are given in the table below.
They raise a number of issues, including:
1 / where the contamination between the inside and the outside of the SOCATRI site has passed: the creek called La Gaffière crosses the Socatri site, passes under the road and comes out on the other side, through two culverts. What has happened between the site Socatri where contamination of Gaffière reached 41 600 mcg / l July 8 9h30 and outside the site, a few tens of meters, where contamination has dropped to 49 mcg / l? 99,9% of the contamination has volatilized in minutes and there is no line of explanation. The prefectural authorities, the ASN and the IRSN are not very curious because they take back and disseminate these data without apparently asking any question.
2 / Why are contamination levels increasing from the confluence of Mayre Girard and Gaffière? Officially, there has been no leak in Mayre Girard, a creek that runs west of the Tricastin site. Either it is false (and SOCATRI has also lied on this point); either these values indicate that a first wave of radioactive releases into the environment occurred well before 6h30 (and SOCATRI concealed it ... unless it even noticed).
Questions on the contamination of groundwater in the communes of Bollène, Lapalud and Lamotte-du-Rhône
Several convergent testimonials from residents of the area affected by the pollution2 mention the withdrawal of groundwater by SOCATRI in their private well (water they usually use for their consumption and for irrigation). They then called SOCATRI to get the results of the analyzes. They were told by their interlocutor that the water in their wells showed contamination above the norm but did not give them numerical value and absolutely refused to give them any written documents. In all cases, the instruction would have been the same: "Contact our legal department of SOCATRI who will take care of your compensation! "
These testimonies are consistent with a note at the bottom of one of the tables on page 1 / 13 of the document sent by SOCATRI to the General Council of Drôme. A quick reading of the table seems to indicate that no result exceeds the WHO standards of 15 μg / liter. However, the note mentions a more disturbing result, which exceeds the WHO limit by more than 4: 64 μg / l. Nothing is indicated as to the time of sampling: 6h, 9h, 13h ...? Everything is done on the contrary to let the reader believe that this figure is not validated, that it is a metrological anomaly. The CRIIRAD is convinced that it is not: if it was a measurement error it would be indicated.
There is no reason to conclude that this value of 64 μg / l constitutes a maximum. The checks were not carried out with sufficient frequency to make sure of this. The chronology of the extension of the contamination in the waters of the superficial aquifer is still unknown. In addition, the evidence available to us shows several exceedances of standards. Only one result appears in the table prepared and distributed by SOCATRI.
How is it that we are reduced to such questions?
Is it up to the polluter to investigate?
What do the services of the State do?
Recall the guarantees that are supposed to bring the law of 13 June 2006. Article 18 states, for example, that:
"The State is responsible for informing the public about the modalities and results of nuclear safety and radiation protection control. It provides the public with information on the consequences, in the national territory, of the nuclear activities exerted outside it, in particular in case of incident or accident. "
Self-monitoring (the control exercised by the operator himself) already plays a very (too) important 3 role in a normal situation. In a situation of accidental pollution, this pre-eminence of the polluter over the controller raises even more acute problems.
ASN has just announced its decision to strengthen the surveillance plan ... of SOCATRI! The polluter must measure once a day and inform the ASN and the prefectures of any abnormal changes.
Laxity on the ASN side
· In this file, the delays accumulate: delay in the information, delay in the implementation of the measures of protection ... and delay in the inspection carried out by the Nuclear Safety Authority: it took place of 10 July , more than 48 hours after rejection. The notification was made on 11 July (24 overtime) and it still gives 24 hours of time to the operator to drain the tanks that contain leaking and leaking liquid effluents as well as those that are associated with inoperative backup devices !!!
It should be noted that this raises the question of the responsibility - or the irresponsibility of the operator: if SOCATRI must wait for an ASN inspection and notification to empty the tanks that are leaking or not associated with the tanks. retention prescribed by the order of 2005, it is a suspension of the license which is imperative, and as soon as possible!
· Environmental release limits are sputtered and ASN reports only "discrepancies", at most "anomalies"!
ASN has just confirmed the SOCATRI proposal to classify the radioactive leak at the 1 level of the INES scale. Thus is classified as a simple anomaly, not even incident, the uncontrolled release of radioactive effluents that have spilled into the ground and polluted the streams of La Gaffière and Lauzon. The quantities released are however 27 times greater than the maximum that the operator is allowed to discard during the year (and in the Donzère-Mondragon canal, not in streams with dilution capacities more than 1 000 times lower!). Not to mention that the pollution of the environment is consecutive to the violation of the prescriptions of the interministerial decree of 16 August 2005.
In 2007, SOCATRI has released into the atmosphere 42 times more 14 carbon and 5 times more tritium than the maximum set by the 16 August 2005 decree governing the installation. The overrun was essentially related to an uncontrolled release that occurred in early December 2007. ASN took no penalty and classified this serious malfunction at the 0 level of the INES scale: not a serious incident (level 3), nor even a single incident (level 2), not even an anomaly (level 1 ), but a simple deviation from the rule (level 0)!
This type of decision creates a climate of permissiveness, even impunity, which is extremely detrimental to the protection of the environment and especially of the health of the surrounding populations: all radioactive and chemical pollutants released into the atmosphere are directly breathed by the population.
CRIIRAD welcomes the decision taken by Didier GUILLAUME,
President of the General Council of Drôme, to organize an exceptional meeting of CIGEET next Friday 18 July at 8h30. In fact, the information published by SOCATRI raises more questions than it answers.
This meeting will take place in Valencia, in the premises of the Prefecture.
1 Cf. notably the release n ° 5 making the "Point of the situation the 10 July to 16 hours".
2 This is the southern zone of the island located between the Rhone and the Donzère-Mondragon canal, ie the part located downstream of the nuclear site, that is to say in the south: see image google satellite.
3 Too important a role in the opinion of CRIIRAD which has been able to demonstrate on many occasions that this self-monitoring did not allow to account for the impact of the installation and that it was not sufficiently controlled neither by the services of the State nor by those of the Nuclear Safety Authority who consider a priori that the operator does his job well and very rarely require the rectification of his environmental monitoring plans.
That's good, if I posted all this is for people to realize the nuclear policy lie, after I fight the egg.
what I know is that it could have happened near my home and my kids, and it's the same for you except when it's too late to complain about malformations or cancers.
do not close your eyes or be afraid, you have to be REALISTE brothel.
Thus, the July 13 and 14, Mr Sarkozy, who took for 6 months the presidency of the European Union, will receive in Paris many heads of state: the 27 countries of the European Union will be represented, as well as many countries in the Middle East. In particular, even if his arrival is uncertain, the Libyan dictator Mr Gaddafi is again invited to Paris.
However, one of the main objectives of the French President, during these two days, will be to find outlets for the French nuclear industry which, contrary to what is claimed here or there, is far from flourishing. To do this, Mr. Sarkozy intends:
- to have nuclear energy included in the category ... of renewable energies, in defiance of scientific evidence and the meaning of words.
- to convince foreign political leaders that the spread of nuclear energy would not be, in spite of common sense, a risk in itself with the sale of civilian nuclear reactors while it is only a race to proliferate the atomic bomb on the entire surface of the globe.
European citizens are therefore invited to gather in numbers in Paris on July 12 to express that:
- nuclear power is neither clean nor renewable;
- the sale of nuclear reactors, especially to dictators like Mr Gaddafi, endangers the environment and the survival of the planet;
it is never the peoples, but their leaders, who want nuclear power;
- "civilian" nuclear and military nuclear are inseparable.
Most of the 435 reactors in service on the planet are very old, and will close in the next 20 years. It is to try to slow down this decline, and not because of an alleged "nuclear renaissance", that political and industrial leaders want to build new reactors in various countries. On the contrary, the “Sortir du nuclear” Network considers that it is necessary to take advantage of these numerous reactor closures to hasten the end of the nuclear industry.
A fortiori, it is important not to build new reactors. Opinion polls show that more than 90% of citizens ask for priority investments in energy saving plans and massive development of renewable energies, and not in nuclear energy. It is this path that must be followed to save the planet from the nuclear danger AND fight against global warming. And to respect democracy.
hop, we delete.
