Author: kicknuclear




“Together Against Sizewell C (TASC) demands the Government halt the Sizewell C (SZC) planning process immediately, review the UK’s energy policy and remove the nuclear component which has been shown by report after report to be superfluous to UK climate change, cost and electricity generating targets. Nuclear is too expensive, a security risk and leaves a legacy of radioactive waste.


If SZC nuclear power station were allowed to be constructed over the forecast 12 year build period in this flood-prone rural part of East Suffolk, the unacceptable scale of environmental, social and infrastructure dislocation will be all too evident as it will:-

– devastate the Suffolk Coast and Heaths Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty which provides a rich and varied mosaic of habitats that are a haven for an amazing variety of wildlife including iconic species such as bittern, marsh harrier and otter,

– split the Sizewell Marshes Site of Special Scientific Interest in half with a new permanent elevated road,

– be constructed on the boundary with RSPB Minsmere, with 24/7 light, noise and air pollution being a huge threat to the internationally important nature reserve as well as the wider environment,

– result in the loss of acres of valuable farmland,

– threaten homes, land and businesses with compulsory purchase,

– see road building and alterations for 25 miles around the site, including 7 new roundabouts within an 8-mile radius of Sizewell,

– add hundreds of HGV journeys to and from the Sizewell site every day, causing unacceptable levels of CO2 and NOX emissions,

– harm the flourishing and sustainable tourism industry of East Suffolk affecting businesses around the much visited towns of Aldeburgh and Southwold and many popular villages as well as RSPB Minsmere and the National Trust’s Dunwich Heath,

– see up to 2 million litres of mains water consumed each day of nuclear power station operation, in addition to the huge volumes used during construction, in one of the driest parts of the country,

– see tons of fish and other marine life sucked into the cooling pipes along with an estimated 2.5 billion gallons of sea water per day, see article re Hinkley Point C(same design as SZC):

– require nuclear waste to be stored indefinitely on our crumbling, sinking coast as sea levels rise,

– create a huge upfront carbon footprint during construction and from the mining, milling and fabrication of the uranium fuel together with an unknown carbon footprint at the back end of operation – see why nuclear is not the answer to climate change:

– lead to the production of low level radiation with all its attendant risks to human health, especially to young children and those yet to be born, see:


For more information:
twitter: @SayNo2SizewellC


By hand to Secretary of State for Business Energy and Industrial Strategy”


“The Sizewell reactors sit on a windswept beach just yards from a sea that has already consumed ancient villages as the coastline changed and eroded over the centuries. Now the sea level rise that will come with climate change promises in time to drown a few more, most likely including the Sizewell nuclear site. Undeterred, the French government nuclear company, EDF, insists it will build a new reactor at Sizewell — one of its ill-fated EPR design that is already struggling at Flamanville, Olkiluoto and Hinkley. Just from a climate change point of view, it is an exercise in insanity. But there is so much more at stake.” Continued here:


Fukushima update 2019

please scroll down for Japanese language version of this update

In the 8 years since the meltdowns of three nuclear reactors at Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, the extreme difficulty of cleaning up, or even sticking a working bandaid on the power plant, has become slowly more obvious and more undeniable. Tepco, the company who own the plant, managed to dangle a robot the size of three end-to-end drink cans into reactor 2 in Feb 2019, to poke the pile of melted fuel on the floor under the former reactor. They had a video camera on board, as well as some tongs fitted, so were able to film their robot scooping up a few gravel-like lumps of fuel, yet found that other ‘areas’ of fuel were set like concrete, and will need to be angle-ground or cut out, rather than just scooped up. Difficult when the radiation there will kill any worker in minutes.

One of the biggest dangers is that if you go moving around lumps of highly radioactive material you can accidently bring lumps of it close enough together that will then go critical. A mini nuclear explosion could be the result, which even the Japanese government admit would not improve the site nor make it easier to clean up.

Tepco admitted in October 2018 that the 1.1 million tonnes of contaminated water stored at the site “needs further treatment/filtering” before they can be “released into the ocean”. They found that the ALPS filters had “consistently failed to eliminate a cocktail of other radioactive elements, including iodine, ruthenium, rhodium, antimony, tellurium, cobalt and strontium,” and that over 80% of the water is above the limits set for just throwing it in the ocean. 600,000 Bq/litre of strontium-90 was found in some tanks. For years Tepco has claimed the water only contains tritium, and so if they diluted it with more sea-water they could just throw it in the sea, while never releasing any figures for the actual content of the ‘treated’ water. They are still pumping out and storing around 150 tonnes a day from the reactor building basements, since the ice-wall is “only partially effective” at stopping ground water flowing into the basements. Maybe the next tsunami will just sweep the 1.1 million tonnes of water and the millions of tonnes of waste from the “clean-up” of Fukushima prefecture that are stacked in black bags along the coast into the ocean for them. Job done …

The ALPS filter system is operated by Hitachi, who are not having a good run, having just given up on trying to build two nuclear power reactors in North Wales and two in Gloucestershire, as the “numbers didn’t add up”. Two months earlier, Toshiba gave up on a planned nuclear power station next to Sellafield, in Cumbria, and six months before that Mitsubishi gave up on planned reactors in Turkey, for the same reason. So all three Japanese nuclear corporations have abandoned attempts to spread these deadly plants outside Japan. Only the French, Russian and Chinese governments are still wanting to build them, for reasons of geopolitics and bureaucratic pride/inertia.

Yet 24.9 GW of onshore wind was installed in Asia/Pacific in 2018 alone, bringing the total there to 256 GW. 51.3 GW of wind was installed globally in 2018. The EU installed 8 GW of solar in the same year. Cheaper, quicker, cleaner, doesn’t melt down and poison your country. (Each nuke is about 1 GW.)

With the Olympics scheduled for next year, partly in Fukushima prefecture, they have only found one third of the volunteers they need for the games, mostly old folk. Youth and teenagers don’t want to know, it seems. Surprise. Meanwhile, three swimming pools full of deadly spent fuel remain up on the 4th floors of three of the reactor buildings. One more nasty earthquake collapsing those buildings would probably lead to northern Japan becoming uninhabitable. They hope to have the pools emptied in 5 or 10 years …

After eight years more than 50,000 people are still refugees from the disaster. Many are being forced to move back into radioactively contaminated zones, because the acceptable radiation exposure limit has been raised from 1 to 20 mSv/year and the “financial assistance for evacuees” has been terminated. For citizens in the rest of Japan and the rest of the world the radiation exposure limit is 1mSv/year as set by the ICRP (International Commission on Radio- logical Protection).

In surveys, about 10% of former residents say they plan to move back one day; 60% say they have no plans to move back. Chicken or egg: few people means not much rebuilding of facilities; few facilities means few want to move back. Around 30 group lawsuits demanding compensation have been lodged around Japan, often meeting with success. 5 out of 6 recent cases against the government have resulted in the government and Tepco being held liable due to failing to prepare for the tsunami (foreseeable since 2009, said the courts) and failing to avoid the hydrogen explosions by placing the cooling equipment, generators, on high enough land.

Across Japan some courts, some local governments and many residents are denying permission to restart nuclear reactors. South Korea, Taiwan and China still refuse to buy Fukushima produce. The cleanup might take 40 years; in 2015 the plant manager said maybe 200 years. A conservative think tank, the Japan Centre for Economic Research, said it might cost $640 billion.

272 children have been found to have thyroid cancer. Daily average emissions into air and water from July to September, 2018 were 5.26 million Becquerels of caesium (134 and 137 combined).

When nuclear goes wrong, it goes really wrong. Even an Olympic Games can’t pretend otherwise.

For the best updates, photos and videos on the situation at Fukushima:


福島 最新情報 2019年










Nuclear Industry Association Conference London 2018

Letter distributed outside the Victoria Park Plaza, London, 6 December 2018:

Nuclear Industry Association Conference, London 2018

We have come yet again to warn you of your error in pursuing nuclear power, and to turn back before some Toshiba-type catastrophe descends on you. As you no doubt know, Toshiba had to sell off the only money-making venture it had, its memory chip business, for $18 billion US, just to stay afloat after its disastrous dabble in civilian nuclear power. Its subsidiary, Westinghouse, former grandee of the US nuclear business, has lost £7.7 billion (at least) through delays and problems at the 2 nuclear plants it was building in the USA, nearly sinking its parent, Toshiba, who declared losses of £7.3 billion in 2017 alone. This year, “Toshiba recognizes that the economically rational decision is to withdraw from the UK nuclear power plant construction project, [Moorside]” said the company. Please learn from them, before you too sink.

The thing is, a civilian nuclear power plant is not a money-maker without huge fistfuls of taxpayers’ money. Even the ones built 30 years ago and long since paid off are finding that they cannot compete with ever-cheaper wind and solar. 8 have closed in the last 5 years in the US, and more shutdowns are in the works, like Pilgrim in May, 2019. The 2 x 1.6GW reactors being built at Hinkley, near Bristol, could be replaced at half the cost by renewables, according to the UK Solar Association. These renewables could be built in 18 months, not 20 years. And they wouldn’t produce waste which will need to be guarded for 250,000 years. “The Intergenerational Foundation think tank calculated that Britain would pay up to £40bn less for renewable alternatives that would generate the equivalent power to Hinkley over the plant’s planned lifetime.” Guardian, 5 April 2016.

And how about this article from The Independent, 9 May 2016: “Physicist claims Hinkley Point deal means UK taxpayer could get £53bn bill to supply cheap nuclear energy to France.” According to Keith Barnham, emeritus professor of physics, Imperial College London, the total subsidy paid to the planned Hinkley Point nuclear power station by the hardworking British bill payers could reach a staggering £53 billion over its lifetime – and the main beneficiaries will be French. He argues that such is the likely growth of renewables that the UK will not actually need Hinkley’s electricity, so it will be sold abroad. And, he says, the most likely customers are in France, home of energy giant EDF, which is expected to build the plant.

All in all, the public are getting tired of financing these power plants. Even though we were assured they couldn’t possibly ever go wrong, so far they have averaged a meltdown every 10 years. And the argument that they are needed for ‘baseline’ electricity supply is no longer true. Steve Holliday, CEO of National Grid, the company that operates the gas and power transmission networks in the UK and in the northeastern US, believes the idea of large coal-fired or nuclear power stations to be used for baseload power is outdated: “From a consumer’s point of view, the solar on the rooftop is going to be the baseload.” Energy Post EU,  11 September 2015,

So, all in all, nuclear industry, could do better, by helping set up the renewables and storage we need.

The corium of reactor 2 of Fukushima Daiichi is clearly visible

Fukushima 311 Watchdogs

Fukushima Blog by Pierre Fetet
Translation Hervé Courtois
It has been almost seven years since this deadly magma was created thanks to the imbecility of men. 7 years that we talk about it without ever really seeing it. And now Tepco, in January 2018, unveils, for the first time and in a very discreet manner, some very telling images of the corium of Fukushima Daiichi’s reactor 2.
Above illustration: screenshot made from a Tepco video
At first, all the media published again the photos provided by Tepco, where one sees for example a piece of a fuel assembly’s handle. It was deduced that the rest had melted but nothing more could be said.
In a second time, 3 days later, Tepco added a video of 3 minutes 34 that shows a selection of footage filmed inside the containment. In this video, we see very precisely corium…

View original post 528 more words

World Nuclear Association Symposium September 14th 2017

The following letter was handed to delegates and passersby at the WNA (World Nuclear Association) Symposium in London, on September 14th 2017:


We are here in front of your symposium to try and point out the recent changes in the world of energy, and help you avoid wasting time and our money on yesterday’s technology.

The UK energy auction held last Monday resulted in a price of £57.50/MWh for offshore wind, about half the price of two years ago. This puts the £92.50/MWh (index linked, so now over £100) awarded to Hinkley Point C nuclear power station to shame. These low costs of £57.50/MWh are bound to fall further in the near future, making Hinkley look more and more like a disastrous white elephant.

These price reductions in off-shore wind have been achieved by designing bigger turbines, specialised ships and infrastructure for installation of the wind farms, and cheaper finance costs due to increased confidence and interest. Meanwhile, the costs of nuclear only continue to climb.

The 60 year old nuclear industry has only ever known rising costs and growing delays. Increasingly expensive safety measures have flowed from the major meltdowns or accidents that have occurred every 10 years, and the costs and dangers have led to the public not wanting any more nuclear power to be built. Windscale 1957, Three Mile Island 1979, Chernobyl 1986 and now 3 times Fukushima 2011 have exhausted our patience with ‘Health and Safety by trial and error’, with your industry left bleating that now it is safer because it has learnt from the most recent catastrophe. The worst that wind and solar can do is produce too much energy on a sunny day, whereas nuclear can destroy a third of your country if it encounters a mishap. Not to mention saddling dozens of generations with the costs of guarding our waste. Not good.

You are losing the support of the media. The Economist Intelligence Unit said “the trajectory of cheaper renewable technologies is irreversible”. The formerly pro-Hinkley Lib Dems said the breakthrough should prompt a rethink of the government’s energy plans (Vince Cable). Even The Times; “It is also a clear signal that nuclear energy on the scale of Hinkley Point is fast being left behind”.

Even China is turning away from nuclear. Last year it installed 34.5 GW of solar, and a further 24GW of capacity in the first 6 months of this year, as well as 19.3 GW/h of wind. Both the EPR reactors from France and the AP 1000 reactors from Westinghouse are 3 or 4 years behind schedule, and China has not approved further reactors for several years. The recent bankruptcy of Westinghouse has led to the probable cancellation of any further plans for Chinese AP 1000s, and has brought down Westinghouse’s parent company Toshiba, which is now scrambling to sell off its sole money-making possession, its chip business, to stave off its own bankruptcy. Toshiba has announced that it will not attempt any more nuclear construction. The sums just do not add up, and you lot should take notice of Toshiba’s experience.

The flagship french nuclear construction company Areva has also recently gone bankrupt and undergone a forced marriage with the likewise French state-owned EDF. Which itself would be closed tomorrow if not propped up by the state. It seems only state-owned companies can build nuclear power stations anywhere in the world these days. Again, the sums just do not add up, and only a states’ desire for nuclear weapons allows these dinosaurs to lumber forward.

Never mind. GE announced last month that it had just installed 5 GW of wind energy in Brazil. That is 3 of your EPRs. Energy auctions in Germany earlier this year resulted in offshore wind farms being proposed at a strike price of zero euros per MWh. Only one percent of the North Seas’ potential for wind power has so far been used, so we suggest you start looking at how to participate in what promises to be a massive growth area in the future, and ditch your participation in last century’s failed promise of ‘energy too cheap to meter’. Didn’t turn out, but your engineering skills can still usefully serve the human race.

Pamphlet produced by Kick Nuclear, London.

Fukushima update: spring 2017

please scroll down for Japanese translation:

It is now 6 years since the triple meltdowns at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, and the Japanese authorities and nuclear industry are still manoeuvring to minimise the effects and marginalise the affected. The work of forgetting Fukushima goes on. Starting with denying for the first three months that they had even had a meltdown, let alone three, lying to the citizens who were trying to get out of the way of the plume, and now continuing with the cruel claim that it is the fear of radiation, the “phobia”, rather than exposure to the radioactivity released during the meltdowns that causes the damage. We watched on our TVs as the plants exploded, but now a few years have slid by and most have moved on, drawn away by other disasters. Meanwhile the radioactivity continues to contaminate the soil, air, water, food and bodies of the Japanese, triggering not just cancers but also strokes and a whole host of other radiogenic illnesses.

The well-respected Physicians for Social Responsibility[1] reported that at least 10,000 cases of cancer will occur in Japan as a result of the meltdown, and laments that the full impact of Fukushima may never be known. This is due to Japan’s failure to immediately and fully track radiation exposures, as well as a “disturbing” lack of testing of the general population for radiation-related health effects such as stroke, cardiovascular disease, endocrine disease, miscarriage, foetal malformations, leukaemia, lymphomas and solid tumours.

Apart from the immediate cancer effects, 130,000 people have had their lives and communities shattered by the evacuations necessitated by the disaster. The village of Katsurao is a good example. Evacuated for five years, the chicken-or-egg nightmare continues even when the former residents want to return to their village. The town’s two factories, which made camera parts, are long gone, set up elsewhere, so there is no work to return to. 50%, yes – one half – of the agricultural land around the village is now stacked 5 metres high with black plastic bags full of radioactive waste from the clean-up and decontamination. So there’s little work in the fields either. Many don’t want to buy produce from there anyway. All the couples with children have gone, so the school closed. They won’t return as there is no school and with no kids the school won’t return.

Moreover, most parents don’t want to bring their kids back to a still-contaminated area, as kids are especially sensitive to radiation, as their cells are dividing more rapidly as they grow. Some older people have returned, saying ‘I want to die in the village where I grew up’. But younger people have found jobs, made friends and grown new ‘roots’, in the areas where they’ve been living for the last five years, so they don’t want to return. So the village is permanently damaged. Less people – less resources like hospitals and shops. Less hospitals and shops – less attractive to return to. It can take hundreds of years for a village or town to evolve; you can’t just remove and scatter its people for five years and then expect it to return to how it was. 10 million 1 square metre black bags of waste now blight the landscape of Fukushima province.

Cost estimates for the catastrophe – cleanup, compensation and decommissioning – have recently doubled, to $190 billion.

The uncertainty about ionising radiation is doing enormous damage, as people cotton on to the lack of honesty from a government firmly in the pocket of the nuclear industry aka the ‘nuclear village’. The worldwide limit for exposure for a citizen to ionising radiation from a nuclear power plant is one millisievert a year. The Japanese government just raised this to twenty millisieverts a year, setting this as the limit up to which land would be declared habitable. Therefore housing subsidies, enabling 6,531 voluntarily evacuated households to live elswehere, will be terminated in March 2017[2].  Yet a worker was just declared eligible for compensation as his leukaemia had been caused by his work in the nuclear industry, mostly at Fukushima, with a total, cumulative dose of 19.8 millisieverts. 19.8 can cause leukaemia, yet 20 a year, every year, for citizens is acceptable. Outrageous.

The ice wall seems to be only partly working; the NRA said it isn’t sufficiently preventing the groundwater from entering the site, where it becomes contaminated. Indeed, the ice wall will only last a few years anyway, until the groundwater erodes the land around it. So Tepco have been told to rely on pumping up the groundwater, and double the number of water storage tanks, rather than rely on the ice wall. The new problem is that Tepco have moved from having 4 cubes (the reactor buildings) full of deadly water to having a much larger ‘bathtub’, containing the 4 cubes, now also full of deadly water. Any future crack in the ice wall, or the rock under it, will mean that this much larger mass of contaminated water will move out into the environment. They say that the lack of water current through the basements means the ‘bathtub’ water won’t be poisoned; but anyone knows that if you drop a few teabags into a still bath the whole bath will be tea-coloured within a few days. It’s called diffusion. The authorities floated the idea of just covering the Fukushima Daiichi site with concrete and leaving it, but public outrage soon made them withdraw that idea.

The Niida river in Minimasoma has been found to have 29,500 Bq/kg of radioactive contamination concentrated in its sediment. To compare, anything with radiation levels above 100 Bq/kg used to be considered to be hazardous nuclear waste. Since the Fukushima meltdowns, this has been raised to 8,000 Bq/kg.

5,000 tons of Fukushima fish and crab was smuggled out to China via Vietnam, relabelled, and sold on. That’s one we know of because they were caught. How many others?

Radioactive Caesium from Fukushima has now crossed the Pacific ocean to reach the shores of Oregon, according to Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution[3].

All this downplaying of the damage done, just to continue with the nuclear industry, when wind and solar are now so much cheaper, and utterly safe[4]. Shame.


[2] [3] japan-our-shores#stream/0

[4] power-vs-cost-of-wind-power-coal-nuclear-natural-gas/

we also recommend:

Leaflet by Kick Nuclear:

福島 最新情報 2017年春


「Physicians for Social Responsibility(社会的責任を果たす医師団、PSR)」 の報告書[1]によると、福島の原発事故が原因のがん患者は少なくとも1万人に達する見通しです。しかしPSRは、残念ながらこうした被害の全容が明らかにされることは決してないだろうと嘆いています。その理由は、日本政府が即座に全力で放射線被害を食い止めることを怠ったうえ、放射能の影響で引き起こされかねない心臓発作、心血管・内分泌(ホルモン)疾患、流産、胎児奇形、白血病、リンパ腫、腫瘍について全人口を対象に調べていないことにあります。