DUTCH CARIBBEAN COLONIES HAVE ELECTRICITY RATES RAISED

BES REPORTER

Protests Against New Electricity Fees 

Fail to Impress (Dutch) Minister Wiebes

Minister Wiebes, according to his spokesperson, is not studying any changes to the fee structure laid down in the law regulating Electricity and Water on the BES-islands. 

By René Zwart © 

The Hague – Minister Eric Wiebes of Economic Affairs and Climate is not planning to make any adjustments to the law regulating electricity and water on the BES-islands, now that has become clear what negative effects the law will have on consumers in Bonaire.

The new fee structure for electricity, introduced on 1 April, 2018 will result in (much) higher bills for those who consume little electricity. The law that was actually meant to keep energy affordable, now appears to affect the poorest consumers the most. The culprit is the introduction of the fixed connection fee: even those who do not use any electricity, will now pay a fixed monthly amount just for having a connection to the electricity grid.

The new fees have led to much upheaval and criticism on the island. Thousands of citizens signed a petition, the Island Council announced an emergency visit to The Hague and the Executive Council protested by letter to the Dutch Government. The commotion also brought members of the House of Representatives of CDA and D66 into action, sending several written questions to Wiebes.

The protests however seem to have failed to impress Minister Wiebes so far. A question by news site Bonaire.Nu to Wiebes’ spokesman about whether an adaptation of the law is being studied, the answer was both clear and short: “That is not the case.” According to the spokesperson, extensive consultations were held on the islands, prior to the implementation of the new law.

Exco did not protest proposed fee structure

Official documents do show indeed that the Executive Council of Bonaire in 2014 did not raise any concerns about the negative effects that the new law would possibly have for the population. At the time, the Executive Council in Bonaire was mainly against the idea that citizens would be allowed to generate electricity themselves, because this would be at the expense of WEB’s turnover. Protests were also filed against the announcement that the subsidy of the state would be phased out.

Now that Minister Wiebes says he does not intend to do anything about the protests, it will depend on the Second Chamber to decide if the law will be “repaired.” This can be achieved by either increasing the subsidy by the Ministry of Economic affairs, or by reverting back to the old system where the bills to be paid are calculated exclusively based on consumption.

New Solar Park supplies entire Statia with electricity

BES REPORTER

On St. Eustatius, one of the three Public Entities of the Caribbean Netherlands, on the 15th of November a solar park will be officially put into use that can supply the entire island with electricity during the day until after sunset. Thanks to the park, the use of diesel generators, which until recently produced all electricity, can now be reduced by almost half.

The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate has funded the solar park with a subsidy of over USD 14.1 million. This corresponds to almost USD 7,900 for each of the 1800 households and companies whom the investment from the Dutch Government will benefit.

In addition to the solar panels the park has an innovative battery storage of 2.6 MW / 5.9 MWh that can keep the grid stable without the diesel generators. On sunny days from 9.00 AM until 8.00 PM  the solar park is responsible for the entire power production. Around noon the park produces more than 200% of the electricity demand. The produced surplus is stored and utilized later in the day. At night diesel generators take over the production.

This way on an annual basis the solar park provides 46% of the electricity needs of the island. The park has a nominal output of 4.15 MW; thanks to the sunny climate this plant can produce almost twice as much power as would be possible in the European Netherlands. With an expected annual production of 6.4 GWh, after Sunport Delfzijl, this is the Netherlands’ largest solar park.

The plant will be put into use officially on 15 November 2017 by the Kingdom Representative, Gilbert Isabella.

Venezuela and Aruba finalise agreement to re-open refinery

Caribbean News Now!

CARACAS, Venezuela -- Authorities from the governments of Aruba and Venezuela, and officials from Petróleos de Venezuela, SA (PDVSA) and CITGO Aruba, gathered in Caracas on Friday to witness the execution of a commercial agreement between CITGO Aruba and the Aruban government that will reopen a 209,000 B/D refinery located in San Nicolas, Aruba. 

In attendance at the event were the president of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro; the Venezuelan minister of energy and petroleum, Eulogio del Pino; the prime minister of Aruba, Mike Eman; the Aruban Minister of economy, communication, energy and environment, Mike de Meza; and the president and CEO of CITGO Petroleum Corporation, Nelson Martínez.

Following several months of negotiations, officials from the Aruban government and CITGO Aruba announced plans to reactivate operations, which have been idled since 2012, through a refining facilities 15-year lease agreement, with a 10-year extension option.

READ THE FULL REPORT HERE.

Jones Act application a major cause of Puerto Rico economic crisis?

Why Congress Should Care About Puerto Rico

Hawai'i Free Press

by Salim Furth, 

Daily Signal

Puerto Rican legislators and lobbyists have flooded Capitol Hill this year asking Congress to intervene on the debt-ridden island’s behalf. Sadly, the bailouts and bankruptcy law changes that Puerto Rico’s lobbyists seek would benefit Puerto Rico’s government without creating jobs or wage growth for most Puerto Ricans.

Although most congressmen were not elected with Puerto Rico in mind, they were sent to Washington to tame the deficit, to enable job creation, and to protect prosperity. Addressing federal policies that have held Puerto Rico’s economy back will help Congress meet those priorities.

If Puerto Rico does not find a path to prosperity, more Puerto Ricans will give up looking for work and accept welfare or disability benefits, adding to the federal deficit. And without job opportunities at home, more will move to the mainland to look for work. In the hardest-hit congressional districts, where residents have struggled to find work since the end of the recession, adding new job-seekers could extend the slow recovery.

In some ways, Puerto Rico is well integrated into the U.S. economy, buying goods and services from producers all around the U.S. But the maritime Jones Act has severed Puerto Rico from U.S. energy markets. While Puerto Rico is allowed to import natural gas, coal, and oil from Trinidad and Tobago, Colombia, and Venezuela, for example, the Jones Act—which requires that all goods shipped between two U.S. locations be transported on a U.S-built, U.S.-flagged, and 75 percent U.S.-crewed ship—makes imports from Pennsylvania, Wyoming, or Texas untenable. In fact, no tanker routinely supplies Puerto Rico with U.S. energy.

Heritage Foundation research found that job-creating manufacturing has proven untenable in Puerto Rico, due to artificially high prices of energy, shipping, and labor. Without federal legislation that allows those prices to fall to market-determined levels, Puerto Rico will not find its way to robust, job-creating growth.

Bailouts, bankruptcy, and even beneficial fiscal reforms are not going to overcome the basic math: Why do business in Puerto Rico when the costs are higher than anywhere else?

Exempting Puerto Rico from the Jones Act—a privilege already granted to the U.S. Virgin Islands—is the single most important step Congress can take toward enabling economic growth in Puerto Rico. With the Jones Act waived, Puerto Rico’s power companies would be able to replace foreign-sourced oil with cheaper, cleaner, U.S.-sourced natural gas.

Manufacturers in Puerto Rico would no longer be at a cost disadvantage relative to Asia and other Latin American countries when shipping goods to the U.S. And the cost of living in Puerto Rico would fall, allowing residents to stretch their wages further.

Another valuable policy reform would be for Congress to give Puerto Rico the authority to set its own minimum wage. Median wages in Puerto Rico are much lower than in any mainland state, but Puerto Rican employers must pay $7.25 an hour, the federal minimum. As a result, fewer jobs are available, and many Puerto Ricans work off the books for low wages, and without legal protections, and without earning a stake in Social Security and Medicare benefits.

A lower minimum wage, set by Puerto Rico’s own government, would bring some of those workers out of the shadows, enable economic growth, broaden the tax base, and decrease net migration to the mainland.

Congress cannot afford to ignore U.S. citizens whose ability to make a living has been stifled by the Jones Act and a one-size-fits-all minimum wage. The fiscal crisis Puerto Rico faces is really an economic crisis, and a narrow focus on the Commonwealth’s deficits and debt will not overcome the policy barriers to growth that federal policy has erected.

Transition to solar power for Cook Islands

Auckland, New Zealand

By Sarah Robson

Just beside the Cook Islands' only international airport, there's a paddock full of solar panels.

It's something of a jarring sight - rows and rows of shiny black solar panels, 3000 in all, hemmed in by a wire fence, set against a backdrop of lush rainforest and towering, rocky outcrops.

The solar power plant - Te Mana o te Ra, meaning power from the sun - was built last year on one of the rare large flat areas of Rarotonga, with the help of $3.3 million of funding from New Zealand.

The plant churns out about a megawatt of energy in the middle of the day and it meets around five percent of Rarotonga's electricity demand.

It's designed for the unique conditions of Rarotonga, meaning it can withstand the odd tropical cyclone and the constant blast of jet engines.

It's another step towards the Cook Islands' goal of being powered entirely by renewable energy sources by 2020, having already hit the target of being 50 percent renewable by 2015.

New Zealand aid programme manager Joseph Mayhew says the switch to renewable energy sources has a host of benefits for the Cook Islands.

It reduces fuel bills - savings to the tune of about $500,000 a year - and reduces the Pacific nation's dependence on imported diesel and petroleum for electricity generation, he said.

That in turn reduces greenhouse gas emissions by over 1000 tonnes a year.

Mr Mayhew says New Zealand has also been instrumental in getting solar power to six of the more remote northern islands in the Cook group.

The $20m investment means the island of Pukapuka, which didn't have reticulated electricity previously, now has access to a modern amenity most take for granted.

Over the last three years, New Zealand has provided $78 million in aid to the Cook Islands.

Just over 40 per cent of that has been spent on infrastructure projects, including renewable energy, water supply and sanitation.

The New Zealand government is committing another $64m or so to a variety of projects over the next three years.

Scientists question potential new dependence on natural gas for Caribbean electricity generation

4 Reasons Natural Gas Is a Bridge to Nowhere in the Caribbean

Jesse Morris and Kaitlyn Bunker, Ph.D.

 Rocky Mountain Institute 

Caribbean island residents pay some of the highest retail electricity prices in the world. Most islands generate 90 – 100 percent of their electricity by burning expensive imported diesel or heavy fuel oil in large generators. Thus Caribbean electricity users pay between $0.20 and $0.50/kWh (kilowatt hour). By comparison, the average for mainland U.S. residential customers is $0.13/kWh; in Hawaii, where they burn oil for much of their electricity, the average is $0.39/kWh.

Naturally, Caribbean islands are in the market for more affordable alternatives. Some islands are seriously pursuing renewables—witness Jamaica’s 20-MW-and-growing wind farm and the Dominican Republic installing one of the largest solar arrays in the Caribbean. Some other islands such as the U.S. Virgin Islands are experimenting with different fossil fuels that don’t require major capital investments, like propane.

But another option looms on the horizon: natural gas. A recent U.S. Energy Information Administration article and a soon-to-be-released International Development Bank study noteliquefied natural gas (LNG) is increasingly being touted as a cost-effective solution for the Caribbean.

This is more than unfortunate. Switching from one imported fossil fuel (diesel/oil) to another (LNG)—the latter of which is currently slightly less expensive but much more price-volatile—overlooks the Caribbean’s abundant, domestic supply of cost-effective energy efficiency and renewable energy.

One Colombian island in the western Caribbean, San Andres, is grappling now with the future of its electricity generation, including the relative merits of LNG compared to efficiency and renewables. It becomes quickly clear that there are at least four important reasons LNG is the wrong choice for the Caribbean’s electricity.

READ THE FULL REPORT HERE.

California Electric Car Boom Accounts For 40 Percent of U.S. Sales

EcoWatch

Anastasia Pantsios

In the last four years, 250,000 electric vehicles were sold in the U.S. and 40 percent of those—102,440— were sold in California, according to the Plug-In Electric Vehicle Collaborative. That includes both battery-driven and hybrid cars. Palo Alto-based Tesla, which just announced the construction of a massive battery factory in next-door Nevada, is responsible for 10 percent of those sales.

“California’s plug-in electric vehicle market is ramping up, and we expect to see significant growth over the next ten years as customers realize how economical and convenient they are,”said California Plug-In Electric Vehicle Collaborative executive director Christine Kehoe.

California has been in the forefront of pushing for the adoption of fuel-efficient vehicles. It’s been leaning on automakers to lower tailpipe emissions since the ’70s, and in 2009, the state set new, tougher standards under its Zero-Emission Vehicle program, fueling the boom in EVs. Governor Jerry Brown has set a goal of 1.5 million electric vehicles on the road in the state by 2025.

That means more charging stations are needed to keep the cars running. Currently, more than a quarter of the charging stations in the U.S. are in California, with growing demand. The San Jose Mercury News reported in January the EV owners at Silicon Valley companies are fighting over the chargers at their work places.

ChargePoint, the world’s largest EV charging network, opening 500 new stations a month internationally, is one of the companies installing such public charging stations in California.

“Gasoline is four dollars a gallon in California and rising,” pointed out ChargePoint founder and chief technical officer Richard Lowenthal. “Consumers want alternatives and we’re here to help make the best alternative—electricity—more accessible, and to make electric vehicles more appealing.”

Mobilizing Nuclear Bias: The Fukushima Nuclear Crisis and the Politics of Uncertainty

globalresearch.ca

____________________

The Asia-Pacific Journal 

Vol. 12, Issue 7, No. 4, February 17, 2014. 

Kyle Cleveland 

Abstract 

The nuclear disaster in Fukushima which followed in the wake of the 3/11 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami has given rise to one of the most significant public health crises in modern world history, with profound implications for how nuclear energy is perceived. This paper analyzes the most dire phase of the Fukushima nuclear crisis, showing how the level of risk was assessed by nuclear experts and state-level actors who worked largely out of view of public scrutiny. In addition to examining how the accident progression in the reactors was addressed and conveyed to the general public, the paper addresses how the exclusionary zones were determined by Japanese and foreign governments in Japan. 

As the crisis unfolded and efforts to bring the reactors under control were initially proving ineffective, concerns increased that radiation dispersion was unmitigated, and with radiation monitoring by the U.S. military indicating levels significantly beyond TEPCO’s conservative assessments, the United States broke with Japan, recommending an 80km exclusionary zone, and initiating military assisted departures for embassy staff and Department of Defense dependents from Japan. These actions deviated significantly from Japan’s assessments (which had established a 30km evacuation zone), creating a dynamic where the U.S. provided technical consultation for the nuclear response while striving to maintain a delicate diplomatic balance as they attempted to impose a qualitatively different crisis management response. 

Because this crisis had significant implications for Japan's international relations, diplomatic considerations have helped to suppress the complex, often fractious relations between Japan and foreign governments - especially the United States - whose collective efforts eventually turned the tide from managing the nuclear meltdowns to ameliorating their long-term consequences. Based on interviews with political officials in both the Japanese government and foreign embassies in Japan, and nuclear experts and military officers who worked the crisis, the paper analyzes how technical assessments drove decision making and were translated into political policy. 

READ FULL DOCUMENT HERE

European Union and Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat sign a FJ$90.8m. programme on climate change

JOINT PRESS RELEASE FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION 

AND THE PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM SECRETARIAT

The European Union (EU) with the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat (PIFS) have signed a financing agreement for Adapting to Climate Change and Sustainable Energy (ACSE) programme worth FJ$90.8m.

The ACSE programme will help the 15 Pacific ACP countries (Cook Islands, East-Timor, Fiji, Kiribati, , Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Republic of the Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu) to address three main challenges common to all of them: adapting to climate change; reducing their reliance on fossil fuels; and capacity building.

The total project cost is €37.26 (FJ$95.37) million with the European Union contributing €35.5 (FJ$90.86) million through the European Development Fund (EDF). For the implementation of this programme, the European Union will be working in partnership with the German International Cooperation Agency (Deutsche Gesellschaft furInternationale Zusammenarbeit - GIZ), the New Zealand Government, the Asian Development Bank and the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC).

"I'm thrilled to be here signing this financing agreement. Climate change adaptation and sustainable energy are in the core of EU's support towards the Pacific countries. This project not only illustrates this but it's yet another example of the ever closer cooperation between the European Union and our partners in the Pacific,” says Mr DirkMeganck, European Commission's Director for Asia, Central Asia, Middle East, Gulf and the Pacific whilst signing on behalf of the European Union during the regional programming meeting for the 11th EDF, held at PIFS in Suva, Fiji this week.

"The Forum Secretariat and its partner regional agencies warmly welcome the EU’s commitment to climate change and sustainable energy,” says Tuiloma Neroni Slade, The Secretary-General of the Pacific Island Forum Secretariat. “In almost every Forum communiqué in recent years, Leaders have emphasised the importance of securing access to energy, their commitment to renewable energy, the promotion of efficiency measures and the need for significant progress in diversification by developing domestic renewable energy to reduce their reliance on imported fuels. Similarly, Forum Leaders have given affirmation of the dangers of climate change – to the livelihoods, security and well-being of the peoples of the Pacific.”

The programme aims to strengthen the Pacific island countries' capacity to adapt to the adverse effects of climate change and to enhance their energy security at national, provincial and local/community level. The programmeseeks to deliver the following key achievements:

* Create and/or strengthen national technical expertise on climate change adaptation and sustainable energy;

*  Improved cost-effective and efficient energy systems to reduce fossil fuels dependency; and

*  Improvements in communities’ adaptive capacity to cope with climate change challenges.

Another aim of the ACSE programme is to enhance sustainable livelihoods through the support of government institutional efforts and empowering communities to increase their self-reliance and their ability to cope with the effects of climate change through appropriate practices in agriculture and coastal fishery, by disseminating improved plant varieties which are resistant to salt water, by securing their daily water supply and by improving their access to energy, among other initiatives.

Ends

For further information please contact:

Delegation of the European Union for the Pacific Suva, Fiji, Tel: (+679) 3313-633 Email: Delegation-fiji-media@eeas.europa.eu

Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat: Diane Abad, Communications Adviser (+679) 868 5166 Email:media@forumsec.org

Background

Climate change is already disproportionally affecting the Pacific island states, although islanders have done little to contribute to the cause - producing less than 0.03% of current global greenhouse gas emissions. They are among the first to be exposed, often disproportionally, and with limited means to adequately respond.

At the same time, despite efforts to reduce their reliance on fossil fuels, many small Pacific states remain almost 100% dependent on these imports for power generation and transportation. Sustainable energy and climate change adaptation are therefore top priorities for the Pacific ACP governments as expressed in regionally endorsed frameworks and in national policies and strategic documents.

Virgin CEO Richard Branson Vows to Turn Caribbean Islands Green

Brandon Baker 

While Sir Richard Branson is preparing to make the $13.6 million Moskito island his new “family complex,” the billionaire says the move can impact a lot more than just his luxurious profile.

Along with Necker island, which Branson rents for nearly $55,000 a night, Moskito will userenewable energy for 75 to 80 percent of its electricity, according to The Guardian. Using technical and financial blueprints from his green business group, Carbon War Room, and the Rocky Mountain Institute, Branson will offer advice to help all Caribbean governments cut diesel imports and switch to renewable sources. He believes the two properties can become models for islands around the world. 

“This is personal and global,” said Branson, founder of the Virgin Group, which consists of about 400 businesses. “We know that islands will suffer the most from climate change and sea-level rise. Reefs will be devastated, and wildlife decimated.”

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE.

Japanese Market Research Firm Forecasts Growth of Offshore Wind and Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion Power Generation

Japan for Sustainability

Image by Kim Hansen. Some Rights Reserved.

Fuji Keizai Co., a Japanese market research firm, released the results of its investigation into the prospects of the renewable energy market on June 20, 2013. It predicts that the domestic market for offshore wind power generation will show a rapid growth from 50 million yen ( about U.S.$0.51 million) in 2012 to 76.7 billion yen (about U.S.$0.78 billion), in 2020. Offshore wind power generation is capable of generating more electricity than on land due to stronger winds. Fuji Keizai expects further expansion of offshore wind power generation systems, taking into account the tests for floating offshore wind power generation underway since fiscal 2012 at Kabashima, off the coast of Goto City, Nagasaki Prefecture, southern Japan.

Fuji Keizai also forecasts the rapid growth of Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC) from 0 yen in 2012 to 180 billion yen (about U.S.$1.84 billion) in 2020. OTEC drives a turbine to generate power utilizing differences in temperature between warmer surface water and cooler deep seawater to generate electricity. 

Fuji Keizai's prediction is based on following factors: 1) the launch of tests for OTEC at Kume Island in Okinawa Prefecture, southern Japan, conducted by the Okinawa Prefectural Deep Sea Water Research Center; and 2) plans to start operation of a commercial plant with a generation capacity of 10 megawatts by 2020 by the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO), an agency under Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

Related articles:

Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion Plant to be Demonstrated in Okinawa

NEDO Promoting Japan's First Offshore Wind Power Demonstration Project

Australia signals a decrease in Pacific influence - Nic Maclellan

Stopping the cheques

Australia’s performance at CHOGM (Commponwealth Heads of Government Meeting) and in Warsaw (in November) will accelerate the decline of its influence in the Pacific, writes Nic Maclellan

Nauru’s president Baron Waqa with prime minister Tony Abbott at CHOGM meeting in Colombo. Robert Schmidt/ AFP

STANDING on the podium in Warsaw this week, president Baron Waqa of Nauru wasn’t mincing his words. “Many of the countries most responsible for climate change are retreating from their moral responsibility and obligation to act,” he said. “Consequently, we are lacking the urgent ambition required to lower emissions in the short time we have to avert catastrophe.”

This year’s global climate negotiations haven’t gone well. The Alliance of Small Island States, or AOSIS, is angry that many developed nations are abandoning pledges to provide financial support for the most vulnerable islands affected by global warming. Speaking on behalf of this forty-three-member bloc, Waqa stressed [1]the vital role of climate finance in responding to the climate emergency. “We are missing the all-embracing idea of human solidarity that underpins the concept of ‘loss and damage,’” he said, referring to the devastation to land, water supply, agriculture and infrastructure caused by delays in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and the failure to fund the necessary adaptation.

Leading the retreat at Warsaw is the Australian government. In December last year, the Coalition’s shadow climate minister, Greg Hunt, said that an Abbott government would not give a “blank cheque” to cover loss and damage. Now, as federal environment minister (“climate” having been removed from the title), Hunt has refused to attend the Warsaw negotiations and is making good on his pledge to stop the cheques.

At this month’s Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Sri Lanka, the Abbott government ditched Australia’s pledge to contribute to the Green Climate Fund, an innovative new funding mechanism for dealing with the effects of climate change. In their final communique [2], the CHOGM leaders “recognised the importance attached to both the operationalisation and the capitalisation of the Green Climate Fund.” But a footnote recorded that “Australia and Canada had reservations about the language of paragraphs 18, 19, 20 and 21 and indicated that they could not support a Green Capital [sic] Fund at this time.”

Hunt made clear in December last year that the Coalition wouldn’t support this multilateral body. “This is not a fund which we support. We have no control over where the money goes, no control over how it’s used, no control over how much we pay and this is something which we clearly, simply, categorically reject.” At the time, international observers were astounded by the chutzpah of this statement. Australia had played a central role in the creation of the fund, with AusAID’s deputy director-general, Ewen McDonald, appointed co-chair of the Fund’s board for its first year of operation. Australian officials have played a crucial role in determining the Fund’s mandate, operations and policies.

READ FULL ANALYSIS HERE AT

 

TEPCO clean-up boss says Fukushima's radioactive water will be dumped into Pacific Ocean

ABC/PACNEWS

The man in charge of the clean-up at Japan's Fukushima nuclear plant says growing stores of contaminated water from the site will eventually have to be dumped into the sea.

In an exclusive interview with the ABC, the chairman of the Fukushima Monitoring Committee, Dale Klein, has also admitted there are likely to be more blunders and slip-ups at the plant in the months and years to come.

“I think the best word to use with Fukushima is challenging,” the former chief nuclear watchdog in the US said.

Since the 2011 earthquake and ensuing tsunami sparked the nuclear disaster, TEPCO has been pouring millions of litres of water onto Fukushima's reactors to try and keep them cool.

That radioactive water is now being stored in tanks at the site but already thousands of litres have leaked into the Pacific Ocean.

Klein says the biggest challenge for TEPCO is dealing with these ever-growing volumes of contaminated water being stored at Fukushima.

He believes that after the water is treated and stripped of most radioactive elements, it will be safe to dump into the Pacific.

“At the end of the day, when the water is discharged, it will be released in a way that it's diluted,” he said.

“So there's no risk to public health and safety. But it's an emotional issue.”

It is not just contaminated water causing problems at Fukushima.

Hastily and shoddily built systems at the nuclear plant have also triggered some anxious moments.

The ABC has spoken to one man who worked at the Fukushima site until he reached his maximum radiation exposure limit.

He still works for TEPCO, and only agreed to speak to the ABC on the condition of anonymity.

“I was at the plant earlier this year when a rat chewed through some wiring and knocked out power to several used fuel pools,” he said.

“I thought, 'how could one rat cause such a big problem?' There were no back-up systems.”

Klein has told the ABC he believes there will be more dramas at Fukushima.

“I think we will see more of those. When you look at that site, it's massive,” he said.

"It's a big site and it's not unusual to have other things like that.".

Deep Sea Mining: Coming soon to an ocean near you

Papua New Guinea Mine Watch

Deep Sea Mining:  Coming soon to an ocean near you Carlos Duarte and Sophie Arnaud-Haond, IFREMER, France  University of Western Australia  The depletion of resources on land together with the increase in resource demand and the parallel development in technologies for deep sea exploration have brought the issue of deep-sea mining to the forefront of political, industrial and scientific debate, writes Carlos Duarte. **** Shallow submarine mining is already a reality in coastal areas, such as the De Beers Marine diamond mining operation in Namibia, in depths up to 150 metres. The current challenge is to move these operations to the deep sea, which contains vast resources of minerals, including manganese, iron, nickel, copper, cobalt, rare earths and gold, often associated with areas of volcanic activity. Whereas nations are sovereign to regulate seabed mining within their economic exclusive zones, the access to resources in the seabed and ocean floor beyond these national jurisdiction waters, referred in United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as “the Area”.is organized and controlled by the autonomous international organization called “International Seabed Authority” initially established under UNCLOS. To date, the International Seabed Authority has entered into seventeen 15-year contracts for exploration for polymetallic nodules and polymetallic sulphides in the deep seabed with thirteen contractors. Eleven of these contracts are for exploration for polymetallic nodules in the Clarion Clipperton Fracture Zone in the Pacific, with two contracts for exploration for polymetallic sulphides in the South West Indian Ridge and the Mid Atlantic Ridge. These contracts allow the contractors to explore specified parts of the deep oceans outside national jurisdiction, giving each contractor the exclusive right to explore an initial area of up to 150,000 km2. Russia, China, Korea, Germany and and France are the nations involved in most of these contracts, which include contracts for small nations, such as Nauru, Kiribati and Tonga, whom would likely open them up to tender by international companies. Indeed, at a summit on Deep-Sea Mining in London two months ago Mark Brown, Minister of Minerals and Natural Resources of the Cook Islands, announced that the Cook Islands is embracing deep-sea mining as a pathway to multiply the country’s gross domestic product by up to 100 fold, as they assessed that the Cook Islands' 2 million Km2 exclusive economic zone contains 10 billion tons of manganese nodules, which contain manganese, nickel, copper, cobalt and rare earth minerals used in electronics. Negotiations are under way between the Cook Islands and companies in the UK, China, Korea, Japan and Norway, towards granting the first tenders within a year. These facts suggest that we may soon face and underwater gold rush, but in most citizen’s minds deep-sea mining is still something for sci-fic movies. Much to the contrary, the technology for deep-sea mining is not something of the future but it is largely existing. A deep-sea mining operation consists of a mining support platform or vessel; a launch and recovery system; a crawler with a mining head, centrifugal pump and vertical transport system; and electrical, control, instrumentation and visualization systems. Companies such as Lockheed Martin, Soil Machine Dynamics, IHC Mining and Bauer or Nautilus Minerals are developing vehicles for deep-sea mining, pledging they are in the position to readily develop techniques to operate down to 5,000 metre depth. Indeed, the submarine vehicles required are already in existence and their operations are described in compelling animations. Besides direct removal of parts of the sea floor during mineral collection, increased toxicity and turbidity is expected in the water column due to sediment resuspension during the extraction (ie near bottom) and tailings rejection after minerals are sorted on the floating plateform (ie near the surface) resulting in clouds of particles forming plumes.  Waste will represent most, 90%, of the volume of materials pumped to surface and, thus, seabed operations will deposit massive amounts of waste at the sea floor.  This waste can, in turn, release massive amounts of metals and other elements to the surrounding water, impacting on the ecosystems that thrive near these deep sea mining sites. While near bottom resuspended sediment may cause a major threat to local communities, surface plumes generated by tailing may have a wider impact by affecting larger areas. Here is, however, where the main problem lies. Deep sea communities are very poorly characterized and mapped, and even where a reasonable taxonomic knowledge could be claimed and communities mapped over accurate scales, their sensitivity to these impacts is unknown. Despite these uncertainties, there is little doubt that losses of fragile deep-sea communities during the operations will be unavoidable, and the focus of industry and scientists is placed in the ecological restoration of the deep sea from impacts of mining. The International Marine Minerals Society has developed a voluntary Code for Environmental Management of Marine Mining that recommends that plans for deep sea mining include at the outset procedures that “aid in the recruitment, re-establishment and migration of biota…”. The first impact assessment for a deep-sea mining project has now been produced. This was commissioned by Nautilus Minerals Inc., incorporated in Canada but also present in Australia (Queensland). Nautilus was granted the first mining lease for polymetallic seafloor massive sulphide deposits at the prospect known as Solwara 1, in the territorial waters of Papua New Guinea, where it is aiming to extract copper, gold and silver. The company, which is likely to be the first one to implement deep-sea mining is also looking at operating in the exclusive economic zones and territorial waters of Fiji, Tonga, the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and New Zealand. A workshop, promoted by Nautilus Minerals Inc., was held in Sète (France) in November 2012, including one of us (S.A.-H.) to consider the feasibility of ecological restoration of the deep sea following mining operations. The outcomes of the workshop are reported in a paper, including coauthors from Nautilus Minerals Inc, published in the journal Marine Policy (Van Dover et al. 2013). This exercise indicated that most of the direct costs (80%) for a deep-sea mining restoration programs would be associated with ship use, including use of remotely operated and autonomous underwater vehicles.  The experts attending this workshop concluded that deep-sea restoration will be expensive, but that cost alone should not be a reason for inaction and that restoration should be included in project budgets. They concluded that where restoration costs are prohibitive, offsetting options can be explored but that neither restoration nor rehabilitation objectives or commitments should be taken as a ‘license to trash’. A record of disasters in the offshore oil and gas industry, as well as deep sea fisheries, shows that there is a high price to pay in allowing industry to move offshore faster than scientific research does, yet only a handful of nations – which do not include Australia – are sufficiently equipped for deep sea scientific exploration as to keep pace with industry.  The basic knowledge (taxonomic inventories, habitat mapping, characterization of faunal assemblages and dynamics of deep species interactions, …) of deep sea ecosystems and the evaluation of their vulnerability, recovery time scales and processes is a matter of urgency, but this goals cannot be met without significant investments in capabilities for deep-sea research. Providing the immediacy of deep-sea mining, the investment in scientific infrastructure and research to provide the scientific underpinnings for the safe and sustainable mining operations in the deep-sea is an imperative. Reference Van Dover, C.L., J. Aronson, L. Pendleton, S. Smith, Sophie Arnaud-Haond, D. Moreno-Mateos, E. Barbier, D.Billett, K.Bowers, R.Danovaro, A.Edwards, S. Kellert, T.Morato, E.Pollard, A.Rogers and R.Warner. 2013. Ecological restoration in the deep sea: Desiderata. Mar. Policy, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.07.006i ***** Pacific Solution Exchange discusses Deep Sea Mining                        by ramunickel United Nations / PACNEWS The deep sea a place mostly undiscovered and unregulated, is now facing large-scale industrial exploitation as mining of the deep seabed for minerals becomes a reality. The knowledge-sharing forum, Pacific Solution Exchange is hosting an e-discussion across the Pacific on the potential trans-boundary environmental impacts given that deep sea mining operations may happen soon within sovereign Exclusive Economic Zones. Prompting the Pacific-wide discussion is Pacific Political Advisor for Greenpeace Australia Pacific, Ms Seni Nabou. “As terrestrial minerals become depleted and prices rise, the search for new sources of supply is turning to the sea floor and many non-governmental organisations remain concerned at the haste in which exploration and mining is taking place,” Nabou said. “While harvesting these resources could provide a much-needed economic boost to many Pacific Island countries, Greenpeace Australia Pacific and a coalition of Pacific Regional Non-Governmental Organisations are concerned about the rush to deep seabed mining and have called for a halt to it in the Pacific region.” Nabou explained, “This emerging industry, facilitated greatly by advances in technology, poses a major threat to our oceans, which are already suffering from a number of pressures including overfishing, pollution, and the effects of climate change.” The discussion has received contributions from researchers, scientists, government officials, practitioners and experts from the Pacific and other parts of the world that have shared their thoughts on the environmental implications of deep sea mining. Some commentators expressed concern about the potential impacts on species dependent on hydrothermal vents, where one type of seabed minerals is found. The need for better understanding about possible impacts of sediment plumes on marine life was also highlighted. Deep Sea Minerals Project Legal Adviser from the Secretariat of the Pacific Community, Hannah Lily shared that deep sea environments have hardly been studied. She stated that there are different types of deep sea mineral deposits, each with different biological environments, and the extraction techniques will vary between types. It is therefore difficult to predict impacts without knowing the specific technicalities of the proposed operations and details of a specific site. Lily noted that in some cases “Scientists predict the direct impacts of seabed mining are likely to be localised to the mining site, due to the high pressure and low current in the deep ocean, which will restrict sediment dispersal.” She added, “If this is correct, then direct trans-boundary impacts may be considered unlikely, unless perhaps a mining site is allocated right next to a boundary and risk of dispute over mineral rights may well pre-empt that, but the probability of indirect impacts bears further investigation.” A few members shared the view that mining can be done but in a safe manner with strict limits of damage to the environment and major penalties for breaches. Others are critical of the fact that very little is known about what lies deep within the ocean and therefore prefer it untouched because the consequences are unclear. The discussion continues until 4 October 2013, with people invited to join for free the Pacific Solution Exchange (PSE) community if they want to become part of the conversation. PSE is an email-based knowledge sharing service that enables people across the Pacific to ask each other queries and share answers, insights, experiences and lessons learned to help each other in their climate change and disaster risk work. It has over 1500 members including practitioners, students, government, concerned elders, and community members in remote islands. PSE is administered by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Pacific Centre with support from Australian Agency for International Development (AusAID).