Novichok A234 – The facts – Exclusive to

Posted to  by Shaun McGee (aka arclight2011)

Posted on 29th March 2018


Thanks to Prof. Chris Busby for proofreading the chemical composition from the chemist source materials ( linked here link)  and for his input into this article.

After some research on Novichok i discovered that;
1/ Militarised Organophosphates (MOP) can be processed into a sticky oil or a fine powder and there are at least 4 types
2/ New Nuclear, biological and chemical NBC suits were developed before Desert Shield as the Novichok series of chemical agents were designed to circumnavigate the old Noddy suits supplied to the military.
3/ Novichok series compounds are detectable easily with testing equipment developed prior to Desert Shield
4/ It is very likely that an antidote was developed prior to desert shield (especially as Skripals daughter and the policemen are recovering)
5/ By making all references to Novichok series a matter of national security the OPCW was not told that these compounds were so dangerous thus allowing the USA and UK to keep such weapons on their shelves.
6/ Most of the Russian peer reviewed studies on this were done under the guise of fertiliser/insecticide production
7/ Although some of the precursors like SO2 are very nasty making this product difficult to produce a synthetic chemist in a lab could produce it
8/ Concerning the Polonium 210 poisoning of Litvinyenko, this polonium could have been synthesised by reducing radium tubes and dials etc reasonably easily

I have some a posit that these chemicals were not recognised as a chemical weapon because of the need to protect Big Agri profits and their business models (ever wonder why Russia agriculture is mainly organic?)
I decided to see if any country could make this and decided to see if Ukraine (as an example) could have produced this. A 2017 OSCE report cited the need to improve chemical handling, transportation and safety in Ukrainian labs needed to be improved so a 3 year plan was initiated and funded by the EU and USA. Ukraine also sent battalion of chemical trained soldiers to Kuwait before the Iraq invasion. One week after the incident with the Skripals the Ukrainian Gov. sent this message to the UK ;
“…Ukraine is ready to provide Britain with assistance in investigating the case of poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavel Klimkin said….” 
Did the UK and USA also hide this product so they could have used it in Iraq or similar?
Ukraine had the basic Potash needed for manufacture of Novichok;
“…John J. McKetta Jr – 1989 – ‎Science
Of the foreign producers, the largest is the USSR, and its producing centers are the Upper Kama Basin of the western Urals, the Starobinsk Basin in Belorussia, and the Ciscarpathian area in the western Ukraine. USSR production has nearly tripled since 1969. Sulfates of potash are produced in the Ukraine, and Muriate Organphosphate is produced at the Upper Kama and Starobinsk basins …”

Some food for thought. Though Ukraine may not have produced this it could have been a criminal crowd in Russia or any secret services etc etc. I used Ukraine as an example and there is no direct proof that Ukraine was responsible though they were capable, thereby, busting the UK and USA government line that it HAD to be Russia! 

Sources for quotes;

“…We proudly represent products of leading Russian, Belarus, and Ukrainian fertilizer producers. Member of the International Fertilizer Association. products. MOP / KCl – Muriate of Potash Ammonium Sulphate – granular / crystalline. SOP – Potassium Sulfate Calcium Ammonium Nitrate NPK blends – 15-15-15, 16-16-16…..”

From 2017 .. OSCE report with recommendations to have plans in place by 2020 “..2. Objectives

The overall objective of this Decision is to support OSCE projects aiming at strengthening chemical safety and security in Ukraine in line with UNSCR 1540 (2004) and the Association Agreement by providing a significant contribution to the ICSSP in Ukraine. In particular, this Decision aims at reducing the threat posed by the illicit trade of controlled and toxic chemicals in the OSCE region, in particular in Ukraine, thus promoting peace and security in the Union’s neighbourhood…..”

2003 – Kuwait gets a NBC Ukranian battalion trained in NBC protection and cleanup to protect them from Iraq`s “chemical weapons”

13th March 2018 – “…Ukraine is ready to provide Britain with assistance in investigating the case of poisoning of former Russian intelligence agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavel Klimkin said.

“The UK is investigating, of course, it will bring it (until the end – IF.) It is already known that the poisoning was due to chemicals that were developed in Russia … We are in solidarity with Britain if we need our help – expert or other – we will provide it, “the minister said to journalists on Tuesday in Kiev….”

John T McKeta Jnr –

Image source; Crimea: Ukraine notifies NATO of possible chemical weapons supply –

The problem with the BBC and Brexit – Response to Scientists for the EU

Published on 1 Apr 2018

BBC have failed public on quality education over Brexit. As they launch an investigation into themselves – here’s how they could fix the problem with a more evidence-based approach.

Follow “Scientists for EU” on Facebook, G+ and Twitter (@Scientists4EU), subscribe to our YouTube channel – and see our website (

Posted to europeannewsweekly

Posted by Shaun McGee aka arclight2011

2 April 2018

Some food for thought here.. On the 1st January 2019 the EU will enact a new policy concerning tax policy and transparency issues concerning the same. Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive

And the BBC has a pension fund;

“…BBC pension fund

One can also look at the top 20 equity holdings held by the BBC pension fund – of course, the BBC being behind the Panorama programme which aired on Sunday night on the Paradise Papers.The scheme has substantial investments in the following:

Google (Alphabet Inc)


Facebook – like its other online friends, it has, of course, suffered criticism for lack of UK tax payments.

Apple Inc One can also see the funds that the pension scheme invests in by reviewing the annual report for the pension scheme…..”

Of course tax avoidance is endemic in the UK and that was discussed last week during a Parliamentary committee meeting discussing Russian corruption. However, during the meeting the issues of tax avoidance came up as well as the fact that dodgy Russian money is coming into the UK at the rate of about 1 billion Pounds Sterling a week and that Liam Fox and many other politicians were getting some of this money (not well reported on the BBC ). If you want a laugh at the topics discussed and the xenophobic responses, here is the full meeting (worth a view as the BBC made it into a sound-bite of minuscule proportions)

Then read what the BBC “Journalist” reported LOL ..

Lastly, if you watch the Parliamentary committee video, bear in mind that the facts that did come out were quite an eye opener and the corruption is MUCH wider than just Russian issues.. Basically, the anti tax avoidance directive and losing the 1 billion a week (plus other billions a week from various countries) would crash the city, pensions and complicity of politicians, security services etc etc

Keep up the good work but you dont stand a chance. Any right minded people would be calling for a 2nd referendum and thats why the BBC and main stream media prefer the choice of the royal flowers etc .. One last link to rap this up

Be careful though, remember the Fusion Doctrine and RIPA now makes legal what the Home office has been illegally doing to Journalists/researchers who have a moral backbone! (see my channel especially the series in 2013 on the death of the Magna Carta and btw I was supposed to be a part of the #pitchford Inquiry but the terms were narrowed to make the Inquiry worthless)

If I was a betting man I would say that the UK Gov will use Pesco funding and EU citizens rights as a bulwark against the EU Tax avoidance law and concede to a Norway style EEA agreement.. but they surely are not doing that? It is what the Atlantic Alliance would go for (ie NATO) as the UK could then continue as the leading country defending Northern region Fascist Latvia etc as agreed last year giving EU PESCO command of the southern region. So actually all this is a distraction for the plebs and copy for the journalists .. Just saying

UPDATE; Another helpful EU agency is apparently ESMA (security and markets authority) they have currently scared the living daylights out of many companies selling high risk financial ‘trading’ services…

ESMA agrees to prohibit binary options and restrict CFDs to protect retail investors

27 March 2018

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has agreed on measures on the provision of contracts for differences (CFDs) and binary options to retail investors in the European Union (EU)…..

That doesnt work from Ireland so this Cached version does work for me..


Screenshot from 2018-04-02 12:21:19

And when I reported the error;

Screenshot from 2018-04-02 12:23:07

And I tried again and again LOL No progress!

Here is the text;

The agreed measures include:

1.    Binary Options – a prohibition on the marketing, distribution or sale of binary options to retail investors; and

2.    Contracts for Differences – a restriction on the marketing, distribution or sale of CFDs to retail investors. This restriction consists of: leverage limits on opening positions; a margin close out rule on a per account basis; a negative balance protection on a per account basis; preventing the use of incentives by a CFD provider; and a firm specific risk warning delivered in a standardised way.

In accordance with MiFIR, ESMA can only introduce temporary intervention measures on a three monthly basis. Before the end of the three months, ESMA will consider the need to extend the intervention measures for a further three months.

Significant Investor Protection Concern

ESMA, along with National Competent Authorities (NCAs), concluded that there exists a significant investor protection concern in relation to CFDs and binary options offered to retail investors. This is due to their complexity and lack of transparency; the particular features of CFDs – excessive leverage – and binary options – structural expected negative return and embedded conflict of interest between providers and their clients; the disparity between the expected return and the risk of loss; and issues related to their marketing and distribution.

NCAs’ analyses on CFD trading across different EU jurisdictions shows that 74-89% of retail accounts typically lose money on their investments, with average losses per client ranging from €1,600 to €29,000. NCAs’ analyses for binary options also found consistent losses on retail clients’ accounts.

These measures were agreed by ESMA’s Board of Supervisors on 23 March 2018.

Steven Maijoor, Chair, said:

“The agreed measures ESMA is announcing today will guarantee greater investor protection across the EU by ensuring a common minimum level of protection for retail investors. The new measures on CFDs will for the first time ensure that investors cannot lose more money than they put in, restrict the use of leverage and incentives, and provide a risk warning for investors. For binary options, the prohibition we are announcing is needed to protect investors due to the products’ characteristics.

“The combination of the promise of high returns, easy-to-trade digital platforms, in an environment of historical low interest rates has created an offer that appeals to retail investors. However, the inherent complexity of the products and their excessive leverage – in the case of CFDs – has resulted in significant losses for retail investors.

“A pan-EU approach is required given the cross-border nature of these products,  and ESMA’s intervention is the most appropriate and efficient tool to address this major investor protection issue.”

CFDs – agreed measures  

The product intervention measures ESMA has agreed under Article 40 of the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation include:

1.    Leverage limits on the opening of a position by a retail client from 30:1 to 2:1, which vary according to the volatility of the underlying:

·         30:1 for major currency pairs;

·         20:1 for non-major currency pairs, gold and major indices;

·         10:1 for commodities other than gold and non-major equity indices;

·         5:1 for individual equities and other reference values;

·         2:1 for cryptocurrencies;

2.    A margin close out rule on a per account basis. This will standardise the percentage of margin (at 50% of minimum required margin) at which providers are required to close out one or more retail client’s open CFDs;

3.    Negative balance protection on a per account basis. This will provide an overall guaranteed limit on retail client losses;

4.    A restriction on the incentives offered to trade CFDs; and

5.    A standardised risk warning, including the percentage of losses on a CFD provider’s retail investor accounts.

Next steps

ESMA intends to adopt these measures in the official languages of the EU in the coming weeks, following which ESMA will publish an official notice on its website.  The measures will then be published in the Official Journal of the EU (OJ) and will start to apply one month, for binary options, and two months, for CFDs, after their publication in the OJ.


Nuclear Hotseat Shownotes for world segment 2 Jan 2017

GLOBAL Uranium companies to cut production to increase the value of uranium post FUKUSHIMA

Google filters website, so much for net neutrality anyway!

Sellafield Ltd buries the cost of its expensive Evaporator D Nuclear waste processing project

The potential health effects to coastal populations of the dumping of 330,000 tons of radioactively contaminated mud on the coast of Wales, 2.8km from Cardiff.

UK: Renewables a better option than nuclear power: but nuclear is needed for maintaining nuclear weapons

France’s President Emmanuel Macron to save France’s nuclear export industry?

What caused radiation spike in Xian: North Korean blast, European accident, or one closer to home?

Ruthenium 106 investigation update 12 Dec 2017. Who is lying and why?

Russian nuclear plant says it finally emits nuclear isotope #Ruthenium106 (13 Dec 2017)


Tokyo 2020 Olympic fallacies and fallout

To finish this summary of his talk it would seem that the recent drive for tourism in the nuclear damaged Fukushima prefecture would actually be impacted during and after the Olympics. As the deadline for the games approaches clean up from the tsunami and nuclear disaster would be diverted into the Olympic infrastructure program as the tough IOC deadline approaches for July 2020.


Screenshot from 2017-07-26 18:32:43Published 26 July 2017

by Shaun McGee

In this article I wish to report on the issues with the Tokyo 2020 Olympics. This is based on a presentation by Andrew Zimbalist the sports economist at the Foreign Correspondence Club of Japan on the 26th July 2017

As Prof. Zimbalist began his presentation he commented that the promised profits to the country as “Public dialogue is propaganda”.  He added to this by saying that there would be “no positive impulse to the economy”.

He followed up with a breakdown estimate of costs. There are three cost projections. The first being the initial costing to some 5 billion dollars. The second is a more recent report stating 12.5 billion dollars (less the contingency fund that was removed of some 2.5 billion dollars that is supposed to cover the cost over runs). The third was a more recent costing of 27 billion dollars!

He stated that the infrastructure that are being built specifically for the Olympics are likely to be “white elephants” with only a single use. He also said that Tourism will actually suffer during and after the games and that it would be unlikely to benefit the local economy.

Concerning infrastructure, he said that some 8,000 acres of land were used in the Beijing games and that Japan would be sorely stressed to provide all the land the International Olympic Committee (IOC) requires for its planned infrastructure.

The economy would be sorely tested as tax benefits etc for private investment would be at the cost of the tax payer. There would be no Tariffs on building materials imported. Free land would be offered to private investment companies and low indirect loans.

He mentioned the cost of security at being in the region of 2 billion dollars but did not mention that civil society groups would be targeted as they were in London in 2012.

To finish this summary of his talk it would seem that the recent drive for tourism in the nuclear damaged Fukushima prefecture would actually be impacted during and after the Olympics. As the deadline for the games approaches clean up from the tsunami and nuclear disaster would be diverted into the Olympic infrastructure program as the tough IOC deadline approaches for July 2020.

The video from which this article was derived can be found here;

Nuclear Hotseat notes 1 may 2017 Radioactive hidden wildfires

Notes for this weeks Nuclear Hotseat podcast European segment

Siberian wildfires with no mention of issues of the risk of radiation contamination;

No mention of radiation contamination on the wildfires around Namie in the Fukushima prefecture;

Some mention on the issue of re-contamination on this blog;

“Forest fires in Namie, Fukushima within the areas of highest contamination dubbed the “difficult to return zone” have burned since the weekend.”

New science paper highlights the issues with smaller particles causing more harm than originally thought which is relevant to the wildfire pollution issues of small radioactive particles etc being inhaled and getting into the bloodstream;

Staying indoors for a long time can cause lung cancer

Further resources showing the staggering levels of contamination in the wildfire areas;

Radiation reading done by a local activist before the wildfires in an area in the supposedly “safe zone”;

Incredible contamination in Namie, Fukushima where people are being forced to live!

Mirrored, Source for article –

The evacuation orders of the most populated areas of Namie, Fukushima were lifted on March 31st this year.

“Fukuichi area environmental radiation monitoring project” has published airborne radiation measurements map and soil surface density map. The results are simply incredible. This is far much worse than in Radiation Control Zone. Any area becomes designated as such when the total effective dose due to external radiation and that due to radioactive substances in the air is likely to exceed 1.3mSv per quarter – over a period of three months, or when the surface density is over 40,000Bq/m2. In the Radiation Control Zone, it is prohibited to drink, eat or stay overnight. Even adults are not allowed to stay more than 10 hours. To leave the zone, one has to go through a strict screening.

Namie’s radio contamination is far over these figures! And people are told to go back to these areas.



Here is the posting of “Fukuichi area environmental radiation monitoring project” in their FB page on April 20th.




We are uploading the map of airborne radiation rate map measured by GyoroGeiger, the Android supported Geiger counter. Dose rate is measured at 1m from the ground.
At 56 points over 100 measuring points, the dose rate was over 1µSv/h. These points are indicated in red. The highest measure is 3.71µSv/h. Conversion to annual dose gives 32mSv. Is it allowed to make evacuees return to such areas?


Here is the soil contamination map uploaded on April 15th. They even had to introduce 7 scales, for the contamination is so high and they couldn’t deal with the scales they were using before! It is a violation of human rights to let people live in such areas.


The Halden nuclear reactor in Norway, a danger to all of Europe? by Pierre Fetet


“….This “nuclear safety authority” (NRPA) reported only 0.002% of the radioactive release!….”

“….On the French side, I also contacted the IRSN on the same day, but this one has remained silent until now. As for ASN, he referred me to the press releases of NRPA and IFE. We’re going round in circles … No wonder that rumors of meltdown in Halden bloom in several websites! The IFE and the NRPA, while remaining opaque on this “incident”, themselves cause legitimate questions that quickly turn into rumors. At present, these two organizations are obliged to make communiqués to counter the rumors they have helped to form!….”

“….The NRPA told Criirad that it had asked IFE to correct the design defect in the Halden reactor, otherwise the restart permit would not be given…..” Pierre Fetet


This article, like all the other articles I have written in this blog for 6 years, represents the result of my research and the opinion of a simple European citizen who is worried about the air he breathes. It is absolutely not the expression of the CRIIRAD, as a Norwegian site reported yesterday. I made a mistake of appreciation regarding the designation “accident” of the INES scale in the first version of this article. I corrected this error quickly and ask my readers to apologize. However, the event that took place in Halden is, in my opinion, an accident that has had negative effects on the environment, but it should not be called a “nuclear accident” because significant radioactive releases are authorized by Our nuclear societies and low doses are not recognized as hazardous by nuclear safety organizations, although they are proven to be responsible for genetic mutations and diseases. I do not want to panic, it’s not my goal. I simply want to inform and alert on the dangers of nuclear power and the atmospheric pollution that we all undergo without our knowledge. I persist and sign, whatever may be said, the Halden reactor is dangerous, like all other nuclear reactors in the world. This is my opinion, based on sources that everyone can consult. PF (updated 28/03/17)

Radioactive pollution of iodine-131 in Europe at the beginning of 2017 made it possible to highlight the activity of a reactor unknown to the general public, the Halden research reactor in Norway. Although he could not be held responsible for the radioactive cloud that spread from Spain to Norway in January-February, it was learned from the Norwegian NGO Bellona that this reactor had experienced an “incident” in October latest. A Norwegian Nuclear Safety Agency report dated 13 February 2017 reveals the danger to users of this reactor. We move away from Fukushima but not so much because the problem is the same: failure of reactor cooling, risk of explosion of hydrogen, rejection of iodine 131 and other carcinogenic radionuclides, MOX, … do you not recall this?

Author – Pierre Fetet. Original article in French (link takes you to extensive technical picture library of the reactor and site not fully reproduced in this article (images shown here are courtesy of IFE).


1. One of the oldest reactors in the world still in operation

2. Partners of the Halden Reactor Project

3. The “Incident” of 24 October 2016

4. Experimentation of new fuels

5. What was the nature of the radioactive clouds?

6. Halden Reactor Shutdown

7. IFE needs public money to process waste

8. Why do we have nothing more about this event?”

9. Requiring clarification

1. One of the oldest reactors in the world still in operation

The Halden reactor was inaugurated and activated in 1959. Yes, you read: 1959! It is located in Halden, a coastal town in southeastern Norway, near the border with Sweden, 1200 km from France. With a power of 25 MW maximum, this almost 60 years was created for the research.

This boiling water reactor (BWR) is not visible from the outside. It is located 100 meters inside a hill under a rocky cover of 30 to 50 meters. The reactor hall is 10 meters wide, 30 meters long and 26 meters high. The reactor room also contains fuel pits for the temporary storage of the fuel used. The underground complex has a volume of 4500 m3. The cooling circuits are located inside the reactor room and in the reactor inlet tunnel. The control room and service facilities are located outside the excavation. The service buildings contain offices, workshops and laboratories.

The energy produced is delivered in the form of steam through heat exchangers and conduits to Norske Skog Saugbrugsforeningen which uses it for paper production.

The primary function of the Halden reactor is to test fuels and components of nuclear reactors. A fuel charge consists of a combination of test fuels from partner country organizations and fuel assemblies that provide a basis for reactivity for reactor operation. The core consists of about 110 to 120 fuel assemblies, including test fuel, in an open hexagonal network.

In Halden, internationally accepted codes, rules and recommendations are used only in an advisory capacity, meaning that experimenters are aware of international safety standards but may disregard them as they see fit. Yet according to the CEA, the material tests and the analyzes carried out indicate that the reactor can operate safely well beyond the year 2020.

In Halden, internationally accepted codes, rules and recommendations are used only in an advisory capacity, meaning that experimenters are aware of international safety standards but may disregard them as they see fit. Yet according to the CEA, the material tests and the analyzes carried out indicate that the reactor can operate safely well beyond the year 2020.

2. Partners of the Halden Reactor Project

It is managed by the Norwegian Institute of Energy Technology (IFE) and is the most important of the joint projects of the NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency, OECD body): more than 130 scientific, institutional and industrial organizations Of 21 countries are or have been involved in the Halden reactor project.


The partner countries of this atomic project are Germany (Society for the Safety of Power Plants and Reactors – GRS), Belgium (Nuclear Research Center – SCK CEN), Czech Republic (ÚJV Řež), Korea (Korean Institute Atomic Energy Research Center (KAERI), Denmark (Technical University of Denmark – DTU), United Arab Emirates (Nuclear Regulatory Authority – FANR), Spain (Center for Energy Research), United States (US Nuclear Regulatory Commission – USNRC), Russian Federation (ROSATOM Fuel Company – JSC TVEL), Finland (Ministry of Employment and Economics – TVÖ), France France – EDF), Hungary (Center for Energy Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences – MTA), Italy (National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development – ENEA), Japan Japan Regulatory Authority (NRG), Kazakhstan (Ulba Metallurgical Plant – UMP JSC), Norway (Energy Technology Institute – IFE), the Netherlands (NRG Company), the Slovak Republic (VÚJE Trnava) And the CIEMAT technology), the United Kingdom (National Nuclear Laboratory – NNL), Sweden (Swedish Radiation Safety Authority – SSM) and Switzerland (Federal Inspectorate of Nuclear Safety – ENSI). It is therefore a hub of the world nuclear village.

3. The “incident” of 24 October 2016

The terse text of the IFE press release reads as follows: “On Monday, 24 October, at 1.45 pm, an unintentional release of radioactive iodine occurred in connection with the handling of test fuel in the Halden reactor. Rejection poses no threat to IFE employees or the environment. ”

It is so succinct that the NPRA, the Norwegian nuclear safety agency equivalent to the ASN in France, insisted on carrying out an inspection to control the installation and to know the details of this event.

Thanks to the website which has edited the English translation of the Norwegian NPRA report, we know the contents of this document which we have translated into French. You can read the entire report in the appendix at the bottom of this page or by downloading it in pdf format via the links below;


WHOLE REPORT HALDEN in English (with opinon introduction) Courtesy of the NRPA via;

To summarize, while the reactor was stationary – officially for maintenance since October 8, 2016 – a handling error on Monday, October 24, 2016 at 1.45 pm, of a damaged fuel led to the sudden creation of a cloud Which has invaded the reactor hall and its surroundings. Due to the danger, the site staff were immediately evacuated.

The Norwegian Nuclear Safety Authority (NRPA) was notified by the IFE (Energy Technology Institute, responsible for the operation of the reactor) only the following morning; Then, after shutting down the reactor room ventilation system (which stopped the release to the environment), IFE informed the NRPA on Tuesday night (25 October) that the situation was under control. Given the strange management of the incident by the operator, NRPA conducted a surprise inspection at the IFE headquarters in Kjeller. And there, big surprise: the event was still in progress! As a result, the NRPA immediately initiated a strengthened IFE inspection which enabled it to oversee, partly on site, the management of the “incident” until 2 December.

On November 1, after the NRPA called for greater transparency, the IFE reported that the reactor was “in a very special state”. What is a reactor “in a very special state” when it was stationary for more than three weeks? Well, this translates into “temperature fluctuations in the reactor vessel, an indication of increased neutron flux in the core of the reactor and the danger of hydrogen formation”. Nothing less than that. Normally, when a reactor is stopped, the chain reaction is stopped in its entirety. In this particular case, it did not seem to be the case because an increase in the neutron flux indicates a resumption of activity, signed moreover by a production of iodine which is a product of fission. Moreover, the increase of the heat in the core of the reactor, without a cooling circuit, can lead to the degradation of the zirconium sheaths surrounding the fuel. Now, from a certain temperature, the zirconium oxidizes on contact with water and produces hydrogen, highly explosive gas. This phenomenon produced at least three violent explosions in Fukushima in 2011.

To overcome this crisis, the NRPA authorized the reopening of the reactor hall ventilation on 1 November. There were therefore two air releases: the first on 24-25 October 2016 when the event occurred until the ventilation was closed and the second on 1 November.

Following this event, NRPA revoked the license to operate the reactor. However, the IFE is counting on the NRPA to obtain the necessary authorizations in order to continue the experiments. Halden Research Director Atle Valseth says the reactor will be restarted by June 2017.

4. Experimentation of new fuels

Since 2013, the Halden reactor has been used to test a new thorium fuel. It is a small Norwegian-based nuclear energy company, Thor Energy, that has begun testing the potential of thorium to replace uranium in nuclear reactors. At the time of the “incident”, IFE completed a three-year research program that began in January 2015. What was the nature of the research? According to the World Nuclear Association, the current experiment consisted of irradiation of a thorium-MOX fuel. The test fuel is in the form of pellets composed of a dense thorium oxide ceramic matrix containing about 10% plutonium oxide as a fissile conductor. The instability of the reactor at the time of the “incident” may come from this new fuel. The sorcerer’s apprentices of the atom have no limit! It was also during an “experiment” that the Chernobyl disaster, still under way 31 years later, began.

Norway is tempted by thorium because it has large reserves of this material on its territory. Thorium production would have only an economic objective because it does not need nuclear power: Norway produces the bulk of its electricity through renewable energy.

The US company Lightbridge and the IFE have formalized a collaboration in 2015 on the study of a new metallic nuclear fuel developed by Lightbridge. The Halden reactor was designed to allow testing of samples under actual conditions, that is, under the operating conditions of a commercial reactor. Were these trials, which were scheduled for 2017, started earlier than planned? According to Lightbridge CEO Seth Grae, they had to generate data needed for the accreditation of the new fuel by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and its deployment by the nuclear utilities in the reactors Around the world. “We have absolute confidence in IFE’s expertise and the Halden facilities, which are recognized in the nuclear energy industry for their excellence. Said this very enlightened man.


Halden thorium-plutonium fuel assembly (Zdnet source)

5. What was the nature of the radioactive clouds?

According to the NPRA, the discharge was 150 million becquerels for iodine 131 and 24 million becquerels for iodine 132, without mentioning any other radioactive substances that may have been released. The IFE, contacted on March 19 by me, did not wish to communicate the integral nature of the radioactive clouds of October-November 2016 nor the proportions of the different radionuclides composing them. It would do so at the request of the NRPA, if the nuclear authority asked for it. The IFE says it will have to submit a detailed report to the NRPA on the 2016 releases before May 1, 2017. But it does not say whether this report will be public. Moreover, the NRPA, also contacted on 19 March, did not provide any answer to the same question.

On the French side, I also contacted the IRSN on the same day, but this one has remained silent until now. As for ASN, he referred me to the press releases of NRPA and IFE. We’re going round in circles … No wonder that rumors of meltdown in Halden bloom in several websites! The IFE and the NRPA, while remaining opaque on this “incident”, themselves cause legitimate questions that quickly turn into rumors. At present, these two organizations are obliged to make communiqués to counter the rumors they have helped to form!

It is an association that finally got the missing information. The also contacted the NRPA on 16 March. Thanks to it, we have a little more information, and not the least!

The releases of October 2016 did not include only becquerels of iodine131 and 132. They also contained 8 178 billion becquerels of radioactive rare gas and 550 billion becquerels of tritium! We are very far from the 184 million becquerels of radioactive iodine of the reassuring release of the NRPA! This “nuclear safety authority” reported only 0.002% of the radioactive release! How to trust the NRPA after such a lie?

According to the Criirad, in view of the absence of measuring stations close enough to the Halden reactor and devices to preserve the memory of the contamination, “a fine characterization of the impact of the releases on October 24 2016 and the following days “.

6. Halden Reactor Shutdown

It is highly desirable that all European countries should demand that this reactor be stopped permanently because of its great age, especially since the NRPA does not subject it to international nuclear safety standards.

This “incident” showed the great functional inconsistency regarding the containment of the site: the reactor cooling system is linked to the ventilation system of the reactor hall! This means that in the event of a serious accident, there is no alternative but to release into the atmosphere any gaseous or aerosolized radioactive pollution. It is a reactor with a false confinement. Until then, Halden residents were reassured that the facility is under 40 meters of rock and that they therefore risk absolutely nothing. This is totally false. For the underground burial of radioactive waste in the Meuse, the same lie is used: if there is a fire, even 500 meters below ground, the pollution will come out through the aeration chimneys. The confinement is absolutely not assured.

The fact that the Halden reactor is under 40 meters of rock is no guarantee. On the contrary, in the event of a hydrogen explosion, the site can quickly become inaccessible due to landslides and produce atmospheric radioactive pollution through the vent chimneys or any other orifice created by the explosion. Underground accidents are always possible and, once produced, are extremely costly and difficult to manage, especially in the presence of plutonium. See the recent example of WIPP in New Mexico!

The NRPA told Criirad that it had asked IFE to correct the design defect in the Halden reactor, otherwise the restart permit would not be given. This must be followed closely. Indeed, the IFE intends to restart before June the reactor to satisfy its international customers. Doing work would make it run in deficit for the year 2017. Does the NRPA have enough authority to require this important safety work?

7. IFE needs public money to process waste

The Halden reactor was shut down on 8 October 2016, officially due to maintenance, but above all to save money. Indeed, the IFE is affected by the economic slowdown, with a loss of turnover of approximately 5 million euros. To reduce the costs of 2016, this institute has put a portion of its employees in technical unemployment (98 employees set at 50% and 27 redundancies pure). In fact, the research reactor is very expensive when it is stopped and the management of its waste is also a major problem. Amounting 17 tons of various spent fuel from its own tests since the 1960s in the Halden and Kjeller reactors, Norway no longer knows what to do with its waste. According to the Norwegian site TU, “fuel is unstable and potentially self-igniting in contact with air. It is therefore not suitable for long-term storage “.

In 2016, the IFE had asked the Norwegian government for 8 million euros to start repackaging its long-lived waste, but got only three. The Institute relies on AREVA and the Hague to reprocess this hazardous waste. He hopes to convince the Norwegian parliament of the need to deal with this cumbersome and dangerous waste, in particular by focusing on the 18 containers of spent fuel that are currently stuck in a storage well of the former Jeep 1 reactor at Kjeller, Abandoned since the shutdown of the reactor 50 years ago …

8.Why do we have nothing more about this event?”

Because 130 scientific, institutional and industrial organizations from 20 countries are involved in the OECD’s Halden reactor project. They want to be able to experiment quietly, protected from overly restrictive international nuclear safety regulations. The atmospheric tests are done as in the old days. We pollute without counting, and especially without saying anything, “so as not to complicate communication with the general public by too much data” (NRPA).

The world nuclear village being wetted up to the neck by the polluting activities of this outdated reactor, it is understandable that no official body would want to disclose a case of this kind. In the nuclear industry, when you lift the carpet, you discover horrors … Oddly, there is a lack of public data on the days when there was the strongest rejection.

The fact that radiological barriers have been damaged and that the public has been exposed to significant doses is a cause for concern: 35% of the annual discharge limit of Krypton 85 (10.7 years) and 44% Of the annual discharge limit of Xenon 131m (period of 12 days) in ten days, it’s a lot of a sudden. Of course, all official agencies, accustomed to lying to the population, will continue to talk only of iodine-131, although the NRPA was caught in the act of lying.

9. Requiring clarification

All of these falsely transparent bodies, IFE, NRPA, must clearly explain what happened in October-November 2016 in Halden. They must answer these questions:

– What event damaged the fuel tested?

– Why did IFE not alert NRPA immediately?

– What event produced an increase in neutron flux?

– Was the fuel tested thorium-plutonium?

– Was it an experiment of MOX thorium in real conditions?

– What was the exact nature of the radioactive releases from 24-25 November and 1 November 2016? The NRPA information provided to the Criirad is insufficient, as there is no mention of measures on possible releases of carbon 14, cesium 137, cobalt 60, plutonium, etc.

– What was the proportion of radionuclides for each of these clouds?

– Why the Halden reactor does not obey the international safety rules of post-Fukushima nuclear installations?

It is rather unbearable to learn by chance that the European atmosphere is polluted by radioactive gases or aerosols from an outdated reactor and all this with the blessing of the security agencies that are supposed to protect us. A parliamentary inquiry should be required from MEPs to shed light on this case and on all installations likely to release dangerous products into the atmosphere, especially since iodine 131 has still been detected In March in Svanhovd, northern Norway.

10. Annexes

– Communiqué of the Criirad of 24/03/17 (1st update) –

– Bellona article of March 3, 2017 –

– Rreport of NRPA of 13/02/17:

French translation from the English version by Pierre Fetet and Odile GirardSource ;

English version: At-ife-halden-the-handling-of-the-incident-nrpa-report-in-english /

Report in French with added technical  images ( NRPA report in French on the bottom of the page)