六四維園模擬天安門 學生22小時體驗營
(明報)2011年3月23日 星期三
【明報專訊】支聯會 每年到維園 舉行平反六四 集會，但80後「民運新秀」對1989年六四當晚的記憶十分模糊。教協和支聯會在今年六四紀念日，將破天荒由6月3日晚至6月4日下午舉行連續22小時體驗營，在維園足球場搭起帳篷化身天安門 廣場，由支聯會、學聯及記協代表等與學生一起「親歷」六四絕食和清場。
教協及支聯會日前在網站宣傳「廣場的日與夜」學生營，大會預計在6月3日傍晚6時至6月4日下午4時舉行，招募64名中三至中七學生，營費89元，象徵「8964」。
YesStyle
負責活動的80後李耀基表示，大會把維園5號足球場改建成「天安門廣場 」，同場開辦「民主大學」，由「我要回家運動」主席朱耀明牧師、學聯代表會前代表李蘭菊，及記協主席麥燕庭主持。
設女神像旗海 扮演學生工人
李耀基說：「六四事件距今已22年，想讓90後從未經歷過這件事的年輕人，用輕鬆及互動的方式接觸六四。民運對中國改革開放進程有重要角色，但教科書較少提及，希望透過民間活動了解。」
活動由「六四舞台」劇團協助佈置，模擬天安門廣場六四現場，預計設有標語、旗海、民主女神像、人民英雄紀念碑等。學生分8組，擔當不同角色，有大學生、家長、工人、一般市民等，但不設公安、中共領導人。學生在下午6時入營，約7時正式進入廣場「民主大學」，例如用視像對話與王丹 等前學運領袖面談，模擬跪諫、絕食、鎮壓情境。
6月4日學生蒙眼歷清場
學生約在6月4日凌晨2時至5時休息，清晨經歷清場一幕，李耀基指出，屆時學生會以黑布蒙眼，體驗黑暗中被士兵追趕。當日亦成立藝術紀念館，為「六四」薪火相傳。
接替司徒華 成為支聯會主席的李卓人 表示，暫時仍在聯絡海外民運人士如前學運領袖吾爾開希、柴玲等來港，若未能現身就以視像會議進行。
中學生聯盟公共關係副主席李芷馨說：「活動目的和形式能接觸不同意見人士，不是激進的行為，可以學習到中史科以外的知識。」現時為中三學生的李芷馨，指現時中史科只是教至五四運動，未知會否接觸六四事件。
資深通識科教師張銳輝指出，在通識科的「現代中國」，六四事件對改革開放有重要影響。他建議，學生在參加活動前可先了解六四事件的事實，再分析與會者的意見。
明報記者 彭美芳
2011-03-28
北極疑首現臭氧洞 恐南擴至紐約一帶 增患皮膚癌風險
北極疑首現臭氧洞 恐南擴至紐約一帶 增患皮膚癌風險
(明報)2011年3月26日 星期六
【明報專訊】美國 國家地理網站報道，最新研究顯示今冬罕見的低溫天氣，破壞了北極 大氣中的臭氧層，料已造成了臭氧洞，該洞還可能擴大南移遠至紐約 一帶，恐使歐美俄羅斯 偏北地區民眾曬傷、患皮膚癌 比率增加。
德國 物理學家雷克斯（Markus Rex）表示，北極30個臭氧監測站獲得的初步數據顯示，北極區今冬損失的臭氧濃度較以往嚴重。儘管研究尚須進行電腦模擬和衛星測量等確定，但他推測，第一個北極臭氧洞也許已經形成。他說﹕「這種發展速度非常驚人，可載入史冊。」科學家過去發現的臭氧洞，只在南極出現。
北極冷氣團加劇 臭氧濃度降
專家表示，北極高空持續嚴寒結霜的情况，可能已使高空臭氧濃度，比標準濃度降低近一半，而且趨勢持續。今冬北極上空盤旋的冷氣團，面積約達1500萬平方公里，相當於40個德國。這股迅速移動的「北極漩渦」冷氣團可能持續到4月，有專家呼籲天氣回暖前，北半球偏北居民最好逗留室內。
雷克斯指出，距地球表面約20公里同溫層裏的臭氧層，可抵擋大部分太陽紫外線 射至地面。臭氧洞出現會令紫外線輻射 增加，將影響北極生態系統和人類健康。例如，更多陽光照射會導致特定海洋藻類的生長速度變慢，從而影響整個食物鏈。
專家指出，臭氧濃度低的北極漩渦冷氣團可南移到北緯40°到45°的地方，飄至歐洲城市意大利 北部地區，或者美國紐約和三藩市 。
臭氧層變薄 抵不住紫外線
美國國家大氣研究中心（NCAR）的大氣化學家迪爾梅斯（Simone Tilmes）說：「目前我們還不清楚北極的臭氧洞會擴至多大，因為現在臭氧層變得愈來愈薄。」
1980年代，科學家意識到廣泛用於噴髮膠和製冷劑等的「氯氟烴」（CFCs）等化學物質，對南極臭氧層構成極大破壞，遂簽訂《蒙特利爾議定書》，要求全球逐步淘汰氯氟烴。惟氯氟烴一旦進入大氣便逗留幾十年，故南極臭氧洞縱可望縮細，惟迄仍存在。氯氟烴進入上層大氣後，會分解成氯原子，在陽光激活後破壞臭氧分子。這過程又會在極地同溫層降至-78℃低溫，出現所謂「彩雲」後加速。
一注獨中6523萬六合彩
一注獨中6523萬六合彩
(明報)2011年3月27日 星期日
【明報專訊】昨晚攪珠的六合彩頭獎一注獨中派彩6523萬元，是六合彩推出35年來第二高派彩，攪珠結果為2、12、20、25、31、47，特別號碼29。
上周連續兩期六合彩頭獎無人中，逾5200萬元多寶獎金撥入昨晚攪珠，10元一注中頭獎的幸運兒，捧走高達65,235,750元彩金。六合彩最高頭獎彩金，是2003年9月12日的7096萬元，其次便是昨晚派彩。昨攪珠二獎同樣有一注中，派430萬元。三獎則有143.5注中，每注派近8萬元。總投注額高逾9000萬元。
Win Prizes UK
六合彩自去年11月加價1倍，每注金額由5元加至10元，市民購買注數減少，本季中頭獎的人數亦減少近一成半，獎金因而累積如「滾雪球」，不時出現高達數千萬元的巨額獎。下期六合彩將於周二（3月29日）晚開彩，倘一注獨中頭獎，彩金約800萬元。
（劉焌陶攝）
(明報)2011年3月27日 星期日
【明報專訊】昨晚攪珠的六合彩頭獎一注獨中派彩6523萬元，是六合彩推出35年來第二高派彩，攪珠結果為2、12、20、25、31、47，特別號碼29。
上周連續兩期六合彩頭獎無人中，逾5200萬元多寶獎金撥入昨晚攪珠，10元一注中頭獎的幸運兒，捧走高達65,235,750元彩金。六合彩最高頭獎彩金，是2003年9月12日的7096萬元，其次便是昨晚派彩。昨攪珠二獎同樣有一注中，派430萬元。三獎則有143.5注中，每注派近8萬元。總投注額高逾9000萬元。
Win Prizes UK
六合彩自去年11月加價1倍，每注金額由5元加至10元，市民購買注數減少，本季中頭獎的人數亦減少近一成半，獎金因而累積如「滾雪球」，不時出現高達數千萬元的巨額獎。下期六合彩將於周二（3月29日）晚開彩，倘一注獨中頭獎，彩金約800萬元。
（劉焌陶攝）
2011-03-27
日13座火山活動加劇
日13座火山活動加劇
(星島)2011年3月27日 星期日
(綜合報道)
(星島日報 報道)日本 氣象廳昨天透露，在「三•一一」九級大地震後，富士山等十三座活火山活動加劇。未來一至兩個月，專家將密切監測這些火山活動。觀測資料顯示，大地震後，臨近災區的富士山和日光白根山，甚至中部地區的阿蘇山及伊豆半島等十三處活火山出現了劇烈的火山運動。沉寂一陣後，最近幾天又開始運動，到二十五日為止的觀察顯示，富士山周邊的地震活動依然持續。中央社/中通社
Long Distance Phone
(星島)2011年3月27日 星期日
(綜合報道)
(星島日報 報道)日本 氣象廳昨天透露，在「三•一一」九級大地震後，富士山等十三座活火山活動加劇。未來一至兩個月，專家將密切監測這些火山活動。觀測資料顯示，大地震後，臨近災區的富士山和日光白根山，甚至中部地區的阿蘇山及伊豆半島等十三處活火山出現了劇烈的火山運動。沉寂一陣後，最近幾天又開始運動，到二十五日為止的觀察顯示，富士山周邊的地震活動依然持續。中央社/中通社
Long Distance Phone
日本福島第一核電廠泄漏輻射 核泄巨災12萬人恐患癌
核泄巨災12萬人恐患癌
(星島)2011年3月27日 星期日
(綜合報道)
(星島日報 報道)日本 福島第一核電廠泄漏輻射 水的危機擴大，繼三號反應堆機組出現含輻射超標一萬倍的積水，另三個反應堆也泄出高水平輻射水，意味三個堆芯都已受損。核災失控，歐洲輻射風險委員推斷，福島核廠事故，將導致世界上十二萬人患癌。
綜合報道
東京 電力公司承認，一號機組與三號機組一樣，積水所含的碘、銫和鋯均比正常超出達一萬倍，而第二及第四號機組的滑輪機廠房地庫同樣發現深達一米的積水，相信都含有放射物。專家們擔心，三號機組內用來保護堆芯的不鏽鋼外殼已經穿洞或出現裂痕，而一號機組的反應堆容器、閥門和管道已出現滲漏。
這意味著，核輻射泄漏的程度可能比原先想像中更加嚴重。發展下去，可能連地下水也會受到污染。
「一號」積水輻射超萬倍
Real Estate
這些情況對搶救福島核電廠的工作造成重大挫折。周四，有三名在三號機組渦輪廠房內工作的死士暴露在大量輻射之下，其中兩人的足部接觸過輻射水，送院急救。事態發展下去，是三號機組的堆芯在壓力缸的底部自我焚燒，或會泄漏更多輻射。
內閣官房長官枝野幸男昨日說，他無法預測核電廠危機何時才能控制，「現在還不是時候（預測）。」原子能保安院不排除把核事故級別，由國際機制（共七級）中的第五級調升至第六級，即重大事故級別。現在工作人員開始把淡水注入一號、二號及三號機內。美軍也協助這項作業，自橫須賀海軍基地運送五十萬加侖的淡水前來。
「三號」壓力缸隨時自焚
歐洲輻射風險委員會（ECRR）用自行設計的輻射風險研究模型推斷，福島第一核電廠輻射泄漏事故，將導致世界上十二萬人在未來五十年來患癌症。委員會同時指出，輻射泄漏也會對生育、心臟病 等多種疾病造成影響。
馬來西亞 環境工程局顧問陳嘉慶指出，即使低水平輻射也可導致癌症。小孩和胎兒的細胞和器官還在成長階段，對輻射尤其敏感，故長期在輻射範圍內的人，或會有生育問題，例如有機會誕下智障嬰兒。
專家：或誕智障嬰兒
美國 柏克萊大學葛福曼醫學教授估計，一九八六年烏克蘭 發生的切爾諾貝爾核電廠爆炸事故，已令歐洲四十七萬五千人死於癌症，和四十七萬五千人患上癌症。
俄羅斯 科學院核能安全發展問題研究所第一副所長阿魯秋尼揚，上周五在莫斯科 記者會上稱，福島核電廠有必要仿效切爾諾貝爾的做法，加蓋混凝土「石棺」，以防止輻射泄漏。不過，他說，在核燃料發熱時澆灌混凝土會產生裂縫，目前無法立即施工。
(星島)2011年3月27日 星期日
(綜合報道)
(星島日報 報道)日本 福島第一核電廠泄漏輻射 水的危機擴大，繼三號反應堆機組出現含輻射超標一萬倍的積水，另三個反應堆也泄出高水平輻射水，意味三個堆芯都已受損。核災失控，歐洲輻射風險委員推斷，福島核廠事故，將導致世界上十二萬人患癌。
綜合報道
東京 電力公司承認，一號機組與三號機組一樣，積水所含的碘、銫和鋯均比正常超出達一萬倍，而第二及第四號機組的滑輪機廠房地庫同樣發現深達一米的積水，相信都含有放射物。專家們擔心，三號機組內用來保護堆芯的不鏽鋼外殼已經穿洞或出現裂痕，而一號機組的反應堆容器、閥門和管道已出現滲漏。
這意味著，核輻射泄漏的程度可能比原先想像中更加嚴重。發展下去，可能連地下水也會受到污染。
「一號」積水輻射超萬倍
Real Estate
這些情況對搶救福島核電廠的工作造成重大挫折。周四，有三名在三號機組渦輪廠房內工作的死士暴露在大量輻射之下，其中兩人的足部接觸過輻射水，送院急救。事態發展下去，是三號機組的堆芯在壓力缸的底部自我焚燒，或會泄漏更多輻射。
內閣官房長官枝野幸男昨日說，他無法預測核電廠危機何時才能控制，「現在還不是時候（預測）。」原子能保安院不排除把核事故級別，由國際機制（共七級）中的第五級調升至第六級，即重大事故級別。現在工作人員開始把淡水注入一號、二號及三號機內。美軍也協助這項作業，自橫須賀海軍基地運送五十萬加侖的淡水前來。
「三號」壓力缸隨時自焚
歐洲輻射風險委員會（ECRR）用自行設計的輻射風險研究模型推斷，福島第一核電廠輻射泄漏事故，將導致世界上十二萬人在未來五十年來患癌症。委員會同時指出，輻射泄漏也會對生育、心臟病 等多種疾病造成影響。
馬來西亞 環境工程局顧問陳嘉慶指出，即使低水平輻射也可導致癌症。小孩和胎兒的細胞和器官還在成長階段，對輻射尤其敏感，故長期在輻射範圍內的人，或會有生育問題，例如有機會誕下智障嬰兒。
專家：或誕智障嬰兒
美國 柏克萊大學葛福曼醫學教授估計，一九八六年烏克蘭 發生的切爾諾貝爾核電廠爆炸事故，已令歐洲四十七萬五千人死於癌症，和四十七萬五千人患上癌症。
俄羅斯 科學院核能安全發展問題研究所第一副所長阿魯秋尼揚，上周五在莫斯科 記者會上稱，福島核電廠有必要仿效切爾諾貝爾的做法，加蓋混凝土「石棺」，以防止輻射泄漏。不過，他說，在核燃料發熱時澆灌混凝土會產生裂縫，目前無法立即施工。
500「真正死士」 前線搏命人工偏低
500「真正死士」 前線搏命人工偏低
(明報)2011年3月25日 星期五
【明報專訊】在搶修福島第一核電站的過程中，除了「50勇士」外，其實還有逾500人承擔著許多最繁重和危險的工作——在輻射 威脅下抬水管、清理碎石和做其他體力勞動，他們是數百名核能行業的普通勞工，教育水平並不高。
「我很怕。但總得有人去。」29歲的多田賢智，任職於專門生產防護塗層的東海塗裝株式會社（Tokai Toso Co.），他說正常情况下的工作，包括給反應堆設備腐蝕處添上防護塗料。周一他被安排與另外數百工作人員在核電站待命。
Pets Stores
東電無向搶修工人發加班費
這些人中有工程師和操作專員，其他人則主要負責拖電纜、鋪水管或在現場幹體力勞動。多田月薪約20萬日圓 （約1.9萬港元），遠低於日本 人月薪中位數的29.1萬日圓（約2.8萬港元）。雖然母親不讓他來，但他表示沒辦法，「總要有人做」。
東電及相關公司都承認，沒有額外付給這些工人加班費，或提供既有意外和疾病保險外的其他福利。他們辯稱忙於處理事故，無暇考慮這些事，工人亦未有提及，而且在危難關頭伸手要錢是失禮行為。東海塗裝株式會社資深常務董事池田義說，沒有一個人是為了錢而在這裏賣命。很多工作人員都是福島本地人，由於輻射關係被迫離開家園，他們非常願意盡力讓這裏恢復正常。與多田一樣，這批工人中許多教育程度不高。他們所具備的關鍵技能，就是對核電站環境很熟悉。
「福島50死士」鮮離保護屋
目前約有60名重要管理人員，由核電站負責人率領，住在核電站一個多重保護建築裏，外界稱呼他們為「福島50死士」，其實有點誤導，因為真正要冒死的，其實是更多像多田一類的最前線員工，所謂的「福島50死士」，主要是在幕後指揮修復工作，操作控制室並密切關注機組的各項指標。他們很少離開這座保護建築；相比下，其他普通工作人員每次完成工作後就撤出，留在輻射水平較低的地方。
周三，東電派出330名員工前往核電站，東海塗裝等東電稱之為合作企業的公司則派224人。工作人員穿戴防護裝備和面罩，每人身上有兩枚徽章，負責追蹤每次行程的輻射暴露量。
在核電站以西約32公里的田村市一避難所，一名核電設備工人說，本周初接到來電，奉命運送和鋪設為3號機組供水的管道。只有高中程度的他，薪酬與多田賢智相若，他說自己可拒絕任務，但他認為自己義不容辭，並說這樣他就會像在二戰期間執行自殺式任務的「神風敢死隊」一樣。但一名50多歲的工程師則坦言，害怕得不敢再進去受損的核電站，是在妻子的敦促下才再次回去工作。
華爾街日報 /朝日新聞
(明報)2011年3月25日 星期五
【明報專訊】在搶修福島第一核電站的過程中，除了「50勇士」外，其實還有逾500人承擔著許多最繁重和危險的工作——在輻射 威脅下抬水管、清理碎石和做其他體力勞動，他們是數百名核能行業的普通勞工，教育水平並不高。
「我很怕。但總得有人去。」29歲的多田賢智，任職於專門生產防護塗層的東海塗裝株式會社（Tokai Toso Co.），他說正常情况下的工作，包括給反應堆設備腐蝕處添上防護塗料。周一他被安排與另外數百工作人員在核電站待命。
Pets Stores
東電無向搶修工人發加班費
這些人中有工程師和操作專員，其他人則主要負責拖電纜、鋪水管或在現場幹體力勞動。多田月薪約20萬日圓 （約1.9萬港元），遠低於日本 人月薪中位數的29.1萬日圓（約2.8萬港元）。雖然母親不讓他來，但他表示沒辦法，「總要有人做」。
東電及相關公司都承認，沒有額外付給這些工人加班費，或提供既有意外和疾病保險外的其他福利。他們辯稱忙於處理事故，無暇考慮這些事，工人亦未有提及，而且在危難關頭伸手要錢是失禮行為。東海塗裝株式會社資深常務董事池田義說，沒有一個人是為了錢而在這裏賣命。很多工作人員都是福島本地人，由於輻射關係被迫離開家園，他們非常願意盡力讓這裏恢復正常。與多田一樣，這批工人中許多教育程度不高。他們所具備的關鍵技能，就是對核電站環境很熟悉。
「福島50死士」鮮離保護屋
目前約有60名重要管理人員，由核電站負責人率領，住在核電站一個多重保護建築裏，外界稱呼他們為「福島50死士」，其實有點誤導，因為真正要冒死的，其實是更多像多田一類的最前線員工，所謂的「福島50死士」，主要是在幕後指揮修復工作，操作控制室並密切關注機組的各項指標。他們很少離開這座保護建築；相比下，其他普通工作人員每次完成工作後就撤出，留在輻射水平較低的地方。
周三，東電派出330名員工前往核電站，東海塗裝等東電稱之為合作企業的公司則派224人。工作人員穿戴防護裝備和面罩，每人身上有兩枚徽章，負責追蹤每次行程的輻射暴露量。
在核電站以西約32公里的田村市一避難所，一名核電設備工人說，本周初接到來電，奉命運送和鋪設為3號機組供水的管道。只有高中程度的他，薪酬與多田賢智相若，他說自己可拒絕任務，但他認為自己義不容辭，並說這樣他就會像在二戰期間執行自殺式任務的「神風敢死隊」一樣。但一名50多歲的工程師則坦言，害怕得不敢再進去受損的核電站，是在妻子的敦促下才再次回去工作。
華爾街日報 /朝日新聞
日首富孫正義願照料逾千災民
日首富願照料逾千災民
2011-3-24
大公報
圖：日本首富孫正義表示將承擔部分災民一年的吃居飲食費用
新華社
【大公報訊】日本產經新聞、日本新聞網、中央社東京23日報道：日本首富、「軟體銀行」（Softbank）的華裔創辦人兼總裁孫正義22日親自到受災最嚴重的福島縣訪問，看望了遭受地震和核輻射雙重打擊的災民，並向田村市市民做出避難1年期間提供就業與糧食供應的保證。
孫正義和佐賀縣武雄市市長通渡啟佑一同前往災區，與田村市市長富塚宥進行會談。由於田村市位於福島第一核電站20到30公里的範圍內，全市4.1萬多人中，有3.7萬人依然在市內生活，並沒有疏散到其他城市。孫正義提議，讓災民以團體為單位進行避難。
Jobs Search
通渡啟佑說：「武雄市可以收容1200人，有空下來的廳舍」。孫正義也表示，「避難1年當中的交通、就業和飲食，都由我方（即軟體銀行集團）保證」。
地震期間電話任打
孫正義同時表示，願意在地震孤兒成長到18歲之前，提供他們手機和通話免費的支援。此前，有網友在Twitter上向孫正義提議，希望可以讓日本地震中成為孤兒、無支付能力的孩子免費通話，孫正義回覆：「就這麼辦。」其實，自日本11日發生大地震後，孫正義便立即宣布從3月11日起的一周內，凡日本國內通話，無論時間長短，一律免費。
孫正義領導的軟體集團旗下的「軟體通訊」目前是日本第二大的移動通訊公司，也是美國蘋果手機在日本的總代理。根據美國《福布斯》雜誌所公布的最新全球富豪榜，有華人血統的孫正義，是2011年的日本首富，個人資產為81億美元，排名世界第113位。過去兩年，日本首富一直是日本「優衣庫」（Uniqlo）的老闆「柳井正」。
個人資產81億美元
孫正義自稱出自春秋時代的著名兵法家孫武的一族，是從中國遷到朝鮮，到孫正義的祖父輩，又從韓國大邱遷到日本九州去。後代搬遷到朝鮮，再在日本定居。孫正義在日本定居已有三代。他的家族說：「孫氏和韓國固有的孫氏不一樣。我祖籍和漢民族的孫氏屬於同一根源。」1980年代末期，孫氏仍不是日本公民。他的日本妻子隨他姓孫。結婚後，法律承認了她的新姓氏，孫正義隨之而成為日本公民而不用改姓傳統的日本姓氏，直至1991年，孫正義才正式「歸化」為日本人，並擁有日本姓氏「安本」。
2011-3-24
大公報
圖：日本首富孫正義表示將承擔部分災民一年的吃居飲食費用
新華社
【大公報訊】日本產經新聞、日本新聞網、中央社東京23日報道：日本首富、「軟體銀行」（Softbank）的華裔創辦人兼總裁孫正義22日親自到受災最嚴重的福島縣訪問，看望了遭受地震和核輻射雙重打擊的災民，並向田村市市民做出避難1年期間提供就業與糧食供應的保證。
孫正義和佐賀縣武雄市市長通渡啟佑一同前往災區，與田村市市長富塚宥進行會談。由於田村市位於福島第一核電站20到30公里的範圍內，全市4.1萬多人中，有3.7萬人依然在市內生活，並沒有疏散到其他城市。孫正義提議，讓災民以團體為單位進行避難。
Jobs Search
通渡啟佑說：「武雄市可以收容1200人，有空下來的廳舍」。孫正義也表示，「避難1年當中的交通、就業和飲食，都由我方（即軟體銀行集團）保證」。
地震期間電話任打
孫正義同時表示，願意在地震孤兒成長到18歲之前，提供他們手機和通話免費的支援。此前，有網友在Twitter上向孫正義提議，希望可以讓日本地震中成為孤兒、無支付能力的孩子免費通話，孫正義回覆：「就這麼辦。」其實，自日本11日發生大地震後，孫正義便立即宣布從3月11日起的一周內，凡日本國內通話，無論時間長短，一律免費。
孫正義領導的軟體集團旗下的「軟體通訊」目前是日本第二大的移動通訊公司，也是美國蘋果手機在日本的總代理。根據美國《福布斯》雜誌所公布的最新全球富豪榜，有華人血統的孫正義，是2011年的日本首富，個人資產為81億美元，排名世界第113位。過去兩年，日本首富一直是日本「優衣庫」（Uniqlo）的老闆「柳井正」。
個人資產81億美元
孫正義自稱出自春秋時代的著名兵法家孫武的一族，是從中國遷到朝鮮，到孫正義的祖父輩，又從韓國大邱遷到日本九州去。後代搬遷到朝鮮，再在日本定居。孫正義在日本定居已有三代。他的家族說：「孫氏和韓國固有的孫氏不一樣。我祖籍和漢民族的孫氏屬於同一根源。」1980年代末期，孫氏仍不是日本公民。他的日本妻子隨他姓孫。結婚後，法律承認了她的新姓氏，孫正義隨之而成為日本公民而不用改姓傳統的日本姓氏，直至1991年，孫正義才正式「歸化」為日本人，並擁有日本姓氏「安本」。
2011-03-26
The Genetically Modified Organisms (Control of Release) Ordinance, Cap. 607
The Ordinance
The Genetically Modified Organisms (Control of Release) Ordinance, Cap. 607 (the Ordinance), gives effect to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity to control the release into the environment and the transboundary movement of living genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and provide for related matters.
Living organisms are defined as any biological entity capable of transferring or replicating genetic material, including sterile organisms, viruses and viroids. GMOs are living organisms that possess a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology which include the application of in vitro nucleic acid techniques (such as recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and direct injection of nucleic acid into cells or organelles), or techniques involving the fusion of cells beyond the taxonomic family, that overcome natural physiological reproductive or recombination barriers and are not techniques used in traditional breeding and selection. GMOs cover a variety of food crops (such as BT corn, anti-frost tomatoes and herbicide-tolerance soya beans), GM seeds, GM fish, GM flowers, etc. However, GMOs do not include non-living food products produced from GM crops, such as corn oil, soymilk and polished rice. They also do not include living organisms with genetic material altered through traditional breeding and selection techniques (e.g. hybrid rice and golden sweet maize).
Blue Mountain Greeting Cards
GMOs are regulated according to their intended uses, including:
GMOs intended for direct consumption as food or feed, or for processing (GMOs-FFP), such as virus-resistant papaya fruit, herbicide-resistant soy bean and BT maize;
GMOs intended for contained use, such as GM micro-organisms cultured in laboratories, transgenic plants growing in greenhouses and knock-out transgenic mice kept in cages; and
GMOs intended for release into the environment, such as seeds of GM crops to be sown on farmlands, experimental GM plants to be planted on open fields, and cut flowers of GM variety to be displayed in open area.
The Ordinance does not apply to or in relation to a GMO that is a pharmaceutical product for use by human beings.
The Ordinance ordains the following controls on GMOs in Hong Kong:
Restrictions on Release into Environment and Maintenance of Lives of GMOs
No one is not allowed to release a GMO into the environment, import a GMO intended for release into the environment or maintain the life of a GMO that is in a state of being released into the environment, unless:
the GMO has been approved and any condition for the approval has been complied with; or
the GMO has been exempted by the Secretary for the Environment from the restriction and any condition for the exemption has been complied with.
These restrictions do not apply to or in relation to a GMO that is in transit or transhipment. For detailed approval application process, please refer to the Guidelines for GMO Approval Application.
The approval will apply to all subsequent releases, after the GMO is approved and entered in the GMOs Register (www.afcd.gov.hk/gmo). There may be conditions attached to the approval. You may search the GMOs Register for the list of approved GMOs and the conditions for the approvals, before making an application or releasing a GMO into the environment of Hong Kong.
Contravention to the above restrictions commits an offence and is liable to a fine of HK$100,000 and to imprisonment for one year.
The Genetically Modified Organisms (Control of Release) Ordinance, Cap. 607 (the Ordinance), gives effect to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity to control the release into the environment and the transboundary movement of living genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and provide for related matters.
Living organisms are defined as any biological entity capable of transferring or replicating genetic material, including sterile organisms, viruses and viroids. GMOs are living organisms that possess a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology which include the application of in vitro nucleic acid techniques (such as recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and direct injection of nucleic acid into cells or organelles), or techniques involving the fusion of cells beyond the taxonomic family, that overcome natural physiological reproductive or recombination barriers and are not techniques used in traditional breeding and selection. GMOs cover a variety of food crops (such as BT corn, anti-frost tomatoes and herbicide-tolerance soya beans), GM seeds, GM fish, GM flowers, etc. However, GMOs do not include non-living food products produced from GM crops, such as corn oil, soymilk and polished rice. They also do not include living organisms with genetic material altered through traditional breeding and selection techniques (e.g. hybrid rice and golden sweet maize).
Blue Mountain Greeting Cards
GMOs are regulated according to their intended uses, including:
GMOs intended for direct consumption as food or feed, or for processing (GMOs-FFP), such as virus-resistant papaya fruit, herbicide-resistant soy bean and BT maize;
GMOs intended for contained use, such as GM micro-organisms cultured in laboratories, transgenic plants growing in greenhouses and knock-out transgenic mice kept in cages; and
GMOs intended for release into the environment, such as seeds of GM crops to be sown on farmlands, experimental GM plants to be planted on open fields, and cut flowers of GM variety to be displayed in open area.
The Ordinance does not apply to or in relation to a GMO that is a pharmaceutical product for use by human beings.
The Ordinance ordains the following controls on GMOs in Hong Kong:
Restrictions on Release into Environment and Maintenance of Lives of GMOs
No one is not allowed to release a GMO into the environment, import a GMO intended for release into the environment or maintain the life of a GMO that is in a state of being released into the environment, unless:
the GMO has been approved and any condition for the approval has been complied with; or
the GMO has been exempted by the Secretary for the Environment from the restriction and any condition for the exemption has been complied with.
These restrictions do not apply to or in relation to a GMO that is in transit or transhipment. For detailed approval application process, please refer to the Guidelines for GMO Approval Application.
The approval will apply to all subsequent releases, after the GMO is approved and entered in the GMOs Register (www.afcd.gov.hk/gmo). There may be conditions attached to the approval. You may search the GMOs Register for the list of approved GMOs and the conditions for the approvals, before making an application or releasing a GMO into the environment of Hong Kong.
Contravention to the above restrictions commits an offence and is liable to a fine of HK$100,000 and to imprisonment for one year.
Why the U.S. can't abandon the nuclear renaissance
Why the U.S. can't abandon the nuclear renaissance
By Cyrus Sanati, contributor
March 17, 2011
FORTUNE -- The devastating earthquake and subsequent tsunami last week has claimed an untold number of Japanese victims, but there's one casualty in the U.S. that won't go down without a fight: the nuclear power industry.
The resulting damage to one of Japan's nuclear power plants has resurrected old debates about the safety and soundness of nuclear technology and its ability to be used as a viable power source.
But even if nuclear power plant construction costs rise as a result of this incident, the economics of power generation still favor a mix of energy sources that include nuclear.
Renewable sources of energy, like wind and solar, while recently becoming more cost-competitive to nuclear energy (thanks in part to generous government subsidies), are still unable to efficiently generate enough power to keep the lights on and fully replace nuclear power in the United States just yet.
The possibility of multiple reactor core meltdowns at the Fukushima nuclear power plant has captured the world's attention. We don't yet know if this will become another Chernobyl -- what we do know is that no matter happens, it is a public relations disaster for the nuclear industry.
Electric Car Conversion
In Germany, plans to overturn a directive that would have kept the nation's 17 nuclear plants from being closed in the coming years were placed on hold for three months.
Switzerland said that it was suspending efforts to keep three of its nuclear plants operating, while the European Union announced that it wants stress tests performed on all of its 143 nuclear reactors in response to what the EU's energy chief said was an "apocalypse" in Japan.
In Washington, the Republicans, who have traditionally championed nuclear power, have been pretty much silent on the news. But some liberal Democrats, like Rep. Ed Markey from Massachusetts, have called for a moratorium on nuclear plants in earthquake prone areas of the country, while Senator John Kerry, the Democrat from Massachusetts, went a step further and called for all nuclear power plant construction to be halted immediately.
This has put the White House in an awkward position. The Obama administration has earmarked $36 billion in its 2012 budget to help finance the construction of several new nuclear plants across the country.
That's in addition to the $18.5 billion in funds that were earmarked by Congress back in 2007, of which $10.2 billion remains unspent.
The nuclear commitment
In total, it looks like the US government has placed a $55 billion bet on an industry that could meltdown thanks to the Fukushima incident. President Obama has reiterated his support for nuclear power since the disaster struck, but that could change quickly, putting that $36 billion top-up to the industry in jeopardy. Republicans vow to slash line items in the budget, but the nuclear issue has not been their primary target, yet. As for the general public, it doesn't see the need for government support for the industry. An opinion poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal and NBC News released on March 3, before the incident, found that financial support for the nuclear industry was the single most popular possible budget cut, with 57% agreeing.
It wouldn't take much to let the nuclear industry just die out in the US. Until last year, the government had not approved the construction of a new plant since the partial reactor meltdown at the Three-Mile Island nuclear facility in 1979. The last plant went online in 1996.
There are currently 20 projects being reviewed by the government but only three seem to be going anywhere. Atlanta-based Southern Company (SO, Fortune 500) is the farthest along and has been promised $8 billion by the government for the construction of a $14 billion plant Georgia.
But it is highly unlikely that any of the other projects will ever get built if the government takes away funding. While nuclear plants are cost effective in the long run, they have significant start-up costs. For example, the $14 billion price tag on the Southern Company's plant is around half of its entire market capitalization. Other companies far into the permitting process, like Dynegy (DYN), have market caps that are a fraction of the costs to get a plant constructed.
Those rallying against nuclear energy are pushing for the government to back other energy alternatives like solar and wind. Both have made great strides in becoming more cost competitive over the years, thanks in part to large government subsidies. While they remain highly uncompetitive to fossil fuels, they have overtaken nuclear on a cost per kilowatt basis.
That's because the cost to build a new next generation nuclear facility in the US has jumped 37% in the past year from an average build cost of $3,902 per kilowatt to $5,339/kW, according to a recent government study. New design specifications and a lack of competition in the nuclear construction industry were blamed from the increase in costs.
Solar power now looks on the surface to be potentially competitive. The cost to build a photovoltaic solar plant is down 25% in the past year from an average build cost of $6,303 per kilowatt to $4,755. The build cost for a solar thermal plant dropped 10% to $4,692 per kilowatt. Wind power remains the cheapest and the most expensive alternative to both nuclear and solar. Onshore wind power costs just $2,438 per kilowatt while offshore wind power costs $5,975/kW. For a comparison, natural gas blows all of them out of the water, costing just $978 per kilowatt.
Obstacles to solar and wind
But comparing alternatives on a cost per kilowatt basis is deceptive. Even with the government's careful controls of geography and markets, the cost factor doesn't seem to take into account the resources needed to generate the power on a scale that could serve the population.
For example, it is not possible to install wind or solar plants on a commercial scale everywhere because some areas of the country are just not windy or sunny enough to yield enough power.
That compares to a nuclear plant that could theoretically be built almost anywhere.
More importantly, alternatives don't generate enough power to do the job. Nuclear energy is a dense form of energy that requires very little in the form of land and transmission lines to carry it to a population center.
Alternative energies are not dense at all and require gobs of space to generate a fraction of the energy generated by a small nuclear facility.
For example, the government assumed a certain output would be generated by a plant in their calculations. For a nuclear plant it was 2.2 million kilowatts, while it was just 150,000 kilowatts for a photovoltaic plant and 100,000 kilowatts for an onshore wind plant.
That nuclear power plant is a large jolt of electricity neatly contained to an area of 8 to 10 square miles. Compare that to an onshore wind plant, the cheapest alternative according to the government. Each 2,000 kilowatt wind turbine takes up a quarter of a square mile worth of space, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
So to replace that nuclear power plant with wind would mean dedicating nearly 280 square miles of land to a gigantic wind farm, which would be about the size of New York City.
The energy concentration in nuclear power plants is just one reason why nuclear remains so attractive, despite the high start up costs. The nuclear industry has spent millions of dollars over the years touting its safety record and lobbying for government support, but just one incident by a massive earthquake has wiped most of that effort away.
It remains to be seen if the industry spent enough money to ensure that the government keeps its coffers open to them.
By Cyrus Sanati, contributor
March 17, 2011
FORTUNE -- The devastating earthquake and subsequent tsunami last week has claimed an untold number of Japanese victims, but there's one casualty in the U.S. that won't go down without a fight: the nuclear power industry.
The resulting damage to one of Japan's nuclear power plants has resurrected old debates about the safety and soundness of nuclear technology and its ability to be used as a viable power source.
But even if nuclear power plant construction costs rise as a result of this incident, the economics of power generation still favor a mix of energy sources that include nuclear.
Renewable sources of energy, like wind and solar, while recently becoming more cost-competitive to nuclear energy (thanks in part to generous government subsidies), are still unable to efficiently generate enough power to keep the lights on and fully replace nuclear power in the United States just yet.
The possibility of multiple reactor core meltdowns at the Fukushima nuclear power plant has captured the world's attention. We don't yet know if this will become another Chernobyl -- what we do know is that no matter happens, it is a public relations disaster for the nuclear industry.
Electric Car Conversion
In Germany, plans to overturn a directive that would have kept the nation's 17 nuclear plants from being closed in the coming years were placed on hold for three months.
Switzerland said that it was suspending efforts to keep three of its nuclear plants operating, while the European Union announced that it wants stress tests performed on all of its 143 nuclear reactors in response to what the EU's energy chief said was an "apocalypse" in Japan.
In Washington, the Republicans, who have traditionally championed nuclear power, have been pretty much silent on the news. But some liberal Democrats, like Rep. Ed Markey from Massachusetts, have called for a moratorium on nuclear plants in earthquake prone areas of the country, while Senator John Kerry, the Democrat from Massachusetts, went a step further and called for all nuclear power plant construction to be halted immediately.
This has put the White House in an awkward position. The Obama administration has earmarked $36 billion in its 2012 budget to help finance the construction of several new nuclear plants across the country.
That's in addition to the $18.5 billion in funds that were earmarked by Congress back in 2007, of which $10.2 billion remains unspent.
The nuclear commitment
In total, it looks like the US government has placed a $55 billion bet on an industry that could meltdown thanks to the Fukushima incident. President Obama has reiterated his support for nuclear power since the disaster struck, but that could change quickly, putting that $36 billion top-up to the industry in jeopardy. Republicans vow to slash line items in the budget, but the nuclear issue has not been their primary target, yet. As for the general public, it doesn't see the need for government support for the industry. An opinion poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal and NBC News released on March 3, before the incident, found that financial support for the nuclear industry was the single most popular possible budget cut, with 57% agreeing.
It wouldn't take much to let the nuclear industry just die out in the US. Until last year, the government had not approved the construction of a new plant since the partial reactor meltdown at the Three-Mile Island nuclear facility in 1979. The last plant went online in 1996.
There are currently 20 projects being reviewed by the government but only three seem to be going anywhere. Atlanta-based Southern Company (SO, Fortune 500) is the farthest along and has been promised $8 billion by the government for the construction of a $14 billion plant Georgia.
But it is highly unlikely that any of the other projects will ever get built if the government takes away funding. While nuclear plants are cost effective in the long run, they have significant start-up costs. For example, the $14 billion price tag on the Southern Company's plant is around half of its entire market capitalization. Other companies far into the permitting process, like Dynegy (DYN), have market caps that are a fraction of the costs to get a plant constructed.
Those rallying against nuclear energy are pushing for the government to back other energy alternatives like solar and wind. Both have made great strides in becoming more cost competitive over the years, thanks in part to large government subsidies. While they remain highly uncompetitive to fossil fuels, they have overtaken nuclear on a cost per kilowatt basis.
That's because the cost to build a new next generation nuclear facility in the US has jumped 37% in the past year from an average build cost of $3,902 per kilowatt to $5,339/kW, according to a recent government study. New design specifications and a lack of competition in the nuclear construction industry were blamed from the increase in costs.
Solar power now looks on the surface to be potentially competitive. The cost to build a photovoltaic solar plant is down 25% in the past year from an average build cost of $6,303 per kilowatt to $4,755. The build cost for a solar thermal plant dropped 10% to $4,692 per kilowatt. Wind power remains the cheapest and the most expensive alternative to both nuclear and solar. Onshore wind power costs just $2,438 per kilowatt while offshore wind power costs $5,975/kW. For a comparison, natural gas blows all of them out of the water, costing just $978 per kilowatt.
Obstacles to solar and wind
But comparing alternatives on a cost per kilowatt basis is deceptive. Even with the government's careful controls of geography and markets, the cost factor doesn't seem to take into account the resources needed to generate the power on a scale that could serve the population.
For example, it is not possible to install wind or solar plants on a commercial scale everywhere because some areas of the country are just not windy or sunny enough to yield enough power.
That compares to a nuclear plant that could theoretically be built almost anywhere.
More importantly, alternatives don't generate enough power to do the job. Nuclear energy is a dense form of energy that requires very little in the form of land and transmission lines to carry it to a population center.
Alternative energies are not dense at all and require gobs of space to generate a fraction of the energy generated by a small nuclear facility.
For example, the government assumed a certain output would be generated by a plant in their calculations. For a nuclear plant it was 2.2 million kilowatts, while it was just 150,000 kilowatts for a photovoltaic plant and 100,000 kilowatts for an onshore wind plant.
That nuclear power plant is a large jolt of electricity neatly contained to an area of 8 to 10 square miles. Compare that to an onshore wind plant, the cheapest alternative according to the government. Each 2,000 kilowatt wind turbine takes up a quarter of a square mile worth of space, according to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
So to replace that nuclear power plant with wind would mean dedicating nearly 280 square miles of land to a gigantic wind farm, which would be about the size of New York City.
The energy concentration in nuclear power plants is just one reason why nuclear remains so attractive, despite the high start up costs. The nuclear industry has spent millions of dollars over the years touting its safety record and lobbying for government support, but just one incident by a massive earthquake has wiped most of that effort away.
It remains to be seen if the industry spent enough money to ensure that the government keeps its coffers open to them.
Why earthquake-prone Japan relies on nuclear power
The Christian Science Monitor
Global News Blog
Why earthquake-prone Japan relies on nuclear power
Nuclear power is increasingly seen as a way for Japan, and other nations including the United States, to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
Fukushima Daiichi power plant's Unit 1 is seen in Okumamachi, Fukushima prefecture, Japan, on Friday, March 11. The nuclear power plant affected by a massive earthquake is facing a possible meltdown, an official with Japan's nuclear safety commission said Saturday.
Buy.com
(Yasushi Kann/The Yomiuri Shimbun/AP)
By Stephen Kurczy, Staff writer
posted March 14, 2011
Nuclear energy provides an estimated 30 percent of electricity in Japan, despite it being one of the world's most seismically volatile nations.
Why? Nuclear power is increasingly seen as a way for Japan to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. That's the same reason why President Obama has also been pushing the US to build its first nuclear power plant in almost three decades. In his 2010 State of the Union address, he called for "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants."
But as shown by the unfolding nuclear crisis in Japan, with two reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station suffering explosions since Friday's massive earthquake knocked out cooling systems at the plant, there is simply no easy solution to humanity's need for energy. While fossil fuel raises concerns of climate change, nuclear energy raises the specter of radioactive contamination.
"Japan's debate closely mirrors those worldwide, as governments highlight nuclear power as an easier way to cut carbon emissions than boosting wind and solar power," the Monitor wrote a year ago in the article "Earthquake prone Japan sees green in new nuclear power plants."
Nuclear role in cutting carbon
Japan has touted nuclear power as key to reducing carbon emissions to 75 percent of 1990 levels by 2020. The public remains wary about the push, with one poll showing that 54 percent of the population feels anxious or uneasy about nuclear power. Shunsuke Kondo, chairman of Japan's Atomic Energy Commission, told the Monitor then that his nation's nuclear power plants were built to withstand all but a "once in 10,000 year" earthquake.
Tragically, that's exactly what hit Friday when an 8.9-magnitude temblor rocked the nation's northeast coast and sent a 30-foot high tsunami crashing inland, knocking out electricity at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station and causing cooling systems to fail in at least three reactors.
Nuclear plants also provide an estimated 20 percent of US power, with Obama recently pledging $8 billion in loan guarantees for the construction of the first nuclear power plant in the US since 1979, the year of the Three Mile Island meltdown. Proposals are currently being heard for 20 new reactors to be built over the next 15 to 20 years.
According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, there are currently 104 licensed nuclear power plants, with eight sitting in the earthquake-prone West Coast states of Washington, California, and Arizona. (Here's a map of reactors across the US.) Two of those plants in California sit especially close to fault lines.
The New York Times today reports that "most of the nuclear plants in the United States share some or all of the risk factors that played a role at Fukushima Daiichi: locations on tsunami-prone coastlines or near earthquake faults, aging plants and backup electrical systems that rely on diesel generators and batteries that could fail in extreme circumstances."
Overreacting to the nuclear crisis?
Even a year ago, as the Monitor reported, Japan's earthquake-prone geology caused concern among activists and raised the specter of a quake-induced Chernobyl. Comparisons to Ukraine's 1986 disaster have been stated repeatedly in recent days, despite officials downplaying such a scenario.
The Wall Street Journal's Op-Ed page has criticized American media for "overreacting" to the nuclear crisis in Japan. "Unlike the Soviets at Chernobyl, the Japanese have been taking sensible precautions like evacuating people near the plants and handing out iodine pills even if they may never be needed. These precautions increase public worry, but better to take them even if they prove to be unnecessary," the WSJ said.
"We should learn from the Japanese nuclear crisis, not let it feed a political panic over nuclear power in general," the Journal said.
Global News Blog
Why earthquake-prone Japan relies on nuclear power
Nuclear power is increasingly seen as a way for Japan, and other nations including the United States, to reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
Fukushima Daiichi power plant's Unit 1 is seen in Okumamachi, Fukushima prefecture, Japan, on Friday, March 11. The nuclear power plant affected by a massive earthquake is facing a possible meltdown, an official with Japan's nuclear safety commission said Saturday.
Buy.com
(Yasushi Kann/The Yomiuri Shimbun/AP)
By Stephen Kurczy, Staff writer
posted March 14, 2011
Nuclear energy provides an estimated 30 percent of electricity in Japan, despite it being one of the world's most seismically volatile nations.
Why? Nuclear power is increasingly seen as a way for Japan to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. That's the same reason why President Obama has also been pushing the US to build its first nuclear power plant in almost three decades. In his 2010 State of the Union address, he called for "a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants."
But as shown by the unfolding nuclear crisis in Japan, with two reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station suffering explosions since Friday's massive earthquake knocked out cooling systems at the plant, there is simply no easy solution to humanity's need for energy. While fossil fuel raises concerns of climate change, nuclear energy raises the specter of radioactive contamination.
"Japan's debate closely mirrors those worldwide, as governments highlight nuclear power as an easier way to cut carbon emissions than boosting wind and solar power," the Monitor wrote a year ago in the article "Earthquake prone Japan sees green in new nuclear power plants."
Nuclear role in cutting carbon
Japan has touted nuclear power as key to reducing carbon emissions to 75 percent of 1990 levels by 2020. The public remains wary about the push, with one poll showing that 54 percent of the population feels anxious or uneasy about nuclear power. Shunsuke Kondo, chairman of Japan's Atomic Energy Commission, told the Monitor then that his nation's nuclear power plants were built to withstand all but a "once in 10,000 year" earthquake.
Tragically, that's exactly what hit Friday when an 8.9-magnitude temblor rocked the nation's northeast coast and sent a 30-foot high tsunami crashing inland, knocking out electricity at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station and causing cooling systems to fail in at least three reactors.
Nuclear plants also provide an estimated 20 percent of US power, with Obama recently pledging $8 billion in loan guarantees for the construction of the first nuclear power plant in the US since 1979, the year of the Three Mile Island meltdown. Proposals are currently being heard for 20 new reactors to be built over the next 15 to 20 years.
According to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, there are currently 104 licensed nuclear power plants, with eight sitting in the earthquake-prone West Coast states of Washington, California, and Arizona. (Here's a map of reactors across the US.) Two of those plants in California sit especially close to fault lines.
The New York Times today reports that "most of the nuclear plants in the United States share some or all of the risk factors that played a role at Fukushima Daiichi: locations on tsunami-prone coastlines or near earthquake faults, aging plants and backup electrical systems that rely on diesel generators and batteries that could fail in extreme circumstances."
Overreacting to the nuclear crisis?
Even a year ago, as the Monitor reported, Japan's earthquake-prone geology caused concern among activists and raised the specter of a quake-induced Chernobyl. Comparisons to Ukraine's 1986 disaster have been stated repeatedly in recent days, despite officials downplaying such a scenario.
The Wall Street Journal's Op-Ed page has criticized American media for "overreacting" to the nuclear crisis in Japan. "Unlike the Soviets at Chernobyl, the Japanese have been taking sensible precautions like evacuating people near the plants and handing out iodine pills even if they may never be needed. These precautions increase public worry, but better to take them even if they prove to be unnecessary," the WSJ said.
"We should learn from the Japanese nuclear crisis, not let it feed a political panic over nuclear power in general," the Journal said.
2011-03-24
別讓醫生殺了你 - 醫生都不說的醫學真相
Triathlon Race Video - Download MP4 to watch
2010 London Men
2010 London Women
別讓醫生殺了你─醫生都不說的醫學真相
西醫危害健康 - 袁大明 周兆祥 醫療風暴
What to Know if You Ever Want to Eat Chicken Again…
It's still standard practice on chicken AFOs (Animal Feeding Operations) to dose the birds with arsenic 砷; 砒霜 .
Arsenic makes the birds grow faster and helps control a common intestinal disease of chickens.
Arsenic makes the birds grow faster and helps control a common intestinal disease of chickens.
More than 2,000 vaccinated babies died: The cost of doing business
Study: 700,000 people, mostly children, end up in emergency rooms ER every year for pharmaceutical drug poisoning.
Forty-three percent of all these poisonings are caused by antidepressant drugs and common painkillers, many of which are available without a prescription.
Pecans promote heart health, lower cholesterol levels
How Cell-phone Radiation Works
Ionizing radiation & Non-ionizing radiation
How Does Nuclear Radiation Affect The Body?
iHerb $5 Discount Off First Order
輻射菜殺到香港 超標9倍 日本5縣農產今無限期禁入口
輻射菜殺到香港 超標9倍 日本5縣農產今無限期禁入口
(明報)2011年3月24日 星期四
【明報專訊】日本 輻射 污染蔬菜差點流入本港，昨日兩批共3個樣本的日本空運抵港蘿蔔和菠菜，被驗出放射物質碘-131含量達260至1000貝克/公斤，超出本港安全標準1.6至9倍，全部來自鄰近東京 的千葉縣。港府緊急宣布，今日正午起無限期禁止日本千葉、櫪木、茨城、群馬及福島縣5個縣的奶類及蔬果等農產及相關加工、包裝食品入口。
被驗出輻射超標的兩個批次樣本，包括同一批次的一個白蘿蔔樣本、一個蘿蔔樣本，和另一批次的菠菜樣本，碘-131含量分別為每公斤260貝克、800貝克和1000貝克，較本港安全標準100貝克分別高出1.6倍、7倍和9倍，其中蘿蔔和菠菜樣本亦驗出含放射物質銫-134和銫-137，每公斤含量由8.5貝克至26貝克不等，但未有超標。
Drugstores Online
菠菜蘿蔔來自千葉縣
有關超標蔬菜並非產自福島及鄰近櫪木、茨城、群馬3個重災區縣，全部來自毗鄰東京的千葉縣，其中碘超標9倍的菠菜樣本，更獲日本當地的JAS有機認證，此認證制度由日本農林水產省制定。兩款蘿蔔樣本入口商是Tukiji Nakagai Hong Kong Sodairi Hogami Suisan Co. Ltd和菠菜樣本入口商Pronet(Asia) Ltd。
食物及衛生局副局長梁卓偉強調，上述輻射超標蔬菜全被扣檢沒有流入本港市面，若真的有人食用了，最嚴重者相等於照了10張X光肺片（見FAQ）。中大生命科學院副教授何永成則說，是次超標以倍計，反映污染非常嚴重，市民吃下肚後未必能即時排出體外，或會損害人體細胞，甚至令其他腸胃組織受破壞，市民切勿冒險進食。
昨空運抵港沒流出市面
政府將於今日刊憲，由即日中午12時起，禁止出售於3月11日（地震發生當日）或以後在上述5縣收穫、製造、加工或包裝的食品進口，分別為奶、奶類飲品、奶粉、蔬果。冷凍或冷藏野味肉類和家禽、禽蛋，以及鮮活、冷凍或冷藏海鮮，若有日本官方發出的衛生證明書，可獲豁免。當局解釋，禁令今天才生效，是給予業界時間作運貨準備。立法會議員李華明和王國興批評寬鬆做法不恰當，理應一刀切全面禁止有關地區所有農產來港。食物及衛生局強調，會繼續抽檢，且貨品有衛生證明書，雙重保障。
議員批太遲生效不恰當
對於福島對開海水輻射污染，天文台 強調當地水流向東，不會流入本港，當局與專家研究後，亦確認本港漁民不會到有關水域捕魚。漁護署昨日到本港5個漁場抽魚化驗輻射，結果正常。至於其他日本進口的加工食品，如餅乾、糖果、蛋糕和冰凍甜點，以及以水和植物製造的日本進口消費品，包括洗頭水、護髮素、皂液、牙膏、化妝品等，港府未有發現輻射超標。
日本厚生勞動省昨宣布，福島縣露天栽種的西蘭花（青花菜）、椰菜等11種蔬菜檢測到輻射物質，美國 隨即宣布，即時停止進口福島、茨城、櫪木、群馬4縣生產的牛奶、奶製品、新鮮蔬果；韓國也表示「積極」考慮禁止入口日本食品。法國 除了自行檢測日本進口食品，也呼籲歐盟對日本輸入歐陸的新鮮食品，實施「系統管制」，防範核污染，一些入口商已停止輸入日本食品，預料禁止入口日本食品的國家將陸續增加。
(明報)2011年3月24日 星期四
【明報專訊】日本 輻射 污染蔬菜差點流入本港，昨日兩批共3個樣本的日本空運抵港蘿蔔和菠菜，被驗出放射物質碘-131含量達260至1000貝克/公斤，超出本港安全標準1.6至9倍，全部來自鄰近東京 的千葉縣。港府緊急宣布，今日正午起無限期禁止日本千葉、櫪木、茨城、群馬及福島縣5個縣的奶類及蔬果等農產及相關加工、包裝食品入口。
被驗出輻射超標的兩個批次樣本，包括同一批次的一個白蘿蔔樣本、一個蘿蔔樣本，和另一批次的菠菜樣本，碘-131含量分別為每公斤260貝克、800貝克和1000貝克，較本港安全標準100貝克分別高出1.6倍、7倍和9倍，其中蘿蔔和菠菜樣本亦驗出含放射物質銫-134和銫-137，每公斤含量由8.5貝克至26貝克不等，但未有超標。
Drugstores Online
菠菜蘿蔔來自千葉縣
有關超標蔬菜並非產自福島及鄰近櫪木、茨城、群馬3個重災區縣，全部來自毗鄰東京的千葉縣，其中碘超標9倍的菠菜樣本，更獲日本當地的JAS有機認證，此認證制度由日本農林水產省制定。兩款蘿蔔樣本入口商是Tukiji Nakagai Hong Kong Sodairi Hogami Suisan Co. Ltd和菠菜樣本入口商Pronet(Asia) Ltd。
食物及衛生局副局長梁卓偉強調，上述輻射超標蔬菜全被扣檢沒有流入本港市面，若真的有人食用了，最嚴重者相等於照了10張X光肺片（見FAQ）。中大生命科學院副教授何永成則說，是次超標以倍計，反映污染非常嚴重，市民吃下肚後未必能即時排出體外，或會損害人體細胞，甚至令其他腸胃組織受破壞，市民切勿冒險進食。
昨空運抵港沒流出市面
政府將於今日刊憲，由即日中午12時起，禁止出售於3月11日（地震發生當日）或以後在上述5縣收穫、製造、加工或包裝的食品進口，分別為奶、奶類飲品、奶粉、蔬果。冷凍或冷藏野味肉類和家禽、禽蛋，以及鮮活、冷凍或冷藏海鮮，若有日本官方發出的衛生證明書，可獲豁免。當局解釋，禁令今天才生效，是給予業界時間作運貨準備。立法會議員李華明和王國興批評寬鬆做法不恰當，理應一刀切全面禁止有關地區所有農產來港。食物及衛生局強調，會繼續抽檢，且貨品有衛生證明書，雙重保障。
議員批太遲生效不恰當
對於福島對開海水輻射污染，天文台 強調當地水流向東，不會流入本港，當局與專家研究後，亦確認本港漁民不會到有關水域捕魚。漁護署昨日到本港5個漁場抽魚化驗輻射，結果正常。至於其他日本進口的加工食品，如餅乾、糖果、蛋糕和冰凍甜點，以及以水和植物製造的日本進口消費品，包括洗頭水、護髮素、皂液、牙膏、化妝品等，港府未有發現輻射超標。
日本厚生勞動省昨宣布，福島縣露天栽種的西蘭花（青花菜）、椰菜等11種蔬菜檢測到輻射物質，美國 隨即宣布，即時停止進口福島、茨城、櫪木、群馬4縣生產的牛奶、奶製品、新鮮蔬果；韓國也表示「積極」考慮禁止入口日本食品。法國 除了自行檢測日本進口食品，也呼籲歐盟對日本輸入歐陸的新鮮食品，實施「系統管制」，防範核污染，一些入口商已停止輸入日本食品，預料禁止入口日本食品的國家將陸續增加。
武漢男搶萬三斤鹽後悔莫及
武漢男搶萬三斤鹽後悔莫及
(明報)2011年3月23日 星期三
武漢一名男子「盲搶鹽」的嚴重程度堪稱病入高肓，正煩惱如何處理幾天前高價搶購的13000斤食鹽。
對於6天前花高價買下的13000斤食鹽，令武昌熊家嘴的郭先生後悔不已：「退不掉，賣不得，運不走，難道要自己慢慢吃完？」
Radiation Detector
《武漢晚報》報道，郭先生租住在熊家嘴一間20多平方米的出租屋內，260大包食用碘鹽堆起1米多高，佔去房間大半。如果他一人吃，要吃3561年才吃完。
郭先生來自甘肅 蘭州，老家人和親戚開了三間大餐館，日用鹽量幾十斤。
3月17日上午，家人突然來電話，稱當地食鹽已賣到8元一斤，還斷了貨，「可能會有長達半年的鹽荒」。
郭先生上街一看，大小超市食鹽均遭搶購。他趕緊去多家調味市場打聽，「原價65元50斤的食鹽，已賣到了95元到120元」，郭先生當即大肆購入13000斤，加上運費共花去2.7萬元，約合每斤2元、每包100元。
「商戶出車送鹽回家，足足拖了3輛貨車」。郭先生回家打開電視，發現政府部門已開始澄清「謠鹽」，次日碘鹽價格一路走低，很快跌破他的購入價。
郭先生急了，「這大批鹽怎處理？」想運回家，可物流公司說沒有經營許可證不能托運；想退貨，可購鹽時未拿票據，要退貨是難上加難。
目前，郭先生正設法聯繫買主，想以每包65元的市價轉讓，並負責送貨上門，即使成功，最終也要虧近萬元。
湖北省鹽務管理局武漢分局鹽政科邵科長表示，可出面協調賣鹽商戶或當地鹽業公司回收 這批食鹽，盡量減少郭先生的損失。
（中通社）
(明報)2011年3月23日 星期三
武漢一名男子「盲搶鹽」的嚴重程度堪稱病入高肓，正煩惱如何處理幾天前高價搶購的13000斤食鹽。
對於6天前花高價買下的13000斤食鹽，令武昌熊家嘴的郭先生後悔不已：「退不掉，賣不得，運不走，難道要自己慢慢吃完？」
Radiation Detector
《武漢晚報》報道，郭先生租住在熊家嘴一間20多平方米的出租屋內，260大包食用碘鹽堆起1米多高，佔去房間大半。如果他一人吃，要吃3561年才吃完。
郭先生來自甘肅 蘭州，老家人和親戚開了三間大餐館，日用鹽量幾十斤。
3月17日上午，家人突然來電話，稱當地食鹽已賣到8元一斤，還斷了貨，「可能會有長達半年的鹽荒」。
郭先生上街一看，大小超市食鹽均遭搶購。他趕緊去多家調味市場打聽，「原價65元50斤的食鹽，已賣到了95元到120元」，郭先生當即大肆購入13000斤，加上運費共花去2.7萬元，約合每斤2元、每包100元。
「商戶出車送鹽回家，足足拖了3輛貨車」。郭先生回家打開電視，發現政府部門已開始澄清「謠鹽」，次日碘鹽價格一路走低，很快跌破他的購入價。
郭先生急了，「這大批鹽怎處理？」想運回家，可物流公司說沒有經營許可證不能托運；想退貨，可購鹽時未拿票據，要退貨是難上加難。
目前，郭先生正設法聯繫買主，想以每包65元的市價轉讓，並負責送貨上門，即使成功，最終也要虧近萬元。
湖北省鹽務管理局武漢分局鹽政科邵科長表示，可出面協調賣鹽商戶或當地鹽業公司回收 這批食鹽，盡量減少郭先生的損失。
（中通社）
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)