LATEST ARTICLES

Nuclear-waste bunker would cost billions and causing Danger

Image result for nuclear plantRelocating a nuclear-waste bunker from its currently proposed site on Lake Huron would cost billions of dollars, take decades to execute, and increase health and environmental risks, according to a new report by the project’s proponent.

The report by Ontario Power Generation, done at the request of the federal environment minister, also asserts that the public doesn’t really care about the proposal for the deep geologic repository — or DGR — even though scores of Great Lakes communities in both Canada and the United States have denounced the plan.

“There is little interest among the general public regarding the DGR project,” the report states. “Ontarians are not looking for information on nuclear-waste disposal in large volumes. This topic is not a popular one nor is it generating large volumes of curiosity.”

In May 2015, an environmental review panel approved the project — currently estimated to cost about $2.4 billion — which would see a bunker built at the Bruce nuclear power plant near Kincardine, Ont. Hundreds of thousands of cubic metres of radioactive waste — now stored at the site above ground — would be buried in bedrock 680 metres deep about 1.2 kilometres from Lake Huron.

The federal government has since delayed making a final decision on the plan, instead asking OPG last February to provide information on locating the repository somewhere else.

Moving the location now would add as much as $3.5 billion, OPG says. The money would go toward buying and preparing the needed land, as well as to packaging and shipping the dangerous waste. In addition, the utility says, the current plan to start burying the waste in 2026 would be derailed and in-service date would likely be pushed back to as late as 2055 if another site is chosen.

While the study does not identify any actual sites, it does find that vast stretches of the province, including much of southern and southwestern Ontario, would be geologically suitable for a waste bunker.

Perhaps the biggest risk posed by building somewhere else would be the need to truck the hazardous material as far as 2,000 kilometres at a cost of up to $1.4 billion.

“Relocating the DGR project to an alternate location would require approximately 22,000-24,000 radioactive shipments resulting in over a million kilometres of travel on public roadways throughout the duration of the transportation campaign,” the study states.

“The incremental conventional transportation risks are estimated to be between three and 69 road collisions. It would also add a small but incremental risk of exposure to radioactivity to the public and workers.”

Preparing an alternate 900 hectare site, including clearing the area and creating road access, would also hurt wildlife habitat and cause environmental damage, the report says.

Finding another community willing to take the waste — the municipality of Kincardine has been supportive of the project — won’t be easy.

“There would be considerable uncertainties associated with a DGR at an alternate location including the time required to develop and implement a consent-based site-selection process and achieve a willing and supportive host community, as well as the consent of indigenous communities,” the report states.

The Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency will now review and assess the utility’s report, allow time for public comment, and come up with its own recommendations to Environment Minister Catherine McKenna in the fall. The agency notes the timeline could change if it requires more information.

For its part, however, OPG insists it’s time to set aside any criticism and get on with digging the bunker — at the Bruce site.

“Deferring costs to future generations, when a safe, cost-effective option already exists, is not necessarily in the best interests of society,” the report states. “OPG therefore concludes that the DGR project at the Bruce nuclear site remains the preferred location.”

Colin Perkel, The Canadian Press

Natalie-Marie Hart – Jesse Marcel – Roswell and Area 51

Biography:

Jesse Marcel is the grandson of Major Jesse Marcel who investigated the Roswell Crash. His grandson answers questions about Aliens, Roswell and Area 51. He also talks about his own exciting new flying car project. Listen into this wonderful interview for more.

Websites:

http://www.airbornemotors.com
http://jessemarcel.com/

Crystal Kids TV’s Social Medias:

https://www.facebook.com/crystallightkids/?ref=hl
https://twitter.com/crystalkidradio
https://plus.google.com/110327718180589334503

 

March 11, 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster left 10.7 million 1-ton container bags with radioactive debris

Let’s remember the poor people who died because of Fukushima. It is five years since this has happened.

Five years after a powerful earthquake and tsunami sent the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant in Japan into multiple meltdowns, cleaning up the mess both onsite and in surrounding towns remains a work in progress. Here’s a look, by the numbers, at the widespread effects of radiation from the March 11, 2011, disaster:

164,865: Fukushima residents who fled their homes after the disaster.

97,320: Number who still haven’t returned.

49: Municipalities in Fukushima that have completed decontamination work.

45: Number that have not.

30: Percent of electricity generated by nuclear power before the disaster.

1.7: Percent of electricity generated by nuclear power after the disaster.

3: Reactors currently online, out of 43 now workable.

54: Reactors with safety permits before the disaster.

53: Percent of the 1,017 Japanese in a March 5-6 Mainichi Shimbun newspaper survey who opposed restarting nuclear power plants.

30: Percent who supported restarts. The remaining 17 percent were undecided.

760,000: Metric tons of contaminated water currently stored at the Fukushima nuclear plant.

1,000: Tanks at the plant storing radioactive water after treatment.

10.7 million: Number of 1-ton container bags containing radioactive debris and other waste collected in decontamination outside the plant.

7,000: Workers decommissioning the Fukushima plant.

26,000: Laborers on decontamination work offsite.

200: Becquerels of radioactive cesium per cubic meter (264 gallons) in seawater immediately off the plant in 2015.

50 million: Becquerels of cesium per cubic meter in the same water in 2011.

7,400: Maximum number of becquerels of cesium per cubic meter allowed in drinking water by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Credit:

http://www.thestandard.com.hk/breaking-news.php?id=72359

$12.8B rebuild of Ontario nuclear plant

TORONTO — The proposed $12.8-billion refurbishment of four nuclear reactors at the Darlington generating station is an ill-advised make-work project that will end up soaking taxpayers, a retired nuclear scientist says.

In a letter to Ontario‘s energy minister, obtained by The Canadian Press, Frank Greening warns of the formidable technical hazards he says will undermine rosy projections for the project.

“I am quite mystified that you would consider the refurbishment of Darlington to be some sort of solution to Ontario’s economic woes, when in fact the premature failures of (nuclear reactors) are a major cause of Ontario’s economic problems,” writes Greening, a frequent critic of the industry.

“Spending billions of dollars trying to patch up Darlington’s four dilapidated reactors will simply continue the bleeding.”

Earlier this month, the province’s publicly owned generating giant, Ontario Power Generation, announced plans to start refurbishing Darlington — situated east of Toronto on Lake Ontario — this fall. The project aims to extend the life of the CANDU reactors, scheduled for permanent shutdown in 2020, by 30 years.

The government projects the rebuild will create up to 11,800 jobs a year at the height of construction and generate $14.9 billion in economic and spinoff benefits.

Greening argues the units are in need of rebuilding prematurely because their pressure tubes and feeder pipes will soon fail fitness tests. He also warns the reactors’ massive steam generators, which are not part of the proposed project, have had a less than stellar track record and will more than likely need replacement.

“Replacing these steam generators is fraught with very serious problems, both technical and economic, that could prevent the continued operation of Darlington beyond 2030,” says Greening, a senior scientist with OPG until he retired in 2000.

“The decision to proceed with the refurbishment of Darlington could prove to be a disastrous mistake if it is discovered that steam generator replacement is in fact needed in the next 10 to 15 years.”

Environmental groups also argue such projects always run massively over budget and have cost taxpayers untold billions in the past and refurbishment is simply not worth the potential radiation risk to public safety.

The Ontario cabinet has so far given the green light to refurbish one of Darlington’s reactors. OPG would need separate approvals for each of the other three units. The government said that process would allow it to call off the project at each stage if things are going awry.

Energy Minister Bob Chiarelli, who argues the province needs Darlington’s power, referred questions about Greening’s criticism to Ontario Power Generation.

OPG spokesman Bill McKinlay said Wednesday the federal nuclear regulator noted Greening’s concerns before giving the project its stamp of approval.

“We’ve been preparing since 2009 and we’re ready to deliver the job safely, on time and on budget,” McKinlay said. “We expect it will provide 30-plus years of clean, reliable base-load power at a cost lower than other alternatives.”

Greening, however, argues the project is an attempt to put a “dying industry on life support” at the taxpayer’s expense.

“The inconvenient truth is that, after less than 25 years of operation, Darlington NGS is a mess,” he says.

“Its feeder pipes are falling apart and its pressure tubes are ready to crack. Darlington is another failed CANDU station desperately in need of a fix.”

The performance of four other refurbished CANDUs in Ontario, he argues, has fallen well short of what a new reactor typically delivers.

“This reveals the uncomfortable truth: A refurbished CANDU reactor is no substitute for a new one.”

Credit: Canada press

Schematic Diagram of a CANDU reactor: The prim...
Schematic Diagram of a CANDU reactor: The primary heavy-water loop is in yellow and orange, the secondary light-water loop in blue and red. The cool heavy water moderator in the calandria can be seen in pink, along with partially inserted adjuster rods. { (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Flaw found in French nuclear reactor

Flaw found in French nuclear reactor
By Rob Broomby, British affairs correspondent, BBC World Service, July 15, 2015
 
A weakness has been discovered in a French nuclear reactor of the type set to be built at Hinkley in the UK.
 
France‘s nuclear safety regulator told the BBC the flaw in the steel housing the reactor core at the nuclear plant being built in Normandy is “serious”.
 
He added that unless he was satisfied with the plans to put it right, he could stop the project.
 
The fault in the French reactor is thought to be a construction fault, not an inherent weakness in the design.
 
The troubled European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) under construction in France is one of the standard bearers for the next generation of nuclear power plants.
 
It is of the same design as that planned for Hinkley C in Somerset and its collapse would deliver a major blow to the so called nuclear renaissance.
 
“It is a serious anomaly affecting a crucial component of the nuclear power plant,” said Pierre-Franck Chevet, President of the French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN).
 
“We have observed a bad chemical and mechanical characteristic,” he said.
 
ASN has ordered the loss-making French state owned reactor manufacturer Areva to conduct a further round of destructive testing on a similar component which will see the 116 tonne pressure vessel head or lid once earmarked for the planned reactor at Hinkley C destroyed in the process.
 
Safety and quality
 
A statement from the French state-owned EDF Group which is behind both projects confirmed new tests are planned intended to “provide the safety authority with all the necessary information to demonstrate the safety and quality of the corresponding equipment”.
 
The problem affects the steel making up the dome-like vessel head and bottom of the structure which has to withstand enormous heat and pressure from coolant water circulating around the core of reactor itself. The pressurised water is then pumped to a steam generator which indirectly turns a turbine creating electricity.
 
Chemical and mechanical tests on the steel completed in late 2014 found “high carbon concentration, leading to lower than expected mechanical toughness” according to ASN.
 
The 12.7 meter high pressure vessel which without the head weighs 410 tonnes is designed to contain huge mechanical and thermal shocks.
 
But Pierre-Franck Chevet says the tests revealed the resilience of the steel was “far below the prescribed value”.
 
French standards require the vessel to withstand shocks of 60 joules but they found values as low as 30, meaning the component is in parts about half as strong as it should be.
 
Though there were aspects of the material which were good he said: “On this characteristic of the steel we have 50% of what we want.”
 
The flagship project for manufacturers Areva and the French state owned utility EDF is already way behind schedule and the costs has soared from £2.3 billion at the time of purchase to nearer £6 billion now.
 
ASN has said it will not give its verdict until early next year but EDF maintains work will continue in the meantime.
“It could be yes, it could be no; it could be yes with certain conditions,” Mr Chevet told the BBC.
 
Completion delay
 
The completion date for the Flamanville reactor in Normandy has already been shifted from 2012 to 2017 and the latest problem could make that worse. If they have to replace both the base of the reactor as well as the lid it could prove costly.
 
“If they would have to fabricate a new bottom and head and that is not going to be quick,” said Steve Thomas, professor of energy policy at Greenwich University who has written extensively about the EPR delays. “Removing the base would be more time consuming and could be prohibitively expensive.”
 
A spokesperson for the Office for Nuclear Regulation said ASN’s British counterpart said the two organisations were liaising closely: “ONR expects that any learning that is identified from Flamanville is applied to the Hinkley Point C project.”
 
The statement said: “If ONR is not convinced that an activity is sufficiently safe, it will not [give] permission for the activity.”
 
In an official statement, EDF Energy which has still to make its final investment decision regarding the reactors to be built at Hinkley in Somerset, said there was plenty of time to learn the lessons.
 
“The equivalent parts which will be used on Hinkley Point C have not yet been manufactured. The way in which they will be manufactured will ensure they meet all the requirements of the UK regulator, the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR),” it read.
 
Pierre Franck Chevet has won respect for his straight talking in an industry once prone to secrecy. “My job is not to reassure the public, my job is to control and regulate nuclear activities” he said, admitting his words were not always appreciated by the utilities.
 
In a written technical assessment, ASN confirms the two EPR reactors being built in Taishan China were cast at the same forge in Le Creusot in eastern France “using a process similar to that used for the Flamanville EPR reactor pressure vessel”.
 
Mr Chevet will fly to China in the coming weeks to speak to the Chinese regulator there. It could be a tense conversation given the growing interdependence of the two nuclear industries.
 
The international nuclear consultant Yves Marignac, director of Wise-Paris, who has been critical of the French nuclear programme for many years, said the problem would “raise serious issues of profitability”. In a recent analysis of the problems, he wrote: “Economic scenario assessments might show that abandoning the project is cheaper than repair or replacement options, when factors such as the financial costs of further delays, or savings on decommissioning costs if the reactor doesn’t go nuclear are included.”
 
He added: “It is serious enough to put the EPR at risk from a technical point of view and it raises big questions about the competence and integrity of the industry.”

Ottawa Citizen: SNC-Lavalin consortium chosen to run Chalk River nuclear lab

Background:

It is perhaps understandable that the article does not mention the ethical scandals that have plagued SNCLavalin in recent years.  It is less understandable why the article doesn’t mention that the production of medical isotopes using the Chalk River reactor was scheduled to end in 2016, a deadline that is now extended to 2018.

Gordon Edwards.

SNC-Lavalin consortium chosen 

to run Chalk River nuclear lab

By Ross Marowits, Canadian Press via Ottawa Citizen, June 26 2015
Headquarters of SNC-Lavalin engineering firm i...
Headquarters of SNC-Lavalin engineering firm in Montreal, René-Lévesque Blvd. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
 

MONTREAL — Ottawa says it has completed a multi-year restructuring of Canada’s nuclear operations with the selection of a preferred bidder to operate a nuclear laboratory in eastern Ontario that is one of the world’s largest producers of medical isotopes.

Canadian National Energy Alliance was chosen Friday over three other engineering groups to manage and operate Canadian Nuclear Laboratories (CNL), a subsidiary of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.

The consortium includes SNC-Lavalin, CH2M HILL Canada Ltd., Fluor Government Group Canada Inc., EnergySolutions Canada Group Ltd. and Rolls-Royce Civil Nuclear Canada Ltd.

“Today’s announcement marks the conclusion of a six-year process enhancing the efficiency and prosperity of the Canadian nuclear industry,” Natural Resources Minister Greg Rickford said in a statement.

The government and CNEA are expected to finalize a contract in two months followed by a six-month transition.

Department spokeswoman Jacinthe Perras said the selection process included the use of third-party nuclear, financial and legal advisers and an independent fairness monitor. All bidders also had to comply with the government’s integrity framework.

The winning consortium said it will bring “private sector rigour and efficiency” to Canada Nuclear Laboratories while reducing risks and containing costs for taxpayers.

“There is a real interest to improve the facilities at the site, to expand our mission areas, to increase the capabilities here and polish the jewel that we have here of the Canadian nuclear laboratories,” CEO Mark Lesinski said in an interview.

CNL employs about 3,300 people, mostly at the Chalk River Laboratories whose nuclear reactor, which has been in operation since 1957, is slated to be decommissioned in 2018.

However, the government said the site has “an enduring science and technology mission.”

Lesinski said there are no current plans for job cuts.

“There is growth and we’ll probably need resources down the road at some point, but I’m not sure when that will be,” he added.

CNL will focus on managing radioactive waste and decommissioning, performing science and technology activities and supporting Canada’s nuclear industry through access to science, technology facilities and expertise.

In 2011, the government sold the AECL division that produces Candu nuclear power plants to SNC-Lavalin for $15 million plus royalties.

In addition to AECL’s restructuring, the government said it has spent $325 million on research infrastructure at CNL, updated Canada’s nuclear liability legislation and opened trade opportunities in growing energy markets such as China and India.

Nuclear power generates nearly 15 per cent of Canada’s electricity, including more than half the electricity supply in Ontario.

Associations that work with Canada’s nuclear industry welcomed the announcement.

“This will allow Canada’s nuclear industry and the Chalk River site to be on a more stable footing for the 21st century and allow a new nuclear energy policy to emerge,” said John Barrett, president of the Canadian Nuclear Association, whose members include the winning partners.

The Organization of Canadian Nuclear Industries, which employs more than 12,000 specialized engineers, technologists and tradespeople, said its member companies want to work closely with CNEA.

The idea is to convert science and technology innovations at the Chalk River laboratories into “successful commercial nuclear products and services that benefit utility customers and create high-quality jobs in the communities across Canada in which OCI companies operate.”

 

Facebook now harvesting the list of all the other websites you visit: total online surveillance is here

(NaturalNews) If you’re one of the millions of people who have a love/hate relationship with Facebook, there are now even more reasons for hating the immensely successful social media giant.

You probably know that Facebook collects and stores your personal data and preferences to form a profile that it uses to generate advertising content targeted directly at you. But did you know that Facebook also looks at all the other websites you visit and stores that data, too? Facebook also collects your online search data along with some of the details you give to retailers when you purchase something.

Facebook and the data brokers

Zuckerberg and his Facebook shareholders make huge amounts of money by partnering with what are known as “data brokers.”

Bruce Schneier, a data security expert, defines data brokers as entities which:

“collect demographic information: names, addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail addresses, gender, age, marital status, presence and ages of children in household, education level, profession, income level, political affiliation, cars driven, and information about homes and other property. They collect lists of things you’ve purchased, when you’ve purchased them, and how you paid for them. They keep track of deaths, divorces, and diseases in your family. They collect everything about what you do on the Internet.”

This information is used to target advertising to individuals, but many see it as an illegal invasion of privacy. One of the charges against Facebook is that it deliberately tries to hide the extent of its data mining. Very few people actually read the terms and conditions when they sign up to Facebook, and even those who do typically don’t have a real understanding of what the privacy policies actually mean.

A recent article posted by Phys.org explores the issue and observes:

Users of social media are generally unaware of how much of their fragmented personal data is collated from across social media sites–and even taken from the content of their free, web-hosted emails (e.g. Gmail)–and how this can be used to build detailed personal profiles.

“Opting out” is difficult and basically futile

Facebook claims that its users can opt out of its data-mining practices, but it’s difficult to do so, and, according to data security experts, it doesn’t make much difference if you do.

As a piece on the Sherbit Blog points out:

A ‘note’ on the ‘Facebook and Privacy‘ page attempts to comfort users by insisting that “the process is designed so that no personal information is exchanged between Facebook and marketers (or the third parties those marketers work with).” But the truth of the situation is that the ‘data brokers’ already own your personal information–and their collaboration with the social network may allow them to assemble even more detailed profiles of your health and habits in the future.

The bottom line is that Facebook and the data brokers collect and store more personal information than the NSA does, and they make piles of money doing it.

A recent analysis conducted by the Belgian Privacy Commission concluded that these practices are in violation of European law, but it remains to be seen whether or not anyone will be able to curtail Facebook’s snooping practices.

Facebook claims that its data-mining activities make for a better user experience, but I doubt that very many people actually appreciate their spying. “Big Data” is increasingly expanding its reach into our personal lives, and it appears that the age of total online surveillance has arrived.

What many of once thought of as a fun, essentially harmless and amazingly useful social network has turned into a intrusive tracking monster of Orwellian proportions. The NSA has nothing on Mark Zuckerberg and Co., and unless there is a concerted global effort to reverse the trend, we can expect the ever-increasing monitoring of every detail of our lives.

 
 

Researchers Discover First Sensor of Earth’s Magnetic Field in an animal

A team of scientists and engineers at The University of Texas at Austin has identified the first sensor of the Earth’s magnetic field in an animal, finding in the brain of a tiny worm a big clue to a long-held mystery about how animals’ internal compasses work.

Animals as diverse as migrating geese, sea turtles and wolves are known to navigate using the Earth’s magnetic field. But until now, no one has pinpointed quite how they do it. The sensor, found in worms called C. elegans, is a microscopic structure at the end of a neuron that other animals probably share, given similarities in brain structure across species. The sensor looks like a nano-scale TV antenna, and the worms use it to navigate underground.

“Chances are that the same molecules will be used by cuter animals like butterflies and birds,” said Jon Pierce-Shimomura, assistant professor of neuroscience in the College of Natural Sciences and member of the research team. “This gives us a first foothold in understanding magnetosensation in other animals.”

The researchers discovered that hungry worms in gelatin-filled tubes tend to move down, a strategy they might use when searching for food.

When the researchers brought worms into the lab from other parts of the world, the worms didn’t all move down. Depending on where they were from—Hawaii, England or Australia, for example—they moved at a precise angle to the magnetic field that would have corresponded to down if they had been back home. For instance, Australian worms moved upward in tubes. The magnetic field’s orientation varies from spot to spot on Earth, and each worm’s magnetic field sensor system is finely tuned to its local environment, allowing it to tell up from down.

The research is published today in the journal eLife.

The study’s lead author is Andrés Vidal-Gadea, a former postdoctoral researcher in the College of Natural Sciences at UT Austin, now a faculty member at Illinois State University. He noted that C. elegans is just one of myriad species living in the soil, many of which are known to migrate vertically.

“I’m fascinated by the prospect that magnetic detection could be widespread across soil dwelling organisms,” said Vidal-Gadea.

The neuroscientists and engineers, who use C. elegans in their research into Alzheimer’s disease and addiction, had previously discovered the worm’s ability to sense humidity. That work led them to ask what else the worms might be able to sense, such as magnetic fields.

In 2012, scientists from Baylor College of Medicine announced the discovery of brain cells in pigeons that process information about magnetic fields, but they did not discover which part of the body senses the fields. That team and others have proposed a magnetosensor in the birds’ inner ear.

“It’s been a competitive race to find the first magnetosensory neuron,” said Pierce-Shimomura. “And we think we’ve won with worms, which is a big surprise because no one suspected that worms could sense the Earth’s magnetic field.”

The neuron sporting a , called an AFD neuron, was already known to sense carbon dioxide levels and temperature.

The researchers discovered the worms’ magnetosensory abilities by altering the magnetic field around them with a special magnetic coil system and then observing changes in behavior. They also showed that worms which were genetically engineered to have a broken AFD neuron did not orient themselves up and down as do normal . Finally, the researchers used a technique called calcium imaging to demonstrate that changes in the cause the AFD neuron to activate.

Credits:  http://phys.org/news/2015-06-sensor-earth-magnetic-field-animal.html

Archaeologists Have Made An Incredible Discovery At Stonehenge

By George Dvorsky

Using powerful ground-penetrating radar, investigators working around Stonehenge have detected a trove of previously unknown burial mounds, chapels, shrines, pits — and most remarkable of all — a massive megalithic monument made up of more than 50 giant stones buried along a 1,082-foot-long c-shaped enclosure.

This news is unreal — and it’s resetting virtually everything we thought we knew about Stonehenge. Just a week after finding out that Stonehenge was once a complete circle, archaeologists from Birmingham and Bradford universities, and from the Ludwig Boltzman Institute in Vienna, have shattered the image of Stonehenge as a desolate and lonely place.

After four years of painstaking effort, and by using a magnetometer, a ground-penetrating radar (GPR), and a 3D laser scanner, archaeologists have shown that Stonehenge was once a sprawling complex that extended for miles.

And then there’s the previously unknown “super henge,” a monument located just two miles from Stonehenge. Scans suggest that each buried stone is about three meters (10 feet) long and 1.5 meters (5 feet) wide. The stones are positioned horizontally, not vertically, but it’s conceivable that they originally stood upright like other standing stones. The archaeologists suspect they were brought to the site shortly before 2,500 BC.

The Independent reports:

The c-shaped enclosure – more than 330 metres wide and over 400 metres long – faced directly towards the River Avon. The monument was later converted from a c-shaped to a roughly circular enclosure, now known as Durrington Walls – Britain’s largest pre-historic henge, roughly 12 times the size of Stonehenge itself.

As a religious complex, it would almost certainly have had a deeply spiritual and ritual connection with the river. But precisely why is a complete mystery, although it is possible that that particular stretch of water was regarded as a deity.

As for the other henge-like Neolithic and Bronze Age religious shrines, they range between 10 and 30 meters ( 32 to 100 feet) in diameter. Scans also revealed around 20 large ritual pits, each up to five meters (16 feet) in diameter. More than a half dozen Bronze Age burial mounds were discovered, along with four Iron Age shrines or tombs, and a half dozen Bronze Age and Iron Age domestic or livestock enclosures.

Archaeologists Have Made An Incredible Discovery At Stonehenge

Under one of the mounds, the investigators identified a 33 meter (108 feet)-long timber building dated at about 6,000 years old. It was likely used for ritual burials and related practices.

Archaeologists Have Made An Incredible Discovery At Stonehenge

“[The building] has three rows of roof-bearing posts. It is around 300 square metres and slightly trapezoidal, which is interesting because in the same period on the continent, about 100 to 200 years earlier, we also find this type of trapezoidal building related to megaliths [giant stones],” noted Wolfgang Neubauer of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute in a BBC article.

The monuments and structures were not all built at the same time, so the entire complex was not conceived or planned as a whole. Further analysis will reveal exactly how the site evolved through the ages.

Special Edition Interview: Dr. Gordon Edwards

Natalie-Marie Hart’s special edition interview with Dr. Gordon Edwards. Most recent interview with Dr. Gordon Edwards done in May 2015 and a must listen. We talk about the World Uranium Symposium, the dangers of Tritium, the dangers of nuclear power, and much more. Listen in to find out more about this special edition interview:

Biography:

 
Gordon Edwards was born in Canada in 1940, and graduated from the University of Toronto in 1961 with a gold medal in Mathematics and Physics and a Woodrow Wilson Fellowship. At the University of Chicago he obtained two master’s degrees, one in Mathematics (1962) and one in English Literature (1964). In 1972, he obtained a Ph.D. in Mathematics from Queen’s University.