40,000 signatures collected for Palomares nuclear fall-out clean-up

From The Olive Press website.

Once described as the most radio-active town in Europe, Cuevas del Almanzora and it's environs has had large desert  and other developments still being full advertised on property websites although these sites have been informed of the potential health implications for buyers.

40,000 signatures should now focus the minds of those still advertising these developments for their own monetary ends!!

Depends on the press people believe, scambuster.

Below is an excerpt from Guardian.com of 2007 

The nuclear regulatory agency is expected to prohibit building or selling produce grown inside the contaminated area at its meeting today, according to El País. "There is no health risk," Teresa Mendiz bal, director of environmental studies for CIEMAT, told El País. "The dose of radiation is very low, and we are only restricting use of the land where there is americium, but only as a precaution."

Floella, I'm sure 40,000 signatures demanding a clean-up means this might not be 'a low dose of radiation'.  People are clearly concerned. There must be more to this as a quick Google search show lots of links to this.

'Low dose or not, I would not trust the situation with a bargepole, effects from radiation such as cancers don't show up for years by which time it could be too late for some.

Why developers build in such close proximity to areas like this can only be because the land was cheap as a result of the scare, and for profit greed. Spain is a big country, this contaminated area could have been avoided. I fully expect litigation cases in due course. Properties there could be totally unsaleable as if things aren't bad enough in Spain already with the market.

Personally wouldn't  desire to live or holiday there but doesn't  seen to have halted building/ selling new apartments in the surrounding area.

But then is anywhere in the world actually safe from contamination of one sort or another? At least this area gets checked regularly.

I suspect the reason that people have bought there is because they don't know the facts, I doubt if agents/developers would really tell them 'oh by the way there is some radiation caused by a plane crash with a nuclear warhead', if they were not informed, there could be grounds to sue if it should have shown up in searches as happens in the UK. Any radiation however low needs to be avoided, it also gets into agriculture and food stocks.

Maybe properties were offered so cheaply there people either toook a chance or thought they were such bargains. The area might be constantly checked for radiation but have not heard that has to be done in other countries like UK, France, Italy, etc

Why take the risk, I say avoid, plenty of other safe areas to buy in?

Well, back in 2007 they were not cheap in Palomares itself, but I would have to say, the accident (of 1966)  has long been known about, and it did not impact on the demand. Interestingly, although the new apartments and villas are now very cheap, they are not as cheap as they are in Turre, just down the road, but away from the accident site  (cheapest in Spain I believe).  Maybe the choice between the possibility of radiation, and the definite reality of living in a place full of Brits is not as straight forward as some might think!!!   Palomares itself, in my view, is not particularly attractive, but it is between Mojacar and Villaricos - both very popular locations, and very beautiful (again in my opinion).   I think that most people would see at a glance that there is a lack of  disfigured people around and nobody seems to glow in the dark...... 

The Palomares nuclear contamination issue in Almeria is not a new story. It was originally suppressed by Franco in 1966 with the active collaboration of the USA. They were cold war warrior partner’s acting in their own best interests.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/forgotten-the-most-radioactive-town-in-europe-2198466.html

What is new and has only recently been made public is the USA, the regional government of Almeria and the mayor of Palomares have been aware since 2006 of the previously underestimated extent of the serious contamination of plutonium in the area. The US has also been giving Spain considerable sums of money each year to monitor public health in the region.

As a result of the Snowden revelations Wikileaks has published some US diplomatic cables exposing the truth. The major of Palomares enjoyed a junket in Washington and the Americans made it clear he was 'on side' in the PR battle. The PR and publicity is of vital importance to the Americas and the regional government. Although the disastrous demolition policy by Almeria regional government cannot ever be described as good PR.

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09MADRID432_a.html

https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06MADRID2853_a.html

The new argument now seems to be who is going to pay for the much needed further clean up. The US is fed up of paying all the bills. $3 billion and counting. The US still pays the region $300k per year that is supposed to be used for monitoring local public health.

The last thing this region needs economically is more adverse publicity and those with a vested commercial interest are trying to prevent the truth from being widely circulated. However public health is at stake here as well as the investments of individuals, mainly Brits who have bought property in the locality, blissfully unaware of the risks involved. They are usually never told for obvious reasons. That's nothing short of a scandal.

http://www.theleader.info/259/article/17740/atomic-bombs-stop-british-company-building-in-almera/

There have also been a number of owners who have been refused a residential licence because property has been illegally built near the plutonium contaminated zones. 

Thanks Micky for that very informative post, it clearly is an important and controversial matter hence the vested interest crowd trying to hush things up I suspect. BTW a large Desert resort is still being advertised on a Spanish property website!! Are the buyers being told of this, you know how in the old days Agents/Developers could tell people anything they wanted them to hear, and not what they wanted them to know? Things like 'nothing will be built there, 'it's a green area' whish bang wallop up goes a hideous apartment block to obscure your views after you've moved in.

I like Roly's coomment 'nobody seems to glow in the dark', hey Roly maybe end that with 'yet', 

Pressure must be mounting and 40,000 signatures so far would seem to indicate that it's not just those buyers in the large Desert resort etc but probably lots of locals too.

I would be very surprised if many of the 40000 signatories have even visited Palomares.   I think after nearly 50 years it would be very evident if there were major health problems either for the residents or for those who visit.   It certainly wont stop me from the odd stop off en route to Villaricos.  If you are referring to Desert Springs golf resort, it is indeed still being sold.   But it has been around for quite a while now and I have not heard that there is a problem with legality?  I think Ian Botham and a few other celebs bought there before the crash.  Again, only my opinion, I would rather be on Desert Springs than on something on the scale of the   La Manga resort/monstrosity.  In spite of the accident.

Read what the locals think about this subject.

http://www.veraplayafriends.com/index.php/topic,482.0/nowap.html?PHPSESSID=phvv4val8v52d4ka96mkefdmm3

Surely Botham and co didn't actually buy there but were probably given/loaned properties to front their advertising campaigns? They wouldn't have done that for nothing.

Sorry, don't buy this 'everything is ok there chat', why does this keep cropping up every couple of years, I suspect it is deliberate suppression of facts by embarrased Americans and after all this is Spain, the Spanish authorities.

Just had a look on the Vera Playa Friends comments and clearly they are concerned. 2 areas have high levels of radioactivity, some say one bomb wasn't found (they're pretty big to lose if that's the case). This is also part of a large area that produces much of Spain's veggies etc. Roly, why would 40,000 people sign something that they were not concerned about, perhaps many of them don't wish to visit Palomares for a reason?

Latest posting on that site Mickey were in 2011 with most in agreement there wasn't a problem.

Is the Olive Press desperate for news...or, scambuster, are you highlighting old news  in order to settle a score with a particular forum you  allude  to. .??

Having friends in both Vera and Mojacar I have passed through this area many times. Over the years it has more than tripled in size with construction and the areas of vegetation are lush.  So the incident that happened almost 50 years ago has made zilch impact on either atmosphere or concerns of the populace.

Yes, floella actually that was my point in posting the link. Some locals don’t think there is a problem. Nobody glows in the dark, the sun still rises the earth does not implode.

Yet we and the science all know that nuclear contamination does not leap from the earth and bite you. It’s insidious, odourless, colourless and deadly. The risk to human health also lasts at best for a thousand years. The fact this fall out occurred almost 50 years ago is a blink of an eye in nuclear contamination terms.

The reckless building for residential use close to an acknowledged nuclear contaminated site is negligent in the extreme.   It is profit above the health and lives of people. Many developers bought the land around the site at very low cost and sought to profit from it. It was dirt cheap years ago because everyone locally knew of the contamination.

Now it’s as if it does not exist. Do some research and discover just how long this risk lasts. It is dishonest on the part of everyone involved in selling property there not to warn potential buyers of the facts surrounding the area and the continued contamination risk.

Understand where you are coming from scambuster and Mickeyfinn BUT if an professional environmental agency gives it an clean bill of health for the populace in 2007 ( see my posting below ) then however annoyed or disbelieving you maybe it is certainly not dishonest , assuming they are legal, to build or advertise for sale properties in this area.  Something every local REA  and local forums do.

Floella whya are you being so defensive or protective to this issue? You don't seem to like the fact that it's been brought to light again, it's not 'old news' when it talks of the large numbers of signatures collected, it means something's afoot.

Fully understand agents/developers selling in that region and people who live in the area not wanting this brought up in case it affected their property values, but hey, we're not talking about a milk lorry crashing and shedding it's load. The fact you mention 'however annoyed or disbelieving you maybe it is certainly bot dishonest' leads me to think you might have more than a passing interest in the area. As for 'not dishonest', I bet many people have purchased there who didn't even know of the Palomares incident, and in that case they should have been told so they could make their own minds up whether to buy or not, now that's being honest. It's a fact that most Agents/Developers only tell you what they want to in Spain. Honesty is a rarity in Spain's property market.

If you read the detailed leaked US cables you will see that the area around Palomares is more contaminated with Plutonium than scientists originally thought. The US and CIEMAT have known that for some time

The arguments today are who is going to pay for the substantial clean up that is required. The US is prevaricating saying they have paid the Spanish zillions to do it over the years since the accident happened and nothing meaningful was in fact done with the money.

There is no argument that the area is not seriously contaminated with plutonium.  I repeat the argument today is simply the cost of cleaning it up. The fact that plutonium exists in substantial quantities at the site is self-evidently dangerous to public health.

Everybody involved in the town and region wants it cleaned up. The developers most of all. They made a conscious decision to buy the land adjacent to the polluted site for peanuts and went ahead selling properties to the public and bulding golf courses well knowing the truth. Did they warn their prospective buyers of the risks? Did the local authority prevent building near the site? The answer is no they did not to both questions. 

Well, I find myself in agreement with Floella.  This is a very old story that resurfaces every now and again.   40000 signatories for a green issue really is not very many.   I could start an on line petition calling for the flattening of Mojacar Playa and I would probably get 40000 greens signing up.   I am basing my opinion - and it is only an opinion - on my knowledge of the area and my friendship with Spanish families who have lived there all their lives.   There have been no health issues - and they would have shown by now.   There are areas where you are not allowed to grow produce, but that is a different ball game.  I also admit I am not a conspiracy theorist backer - so I don't believe in the missing bomb. I believe it was found when they said it was found i.e. intact after a search of several months.  

I have no vested interest in this other then trying to be fair and realistic.  

I have no vested interest in this other than to be fair to all those who may have been misled when they bought there, posting facts from what is readily accessible as well as an up to date story from another source is quite within our rights.

I find myself in agreement with Micyfinn. Old story or not it is relevant and being discussed now, also brought up recently by the Daily Mail, no smoke without fire I think! I certainly would not buy in that area nor advise anyone else to when there are huge areas in Spain without that problem. 

Mickyfinn is correct to say that developers moved in because the land would have been so cheap they could make a fast buck. Withholding information to those considering purchase who act in good faith is scandalous.

"Floella whya are you being so defensive or protective to this issue?  "

"....leads me to think that you might have more than a passing interest in this area.."

Guess this means I am not allowed to have an opinion that differs from yours otherwise I stand accused of having an ulterior motive.    

As it is your prerogative to agree with Olive Press it is mine to agree with the official CIEMAT report and therefore unable to understand your reasoning behind it being dishonest to advertise legally built properties there.

As it was such a strong opinion (defence of Palomares etc) and a post of yours was somewhat an attack 'settle a score with a particular forum you allude to' you said it, seems like you want to be contentious!

Why not just stick to the topic without trying to create situations? I will continue to let others know what they may need to, Ok?